Take a hint
-
This post did not contain any content.
Because small creators are basically forced to take chances and be creative to survive with limited budgets while big corpo can take the boring safe bet and the big money attracts people that have a lot of talent for personal marketing and not much else while the number of people involved makes everything a design by committee.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I've yet to see a "high quality YouTube Show that's not just copying stuff that's been researched by real journalists or documentaries on TV, cobbled together with cheap stock photos and/or Blender Animations
-
This post did not contain any content.
What's interesting to me is the lack of crossover between the two. As far as I'm aware, no popular Youtube creator has ever successfully transitioned to doing Hollywood movies or TV shows. Sure there's been the occasional cameo, short-lived series, or direct to streaming movie, but none of them had any staying power. Why isn't Hollywood treating youtube as a farm league for new talent and IP that they can snatch up and exploit after the market for it is proven?
To be clear, I'm not saying I want that to happen. The good content creators deserve better as far as I'm concerned. But the opportunity seems so obvious that I'm truly baffled at the apparent lack of interest.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Dropout and Nebula are making some insanely high quality content, and those are just the two obvious examples that came to my mind. Both also exhibit a more progressive business model and are less capitalistic in their thinking.
I’m sure there are plenty of similar examples.
-
I've yet to see a "high quality YouTube Show that's not just copying stuff that's been researched by real journalists or documentaries on TV, cobbled together with cheap stock photos and/or Blender Animations
Check out Real Engineering. He does good research and a lot of his own interviews.
Practical Engineering writes hits own material and makes a lot of mini models to demonstrate the effects he is talking about.
Red Letter Media has a ton of movie discussion and analysis.
-
This post did not contain any content.
The amount of indie games in my "best games of the year" list is increasing year by year.
Corpos are skilled at wringing any and all interesting bits out of something and reducing it to harmless, overdone slop that still sells. They don't take risks because that may make them $5 less. But indies do.
-
I've yet to see a "high quality YouTube Show that's not just copying stuff that's been researched by real journalists or documentaries on TV, cobbled together with cheap stock photos and/or Blender Animations
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I think there are plenty of channels that aren't just using "cheap stock photos and/or blender animations", and I can list some examples if you'd like. The first criterion is harder, though, because sci-com by its very nature isn't going to be original research, so channels in this category tend to be more creative or opinion-based (i.e. multi-hour video essays).
That said, if I'm trying to really get at the gist of what you're saying, I think you're looking for shows that have a lot of original work and high production value?
Some random examples I can think of (I'm sure there's plenty more):
- 3 Blue 1 Brown
- Captain Disillusion
- Gamers Nexus (specifically their investigations)
- Smarter Every Day
- Every Frame a Painting (inactive but with a huge catalogue)
- PBS Eons
- Technology Connections
- Montemayor
- Taylor Lorenz
- Climate Town
- Tantacrul
(this is excluding so many great video essayists and artists since the original comment seems not to be referring to those)
-
What's interesting to me is the lack of crossover between the two. As far as I'm aware, no popular Youtube creator has ever successfully transitioned to doing Hollywood movies or TV shows. Sure there's been the occasional cameo, short-lived series, or direct to streaming movie, but none of them had any staying power. Why isn't Hollywood treating youtube as a farm league for new talent and IP that they can snatch up and exploit after the market for it is proven?
To be clear, I'm not saying I want that to happen. The good content creators deserve better as far as I'm concerned. But the opportunity seems so obvious that I'm truly baffled at the apparent lack of interest.
David F. Sandberg aka "ponysmasher" comes to mind. He started doing largely horror films himself on no/low budgets. One of his own films got opportunity to become a feature film. That then gave him future opportunities, the largest of which was Shazam! (2019).
Additionally when YouTube Premium (YouTube Red at the time) first launched they also launched YouTube Originals. Many of those programs were created by YouTubers.
The "Originals" eventually stopped being made, but it's not clear if the issue was the content, the service or a bit of both.
-
For the Empire by AFK is preeeetty cool.
Just rewatched it a few hours ago! I can only recommend it, it is my favorite webseries. Still mind blowing how they put out this amazing content for free.
-
This post did not contain any content.
RIP battle of Axanar and Star Trek continues.
best Star Trek content in a while
why are they sending cease and desist instead of offering to produce their content. are they allergic to money?
-
What's interesting to me is the lack of crossover between the two. As far as I'm aware, no popular Youtube creator has ever successfully transitioned to doing Hollywood movies or TV shows. Sure there's been the occasional cameo, short-lived series, or direct to streaming movie, but none of them had any staying power. Why isn't Hollywood treating youtube as a farm league for new talent and IP that they can snatch up and exploit after the market for it is proven?
To be clear, I'm not saying I want that to happen. The good content creators deserve better as far as I'm concerned. But the opportunity seems so obvious that I'm truly baffled at the apparent lack of interest.
It may just be a factor that a lot of YouTubers don't want to give up creative control. Working with Hollywood ultimately usually means giving up a lot of control on the type and content of your work. They're paying for the big production budget; they get final say in all creative decisions.
