Comments on: Are Car Magazine Websites Missing a Trick with Video? http://blog.neillwatson.com/video/are-car-magazine-websites-missing-a-trick-with-video/ Professional Photographer Tue, 13 Jul 2010 22:32:21 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Mike CJ http://blog.neillwatson.com/video/are-car-magazine-websites-missing-a-trick-with-video/comment-page-1/#comment-784 Mike CJ Tue, 19 May 2009 06:58:41 +0000 http://blog.neillwatson.com/?p=143#comment-784 As always Neill, interesting, well written and well thought out. I am the reader you refer to. I subscribed to Car Magazine from the age of 18, grew up as Setright grew old, and maintained that subscription until a couple of years ago. I also bought Autocar and whatever else took my fancy, on a regular basis. So why did I stop? Because I was getting more immediate information, and more of it, from the net. And through social media, I was being directed to more and more of it, and it was tailored to my interests. I think the thrust of your post is that video on websites will sell more magazines, and it will. But for me the new business model for car magazines should be: 1/ Tons of great free content online. 2/ A "Premium" membership site for people like me, giving extra content, extra detail, longer videos and so on. 3/ I want to access all this on my PC and via my Kindle. By leveraging the power of the internet and getting big numbers of subscribers, the cost should be low (substantially lower than a subscription to the magazine). Advertisers could be offered a choice of one off charges or pay per click. What do you think? Too radical? On video: Don't get too hung up on production quality, sound quality and editing. Remember that 95% of people will watch the video in the original You Tube small window, with headphones on! Television values don't apply! What I'm looking for are some decent overall shots of the car, plenty of interior stuff, and exactly as you say, I want to hear the car charging through the gears and get a feel for what it's like to sit in that seat. Keep it raw and unscripted - deliver it from the heart with some emotion. I don't care about cock ups, or slips of the tongue, let me have it in one take. As always Neill, interesting, well written and well thought out. I am the reader you refer to. I subscribed to Car Magazine from the age of 18, grew up as Setright grew old, and maintained that subscription until a couple of years ago. I also bought Autocar and whatever else took my fancy, on a regular basis. So why did I stop?

Because I was getting more immediate information, and more of it, from the net. And through social media, I was being directed to more and more of it, and it was tailored to my interests.

I think the thrust of your post is that video on websites will sell more magazines, and it will. But for me the new business model for car magazines should be:

1/ Tons of great free content online.
2/ A “Premium” membership site for people like me, giving extra content, extra detail, longer videos and so on.
3/ I want to access all this on my PC and via my Kindle.

By leveraging the power of the internet and getting big numbers of subscribers, the cost should be low (substantially lower than a subscription to the magazine). Advertisers could be offered a choice of one off charges or pay per click.

What do you think? Too radical?

On video: Don’t get too hung up on production quality, sound quality and editing. Remember that 95% of people will watch the video in the original You Tube small window, with headphones on! Television values don’t apply! What I’m looking for are some decent overall shots of the car, plenty of interior stuff, and exactly as you say, I want to hear the car charging through the gears and get a feel for what it’s like to sit in that seat. Keep it raw and unscripted – deliver it from the heart with some emotion. I don’t care about cock ups, or slips of the tongue, let me have it in one take.

]]> By: Neill http://blog.neillwatson.com/video/are-car-magazine-websites-missing-a-trick-with-video/comment-page-1/#comment-258 Neill Wed, 01 Apr 2009 13:37:57 +0000 http://blog.neillwatson.com/?p=143#comment-258 The time is the big thing that people under estimate. It need not take three days :-) but it's not unusual. The Ice Driver video took 1.5 days, but could have been done in less, as the camera was new to me and testing it was part of the objective. Editing also takes time. One thing that you can't do is shoot both stills and motion at the same time - you need to do them sequentially or have a second shooter. The time is the big thing that people under estimate. It need not take three days :-) but it’s not unusual. The Ice Driver video took 1.5 days, but could have been done in less, as the camera was new to me and testing it was part of the objective. Editing also takes time.
One thing that you can’t do is shoot both stills and motion at the same time – you need to do them sequentially or have a second shooter.

]]> By: tim http://blog.neillwatson.com/video/are-car-magazine-websites-missing-a-trick-with-video/comment-page-1/#comment-257 tim Wed, 01 Apr 2009 13:08:24 +0000 http://blog.neillwatson.com/?p=143#comment-257 all valid points, video does take time though to be done right. i shot two minutes for honda once and it took 3 days! that is in the extreme but I think you do need a good day or a lot of forward planning, but yes, Kens video is an example of the potential. all valid points, video does take time though to be done right. i shot two minutes for honda once and it took 3 days! that is in the extreme but I think you do need a good day or a lot of forward planning, but yes, Kens video is an example of the potential.

]]>