Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Prince Rupert's Drop vs Molten Glass [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 62 posts

Re: Prince Rupert's Drop vs Molten Glass [video]

#51

Post by TRiG_Ireland »

simondotau wrote: post #10
mikewarot wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>YouTube’s crusade to incentivize long form content They're all about "YouTube Shorts" now, of course that will change soon enough.

Shorts are mostly just “here’s a weird or unexpected thing, look how weird or unexpected it is”. There’s also regular, formulaic stuff like Half as Interesting which tend to be about one paragraph of information laboriously spread out over five minutes of generic stock footage and painfully tedious jokes. YouTube, at its best, are the videos where someone genuinely interested in a topic can show you why it’s interest…

> allowing the content to dictate the length

This is Tom Scott for me. His videos tend to range around the 5- to 10-minute mark, but are occasionally far far longer. And yet every one of them is exactly the length it should be.

Re: Prince Rupert's Drop vs Molten Glass [video]

#52

Post by rocket_surgeron »

Maxion wrote: post #21
esperent wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At that price you could put someone through a glass blowing course and then have them work for a few months making thousands of these for you.

There's a reason early Model T's are collectibles, and why 1980s Ford Escorts are in junkyards.

My grandfather was embarrassed because his family had a Model T in the 1940s. 20 years after the end of their production they were seen as junk that only poor people drove. It was better than the buggy his family used but everyone else had nice cars.

Model T's USED to be destined for junkyards.

The few that escaped that fate are now collectibles.

The Yugo used to be what your parents bought for you (paying just a little bit more than the 286 laptop they also got for you) so that you could have something to drive when you went off to college.

The vast majority ended up in junkyards.

Now they are becoming collectible: https://carsandbids.com/auctions/Km2odWYp/1988-yugo-gv

My first car was a Karman Ghia that I paid $500 for in the 90s. It was seen as junk. The floor pans were rusting out and it would have cost way more than it was worth for the owner to fix it up so rain didn't spray into the cabin from underneath while driving. Looking at the prices they go for now I highly regret driving it until it thew a rod and then junking it.

Ford Escorts will be the same one day.

Re: Prince Rupert's Drop vs Molten Glass [video]

#53

Post by mikestew »

rocket_surgeron wrote: post #52
Maxion wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a reason early Model T's are collectibles, and why 1980s Ford Escorts are in junkyards.

My grandfather was embarrassed because his family had a Model T in the 1940s. 20 years after the end of their production they were seen as junk that only poor people drove. It was better than the buggy his family used but everyone else had nice cars. Model T's USED to be destined for junkyards. The few that escaped that fate are now collectibles. The Yugo used to be what your parents bought for you (paying just a lit…

Yugo: they sold for $4K new, so a 50% return on something I had to keep in the corner of the garage for 30 years is a pretty poor "investment". And that's assuming someone even wants it; just because it's for sale doesn't mean it's collectible. Model Ts are distinctly different, even in comparison to their younger brother the Model A. Yugos are just shitty versions of what you're driving now. I suspect one will find the same with Ford Escorts.

Re: Prince Rupert's Drop vs Molten Glass [video]

#54

Post by mrguyorama »

hnbad wrote: post #42
ramraj07 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it all have to be 30 minutes though? Not just him to be sure but I’m not a fan of YouTube’s crusade to incentivize long form content which just seems to have made everyone pad out every topic as much as they can. Very rare have I seen 30 minute videos that truly deserve that time commitment.

I have literally watched a 5 hour plus video essay (NOT just a stream VOD, an actual video essay without much filler) recently but I concur that a lot of times a shorter video would suffice to get the point across. I guess there's room for a happy middle ground between traditional TikTok and modern long-form YouTube.

I have rewatched, over and over and over, a 3 and a half hour long video essay on a video game I've never played, in a video game series I actively dislike.

Honestly a long form video essay on youtube has gotten to the point, by most talented creators, that it is basically just a high quality book.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93-_r0w7ykI

Re: Prince Rupert's Drop vs Molten Glass [video]

#55

Post by GaryNumanVevo »

capableweb wrote: post #46

> So it would be interesting to see what price he chooses. https://orbixhotglass.com/product-category/prince-ruperts-dr... Least expensive: 500 USD Most expensive: 100,000 USD Most of them are below 3,500 USD, but damn, pretty high prices for something like that, although I guess it makes sense considering how long time they probably spent on making them and coming up with the process.

