Wetlook World Forum

Message # 39187.1.1.1.1.1.1

Subject: Re: Poliut the Winner

Date: Fri 27/02/09 15:05:38 GMT

Name: Boss

Email:

Website:

By Poliut - Fri 27/02/09 13:31:26 GMT

Website:

To me, it was more the use (placement) than anything else. And no, that was not the worst use of slow-motion I have ever seen. That goes to the editor who inserts a slow motion sequence into a game winning play in a movie - absolutely hate it when that happens. But that's another topic.

"but to tell a websmaster detailed what is not good in his editingstyle is like to tell Bruce Springsteen for example that you don't like the rythm or the text of his newest song.

You don't think I've done that? Not to/about Springsteen (I don't listen to his music - don't hate him, don't like him - so I wouldn't know what to criticize about), but I have been critical of things like that before. And I have been blasted for web design layout back toward the beginning of the decade.

"It's like this. You like it or you do not like it. It's art and deepends on personal taste. Wetlook Videos are the same. Sometimes I see updates from websites and think to myself that's rubish. But I will never post something like that... later I read some nice coments from people who enjoyed what I called rubish a lot."

Well, when I do list something as crap, I try to explain why I think it's crap. And I also try to include things I like, because, just like nothing will be 100% perfect, nothing will be 0% perfect either.

"Well this is true, and I belive you that your critics are made to improve a product but in my opinion you underestimated the "power" of a video review in a forum like this. I noticed that people in the internet trust and belive most which is written there. Just put a cats' feet into paint and let it run over a paper. Put this picture in an Internet-Art-Forum and pay 5 people to write the first comments about this idiotic idea in a very positiv way. I'm sure that then most answers also will be positive. Do the same and write 5 negative reviews about this and all people will write negative about the same picture/idea."

The Law of Averages would win out, and eventually you have dissenting opinions from the 5 paid people.

"However, you wrote "Nothing will ever be perfect". I totally agree with you and I must admit that I'm the same like you and I am always critising my personaly filmed videos very hard. Often there are things I start to hate myself for like wrong lighting during the filming etc.... so I'm just never really happy because you can allways make things better when you see things on the technical view."

Let's see, how much do we have laying around on the cutting room floor? I know I have years worth of material lying around in there!

... but I am the same way - I often think a lot of the things I produce are complete crap. And at the same time, there are people who would then say that that was great (or if it were scrapped, starting to look great), often to my own surprise. I often would eventually settle on something and hope for the best, knowing it's not as great as it could have been. And twice I've had sleepless nights after the release/submission, where I wait for reviews.

Bottom line was - I was a little bored with talking about the technical things that I usually notice, and instead decided to examine on something else, essentially everything BUT that.

Maybe for the next video I'll emphasize what I do like. Looks like you've earned it.

But it will be genuine, make no mistake about that.

By downloaddreams.com - info@downloaddreams.com Fri 27/02/09 04:19:03 GMT

Website: www.downloaddreams.com

thank you for your detailed answer. I will try to explain me my view on this, but this is not allways so good possible, because I'm not very good in english language.

However, you wrote "Nothing will ever be perfect". I totally agree with you and I must admit that I'm the same like you and I am always critising my personaly filmed videos very hard. Often there are things I start to hate myself for like wrong lighting during the filming etc.... so I'm just never really happy because you can allways make things better when you see things on the technical view.

I had the chance to testdrive some great sportcars for example... even a Porsche 911 is in my opinion far away from being the perfect sportscar when you drive it on a racetrack. In just a few minutes I realize where this car needs improvement. But then you have to think further. If you like to make a 50.000 Dollar car just a bit faster you'll have to double the price. And with filming videos it's nearly the same. So when you can't spend 100.000$ for a car, I think it's wrong to complain about the fact that a 50.000$ car isn't as fast as the more expensive version of it.

You like better slo-motion, quality? Technicaly this will be no problem for me, because I "just" would have to buy a camera with the double frame rate per second for the filming and use more light, but that will be 6 times more expensive than the camera I'm using now!

