Have this guy's video thumbnails always been this bad?
he knows what the algorithm wants
If they avoid the thumbnails out of principle, they lose a significant chunk of revenue.
It's a small annoyance for a small number of viewers, and there are browser extensions you can get which fix clickbaity thumbnails. The clear choice is to do the thumbnails
I guess. I only heard about him a year or so ago and it seemed like his thumbnails were more "normal"just that recently.
Click-baityness aside, it just reeks of vapid, shallow, content. I know you're not supposed to judge a book by its cover, but if I see Fabio on the cover of a book, I know I'm in the wrong section so there's some merit to it.
I'm not going to get my tech insight from someone who makes their content look like this.
It's not the worst. I don't have a problem with mkbhd's thumbnails.
I have a genuine curiosity for what you think thumbnails should be?
If not this, then what?
The thumbnail shows the product, shows the general reactions.
What else do you want?
Personally I avoid videos with variations of the open mouth, confused face, and disappointed look these days. It's just the area of YouTube I've gotten tired of, and those videos usually tend to be pretty shilly playing to the algorithm and tend to be from bigger channels. I understand why its done, but it doesn't shield from criticism. Anyways good for them, but it has manifested in a way where because the algorithm is what dictates the product it feels like AI in a way where the presentation style gets tiring.
Fair enough.
Do we really need to have an exaggerated reaction in the thumbnail?
It's barely a reaction in the first place.
I know the rest of YouTube is inundated with such thumbnails but this one in particular is very, very on point.
Less cringeworthy thumbnails? What else do YOU want?
The thumbnail should be the frame closest to the middle of the video's runtime, with no regard for context. I have an extension that does just that.
IMO, that defeats the purpose of the thumbnail.
YouTube worked fine for almost a decade that way. Custom thumbnails are pretty recent.
True. But as a concept, it only makes sense... right? If you're editing a video to have high production quality, then there should be something to draw the audience in... a generic thumbnail wouldn't be as useful to get the attention of a new viewer, right?
And even if they add an option to only choose a frame from the video, that can also be manipulated as long as we know which frames are likely to be chosen for the choices.
Indeed, the reason they added the option was because of how many people were just putting their custom thumbnail as the middle frame of their video, which was jarring every time it happened.
As far as production value and drawing in the audience, I really don't care. I would much rather just not see obnoxious shit no matter who it benefits. But that's what happens when one website has an effective monopoly, people have to scratch out any advantage they can within the closed system because there just aren't enough viewers to go around. At this point, what viewers click on is basically irrelevant anyway because we've crossed over the feedback loop point: because it used to drive engagement on its own, a pog face thumbnail is necessary because not having one gets your channel sent to Algorithmic Deprioritization Purgatory even faster than criticizing youtube on social media does.
The almighty algorithm forces it. I don't care as long as it's not outright misleading
Honestly, when my favourite subscriptions post these thumbnails I don't watch the video. I have one that has never done anything like this but posted their latest video with someone's stupid shocked face on it. I won't watch it and if they continue I'll be unsubscribing.
I think this is just the grumpy old man coming out of me. I realise they are just trying to get more views. It's just frustrating they got this popular without these thumbnails so why start now?
That's shit, you're going to lose out on content you enjoy because the creators are trying to maximise their reach. If the content changed it'd be fair but just the marketing is no reason to do that.
Corollary: when content creators start trying to maximize reach instead of relevance or quality, it's time to stop watching them.
The thumbnail is not the content.
Do you also judge books by their covers?
I mean, the cover of a book is very important as a first impression, sure...
But if I like a book series, I don't care what the cover is like... so, your point technically stands...
The thumbnail is not the content.
Not the whole content, but significant enough that it can be used as a sample signal about the editorial principles from the author.
And yes, the same applies to book covers.
Except the author generally does not design the book cover, and often does not design the thumbnail.
Not the case here because mkbhd is author, editor and producer of the content.
Honestly who gives a shit
At least two people just from this thread alone...
If the quality goes to shit, what's the point on watching it then?
Thumbnails and titles are not high on my list of criteria for quality content. Clickbaity or vague is annoying but what about the next 10 to 20 minutes?
There's an extension for de-clickbaiting thumbnails
Yeah, you don't get to his size without clickbaiting
Mobile games don't become as lucrative as it is without mtx. People understand the business reason, but it doesn't mean it shields it from criticism. Doesn't need defending either, since as you said money is enough to not care. You don't really start doing that stuff if you care about perception, so I say good for them monetarily speaking. But, that's the extent of my praise.
