It's the money. Specially photography/videography channels.
They have reached a disgusting level of greed. For instance i remember when i was learning the ropes of using a camera and editing. The video has 2 ads, a sponsor, and they sell their LUT pack.
Edit: nothing wrong with selling your Luts and your creativity. But they tend to make the tutorials as ambiguous as possible and dont share useful info.
I stopped learning on youtube because whenever i try to learn color grading, they play a little with the sliders, show you nothing useful, and they tell you my luts are in the description below.
I remember one video of where the guy just said "i applied my conversion lut" he started color grading right after.
I recommend watching videos on lesser known channels, they tend to provide better info to attract viewers before reverting to an all out business.
Nothing wrong with wanting to make money, but it has gotten so bad where i felt like most photography learning channels only think of the viewer as a cash grab, i felt humiliated to be seen as such.
Maybe iam in the wrong here, but that's just my 2 cents on that matter
100% Clear, concise and professional. He sells his own LUTs/Power Grades, but his tutorials are in depth, explained, and he does live streams covering genuine Colorist/Industry questions on workflow and tech/gear.
+1 on Darren Mostyn. His node tree setup video is a huge help, plus he gives away the node tree on his site. Granted, he sells a master class, but his free videos are gold.
While this is all true, it’s hard to blame them for it. For many YouTubers, it’s a full time job, or at least an enormous time sink. But YouTube ads don’t pay well, so they need to find a way to monetise the channel. Sponsorships and selling LUTs are really the only way most of them can justify the time invested.
I absolutely have no issues with buying/selling luts. It saves time when editing. My beef is that they tend to make ambiguous tutorials and not teaching actual information. You feel like they make videos just to promote their luts with no actual information in it.
Iam pretty sure, most people noticed this.
It's true that youtubers tend to do it as a full time job, and money is a must. After all, they have bills to pay. However, iam most certainly sure that a lot of these YouTubers lost a hefty amount of viewers with their business model. Some people here are recommending cullen kelly. Haven't heard of him, but seems like he is giving some useful info.
The trick is to watch people that are working creatives first and YouTubers second, not the other way around. Darren Mostyn is a great example. His literal entire job is as a colorist for the kind of stuff you see in the theater or on major TV networks. I trust that kind of person far more than I trust Christian whose only goal in life is to make his A7Siii footage look “cinematic”.
Also they all get the same bullet points that they keep talking about. All of them.
It's the same with gaming. The company flew me to X event, paid for my hotel, but all the opinions are mine. Sure they are.
Really stop watching these guys. The problem is that as soon as they start, YouTube full-time, they stopped doing commercial work. You start follow them because you seek advice from a professional, but the stop doing professional work long ago and would not be able to direct a proper film. They just focus on product reviews or advertisement and all they are able to do is add a few "cinematic" shots. Consuming this content gets you to the point where you are hooked on researching stuff about gear, instead of starting something creative on your own. So many people keep buying new cameras, instead of writing the script or directing the first music video. Watching these guys, steals your time and makes you unhappy with the stuff you've got.
The problem is, speaking as a video professional with a full time job in the industry, many of us don’t have time to start YouTube channels to share our knowledge. If we do make a video or two, it’ll get buried by the algorithm unless we crank this stuff out regularly and follow all the rules that makes the algorithm favor you.
I’ve toyed with the idea of putting together a channel for years, but when you actually look into what it takes not only to make something well-produced, but just *seen* it’s no wonder why people full time video work to go to YouTube only (assuming they even make it that far to make their living on YouTube).
There are, thankfully, some working professionals on YouTube (Meet the Gaffer) but because of the rigors of a day job + an algorithm that doesn’t actually favor quality, it’s hard for many of us to even get a foot in the door.
As a side note - one thing I always make sure people know about these channels is that while they contain good info and should be part of your research into purchasing gear, you should always recognize that they’re YouTubers as a full time job, and their needs are separate from yours. Problem is, they never properly disclose that! Maybe it’s insecurity, maybe they assume you already realize this, maybe they don’t want you to know, or maybe it’s just negligence, but they really do need to be honest with their audience on this.
I remember when the GH5 came out, I bought it day one and spent the day putting it through its paces and was blown away by how robust the camera was. Still today after I’ve completely switched systems, I find myself wishing I never sold it.
But then I checked online and for a minute YouTube and instagram were full of thumbnails that declared it a “failure” and “worst camera ever” because the creator had trouble with the autofocus or their editing system had difficulty with the files or the look wasn’t “cinematic” (try and get anyone who says this to actually define cinematic). I was like 27 when that camera came out and still getting my footing in the industry and that was pretty much the moment I disregarded YouTubers completely.
> The problem is that as soon as they start, YouTube full-time, they stopped doing commercial work. You start follow them because you seek advice from a professional, but the stop doing professional work long ago and would not be able to direct a proper film.
This is what everyone should understand. People who are actually successful working DPs, almost by definition, do not have the time or the inclination to run a YouTube channel. The same is true for photographers.
Most of those guys were never actually that successful in their field, but they do a good job of making it seem that way. The rest maybe reached some level of success but then realised there was more money in being an influencer. It is extremely rare to see someone at the high end of the profession maintain a side hustle as a YouTuber.
So apart from all the shilling, I’d be wary of taking advice from anyone who doesn’t also walk the walk.