So you see there is a point which brings a wetlook producer to it's economically limits, because you won't sell thousands of wetlook videos (at least not my website). So you allways have to try to output the best you can afford. And this is what every website here is doing. You allways should remember that nobody here have a Hollywood budget for filming Wetlook videos, and my shootings are allways  improvisation and nothing is perfect. During the years I learned to live with that fact. Also I have to try my best to make every video as good as possible. Sometimes I also don't like the model or the location we organized for the shooting, but I still have to sell this video to play in my production costs to have again a chance to make the next video better.

You wrote:" No, I haven't filmed/shot/edited a wetlook scene. OK. Most of the people who criticize the US President have never held public office, much less the Presidency."

It's way more harder to get world wide peace than just to talk about peace. The same with most things companies do. Allways are people complaining about Windows.... but why are most of them using Windows? Because for most people there is nothing better available in their price range.

I can remember that I received comments about my wetlook video in the past like "Oh, with such a beautifull house with that pool and those equipment and all those money he's spending for his productions everybody could easily do this". Well then all I can ask is why are these people not just calling their bank to get a camera and rent such a house for a wek. That's exactly what I did, because sadly I don't have rich parents who owns some hotels. lol

You wrote: "At the same time, "could be better" does not mean "suck""

Well this is true, and I belive you that your critics are made to improve a product but in my opinion you underestimated the "power" of a video review in a forum like this. I noticed that people in the internet trust and belive most which is written there. Just put a cats' feet into paint and let it run over a paper. Put this picture in an Internet-Art-Forum and pay 5 people to write the first comments about this idiotic idea in a very positiv way. I'm sure that then most answers also will be positive. Do the same and write 5 negative reviews about this and all people will write negative about the same picture/idea. Therefore I think most webmasters will prefer the critics like how to do it better by email than in a public forum.

Please don't get me wrong. It's not like I like censoreship (I hate censorship), and if my videos are really bad quality or something like that a board like this should be where people can read the warnings about that, but to tell a websmaster detailed what is not good in his editingstyle is like to tell Bruce Springsteen for example that you don't like the rythm or the text of his newest song. It's like this. You like it or you do not like it. It's art and deepends on personal taste. Wetlook Videos are the same. Sometimes I see updates from websites and think to myself that's rubish. But I will never post something like that... later I read some nice coments from people who enjoyed what I called rubish a lot.

I take critics very serious or at least can explain for what reason I have edit/shot the video like this or that way. But if there are things in a clip like a slomotion you don't like or other little details I would love to receive an email form you and answer it as much detailed as possibel.  

Best wishes,

Swen

By Poliut - Thu 26/02/09 23:57:44 GMT

Website:

Number 1: Nothing will ever be perfect - I'll admit that right now. There's always something that could be a better, different, etc... At the same time, that shouldn't stop people from trying. Hopefully, you can make something ideal.

Number 2: No, I haven't filmed/shot/edited a wetlook scene. OK. Most of the people who criticize the US President have never held public office, much less the Presidency.

I say what I think - I'll include what I like and what I don't like. I mentioned some things that I liked, and something things I thought could have been done a little better or a little differently. I try to be constructive about such things, and the intent isn't to scare people away - it's just to provide my opinion and feedback, and have the best get better. At the same time I'm not here to gush over anyone or be their butt boy. I'm not trying to complain or sound like something that would be seen in a hate mail messsage (I sure as hell hope I'm not coming off that way).

I understand editing can be a complete pain - and I wasn't being as hard about that I would flat-out carelessness in a professional product. Like I said, the footage was great, I enjoyed it. My thoughts on editing are more subjective than objective - it's like a piece of music, most of the crtiticisms (especially at the upper levels) are more about things of a subjective nature. Heck, I even criticize things I happen to produce! ... and in some cases not produce. At the same time, "could be better" does not mean "suck" - there are many things that are great but they could be better. Sure, winning a championship is great, but there were things that could be better. And that penalty would probably be one of them.

