All times are UTC [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
  Print view

  Re: Music video
Author Message
    PostPosted: 04 Aug 2017, 08:12 
Darkling
Offline

Posts: 142
Joined: 28 May 2015, 20:02
PermissionToLand wrote:
What makes you say lower production value? I mean, if the concept was to have a junky tractor in the video, not much you can do to make that look really cool. Otherwise, the video quality is high, lighting is great, band looks great, settings are quite nice.


It's the most bare-bones video they've ever done. They shot it outdoors, on one location with no extras (well, almost no extras).

It's likely the cheapest video they've ever made. The visual quality is nice as is the lighting yes - but it's a step down in production value.

There was no concept to it like all previous Darkness videos. This video was done on the cheap. And I didn't say I disliked it - but it's just an observation I have that the video, promotional material and album art are lower budget than ever before and it worries me a bit as a fan.

TavoHawkins wrote:

I was thinking the same thing...

In my opinion this is the worst TD video, I like the song, maybe the band's suffering some financial problems and they have a low budget or maybe the people who works for them in this visual stuff are not so good, I don't know. But you can see clearly the difference between the music videos from LOOK and this one. The LOOK's videos are superior

I really love Dan's surfing scenes


Worse than EHAGT with the dancing bear?

I definitely think Open Fire had a better concept, but the title track video was absolute garbage.[/quote]

The title track video was great. Well shot, had a cool concept, the close ups were great and it had fans in it - a nice touch.

"Everybody Have A Good Time" - the video is okay, the bear is hilarious.


Top
 Profile  
 

  Re: Music video
    PostPosted: 05 Aug 2017, 04:21 
Darkling
Offline

Posts: 70
Joined: 13 Jun 2017, 21:11
Concrete-Lion wrote:
PermissionToLand wrote:
What makes you say lower production value? I mean, if the concept was to have a junky tractor in the video, not much you can do to make that look really cool. Otherwise, the video quality is high, lighting is great, band looks great, settings are quite nice.


It's the most bare-bones video they've ever done. They shot it outdoors, on one location with no extras (well, almost no extras).

It's likely the cheapest video they've ever made. The visual quality is nice as is the lighting yes - but it's a step down in production value.

There was no concept to it like all previous Darkness videos. This video was done on the cheap. And I didn't say I disliked it - but it's just an observation I have that the video, promotional material and album art are lower budget than ever before and it worries me a bit as a fan.


The title track video was great. Well shot, had a cool concept, the close ups were great and it had fans in it - a nice touch.

"Everybody Have A Good Time" - the video is okay, the bear is hilarious.


LIOAF was one location, outdoors (not sure how that makes it cheap), no extras. IBIATCL was one location, no extras.

If visual quality and lighting are good, what specifically is bad about the production value?

I doubt it's the cheapest they've ever made. LOOK was literally nothing but a bunch of unpaid fans dancing in a totally blank white room. A "cool concept"? It didn't even have a concept. I could really care less about having fans in it when they are just standing around in a group vaguely dancing for no reason. It would be cool if there was a narrative and they weaved the fans into it as characters throughout.


Top
 Profile  
 

  Re: Music video
    PostPosted: 05 Aug 2017, 06:18 
Darkling
Offline

Posts: 142
Joined: 28 May 2015, 20:02
PermissionToLand wrote:
LIOAF was one location, outdoors (not sure how that makes it cheap), no extras. IBIATCL was one location, no extras.

If visual quality and lighting are good, what specifically is bad about the production value?

I doubt it's the cheapest they've ever made. LOOK was literally nothing but a bunch of unpaid fans dancing in a totally blank white room. A "cool concept"? It didn't even have a concept. I could really care less about having fans in it when they are just standing around in a group vaguely dancing for no reason. It would be cool if there was a narrative and they weaved the fans into it as characters throughout.


Those videos for the first album were more costly.

And as for "Last Of Our Kind" - they could at least afford to rent a soundstage, fly extras out, etc.

Look, I get it. You love the band. But you need to be able to let others critique the new stuff.

Like I said above - I want to be wrong about their financials. But there are some red flags that worry me. And someone else here sees what I'm getting at, at least. So I can't be that nuts.


Top
 Profile  
 

  Re: Music video
    PostPosted: 06 Aug 2017, 01:13 
Darkling
Offline

Posts: 70
Joined: 13 Jun 2017, 21:11
Concrete-Lion wrote:
PermissionToLand wrote:
LIOAF was one location, outdoors (not sure how that makes it cheap), no extras. IBIATCL was one location, no extras.

If visual quality and lighting are good, what specifically is bad about the production value?

I doubt it's the cheapest they've ever made. LOOK was literally nothing but a bunch of unpaid fans dancing in a totally blank white room. A "cool concept"? It didn't even have a concept. I could really care less about having fans in it when they are just standing around in a group vaguely dancing for no reason. It would be cool if there was a narrative and they weaved the fans into it as characters throughout.


Those videos for the first album were more costly.

And as for "Last Of Our Kind" - they could at least afford to rent a soundstage, fly extras out, etc.

Look, I get it. You love the band. But you need to be able to let others critique the new stuff.

Like I said above - I want to be wrong about their financials. But there are some red flags that worry me. And someone else here sees what I'm getting at, at least. So I can't be that nuts.


I have actually been critical of the new album from the start, so don't make assumptions about me. The production is underwhelming and I don't like the changes to JPOL.

Get Your Hands off my Woman was just a live show, nothing more than the cost of cameras. And unless you have the receipts I don't think you can say anything definitively about what was more costly than what.

A soundstage would likely be cheaper than renting a scenic plot of land, and it would be remarkable to argue that a blank backdrop on a stage is more impressive than a setting in nature.

Oh, and there are at least four settings to ATPG; the cliff overlooking water in the intro, the tractor area, the trees, and the tennis court.


Top
 Profile  
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


  Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Style by website design web, pozycjonowanie seo pozycjonowanie optymalizacja
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group