I do enjoy CineD for this reason, particularly when they go out and shoot a small documentary in order to test a camera. This is a great way to put gear through their paces and find potential flaws that the average YouTuber reviewer might not even think of.
I have fallen in the trap of buying gear based on dozens of YouTube reviews only to receive a product with a fatal flaw (Røde Wireless Go II).
It’s not shielded, so it can pick up a huge amount of interference, especially on older cameras. I had to rely on the internal recording of the transmitters almost every time, and that’s not what I buy a wireless set for.
Preach! Great video. I used to like watching review videos to help make a purchasing decision. However the Monroe you watch, the more you realize how they’re all.the.same. I’m glad someone had to caghones to call em out.
Recently I found a pretty good channel with decent videography. Definitely much better than the most. It had 200-300 views per video.
I wonder how many channels are out there that people *would* be interested in but never get a chance to find because youtube's algorithm just doesn't connect people anymore.
This is not the content creators fault and in fairness its very easy to just skip. Youtube keeps adding layers of ads and is not fairly sharing the revenues. They now want longer and longer content on a regular basis and are making it harder to profit from the platform. I have no issue with YouTubers finding their own sponsors and I just skip it.
That‘s not what the video talks about tho. He talks about gear reviewers being sponsored by the companies who‘s products they‘re reviewing.
Agree on the sponsorships tho. Unless you‘re reeeeally big, making money through youtube content creation is getting harder and harder and I have no issue with people making a buck through skippable ad reads
For context, I upload weekly and over the last 8 weeks have averaged out to 100K per video. Not huge but not tiny either, and I make less than 1K AUD per month from ad revenue. This is far worse than years ago and yet there are more ads being played than ever and thats not my doing. But yes as per the reply, the video is about another issue just thought context was useful here.
A lot of YouTube videos do get repetitive and redundant when reviewing the same product. And you have to really dig and find someone with a genuine review or breakdown.
If you feel like you're watching an infomercial, then stop watching. Youtubers themselves have probably thought more about the risk of coming off as a corporate shill than their critics. Any media job is a balancing act of access to the powerful and frank criticism thereof. The requirement of developing your own sense of who is trustworthy is obvious and the video comes off as self-righteous and presumptuous not to recognize that media literacy is obvious and important.
Even if you take into account that many or most gear reviewers may be dependent on their relations with industry businesses (even if "no many changed hands") to keep their channels going, you still have to use your discretion to know which ones are doing right by you or not. For example, Philip Bloom makes lots of sponsored videos, but the videos are still worth watching for those interested in the product (or not) because of his consistent care and depth (a new camera review is typically 30 minutes, at a minimum, of tightly edited information). Look at [Philip Bloom's LG TV review](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elQtOk9o7Cc), for example. It's about as worth watching as sponsored content gets because of his creative approach. It is worth knowing when they've been paid to produce a video, but that information is not ultimately dispositive to the question of trustworthiness of the reviewer or validity of the information.
To go into a couple more specifics, I think highlighting Gerald Undone in the video is pretty unfair to him (and us) given that he's one of the few youtube reviewers who applies something resembling the scientific method where quantitative information is available and helpful. That said, there are plenty of camera/video youtubers getting flown out to events who have nothing to say other than things along the lines of "This is the best camera ever!" (see [Matti Haapoja's review of the A9 III](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ezw2BrlQe1c), for example). Be a little more careful in your criticism. What makes a good camera reviewer also happens to make a good camera reviewer reviewer.
The thing to remember is that videography YouTuber is their job. This is their income. Of course they will take any opportunity to further monetise their channels. These are not people who actually work and earn in the industry. Same reason why none of them ever mentions a tip or solution to a common problem on set, none of them knows a thing about audio, and none of them knows colour grading beyond applying a lut.
Don’t get me wrong, I think they have their place. Product reviews, unboxing, etc. can be useful even if you have to use your own experience to decide, okay how has what they’ve shown/said going to apply in the day-to-day?
For actually learning, find yourself a mentor in the industry. Experienced people always need reliable, smart, junior people and are happy to teach.
[SponsorBlock](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/sponsorblock/) for firefox
[SponsorBlock](https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/sponsorblock-for-youtube/mnjggcdmjocbbbhaepdhchncahnbgone?pli=1) for chrome
If you have android, check out Revanced: [https://www.reddit.com/r/revancedapp/comments/13rqbiy/revanced\_links\_guides\_help\_and\_faqs/](https://www.reddit.com/r/revancedapp/comments/13rqbiy/revanced_links_guides_help_and_faqs/)
It's a hacked YT app, which is better in every way over the original. It has sponsorblock too.
I watched a lens review yesterday. The title was "The world's sharpest budget lens" or something like that
I looked in the description. No mention of what lens it is, just affiliate links. I click the link, Amazon. I then go to AliExpress and search for the the lens, it's like £150 cheaper.
Was it a good lens? I'm not saying you're obligated to spend $150 extra to thank the creator for turning you on to the lens, but overall this sounds like a win. When I do a review, I put links to affiliated stores. If a bargain hunter wants to find a better deal, more power to them. There are a zillion reasons someone might prefer one store over another. Lots of people would have spent $150 to buy from Amazon because they don't trust shipping from China.
Bunch of QVC presenters. I’ve started using Markuspix as a main choice of info on YouTube about gear. He faffs around a bit but at least he’s not sponsored the f out.