YouTubing is a career type that naturally attracts those that want creative independence. And by the time someone would be of the clout to make a deal with a studio or network, they're probably already earning enough money to be making a comfortable living from their work. 10,000-follower YouTube channels aren't getting calls from Discovery, Nickelodian, or Fox News. They're only going to be recruiting from the top channels. And people at that level are probably already earning a nice full-time living. Channels of that level are often entire miniature production companies. The biggest YouTubers aren't individuals, but creative teams.
That's a level of success many people would consider ideal. You get to live comfortably, you get to have a decent amount of social esteem, you get to pursue what projects you want. And you get the personal satisfaction of providing incomes for a whole bunch of your closest colleagues and maybe even closest friends. Many would call that about as perfect a life as there is possible. And you want to maybe give all that up to go work for a cable network?
I suppose for enough money, you could buy people out. But there's more to life than money after all. If you're already living quite comfortably, already very financially secure, would you really want to give up what you have - complete creative independence*, just to make a bit more? YouTube's top ranks are filled with people who left the rat race to get into YouTube. Many simply won't want to go back into that big corporate world, regardless of how gilded their chains may be.
*Obviously, creative independence is relative. All forms of ad-funded content will have to pander to the whims of advertisers. Even completely audience-funded works are subject to the whims of the audience.
-
What's interesting to me is the lack of crossover between the two. As far as I'm aware, no popular Youtube creator has ever successfully transitioned to doing Hollywood movies or TV shows. Sure there's been the occasional cameo, short-lived series, or direct to streaming movie, but none of them had any staying power. Why isn't Hollywood treating youtube as a farm league for new talent and IP that they can snatch up and exploit after the market for it is proven?
To be clear, I'm not saying I want that to happen. The good content creators deserve better as far as I'm concerned. But the opportunity seems so obvious that I'm truly baffled at the apparent lack of interest.
Olan Rogers made Final Space and he's working on Lightspeed right now. It had a pretty successful run and has a loyal fanbase, despite it being cancelled.
But yeah, stories like these are very rare.
-
RIP battle of Axanar and Star Trek continues.
best Star Trek content in a while
why are they sending cease and desist instead of offering to produce their content. are they allergic to money?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]It's not that they're allergic to money but rather the inflated sense of self-importance and ego. To rightsholders and executives, it's unthinkable that fans could come up with something better and profitable using the intellectual property that they earned (read: bought) fair and square. And if someone somehow did, it's a threat to the bottom line, not something to embrace and encourage.
-
The amount of indie games in my "best games of the year" list is increasing year by year.
Corpos are skilled at wringing any and all interesting bits out of something and reducing it to harmless, overdone slop that still sells. They don't take risks because that may make them $5 less. But indies do.
Corpos are skilled at wringing any and all interesting bits out of something and reducing it to harmless, overdone slop that still sells. They don't take risks because that may make them $5 less. But indies do.
I'm still amazed at how Gearbox managed to royally fuck up Risk of Rain 2. They had a great game with solid foundations handed to them, and they somehow managed to both regress the game logic into being tied to framerate and release a buggy mess of a DLC in one fell swoop.
-
What's interesting to me is the lack of crossover between the two. As far as I'm aware, no popular Youtube creator has ever successfully transitioned to doing Hollywood movies or TV shows. Sure there's been the occasional cameo, short-lived series, or direct to streaming movie, but none of them had any staying power. Why isn't Hollywood treating youtube as a farm league for new talent and IP that they can snatch up and exploit after the market for it is proven?
To be clear, I'm not saying I want that to happen. The good content creators deserve better as far as I'm concerned. But the opportunity seems so obvious that I'm truly baffled at the apparent lack of interest.
Good creators get paid. Why split the buck with Hollywood rapists I mean producers?
-
I've yet to see a "high quality YouTube Show that's not just copying stuff that's been researched by real journalists or documentaries on TV, cobbled together with cheap stock photos and/or Blender Animations
My favourite journalism outlet is Jung & naiv. They are German but purely YouTube based and donation funded. They do very long interviews with relevant political figures from the chancellor to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture.
Another german creator who made a full blown fiction series with CGI and of a quality that is equal to traditional production companies is Julien Bams 'Songs aus der Bohne'. -
Olan Rogers made Final Space and he's working on Lightspeed right now. It had a pretty successful run and has a loyal fanbase, despite it being cancelled.
But yeah, stories like these are very rare.
Bee and Puppycat to Netflix too.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I’ve never seen a YouTuber that actually meets that description though
-
I’ve never seen a YouTuber that actually meets that description though
I can think of a few off hand but the best to come to mind is the dude who did the Astartes videos.
-
It's not that they're allergic to money but rather the inflated sense of self-importance and ego. To rightsholders and executives, it's unthinkable that fans could come up with something better and profitable using the intellectual property that they earned (read: bought) fair and square. And if someone somehow did, it's a threat to the bottom line, not something to embrace and encourage.
it's fucked up that the creator cannot make his art, that he created, because it's own by a company.