He's just the classic YT clickbait content. Much better out there, smaller channels are where the quality content is, not these big cash farming ones.
Yeah I was about to say: "This is an MKBHD video. Don't click it."
And yeah his thumbnails were always terrible. But to be fair, most were from a content perspective, too. Except the very very early ones. It's a business, I get it. But it's so weird how you can watch a 1 hour video and know nothing more than what you knew before. And that's normal. You've been shown a lot of really pretty shots of a phone that make it look very beautiful, so clearly he or someone from his team is a great photographer. But there's little else in the videos.
That's been a youtube trend for a while now. Most 10-20 minute videos should not have been longer than 2-5 minutes. It caused me to massively reduce the time I spend on youtube - and for me to watch a video longer than 5 minutes from somebody I don't know it needs to be about a very interesting topic and a description hinting at it not being just filler yet again.
Humans love faces.
Our brains are wired in a way that makes us want to see faces everywhere. It's why we experience pareidolia - seeing faces where none exist. Like on treebark, moon/mars surface pics, or the people who claim to see Jesus' face on toast.
Thumbnail creators have found that just by putting a face on a thumbnail, people are much more likely to be interested.
Look also at film and TV covers. Pretty much all of them depict faces too. People are drawn to faces.
Having a face in the thumbnail isn't the problem though. Having a useless arrow pointing to the thing that the video is obviously about coupled with the guy holding his head in his hands like he just caught his favorite phone in bed with another YouTuber is the problem.
I thought this guy was supposed to be well regarded.
He is. He's one of the most successful phone tech YouTubers. They do this because it's what gets clicks. Doesn't matter if you like it or hate it.
Why do you guys give a shit about thumbnails? The titles and description are way more informative for me. I curse bad titles way more. And this is a good title.
These "tech youtubers" are dumb AF. They keep feeding idiots anything if a brand pays them good money.
They don't understand evolving technology and their threats. Fucker kept going on about Facebook or something once. Just after facebook was accused of genocide in Myanmar.
Yet this video is very negative about the device, unless I'm missing something about your comment?
Have this guy's video thumbnails always been this bad?
he knows what the algorithm wants
If they avoid the thumbnails out of principle, they lose a significant chunk of revenue.
It's a small annoyance for a small number of viewers, and there are browser extensions you can get which fix clickbaity thumbnails. The clear choice is to do the thumbnails
I guess. I only heard about him a year or so ago and it seemed like his thumbnails were more "normal"just that recently.
Click-baityness aside, it just reeks of vapid, shallow, content. I know you're not supposed to judge a book by its cover, but if I see Fabio on the cover of a book, I know I'm in the wrong section so there's some merit to it.
I'm not going to get my tech insight from someone who makes their content look like this.
It's not the worst. I don't have a problem with mkbhd's thumbnails.
I have a genuine curiosity for what you think thumbnails should be? If not this, then what?
The thumbnail shows the product, shows the general reactions.
What else do you want?
Personally I avoid videos with variations of the open mouth, confused face, and disappointed look these days. It's just the area of YouTube I've gotten tired of, and those videos usually tend to be pretty shilly playing to the algorithm and tend to be from bigger channels. I understand why its done, but it doesn't shield from criticism. Anyways good for them, but it has manifested in a way where because the algorithm is what dictates the product it feels like AI in a way where the presentation style gets tiring.
Fair enough.
Do we really need to have an exaggerated reaction in the thumbnail?
It's barely a reaction in the first place.
I know the rest of YouTube is inundated with such thumbnails but this one in particular is very, very on point.
Less cringeworthy thumbnails? What else do YOU want?
The thumbnail should be the frame closest to the middle of the video's runtime, with no regard for context. I have an extension that does just that.
IMO, that defeats the purpose of the thumbnail.
YouTube worked fine for almost a decade that way. Custom thumbnails are pretty recent.
True. But as a concept, it only makes sense... right? If you're editing a video to have high production quality, then there should be something to draw the audience in... a generic thumbnail wouldn't be as useful to get the attention of a new viewer, right?
And even if they add an option to only choose a frame from the video, that can also be manipulated as long as we know which frames are likely to be chosen for the choices.
Indeed, the reason they added the option was because of how many people were just putting their custom thumbnail as the middle frame of their video, which was jarring every time it happened.