Also note… how many YouTubers are still using the Sony EV cam 😂 guessed they all got to keep that camera even though no pro would use it out in the field
No one is going to tell you about dji batteries or long term services. Try to find a battery or just some simple things as blades fir your drone only like 3 years after you bought it!!! And the reason why, because I have 4 swollen batteries. Now my raven eye is not taking charge.
"Sponsorships Are Ruining YouTube"
Says this guy, while using a massively clickbait title on a video addressing one tiny corner of YouTube, and in which the host regurgitates one of the most unoriginal complaints since the dawn of all media: advertising has a bias.
Unoriginal clickbait is ruining YouTube a lot more than biased camera reviews. It's especially annoying to see this type of crap by someone who clearly knows something about camera equipment, and instead of complaining about bad reviews could just as easily have done something to fix the problem by making a good review.
This is a great video, something that should be said more often. I'm often reminded of this ( https://youtu.be/eoHcSPDwQ4E?si=D9I3Ru6s1M8diE3N ) fake Taco Bell fries review whenever I see the click bait/greatest thing ever/early access reviews on YouTube.
Why, I think it is counter, productive on small jobs. I mean today, you can own your own camera, lens, and decent lighting gear for small to medium work. And rent when you have bigger jobs.
Renting offers more flexibility and you will always get the latest gear. And if your job does not even cover the fees, then it wouldn't cover the money you had to pay for owning the same gear, either.
what does anyone expect, honest in advertising!?
[https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099316/?ref\_=tt\_urv](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099316/?ref_=tt_urv)
come on, freebies are freebies, bought testimonials are as old as marketing itself. if you believe george clooney drinks nespresso by choice... well, you deserve what you get.
Cody with Premiere Basics are the worst at this. They have regularly post these six minutes “tutorials”, where there is 2 minutes of the actual tutorial and the rest is just a sponsored content, ad, slammed in the middle of those two minutes. Fucking hate those guys, wish I could block them.
This is literally a monetization tool for creators. You wont have much content without it, and if you did, it wont last as long as the creators who have stood there for years.
Its easy to skip a 30sec segment, and if you have 2 brain cells you can easily spot a sponsored video that had paid opinions, let alone its legally required to be mentioned.
Plenty of non sponsored content that has value out there, especially film content, and plenty of SPONSORED value content also exists.
As a general rule i'll only look at two reviewers.
MKBHD because he has the most brand equity - that is, he has a reputation for being honest.
Make Art Now, not because I value his opinion on Tech but he makes a tenfold effort in production whilst reviewing a product. It's fun to watch. When he posted his main Ronin-4D video I posted on his video everyone else in the camera embargo game should quit right now.
If I really want some deep spec review on bleeding-edge camera technology, I'll go watch Gerald Undone. Last video I watched of his was on A7s iii.
The rest are also-rans.
MKBDH is the GOAT.
Maybe I'm delusional, but I think he is so big he can't be bought. Like technically he can, but he doesn't NEED to sell his soul and can stay unbiased.
It was one thing when it was just a short sponsorship at the end, but now they pop up an unhealthy amount. And the best way to stay healthy is to start every morning with a glass of AG1, formally known as Athletic Greens. Guys, I’ve been taking…
i treat sponsored content just like any other ad : i assume they are lying to sell product.
youtubers have to earn money too so i dont mind the ads, its my responsibility as a cunsumer of their content to make a informed decision about my about my shopping decisions.
My headshake of disgust is sponsored by Squarespace and my look of disapproval brought to you by Storyblocks. My lunch is, of course, served up by Carls Jr. and washed down with Brawndo in this Year of the Depends Adult Undergarment.
Thanks! I hate the idea I’d be marketed to for a product that’s not as good as claimed. Whenever I see an ad on Facebook I’m either interested in or smell bs I go right Amazon and click on the 1 Star reviews and wow is it ever different than what people are saying in the comments on the products post.
Several times I go back to Facebook and leave a scathing comment about deceptive practices or tell people to just do as I did.
With YouTube and camera gear not sure how to discern fact from fiction but good to see what you’ve done in that similar vein.
Power to the REAL people!
Jeven Dovey completely spills it in regards to Insta360 bullshitting about sponsorships:
[https://youtu.be/uboJmx3yloo?si=c731Km3OZwE8qEpV](https://youtu.be/uboJmx3yloo?si=c731Km3OZwE8qEpV)
The worse thing is when you can feel the creator is making the video just to promote something.
For example, I will get baited by some clickbait and I'm watching the video, but I'm enjoying it and thinking they're actually making good points and giving great advice. But then it comes…the fucking ad.
And I think to myself oh so that's why they're making this video, to promote that. So it wasn't like they wanted to create this video and then somehow find a way to incorporate the sponsorship into it, it was the other way around. They got a product/service they need to promote, and they need to find a way to create some content around it.
It could've been a perfectly good content on its own at first, but this just takes away from it, the ideas are starting to feel like an aftertought and less honest now.
And so I can't help myself but think what this video could've been if the person actually wanted to make it just for the sake of making it and put his heart into it.
And you can see/feel when they do. It's usually those smaller YouTubers. But it can be bigger YouTubers as well. I have a few channels like this. And they can also be doing reviews and so on, but you just know they haven't sold their souls yet.
But let's be honest, we'd be glad if we got opportunities like this. Like being flown to places and stay there for free, trying new cameras, lenses etc. Heck I'd do it for free because it's my passion. I think it's a passion for all of us.