I didn't mean to flip any nerves, as I obviously got one heck of a response this go round, and it was something more subjective based than objective based (which is where most of them rested in other postings) - my intent this time was to actually overlook the objective ones, and just provide my honest opinions (good or bad) about what I saw. If I think something sucks, I'll let them know. If I think something's great, I'll let them know that too. I'm sure with the following clips I'll find more things I like, didn't like, and could have been better. Heck, I know I'm looking forward to some of them! If you change your mind about posting them up becuase of my comments, that's your right to do so. I won't be deeply disappointed disappointed or offended if you do - I've had too many hours of insentivity training from the High Priest of the Church of the Painful Truth, so If you meant to flip my nerves, that's OK.

At the same time I find moments like this to be a great learning experience. In a performance you only see the end product, and not the many hours of rehearsal. I don't know what goes on from the other side, much like how customers often don't know what goes on a company at the levels that they don't see. I gained new insights today: I didn't know you spent weeks editing this thing (unless you did this in one 20 hour sitting - if so hats off to you!) - for all I knew it could have been 2 hours or 2 weeks. Had I known it was 20 hours I would have understood that, you know, "This is probably something that's gone under numerous revisions, there was a lot of time and energy devoted to this..." etc.

I remember one time when I posted a criticism over commentators at a high school football game, and my levels of criticism changed after the station manager happened to come across my comments saying that they needed to be dumped. After some feedback and communication, those same announcers that I blasted weeks ago sounded miles better than before (now the play-by-play girl had emotion and the color commentator guy had insightful analysis). Had I known that the station manager was going to come across those comments, I wouldn't have been as harsh, and instead been more constructive, as I knew someone in the process would be reading those things. All I know is what I witness, with faint knowledge of what goes in preparation.

I don't know what hate mail you get (if any), I don't know the details of the whole process of assembling one of these things, I don't know how profitable these things are (I assume they have to be to some degree just to keep the thing afloat, even if it is for pleasure and not purely for profit), I don't know any of those things (at least in significant detail). I do know what I see, I do know what I think works, and that's basically about it. For anything else, I essentially have to fill in the blanks. I may ask "Why didn't you try (insert missing feature) I thought that this would have..." and then learn "Well we tried (or considered) that, but..." and then I get a better perspective about how something turned out the way it did.

Full hypothetical - two people are at a swimming pool, and they're throwing around an American football. I may ask if there was any consideration for having them do this one drill used by wide receivers, runningbacks, and tight ends, where you stand at the edge of the pool - your goal is to catch the ball, while keeping your feet on the ground until you fall in (it's used to help with sideline catches). That idea may not have even have been considered, due to numerous reasons, including a lack of knowledge of said drill; or it could have been that it was considered, but looked awkward, so it was cut. We both learn something there.

People will obviously disagree (or agree) with things I like (or dislike), and that's totally fine by me. I would probably get nervous if everyone agreed or disagreed with me on something - especially if was a subjective matter.

I try to be a bit deeper than the two word review. I've been like that for a very long time.

... and yes, I would probably gripe about something in a wetlook clip filmed by Steven Spielberg. So you're in good company.

By downloaddreams.com - info@downloaddreams.com Thu 26/02/09 21:43:41 GMT

Website: www.downloaddreams.com

I don't agree to your opinion that the slo-motions where on the wrong places or look bad. To be honest, people who allways complaining make me angry and kill my fun factor of filming Wetlook videos. Or do you think I'm doing this for money? My Videos are barely able to play in the production costs. Furthermore I spend a lot of time for this. Complaining about things where is zero reason to complain about kills my sales, and this means it will kill new productions and the website. The Video you where talking about was more than 20 hours editing work. So nearly two hours of my time for a one minute of the video. I put over 70 music clips in my timeline just to find the two best working sounds for example. Just this takes hours!

However, I will still try to explain to you why I don't agree with you. People who have not the raw footage from the filming-day and are not sitting in front of the editing system can not tell how to edit the footage better. The reason for this is very simple. When you edit a Video, you often try many different ways and solutions how to edit just a clip like this one. I chose what looks best. When I'm not sure, I ask other people how they like the editing... I put way more work in every detail than you think.

