5 ms·

The lack of background music and pace is really interesting to me. Compared to a typical "how it's made" video [1] (which I feel has a similar level of detail),

by tqi 6y ago

The lack of background music and pace is really interesting to me. Compared to a typical "how it's made" video [1] (which I feel has a similar level of detail), this video feels significantly more digestible. Those moments of silence feel totally alien and out of place in today's style, but I think contributes positively to my ability to understand and process the information. [1] https://youtu.be/8gno0_emzo8 https://youtu.be/8gno0_emzo8

dmix 6y ago
That's a good observation. There is a slow pacing but when it's quiet your mind is still working so it's not 'boring' time. It's just like in sports now where someone has to be rambling about something the entire game, even though you're watching it. It's still useful, often to find out which player shot or for the added excitement with the crowd. But they ALL feel the need to fill dead space the entire show which I personally would experiment with if I ran the show. There's plenty going on always already. Humans are weird like that. I'm sure this has applications in Youtube and other educational videos or whatever.
- geoduck14 6y ago
  If the losing team wants to win this game, they are going to need to score more points. https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a8/21/10/a82110b6d53e4089a33e99bb8d2cde7f.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a8/21/10/a82110b6d53e4089a33e...
TaylorAlexander 6y ago
If you’re up for it, go watch an old episode of the show Columbo [1]. Each episode from this 1970’s era TV was over an hour long with no commercials. It’s full of slow, long, quiet scenes. There’s so much time. It’s really amazing to watch. It helped inspire me while making YouTube videos to give more time when cutting things, even if it’s not optimized for algorithmic advancement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbo
foepys 6y ago
That's mostly American television. I cannot watch American documentaries because everything is being hyped as largest, heaviest, most expensive, deadliest, etc. and is being narrated in the same sensationalist tone. I cannot convey the tone by text but you certainly know what I mean. The interesting details always get lost because the hype must be there to keep people watching after the next ad break. European documentaries usually simply follow the process and neutrally explain what is happening.
- systemvoltage 6y ago
  Not sure if I agree. European YouTube channels are doing the same. It’s a general trend, not specific to American productions. The real reason is the incentives that content producers are subjected to. Notice how YouTube algorithms have promoted thumbnails to include faces. TV, documentaries and the likes are subjected to viewership and engagement metrics. Things have gotten worse over the years. There are still a lot of great YouTube channels - Applied Science, Tech Ingredients and such. Nationality has nothing to do with this. 1970’s American television was amazing. Watch some Bell Labs videos or how Saul Bass did branding.
  - bonoboTP 6y ago
    I think the opposite is true. There are so many interesting YouTube channels today, it's "quality documentaries" that were unthinkable in my childhood in the 90s. Technology Connections, Numberphile, 3blue1brown, NativLang, Ben Eater, VSauce, Tom Scott etc. As a teenager I could watch NatGeo and perhaps another similar channel with 2 hour dragged out documentaries with talking heads edited and narrated by people who don't love the topic the way these YouTubers do. I think the Internet is still great if you curate what you watch and read, it's better than ever. But perhaps it's worse on the average. The junk is more potent and the intellectual poison is dosed higher than even the worst reality shows used to be on TV. Both of these can be true at the same time. Also, you're watching this 1937 docu on YouTube, not on Discovery Channel on TV.
    - systemvoltage 6y ago
aasasd 6y ago
That's exactly why this three-hour ‘Intro to synthesis’ series is one of my favorite explanations on musicmaking: https://youtu.be/atvtBE6t48M https://youtu.be/atvtBE6t48M Instead of running through all the parameters in ten minutes and one second, the dude keeps twiddling the knobs and lets you hear what they do. He spends ten minutes on dialing just one sound. As a bonus, since the vid is from the early eighties, you can occupy yourself by guessing exactly how high the man is.
ardy42 6y ago
> The lack of background music and pace is really interesting to me. Compared to a typical "how it's made" video [1] (which I feel has a similar level of detail), this video feels significantly more digestible. Those moments of silence feel totally alien and out of place in today's style, but I think contributes positively to my ability to understand and process the information. I think that's because the older movie is an actual educational movie, while the video you linked is really pseudo-educational entertainment. An educational video has the goal of leaving the viewer with actual understanding of something, while the pseudo-educational video only cares to vaguely tickle the viewer's curiosity, and is fine to leave them nearly as ignorant as when they started. While the two movies may have a "similar level of detail," the educational video focuses on fully explaining a specific problem and solution, while the pseudo-educational video only vaguely skims through the high-level steps of some manufacturing process and barely even explains what the product is for. http://www.engineerguy.com/ http://www.engineerguy.com/ makes educational videos similar to this 1937 movie on a lot of similar topics.
- giansegato 6y ago
  Agree. I got quite interested in the topic in the past [1] — it ultimately boils down to optimizing for attention (modern YouTube) vs optimizing for data retention (traditional education). [1] https://giansegato.com/essays/edutainment-is-not-learning/ https://giansegato.com/essays/edutainment-is-not-learning/