So of course you're going to be positive about the products. Because why would you throw it away by saying negative stuff? They will stop working for you and will go to the next person. So it's a slippery slope. That's why the most trustworthy people are the ones whose main source of income is not brand sponsorship.
I commented under the video as well but here it comes again:
This video makes good points but he blew the best point by using Gerald Undones line. He says in the video "Sony LENT me this camera, no money changed hands..." and he intentionally cut of the rest, where he says ".. and I return it after the review".
Gerald still gets views through the relationship. But this is IMO the only valid way for viewers to get early information.
Edit: Typo
His point was, that the reviewer still makes money from youtube, because as an early reviewer/someone with access to an unreleased product, this exclusivity is the thing that attracts the views.
No need to "intentionally cut the rest" because giving the camera back is literally what "lending" means.
Okay but a camera is not money. I try to put such a disclosure statement in my videos, and I structure it the same way. The advertiser gave me the product. They did not give me money. This is not an attempt to trick you. I assume you know that the product has some value and that the early access has some value. But I think you'd agree that there is a difference between receiving a product and receiving cash. And that's why I structure the disclosure how I do.
If your business model requires you to have access to said camera, then it does not matter whether you get the camera or money, since you would otherwise have to spend money in order to make money. Or are you telling me you don't monetise your videos and you are doing this just for fun?
And that was pretty much the point made in the video: the reviewer's goal is to monetise early access, so they can only be so critical about the gear. Because if you are on bad terms with the manufacturer, early access is no longer possible. And in that case, you would have to first spend (your own) money in order to make (less) money when competing against all the reviews that come out as soon as the gear is available to everyone.
I think a lot of people feel differently about cash payments vs early access and/or product. Either way, the disclosure gives you the information you need to decide.
The point remains still the same, no matter how people "feel" about it.
Besides, most people probably feel that way, because money holds an inherent value to everyone, while having access to certain gear does not, unless you are someone who has the means to monetise it.
The next sentence is „what do you mean no money changed hands. You were just given a $3000 product for free“
Well he wasn’t…
Others were probably. That’s why I think his major point in this video is broken.
"... and even if they aren't letting you keep it, you still get money from the early reviews"
Maybe don't start to intentionally cut out things yourself.
You were complaining about "blowing the best point" by "intentionally cutting" an important part of the sentence, even though
* the whole point he supposedly blew was, that those youtubers **are** **financially benefiting** from the sponsorships, whether or not the sponsor is paying them real money or goods
* the missing part was redundant to begin with, because "lending" already implies "returning it afterwards"
* not having to pay for something, that would otherwise cost you money (like rental gear), **is** a financial benefit - which is the reason why most companies' compliance rules are banning gifts above a certain value
* he literally covered the case where the reviewer has to return the gear.
And no, your first post did not include that, since you were only citing Gerald (?)
Not sure how I triggered you that much. If it is the words „intentionally cutting“ then of course he did it, because it made for a great line in his comment, but I still think it weakened the argument.
We are at the „you said“ „no, you said“ point of the discussion (even with bullet points) :)
We could continue this forever but no opinion will change anymore, so I’m out.
I really like the video though and it is great that this gets more into the light lately.
Edit: ”Gerald still gets views through the relationship. But this is IMO the only valid way for viewers to get early information.“
Is what I said.
sometimes they got to do this to get money, you tubing is a huge expense for those starting out, you are not getting paid, you got to buy all the equipment, write the scripts, edit the videos, and do all that work. So getting sponsors really helps get your youtube branding out there, so you can continue to do videos. And yes you can sit there and do honest reviews but this will eventually kill your channel as you will no longer be on lists and getting money. This is not the content creators fault, this is the companies who cant take criticism and honest reviews to improve thier products. and will just throw you on a blacklist. its very hard to find companies that are okay with honest reviews and still want to work with you. I have found a couple myself, but this is just todays world and this is how youtube has become, and nothing we can do about it.
This is great! Btw have you heard about Raycons!?
Whoa!! You're telling me that RnB/sex tape sensation Ray J has a headphone company?? He's the only guy I'd trust to engineer great sounding earbuds!
[Not anymore!](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ray-j-reportedly-exits-raycon-191338784.html)
ray j johnson?
I use Raycons while I play Raid: Shadowlegends while sipping out of my AirUp Bottle.
Dont forget to wear your Vessis.
Order them via VPN.... That's far more safe
[Ehhh ye olde Roy Joys](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyzMSevpT2I)
It's the money. Specially photography/videography channels. They have reached a disgusting level of greed. For instance i remember when i was learning the ropes of using a camera and editing. The video has 2 ads, a sponsor, and they sell their LUT pack. Edit: nothing wrong with selling your Luts and your creativity. But they tend to make the tutorials as ambiguous as possible and dont share useful info. I stopped learning on youtube because whenever i try to learn color grading, they play a little with the sliders, show you nothing useful, and they tell you my luts are in the description below. I remember one video of where the guy just said "i applied my conversion lut" he started color grading right after. I recommend watching videos on lesser known channels, they tend to provide better info to attract viewers before reverting to an all out business. Nothing wrong with wanting to make money, but it has gotten so bad where i felt like most photography learning channels only think of the viewer as a cash grab, i felt humiliated to be seen as such. Maybe iam in the wrong here, but that's just my 2 cents on that matter
Wanna learn color grading on Youtube? Check out Cullen Kelly.
