Over the week, Jia Jia and I met up twice to get some filming for our sketches done. It’s great that we’ve been constantly working as team, coming up with ideas and making mutual decisions. We managed to refine the ideas for our sketches:

We want to explore how an informational video is made both interesting and appealing to watch. By focusing on the narrative/non-narrative structure of Marques Brownlee’s video review on the iPhone 6, we hope to achieve a better understanding of how video reviews are moulded and constructed.

1. In the case of Brownlee’s video review, one product is filmed against many different backgrounds, and from multiple angles.
2. Cinematics in the production stage play a role from post-production to promotion of the video on YouTube. Here we explore a viewer’s natural response to the attractiveness of a thumbnail on YouTube.
3. Video reviews have certainly evolved over the years. There are many differences between reviewing it using pictures found online, as compared to physically possessing the product.
4. From how we see it, personal opinions play an important role to ensuring a good video review. But what if it were done without it? What if the video only contained a whole lot of facts and information?
5. Conversely, what if there were ONLY personal opinions?
6. How is a video review constructed (from start to finish)? There should be a template. Eg. Physical aspects, internal specs, demonstration, comparisons and personal opinions.
7. The product being reviewed can be compared against a different brand in the market.
8. How does this work in terms of a viewer’s loyalty towards a certain brand, and in guiding a buyer’s decision-making process?
9. There is the inclusion of on-screen text to clarify certain information.
10. How far should the terminology used go? We can explore the types of people who would watch videos such as this.

As we were refining these sketches, a problem we encountered was coming up with more ideas to fit the list-of-ten criteria. We watched Brownlee’s review on the iPhone 6 a couple of times more, scanning through parts of the video that would be able to give us more ideas. I’d say that there is a lot to online video; that there is a more complex aspect to it rather than it just being a file uploaded to the Internet for others to watch. Despite that, it can be difficult to break things down when we are not naturally inclined to inspect all the little elements each time we see an online video – all we do, at least most of the time, is just sit back and watch.

It is interesting, however, to consider understanding how an online video works. What makes it what it is, and what makes it appealing to watch? I have personally worked on a few videos back in college, and I have been at points where my group mates and I would be dry on ideas. The conditions were different, however. Back in college, I had to come up with brand new ideas to promote projects I was working on; here, we unpack a specific video and explore its hybrid narrative/non-narrative forms. We take a step back and begin to really understand it as a whole.

Jia Jia and I began to broaden the ideas we already had, expanding them by looking at each one from different perspectives. We tried to source ideas from the world around us, reminding ourselves of things that had happened in the past. We also watched a couple of other videos just to freshen up, and even looked at a couple of other video reviews. By doing so, we were actually able to come up with ideas 3, 5, 8 and 10.

After seeing Seth’s post on the template for our concept statement and sketches, I’d say that Jia Jia and I are slowly getting on the right track. We began first with these few statements:

We want to explore how an informational video is made both interesting and appealing to watch. By focusing on the narrative/non-narrative structure of Marques Brownlee’s video review on the iPhone 6, we hope to achieve a better understanding of how video reviews are moulded and constructed.

1. Visual focus is on the product, and not the person.
2. Inclusion of on-screen text to clarify certain information.
3. Close-ups are important!
4. Choose an environment that is relatively easy on the eyes.
5. Research beforehand to know what you’re talking about.
6. Include personal opinions.
7. Good lighting makes the product more attractive.
8. Test out the product to show how it works.
9. Regular cuts from one scene to another makes it less boring.
10. Have a clear talking voice.

From there, we decided that we would further refine it in the days to come. We have a few days before our next class in the studio, so hopefully we’ll be able to get some sketches done over the week!

Yesterday, my group mate and I had a discussion for our second project. We took a look at the videos used for our case studies, and began to analyse it in terms of how it connected with its audiences. We then came up with a concept statement to guide the sketches for our second project:

Based on our case studies, we took a look at the feedback and comments received and found several aspects that make watching a video more memorable. Upon gaining a better idea of our audiences, we have noticed that people are more likely to participate when it comes to something that attracts or entertains. Hence, taking the elements of facts and humour to guide our concept, we plan to give viewers a fresh perspective on something that is not actively thought about.

However, after today’s consultation, we realised that we were too caught up with a video’s content, rather than the elements that make it unique. We now have a better idea of what to do in terms of our concept statement and sketches, and we will be re-discussing our ideas tomorrow. Hoping that all goes well!