How long is too long ?

[DiscDogNation]

Just watched it.

Good stuff. Consistent with most well executed edited pieces. The usual you tube round watcher will have no major gripes or dissapointments.

The usual comments apply, I think the golf was recorded well and serves as a good archive of the action true to how it happened. Some wind, and only a little mic wind ruffle in parts. For many, filmed windy rounds that are hard on the ears get passed by quickly. Mic wind was no biggie on this one.

Story telling: this one was a little harder than other film groups on really keeping track of who was throwing at the moment, and a little less inviting to get engaged into the scoring tracking aspect. On screen notations aid with that of course for the vids that do it.

Having the short summary late round by Greenwell was ok with me. It was indeed better to have that done the way it was where it was like an interview or face to face, vs being unseen and only audio from the side. I would have even been ok with another one of those earlier if it had been planned out that way.

Introduction montage. It ran a bit long, and used many stills. The stills with the transitions made me pause and think... Wait... Is this really a slideshow video? ...even though I knew going in it wasn't. Some online may get impatient and click away to something else and miss out. If the intro was faster cut, or faster cut video the actualy length of intro would be fine.

Edited pieces take a long time, but are greatly appreciated. Good reference for the event, the course, the round.

Excellent feedback and thanks a TON for taking the time to not only watch but let me know what you were thinking.

In my first video I put who was throwing and it was an experiment by NOT putting it in to see how it would look, I'm still at odds with myself as to which way I like it better.

Greenwell summary was basically impromptu .. I had asked him a few holes prior if he wouldn't mind saying a word or two ... then the group was almost running through holes and there was no time and we had a short backup on 18 and the situation presented itself ... I think it turned out exceptionally well.


Intro Montage is basically a placeholder in hopes I get sponsors one day.

Again though ... thanks a bunch for your feedback. It's greatly appreciated.

 

[Lewis]

My attention span is totally dependent on rhe quality of the footage. Disc golf isn't exactly exciting to watch, and Youtube tends to shorten people's attention span, so edit out all the fluff you can. My one pet peeve on Youtube is people's intro time. I HATE clicking on a 5 minute video only to get three minutes of somebody's introductory commentary -- i feel like I've been cheated. Once an intro on Youtube passes 10 seconds I start to fast forward.

In terms of the commentary, be sparing with it, and don't mute the action to talk over it. I want to hear the natural sounds of play more than commentary or your music. Add to nature when you have something worthwhile, but don't replace it.

 

[Afropirg]

Intro is way to long. I would say 25-30 seconds is about right. Introduce the course, single shots of each player, production name and sponsors. 45 seconds at the most.

1:30 before you get into the action is to long.

at around 2:17 someone is attempting a putt. This is what meant by having the person's name at the bottom of the screen to identify the player. He's in some thick brush and you can't see who it is.

After the hole, would be nice to have them in order of score.

The cuts during the hole are fine. Nothing lingering to long. Still would like to see what everyone shot other than Ace\Eagle\Birdie. Especially if there is no commentary.

Camera work is fine, I'm assuming you have 1 camera that you're using. Maybe try and get a better angle. Some shots you loose the disc right after it leave's the throwers hand. I'm sure you got one hell of a workout keeping up.

Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed it, subscribed to your channel. I'm looking forward to watching this again on the big screen at home.

 

[DiscDogNation]

Intro is way to long. I would say 25-30 seconds is about right. Introduce the course, single shots of each player, production name and sponsors. 45 seconds at the most.

1:30 before you get into the action is to long.

at around 2:17 someone is attempting a putt. This is what meant by having the person's name at the bottom of the screen to identify the player. He's in some thick brush and you can't see who it is.

After the hole, would be nice to have them in order of score.

The cuts during the hole are fine. Nothing lingering to long. Still would like to see what everyone shot other than Ace\Eagle\Birdie. Especially if there is no commentary.

Camera work is fine, I'm assuming you have 1 camera that you're using. Maybe try and get a better angle. Some shots you loose the disc right after it leave's the throwers hand. I'm sure you got one hell of a workout keeping up.

Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed it, subscribed to your channel. I'm looking forward to watching this again on the big screen at home.

I understand what you mean about the players name at the bottom of the screen ... here's what I did in my first golf video


and I agree about the angles but this course has some EXTREMELY tight Tee pads .. 3, 4 come to mind ... and 18. On 18 my head was about level with the Tee pad and I just stuck my Monopod up as high as I could reach ... pointed the viewer down towards me and tried to keep the camera as steady as I could.

Thanks for watching !!!

And thanks for the input !

 

[Afropirg]

I actually really like the video with the names. Rather than PDGA number you could do score.

 

[Old Dog]

Things I like to see on DG tourney videos:

A brief introduction that includes the name of the venue, dates of the tournament, weather conditions. If there are sponsors for the video keep their spiel as brief as possible. Maybe just flash their logos across the screen during the venue introduction.

The names and brief bios (home town, some stats, etc) of a few of the key competitors/favorites to finish near the top. This can either be done in the intro or in a voice overs during the action when the player first appears in the video.

During the action, especially on Tee shots. I like to have the name of the competitor, the hole number and length of the hole show on the screen briefly during their setup. Or again this could be done in a voice over. A neat idea would be to introduce the hole with a shot of the signage especially on unique holes so we can see what the hole looks like if we are unfamiliar with the course.

During or at the end of footage of the players holing out I like to see the current scores for the group.

Things I hate in DG golf videos:

Load obnoxiousness music that drowns out the commentary, natural sounds on the course or competitors comments. Not everyone's taste in music is the same anyway so just leave it out.

A lack of information. Who was that that just canned a 60' putt from the schull? What hole are we Teeing off on or holing out on? What's the score? Who's leading at this point?

Crappy camera work. Bad angles and jumpy, jittery video.

 

[Old Dog]

My above post was not meant as a critique of the posted video. In fact I had not seen the video when I made that post.

That said I think that the video was done very well and in fact incorporated most of my thoughts on what makes a good DG video.

The only thing I would have really liked to have seen different is I wish the videographer identified the players in the green shirt and the black shirt that we were watching. I have not been involved in DG for long and don't really follow the pros that much so I don't know many of them by sight. A voice over or on screen id of the player shooting would have been a nice touch. for example; "Joe Blow throwing for Birdie" like they do in ball golf.

 

[flip_hyzer]

I enjoy commentary when it's meaningful, and to me, CCDG is the gold-standard.
Simpler is better, maybe some insight into what's going through the golfer's mind when considering a shot; wind, lie, hazards, etc. 'Paul is looking at about 250 feet for his second shot--it will play closer to 300 because of the uphill slope. Most players will shoot the gap to the left with a big forehard hyzer...but not McBeast, he's parked with what looked like a roc3.'

It may be an unpopular opinion, but the Disc Golf Guy has some of the weakest commentary I've heard. I'm sure it's something that takes a great deal of practice, but it felt generic and forced, very unnatural. 'Nikko pulled that shot right, he's going to have a difficult second shot' :gross:

 

[The Birdie Beast]

I can watch hours after hours if good players and commentary. I like to watch a card with good putters before I pratice putts, it really seems to help ALOT.

 

[DiscJunkie]

I prefer not seeing every shot. It gets old fast watching four or five pros literally drop in shots one after another.

McFly has perfected the no-drop-ins video.

45 minutes is perfect. McFly vids are the standard but I honestly think he needs to add 5 to 10 minutes to his vids. with a 2 to 3 second extension to each throw. I like seeing the shot set up and Marty just edits it to close to the release in my opinion.

Agree heartily with both of these.

 

[shoe59]

there is no such thing as too much footage, video can't be too long. If it was, we have the option to just stop watching anyway!

I like commentary if it is on point -- I enjoy the commentary by Terry Miller aka the DG Guy. Don't try and impress the audience with tons of slang or catch phrases -- just say what's going on! hole distances, nuances of the hole, etc. Even with all the catch-phrases, I do also like Billy Crump... I think he does a good job.