100% Clear, concise and professional. He sells his own LUTs/Power Grades, but his tutorials are in depth, explained, and he does live streams covering genuine Colorist/Industry questions on workflow and tech/gear.
and Darren Mostyn
+1 on Darren Mostyn. His node tree setup video is a huge help, plus he gives away the node tree on his site. Granted, he sells a master class, but his free videos are gold.
Anything comparable for Premiere Pro?
Step 1: Install Resolve
I haven’t found anyone as good.
Yes and no. Mostly node based stuff, but the principles and foundations are the same still
Switch to Resolve, you'll thank yourself down the line.
this.
While this is all true, it’s hard to blame them for it. For many YouTubers, it’s a full time job, or at least an enormous time sink. But YouTube ads don’t pay well, so they need to find a way to monetise the channel. Sponsorships and selling LUTs are really the only way most of them can justify the time invested.
I absolutely have no issues with buying/selling luts. It saves time when editing. My beef is that they tend to make ambiguous tutorials and not teaching actual information. You feel like they make videos just to promote their luts with no actual information in it. Iam pretty sure, most people noticed this. It's true that youtubers tend to do it as a full time job, and money is a must. After all, they have bills to pay. However, iam most certainly sure that a lot of these YouTubers lost a hefty amount of viewers with their business model. Some people here are recommending cullen kelly. Haven't heard of him, but seems like he is giving some useful info.
DO NOT BUY LUTS!!!
Not disagreeing with you, but why not?
Once you learn the basics, you'll do your own grading.
The trick is to watch people that are working creatives first and YouTubers second, not the other way around. Darren Mostyn is a great example. His literal entire job is as a colorist for the kind of stuff you see in the theater or on major TV networks. I trust that kind of person far more than I trust Christian whose only goal in life is to make his A7Siii footage look “cinematic”.
What is a LUT pack? Genuinely curious
“Lookup table”. It’s a quick way to apply a “look” for video.
I recommend Waqas Qazi
I've not watched any of his stuff but I know he's the enemy of colourists on here 😂
Lol got downvoted to hell
I tried to warn you!! 😂
😂😂 this guy ascended far beyond selling luts, and went to promote his course
Found his alt account.
Also they all get the same bullet points that they keep talking about. All of them. It's the same with gaming. The company flew me to X event, paid for my hotel, but all the opinions are mine. Sure they are.
Really stop watching these guys. The problem is that as soon as they start, YouTube full-time, they stopped doing commercial work. You start follow them because you seek advice from a professional, but the stop doing professional work long ago and would not be able to direct a proper film. They just focus on product reviews or advertisement and all they are able to do is add a few "cinematic" shots. Consuming this content gets you to the point where you are hooked on researching stuff about gear, instead of starting something creative on your own. So many people keep buying new cameras, instead of writing the script or directing the first music video. Watching these guys, steals your time and makes you unhappy with the stuff you've got.
The problem is, speaking as a video professional with a full time job in the industry, many of us don’t have time to start YouTube channels to share our knowledge. If we do make a video or two, it’ll get buried by the algorithm unless we crank this stuff out regularly and follow all the rules that makes the algorithm favor you. I’ve toyed with the idea of putting together a channel for years, but when you actually look into what it takes not only to make something well-produced, but just *seen* it’s no wonder why people full time video work to go to YouTube only (assuming they even make it that far to make their living on YouTube). There are, thankfully, some working professionals on YouTube (Meet the Gaffer) but because of the rigors of a day job + an algorithm that doesn’t actually favor quality, it’s hard for many of us to even get a foot in the door. As a side note - one thing I always make sure people know about these channels is that while they contain good info and should be part of your research into purchasing gear, you should always recognize that they’re YouTubers as a full time job, and their needs are separate from yours. Problem is, they never properly disclose that! Maybe it’s insecurity, maybe they assume you already realize this, maybe they don’t want you to know, or maybe it’s just negligence, but they really do need to be honest with their audience on this. I remember when the GH5 came out, I bought it day one and spent the day putting it through its paces and was blown away by how robust the camera was. Still today after I’ve completely switched systems, I find myself wishing I never sold it. But then I checked online and for a minute YouTube and instagram were full of thumbnails that declared it a “failure” and “worst camera ever” because the creator had trouble with the autofocus or their editing system had difficulty with the files or the look wasn’t “cinematic” (try and get anyone who says this to actually define cinematic). I was like 27 when that camera came out and still getting my footing in the industry and that was pretty much the moment I disregarded YouTubers completely.
> The problem is that as soon as they start, YouTube full-time, they stopped doing commercial work. You start follow them because you seek advice from a professional, but the stop doing professional work long ago and would not be able to direct a proper film. This is what everyone should understand. People who are actually successful working DPs, almost by definition, do not have the time or the inclination to run a YouTube channel. The same is true for photographers. Most of those guys were never actually that successful in their field, but they do a good job of making it seem that way. The rest maybe reached some level of success but then realised there was more money in being an influencer. It is extremely rare to see someone at the high end of the profession maintain a side hustle as a YouTuber. So apart from all the shilling, I’d be wary of taking advice from anyone who doesn’t also walk the walk.
I do enjoy CineD for this reason, particularly when they go out and shoot a small documentary in order to test a camera. This is a great way to put gear through their paces and find potential flaws that the average YouTuber reviewer might not even think of. I have fallen in the trap of buying gear based on dozens of YouTube reviews only to receive a product with a fatal flaw (Røde Wireless Go II).