When you have the chance to play/test a little bit around with the clips you filmed, you realize very fast where a slo-motion is usefull and where not. What fits and what not. On which position which sequence looks best. This is very important when you edit the videos TOGETHER with the music. It's not like that I "just" edit a clip and then add some music. No everything is edit to the music, and so often the music tells you where the dissolve has to be, where to use the slo-motion. A Video with music has a rythm.... you have to edit that it fits to the music. Yes, sometimes this force you maybe to do a slo-motion at a point you think it's not perfect, or at a secquence which maybe is better without slo-motion.... but this makes the whole look of the complete video better.

The actually Video is really a clip where I'm very proud of the editing and at this point I don't accept the negative comments about wrong editing! It's simply like that. Everybody who watches a video has to trust the cutter that he has done the best job which was possible with the footage. You have to trust me when I tell you that you can't edit this clip better. It's simply like this. You think I have not much knowledge/skills in filming and editing. Or at least you can do it way better. If not, stop complaining about people who are working on a very high level.

I have seen that you also where telling Alf Strübing who made the wetlook-online guest pictures for Wetlook-Online how to do better pictures   . He is a very good Wetlook photographer and when he doesn't use the potential the background gave to him like you wrote, you can be sure that there was a very good reason to shoot the picture like he did. The way you are writing about all that sounds for me a little bit like a guy sitting in front of his TV complaining about Dirk Nowitzki because he didn't goal a penalty shot. Yep, you could do all better! So if you really mean your comments in a positive and constructive way, you should think about the fact that too much kills economics. Maybe some Wetlook websites does some money with the shootings, but for most it's just passion. They put all so much time and hard work into there projects, that it is wrong to complain allways about this.

Actually I would love to offer some underwater sequences soon. I don't have enough money for this at the moment, but I have a special bank account where I save my money, because I would love to buy a new motorbike. I haven't own a bike since a couple of years because I waste all my money for the shootings/equipment. I was so close to spent the money from my "motobike account" to buy a new underwater housing becasue I thought this will make our videos better. But now after your comment I think I would have much more fun to have more freetime when driving with my friends then allways to waste my money for equipment.

It's true that Vendula wasn't smiling the the whole time during the shooting. I never force the models to smile or something like that, because that will give the video a very unrealistic look. I realized this also during the shooting, but she was not used to a video camera. So what should I do in a situation like this? Force people to smile is not what works. Some people are more shy in front of a video camera. So I prefer to let them act as natural as possible.

Yes when you click under "models" there are some girls without screentime in Wetlook or Mud Videos. They are still on the website, but we didn't do Wetlook videos with them. In the past we also offered some other categories on Downloaddreams. The Videos are inactive now, but the models are still in the database. I don't like to delete them, because maybe the other catergories will be online in future again, or we will do Wetlook shootings with these girls, too.

Poliut, please don't understand me wrong. I allways answered very detailed in the past to all your other posts. Also you are a good customers and are buying the clips often. But when you think I'm not doing my editing/filming job good, maybe you go to the websites who can do this so much better than me. Or jsut ask Steven Spielberg to make a Wetlook custom videos for you, but I'm not sure if he have the skills to do that really good enough for you.

Swen

By Poliut - Thu 26/02/09 19:48:17 GMT

Website:

Not that I'm complaining about that, mind you.

Let's see, the video...

I like the buildup - it provides a bit more than just stepping/jumping into a water source and going from there. There were some spots that didn't need the slow-mo and some that could have used it - to add on to that I thought the second slo-mo looked awful. The third was (IMO) the best used and best executed. She also could have looked a bit more happy/alive - to me she came across as either bored, lonely, or pissed. It was like she wanted to be anywhere BUT there - I'm guessing you wanted it that way because every once in a while there would be a blink-and-miss grin starting to develop. Maybe the RP wasn't build well enough... Or I oughta just pretend it's 1PM EST and she just got done listening to the radio . The camera angles were wonderful.

... I would say I want to see more of her, but then again there are models on your models page that have no screentime at all so far

I'll be looking forward to your next update

By downloaddreams.com - info@downloaddreams.com Thu 26/02/09 17:36:09 GMT

Website: www.downloaddreams.com

Here is our new Wetlook-Update:

http://www.downloaddreams.com/product_info.php?currency=USD&cPath=47&products_id=732&language=en

Enjoy!

Michelle