As far as production value and drawing in the audience, I really don't care. I would much rather just not see obnoxious shit no matter who it benefits. But that's what happens when one website has an effective monopoly, people have to scratch out any advantage they can within the closed system because there just aren't enough viewers to go around. At this point, what viewers click on is basically irrelevant anyway because we've crossed over the feedback loop point: because it used to drive engagement on its own, a pog face thumbnail is necessary because not having one gets your channel sent to Algorithmic Deprioritization Purgatory even faster than criticizing youtube on social media does.
The almighty algorithm forces it. I don't care as long as it's not outright misleading
Honestly, when my favourite subscriptions post these thumbnails I don't watch the video. I have one that has never done anything like this but posted their latest video with someone's stupid shocked face on it. I won't watch it and if they continue I'll be unsubscribing.
I think this is just the grumpy old man coming out of me. I realise they are just trying to get more views. It's just frustrating they got this popular without these thumbnails so why start now?
That's shit, you're going to lose out on content you enjoy because the creators are trying to maximise their reach. If the content changed it'd be fair but just the marketing is no reason to do that.
Corollary: when content creators start trying to maximize reach instead of relevance or quality, it's time to stop watching them.
The thumbnail is not the content.
Do you also judge books by their covers?
I mean, the cover of a book is very important as a first impression, sure...
But if I like a book series, I don't care what the cover is like... so, your point technically stands...
Not the whole content, but significant enough that it can be used as a sample signal about the editorial principles from the author.
And yes, the same applies to book covers.
Except the author generally does not design the book cover, and often does not design the thumbnail.
Not the case here because mkbhd is author, editor and producer of the content.
Honestly who gives a shit
At least two people just from this thread alone...
If the quality goes to shit, what's the point on watching it then?
Thumbnails and titles are not high on my list of criteria for quality content. Clickbaity or vague is annoying but what about the next 10 to 20 minutes?
There's an extension for de-clickbaiting thumbnails
Yeah, you don't get to his size without clickbaiting
Mobile games don't become as lucrative as it is without mtx. People understand the business reason, but it doesn't mean it shields it from criticism. Doesn't need defending either, since as you said money is enough to not care. You don't really start doing that stuff if you care about perception, so I say good for them monetarily speaking. But, that's the extent of my praise.
He's just the classic YT clickbait content. Much better out there, smaller channels are where the quality content is, not these big cash farming ones.
Yeah I was about to say: "This is an MKBHD video. Don't click it."
And yeah his thumbnails were always terrible. But to be fair, most were from a content perspective, too. Except the very very early ones. It's a business, I get it. But it's so weird how you can watch a 1 hour video and know nothing more than what you knew before. And that's normal. You've been shown a lot of really pretty shots of a phone that make it look very beautiful, so clearly he or someone from his team is a great photographer. But there's little else in the videos.
That's been a youtube trend for a while now. Most 10-20 minute videos should not have been longer than 2-5 minutes. It caused me to massively reduce the time I spend on youtube - and for me to watch a video longer than 5 minutes from somebody I don't know it needs to be about a very interesting topic and a description hinting at it not being just filler yet again.
Humans love faces.
Our brains are wired in a way that makes us want to see faces everywhere. It's why we experience pareidolia - seeing faces where none exist. Like on treebark, moon/mars surface pics, or the people who claim to see Jesus' face on toast.
Thumbnail creators have found that just by putting a face on a thumbnail, people are much more likely to be interested.
Look also at film and TV covers. Pretty much all of them depict faces too. People are drawn to faces.
Having a face in the thumbnail isn't the problem though. Having a useless arrow pointing to the thing that the video is obviously about coupled with the guy holding his head in his hands like he just caught his favorite phone in bed with another YouTuber is the problem.
I thought this guy was supposed to be well regarded.
He is. He's one of the most successful phone tech YouTubers. They do this because it's what gets clicks. Doesn't matter if you like it or hate it.
Why do you guys give a shit about thumbnails? The titles and description are way more informative for me. I curse bad titles way more. And this is a good title.
These "tech youtubers" are dumb AF. They keep feeding idiots anything if a brand pays them good money. They don't understand evolving technology and their threats. Fucker kept going on about Facebook or something once. Just after facebook was accused of genocide in Myanmar.
Yet this video is very negative about the device, unless I'm missing something about your comment?
crypto bad. fb, google, tesla good
You got one part of that right
Fanboi?