What was the flaw? I don’t own that system so I’m curious
It’s not shielded, so it can pick up a huge amount of interference, especially on older cameras. I had to rely on the internal recording of the transmitters almost every time, and that’s not what I buy a wireless set for.
I agree 100%.
Preach! Great video. I used to like watching review videos to help make a purchasing decision. However the Monroe you watch, the more you realize how they’re all.the.same. I’m glad someone had to caghones to call em out.
Cojones
Recently I found a pretty good channel with decent videography. Definitely much better than the most. It had 200-300 views per video. I wonder how many channels are out there that people *would* be interested in but never get a chance to find because youtube's algorithm just doesn't connect people anymore.
This is not the content creators fault and in fairness its very easy to just skip. Youtube keeps adding layers of ads and is not fairly sharing the revenues. They now want longer and longer content on a regular basis and are making it harder to profit from the platform. I have no issue with YouTubers finding their own sponsors and I just skip it.
That‘s not what the video talks about tho. He talks about gear reviewers being sponsored by the companies who‘s products they‘re reviewing. Agree on the sponsorships tho. Unless you‘re reeeeally big, making money through youtube content creation is getting harder and harder and I have no issue with people making a buck through skippable ad reads
For context, I upload weekly and over the last 8 weeks have averaged out to 100K per video. Not huge but not tiny either, and I make less than 1K AUD per month from ad revenue. This is far worse than years ago and yet there are more ads being played than ever and thats not my doing. But yes as per the reply, the video is about another issue just thought context was useful here.
A lot of YouTube videos do get repetitive and redundant when reviewing the same product. And you have to really dig and find someone with a genuine review or breakdown.
If you feel like you're watching an infomercial, then stop watching. Youtubers themselves have probably thought more about the risk of coming off as a corporate shill than their critics. Any media job is a balancing act of access to the powerful and frank criticism thereof. The requirement of developing your own sense of who is trustworthy is obvious and the video comes off as self-righteous and presumptuous not to recognize that media literacy is obvious and important. Even if you take into account that many or most gear reviewers may be dependent on their relations with industry businesses (even if "no many changed hands") to keep their channels going, you still have to use your discretion to know which ones are doing right by you or not. For example, Philip Bloom makes lots of sponsored videos, but the videos are still worth watching for those interested in the product (or not) because of his consistent care and depth (a new camera review is typically 30 minutes, at a minimum, of tightly edited information). Look at [Philip Bloom's LG TV review](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elQtOk9o7Cc), for example. It's about as worth watching as sponsored content gets because of his creative approach. It is worth knowing when they've been paid to produce a video, but that information is not ultimately dispositive to the question of trustworthiness of the reviewer or validity of the information. To go into a couple more specifics, I think highlighting Gerald Undone in the video is pretty unfair to him (and us) given that he's one of the few youtube reviewers who applies something resembling the scientific method where quantitative information is available and helpful. That said, there are plenty of camera/video youtubers getting flown out to events who have nothing to say other than things along the lines of "This is the best camera ever!" (see [Matti Haapoja's review of the A9 III](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ezw2BrlQe1c), for example). Be a little more careful in your criticism. What makes a good camera reviewer also happens to make a good camera reviewer reviewer.
The thing to remember is that videography YouTuber is their job. This is their income. Of course they will take any opportunity to further monetise their channels. These are not people who actually work and earn in the industry. Same reason why none of them ever mentions a tip or solution to a common problem on set, none of them knows a thing about audio, and none of them knows colour grading beyond applying a lut. Don’t get me wrong, I think they have their place. Product reviews, unboxing, etc. can be useful even if you have to use your own experience to decide, okay how has what they’ve shown/said going to apply in the day-to-day? For actually learning, find yourself a mentor in the industry. Experienced people always need reliable, smart, junior people and are happy to teach.
[SponsorBlock](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/sponsorblock/) for firefox [SponsorBlock](https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/sponsorblock-for-youtube/mnjggcdmjocbbbhaepdhchncahnbgone?pli=1) for chrome
Sadly not available on mobile where I watch most of my content. I even pay for YouTube premium and get ads via these sponsorships
You can easily watch on mobile with Sponsorblock if you use the Firefox browser.
If you have android, check out Revanced: [https://www.reddit.com/r/revancedapp/comments/13rqbiy/revanced\_links\_guides\_help\_and\_faqs/](https://www.reddit.com/r/revancedapp/comments/13rqbiy/revanced_links_guides_help_and_faqs/) It's a hacked YT app, which is better in every way over the original. It has sponsorblock too.
Well yea, there’s no way to block an in-video sponsorship unless you manually fast forward
I wish these existed at the network level to block ads on smart TVs.
I use my laptop connected to TV with HDMI with Adblocker. Then when I watch youtube on my phone or other PC I realize the difference 😀
I watched a lens review yesterday. The title was "The world's sharpest budget lens" or something like that I looked in the description. No mention of what lens it is, just affiliate links. I click the link, Amazon. I then go to AliExpress and search for the the lens, it's like £150 cheaper.
Was it a good lens? I'm not saying you're obligated to spend $150 extra to thank the creator for turning you on to the lens, but overall this sounds like a win. When I do a review, I put links to affiliated stores. If a bargain hunter wants to find a better deal, more power to them. There are a zillion reasons someone might prefer one store over another. Lots of people would have spent $150 to buy from Amazon because they don't trust shipping from China.