by tqi 6y ago

dmix 6y ago

That's a good observation. There is a slow pacing but when it's quiet your mind is still working so it's not 'boring' time. It's just like in sports now where someone has to be rambling about something the entire game, even though you're watching it. It's still useful, often to find out which player shot or for the added excitement with the crowd. But they ALL feel the need to fill dead space the entire show which I personally would experiment with if I ran the show. There's plenty going on always already. Humans are weird like that. I'm sure this has applications in Youtube and other educational videos or whatever.

geoduck14 6y ago
If the losing team wants to win this game, they are going to need to score more points. https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a8/21/10/a82110b6d53e4089a33e99bb8d2cde7f.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a8/21/10/a82110b6d53e4089a33e...

TaylorAlexander 6y ago

If you’re up for it, go watch an old episode of the show Columbo [1]. Each episode from this 1970’s era TV was over an hour long with no commercials. It’s full of slow, long, quiet scenes. There’s so much time. It’s really amazing to watch. It helped inspire me while making YouTube videos to give more time when cutting things, even if it’s not optimized for algorithmic advancement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbo

foepys 6y ago

That's mostly American television. I cannot watch American documentaries because everything is being hyped as largest, heaviest, most expensive, deadliest, etc. and is being narrated in the same sensationalist tone. I cannot convey the tone by text but you certainly know what I mean. The interesting details always get lost because the hype must be there to keep people watching after the next ad break. European documentaries usually simply follow the process and neutrally explain what is happening.

systemvoltage 6y ago
Not sure if I agree. European YouTube channels are doing the same. It’s a general trend, not specific to American productions. The real reason is the incentives that content producers are subjected to. Notice how YouTube algorithms have promoted thumbnails to include faces. TV, documentaries and the likes are subjected to viewership and engagement metrics. Things have gotten worse over the years. There are still a lot of great YouTube channels - Applied Science, Tech Ingredients and such. Nationality has nothing to do with this. 1970’s American television was amazing. Watch some Bell Labs videos or how Saul Bass did branding.
- bonoboTP 6y ago
  I think the opposite is true. There are so many interesting YouTube channels today, it's "quality documentaries" that were unthinkable in my childhood in the 90s. Technology Connections, Numberphile, 3blue1brown, NativLang, Ben Eater, VSauce, Tom Scott etc. As a teenager I could watch NatGeo and perhaps another similar channel with 2 hour dragged out documentaries with talking heads edited and narrated by people who don't love the topic the way these YouTubers do. I think the Internet is still great if you curate what you watch and read, it's better than ever. But perhaps it's worse on the average. The junk is more potent and the intellectual poison is dosed higher than even the worst reality shows used to be on TV. Both of these can be true at the same time. Also, you're watching this 1937 docu on YouTube, not on Discovery Channel on TV.
  - systemvoltage 6y ago

aasasd 6y ago

That's exactly why this three-hour ‘Intro to synthesis’ series is one of my favorite explanations on musicmaking: https://youtu.be/atvtBE6t48M https://youtu.be/atvtBE6t48M Instead of running through all the parameters in ten minutes and one second, the dude keeps twiddling the knobs and lets you hear what they do. He spends ten minutes on dialing just one sound. As a bonus, since the vid is from the early eighties, you can occupy yourself by guessing exactly how high the man is.

ardy42 6y ago

> The lack of background music and pace is really interesting to me. Compared to a typical "how it's made" video [1] (which I feel has a similar level of detail), this video feels significantly more digestible. Those moments of silence feel totally alien and out of place in today's style, but I think contributes positively to my ability to understand and process the information. I think that's because the older movie is an actual educational movie, while the video you linked is really pseudo-educational entertainment. An educational video has the goal of leaving the viewer with actual understanding of something, while the pseudo-educational video only cares to vaguely tickle the viewer's curiosity, and is fine to leave them nearly as ignorant as when they started. While the two movies may have a "similar level of detail," the educational video focuses on fully explaining a specific problem and solution, while the pseudo-educational video only vaguely skims through the high-level steps of some manufacturing process and barely even explains what the product is for. http://www.engineerguy.com/ http://www.engineerguy.com/ makes educational videos similar to this 1937 movie on a lot of similar topics.

giansegato 6y ago
Agree. I got quite interested in the topic in the past [1] — it ultimately boils down to optimizing for attention (modern YouTube) vs optimizing for data retention (traditional education). [1] https://giansegato.com/essays/edutainment-is-not-learning/ https://giansegato.com/essays/edutainment-is-not-learning/