It's kind of funny to be talking about expensive pieces of art when jpegs were regularly selling for $100k+ regularly less than a year ago.

Re: Prince Rupert's Drop vs Molten Glass [video]

#56

Post by simondotau »

TRiG_Ireland wrote: post #51
simondotau wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shorts are mostly just “here’s a weird or unexpected thing, look how weird or unexpected it is”. There’s also regular, formulaic stuff like Half as Interesting which tend to be about one paragraph of information laboriously spread out over five minutes of generic stock footage and painfully tedious jokes. YouTube, at its best, are the videos where someone genuinely interested in a topic can show you why it’s interest…

> allowing the content to dictate the length This is Tom Scott for me. His videos tend to range around the 5- to 10-minute mark, but are occasionally far far longer. And yet every one of them is exactly the length it should be.

I love love love Tom Scott, but some of his recent videos are getting an eeny weeny teeny tiny bit Half as interesting-y, but with Tom’s face to camera instead of incongruous stock footage.

Re: Prince Rupert's Drop vs Molten Glass [video]

#57

Post by throwawaylinux »

aequitas wrote: post #44
throwawaylinux wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's entertainment. People don't want to just look at the results for 10 seconds. What would they do with the next 29 minutes 50 seconds? They want to watch people and hear them talk, make jokes, work on setting up the experiment, etc. Same reason Mythbusters isn't 30 seconds per myth. You could just read scientific papers if you're looking to condense knowledge transfer per time.

However, 30 seconds and 30 minutes are at far ends of a spectrum with a sweet spot in between. Of course there is a market for 30 minutes of content and not everything should be optimised to fit as much content in every second of video. But I definitely do not get entertained by hollow filler and senseless suspense building. Even Mythbusters did this with constant flash forwards/backwards and recaps (which especially…

Presumably you are able to understand that your preferences and your sweet spot is not the same as everybody else's, and would be open to considering that you might be significantly far from the middle of the spectrum. So I don't see the "however".

Re: Prince Rupert's Drop vs Molten Glass [video]

#58

Post by Rastonbury »

ramraj07 wrote: post #3
carterschonwald wrote: post #2

Dustin’s high speed videos are an incredible treasure trove of science and engineering to learn from.

Does it all have to be 30 minutes though? Not just him to be sure but I’m not a fan of YouTube’s crusade to incentivize long form content which just seems to have made everyone pad out every topic as much as they can. Very rare have I seen 30 minute videos that truly deserve that time commitment.

The creator himself has spoken out against YouTube's incentives, he said that he likes to produce longer than is optimum and does not want his videos to be influenced by the algorithm. YT pushes towards 8-15 min as sweet spot, I subscribe to a few who used to do 20+ min vids, and now they do around 10 min. LTT and their shorts for one.

Re: Prince Rupert's Drop vs Molten Glass [video]

#59

Post by yarg »

freetime2 wrote: post #25

Destin has a knack for taking relatively mundane topics and making them interesting. I’ve had low expectations going into his videos on coast guard search patterns, center-pivot irrigators, and a film factory tour, but ended up enjoying them because of his emphasis on the little optimizations that are inherent in all human endeavors, and the people who carry them out. It’s like Dirty Jobs (which I also liked) but for…

His hypoxia video was terrifying.

https://youtu.be/kUfF2MTnqAw?t=180

Re: Prince Rupert's Drop vs Molten Glass [video]

#60

Post by esperent »

alanfalcon wrote: post #48
esperent wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At that price you could put someone through a glass blowing course and then have them work for a few months making thousands of these for you.

But if you wanted some of what makes this particular piece special you would also have to hire a camera crew to capture the backstory and provenance and an influencer to show it to most of a million people and care about it. The best art isn't just the end result!

My comment was intended to highlight that this kind of money can change someone's life - create a whole new career for them, give them employment. Translate it into developing country terms and you could do that for ten or more people.

Or you could spend the same amount to own a lump of pretty glass that appeared in a YouTube video. Which apparently makes it special for some reason.

Post reply on HN