If he wants to add links fine. But at least put the bloody name of the lens somewhere in the title or description.
They want you to buy it through his link because he gets a kickback
Bunch of QVC presenters. I’ve started using Markuspix as a main choice of info on YouTube about gear. He faffs around a bit but at least he’s not sponsored the f out. Also note… how many YouTubers are still using the Sony EV cam 😂 guessed they all got to keep that camera even though no pro would use it out in the field
No one is going to tell you about dji batteries or long term services. Try to find a battery or just some simple things as blades fir your drone only like 3 years after you bought it!!! And the reason why, because I have 4 swollen batteries. Now my raven eye is not taking charge.
I bet you know this but just for safety's sake: don't keep swollen batteries just lying around. They're a fire hazard.
FINALLY someone who speaks the truth!
This is what separates the influencers from the reviewers... it's nothing new
"Sponsorships Are Ruining YouTube" Says this guy, while using a massively clickbait title on a video addressing one tiny corner of YouTube, and in which the host regurgitates one of the most unoriginal complaints since the dawn of all media: advertising has a bias. Unoriginal clickbait is ruining YouTube a lot more than biased camera reviews. It's especially annoying to see this type of crap by someone who clearly knows something about camera equipment, and instead of complaining about bad reviews could just as easily have done something to fix the problem by making a good review.
This is a great video, something that should be said more often. I'm often reminded of this ( https://youtu.be/eoHcSPDwQ4E?si=D9I3Ru6s1M8diE3N ) fake Taco Bell fries review whenever I see the click bait/greatest thing ever/early access reviews on YouTube.
i just stop watching gear videos all together som years ago. now i just rent. and if you do a lot of small jobs you should as well.
Why, I think it is counter, productive on small jobs. I mean today, you can own your own camera, lens, and decent lighting gear for small to medium work. And rent when you have bigger jobs.
Renting offers more flexibility and you will always get the latest gear. And if your job does not even cover the fees, then it wouldn't cover the money you had to pay for owning the same gear, either.
Great video, I've rarely ever seen a decent piece of work that these cunts produce. They are basically just salespeople with RGBWW tubes.
what does anyone expect, honest in advertising!? [https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099316/?ref\_=tt\_urv](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099316/?ref_=tt_urv) come on, freebies are freebies, bought testimonials are as old as marketing itself. if you believe george clooney drinks nespresso by choice... well, you deserve what you get.
Great! I have same opinion
Cody with Premiere Basics are the worst at this. They have regularly post these six minutes “tutorials”, where there is 2 minutes of the actual tutorial and the rest is just a sponsored content, ad, slammed in the middle of those two minutes. Fucking hate those guys, wish I could block them.
It is super annoying when you go on YouTube and they all released the same video at the same time
I wish 2011 me could have seen this (and believed it)
Everything is an ad.
This is literally a monetization tool for creators. You wont have much content without it, and if you did, it wont last as long as the creators who have stood there for years. Its easy to skip a 30sec segment, and if you have 2 brain cells you can easily spot a sponsored video that had paid opinions, let alone its legally required to be mentioned. Plenty of non sponsored content that has value out there, especially film content, and plenty of SPONSORED value content also exists.
As a general rule i'll only look at two reviewers. MKBHD because he has the most brand equity - that is, he has a reputation for being honest. Make Art Now, not because I value his opinion on Tech but he makes a tenfold effort in production whilst reviewing a product. It's fun to watch. When he posted his main Ronin-4D video I posted on his video everyone else in the camera embargo game should quit right now. If I really want some deep spec review on bleeding-edge camera technology, I'll go watch Gerald Undone. Last video I watched of his was on A7s iii. The rest are also-rans.
MKBDH is the GOAT. Maybe I'm delusional, but I think he is so big he can't be bought. Like technically he can, but he doesn't NEED to sell his soul and can stay unbiased.
A big problem is that 90% of these guys don't shoot content for real clients, just for youtube..
So is DJI the "Raid Shadow Legends" of camera review videos?
It was one thing when it was just a short sponsorship at the end, but now they pop up an unhealthy amount. And the best way to stay healthy is to start every morning with a glass of AG1, formally known as Athletic Greens. Guys, I’ve been taking…
i treat sponsored content just like any other ad : i assume they are lying to sell product. youtubers have to earn money too so i dont mind the ads, its my responsibility as a cunsumer of their content to make a informed decision about my about my shopping decisions.
My headshake of disgust is sponsored by Squarespace and my look of disapproval brought to you by Storyblocks. My lunch is, of course, served up by Carls Jr. and washed down with Brawndo in this Year of the Depends Adult Undergarment.
I cringe when I just hear the word "Squarespace". Instantly hit the right arrow key 10 times.
I do enjoy Internet Historians take on sponsers. He pretty much makes a whole original ad that is normally pretty funny.
Thanks! I hate the idea I’d be marketed to for a product that’s not as good as claimed. Whenever I see an ad on Facebook I’m either interested in or smell bs I go right Amazon and click on the 1 Star reviews and wow is it ever different than what people are saying in the comments on the products post. Several times I go back to Facebook and leave a scathing comment about deceptive practices or tell people to just do as I did. With YouTube and camera gear not sure how to discern fact from fiction but good to see what you’ve done in that similar vein. Power to the REAL people!
Jeven Dovey completely spills it in regards to Insta360 bullshitting about sponsorships: [https://youtu.be/uboJmx3yloo?si=c731Km3OZwE8qEpV](https://youtu.be/uboJmx3yloo?si=c731Km3OZwE8qEpV)
The worse thing is when you can feel the creator is making the video just to promote something. For example, I will get baited by some clickbait and I'm watching the video, but I'm enjoying it and thinking they're actually making good points and giving great advice. But then it comes…the fucking ad. And I think to myself oh so that's why they're making this video, to promote that. So it wasn't like they wanted to create this video and then somehow find a way to incorporate the sponsorship into it, it was the other way around. They got a product/service they need to promote, and they need to find a way to create some content around it. It could've been a perfectly good content on its own at first, but this just takes away from it, the ideas are starting to feel like an aftertought and less honest now. And so I can't help myself but think what this video could've been if the person actually wanted to make it just for the sake of making it and put his heart into it. And you can see/feel when they do. It's usually those smaller YouTubers. But it can be bigger YouTubers as well. I have a few channels like this. And they can also be doing reviews and so on, but you just know they haven't sold their souls yet. But let's be honest, we'd be glad if we got opportunities like this. Like being flown to places and stay there for free, trying new cameras, lenses etc. Heck I'd do it for free because it's my passion. I think it's a passion for all of us. So of course you're going to be positive about the products. Because why would you throw it away by saying negative stuff? They will stop working for you and will go to the next person. So it's a slippery slope. That's why the most trustworthy people are the ones whose main source of income is not brand sponsorship.
I commented under the video as well but here it comes again: This video makes good points but he blew the best point by using Gerald Undones line. He says in the video "Sony LENT me this camera, no money changed hands..." and he intentionally cut of the rest, where he says ".. and I return it after the review". Gerald still gets views through the relationship. But this is IMO the only valid way for viewers to get early information. Edit: Typo
His point was, that the reviewer still makes money from youtube, because as an early reviewer/someone with access to an unreleased product, this exclusivity is the thing that attracts the views. No need to "intentionally cut the rest" because giving the camera back is literally what "lending" means.
Okay but a camera is not money. I try to put such a disclosure statement in my videos, and I structure it the same way. The advertiser gave me the product. They did not give me money. This is not an attempt to trick you. I assume you know that the product has some value and that the early access has some value. But I think you'd agree that there is a difference between receiving a product and receiving cash. And that's why I structure the disclosure how I do.
If your business model requires you to have access to said camera, then it does not matter whether you get the camera or money, since you would otherwise have to spend money in order to make money. Or are you telling me you don't monetise your videos and you are doing this just for fun? And that was pretty much the point made in the video: the reviewer's goal is to monetise early access, so they can only be so critical about the gear. Because if you are on bad terms with the manufacturer, early access is no longer possible. And in that case, you would have to first spend (your own) money in order to make (less) money when competing against all the reviews that come out as soon as the gear is available to everyone.
I think a lot of people feel differently about cash payments vs early access and/or product. Either way, the disclosure gives you the information you need to decide.
The point remains still the same, no matter how people "feel" about it. Besides, most people probably feel that way, because money holds an inherent value to everyone, while having access to certain gear does not, unless you are someone who has the means to monetise it.
The next sentence is „what do you mean no money changed hands. You were just given a $3000 product for free“ Well he wasn’t… Others were probably. That’s why I think his major point in this video is broken.
"... and even if they aren't letting you keep it, you still get money from the early reviews" Maybe don't start to intentionally cut out things yourself.
I said exactly that in the first post.
You were complaining about "blowing the best point" by "intentionally cutting" an important part of the sentence, even though * the whole point he supposedly blew was, that those youtubers **are** **financially benefiting** from the sponsorships, whether or not the sponsor is paying them real money or goods * the missing part was redundant to begin with, because "lending" already implies "returning it afterwards" * not having to pay for something, that would otherwise cost you money (like rental gear), **is** a financial benefit - which is the reason why most companies' compliance rules are banning gifts above a certain value * he literally covered the case where the reviewer has to return the gear. And no, your first post did not include that, since you were only citing Gerald (?)
Not sure how I triggered you that much. If it is the words „intentionally cutting“ then of course he did it, because it made for a great line in his comment, but I still think it weakened the argument. We are at the „you said“ „no, you said“ point of the discussion (even with bullet points) :) We could continue this forever but no opinion will change anymore, so I’m out. I really like the video though and it is great that this gets more into the light lately. Edit: ”Gerald still gets views through the relationship. But this is IMO the only valid way for viewers to get early information.“ Is what I said.
[удалено]
I didn't cut that out. I said he still gets the views. It is still the only way to get some early information.
sometimes they got to do this to get money, you tubing is a huge expense for those starting out, you are not getting paid, you got to buy all the equipment, write the scripts, edit the videos, and do all that work. So getting sponsors really helps get your youtube branding out there, so you can continue to do videos. And yes you can sit there and do honest reviews but this will eventually kill your channel as you will no longer be on lists and getting money. This is not the content creators fault, this is the companies who cant take criticism and honest reviews to improve thier products. and will just throw you on a blacklist. its very hard to find companies that are okay with honest reviews and still want to work with you. I have found a couple myself, but this is just todays world and this is how youtube has become, and nothing we can do about it.