Sciencemadness Discussion Board » Fundamentals » Miscellaneous » List some BAD chemistry YouTube videos Select A Forum Fundamentals   » Chemistry in General   » Organic Chemistry   » Reagents and Apparatus Acquisition   » Beginnings   » Responsible Practices   » Miscellaneous   » The Wiki Special topics   » Technochemistry   » Energetic Materials   » Biochemistry   » Radiochemistry   » Computational Models and Techniques   » Prepublication Non-chemistry   » Forum Matters   » Legal and Societal Issues

Pages:  1  ..  6    8    10
chemplayer...
Hazard to Others

Posts: 191
Registered: 25-4-2016
Location: Away from the secret island
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

Wow that really is a terrible video. But he's just begging for someone to come along and do a satirical piss-take spin-off... It's soooo tempting!

Watch some vintage ChemPlayer: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/chemplayer/
Texium

Posts: 3995
Registered: 11-1-2014
Location: Salt Lake City
Member Is Offline

Mood: Triturated

 Quote: Originally posted by JJay I started shooting a video for YouTube yesterday, but some of the clips are badly overexposed or out of focus, so I'm going to have to redo them. It's not easy to make professional-looking videos.... [Edited on 5-5-2016 by JJay]
Yeah, all the great YouTubers out there make it look so easy. I already shot and edited my first video (bromine), but I'm still not quite happy with the voiceover and feel like a few other things need to be added. And of course some of the camera angles are bad and the lighting is weird in a few shots... it's like the chemistry is the easy part!

Come check out the Official Sciencemadness Wiki
They're not really active right now, but here's my YouTube channel and my blog.
The Volatile Chemist
International Hazard

Posts: 1973
Registered: 22-3-2014
Location: 'Stil' in the lab...
Member Is Offline

Mood: Copious

Indeed, filming right is nigh-impossible without the right kind of camera, something I know I don't have.
Zts16 (or Chemplayer for that matter) if you ever need voice-over assistance, I'd be glad to help, though I don't suppose you have any problems with using your voice, more quality-related issues.

chemplayer...
Hazard to Others

Posts: 191
Registered: 25-4-2016
Location: Away from the secret island
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

Thanks - we get lots of offers for voiceovers because lots of people HATE our computerised voice. Then again, lots of people say it's fine. You do get used to it after a while though so we figure that the people complaining just aren't watching enough

It's kind of become a signature now so we won't change. But the main reason we use it is that (as you are finding out) the editing and production process is the hardest bit.

To spill the beans on how we operate, at the moment our process is:

1. Shoot the footage, lots of clips, 10 secs minimum each, different levels of close-up etc. If you're going to need a minute of time to do an explanation at some point (e.g. reaction mechanism), then shoot a couple of minute long wide-clips of the reaction / apparatus). To give you an idea, for each video we start off with between 80 and 150 individual clips.
2. Open the non-linear video editor (Lightworks is free and good, just takes a bit of learning) and first arrange all the rough footage clips so they 'flow' in the right sequence with no voiceover as yet. Making it flow nicely seems to have a few 'patterns' such as doing a close-up, then a mid-close up, then wide-shot in sequence to each other, or not putting two clips next to each other that are roughly the same angle and view - this looks 'jumpy', or if you want to have a section where you skip forward in time, start this with a mid-wide shot and then go to a wide shot which is the 'X minute later' shot, then you can jump closer again.
3. Start at the start, play the footage in sequence, and then make up the voiceover as we go along by figuring out what to say and typing the text into a text editor.
4. TTS program generates the stereo wav file for the text (this takes 10 seconds).
5. We drag the voice wav file over in the editor and position it with the video.
6. Edit the video clip end/start points so it fits the text and timing we want (again, there are some 'patterns' to doing this, like beginning the voice at the start of a clip, or if it's after a bit of a pause, beginning the voice about a second before the next clip kicks in).
7. Back to step 3 for the next clip or place that we want the voice to come in. Repeat until it's done, getting rid of any unneeded video clips.
8. Finally add text, captions, opening/closing sequence, music, edit the background sound, etc.

This is pretty quick (1 - 1.5 hours per video to produce believe it or not), but if in step 4 we needed to get a microphone, read the text, get the file, check it sounds ok, check continuity of the volume / reverb etc. and then continue; we reckon this would more than double the production time.

Outsourcing would be harder because we'd have to either change the whole process or double up - i.e. we'd probably have to do exactly as above, but then wait for someone to send us the human voice versions of the TTS speech clips. We'd then have to use these to replace the TTS audio clips in the editor, potentially adjust timing of the video clips if the voice timing/length isn't quite the same... ARRGGHHHH.

But we're not convinced that quality of camera is that big a deal. Unless you want to publish in 4k (and good luck with a PC and editor that can handle that), and if you can live without some of the artsy-fartsy small depth of field / bokeh effects you get from using a low f-number lens on an SLR type camera (actually some phones / small cameras can do this to some extent), you can get perfectly good video clips provided you do two things:

1. Definitely absolutely use a tripod.
2. Use separate LED lighting and play with the position and white balance to get it looking right. We use a little "Yongnuo digital YN300" and the remote control it comes with to switch the light on/off is honestly the greatest thing since sliced bread. Trust us on the remote control.

Of course, this is for our particular style of production. You can do 'gonzo' channels as well and narrate yourself as you go but this is probably a whole art form in its own different right (perhaps Mr TDep can elaborate on the secrets!).

In our opinion the best looking channels out there (and there are better ones than ours for sure) look great mostly because they get the lighting right.

Read interviews with the best photographers in the world and they all say the same thing - good shots are about composition and light; that's it. Video is not that different. This is what an old iPhone can do:

Watch some vintage ChemPlayer: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/chemplayer/
JJay
International Hazard

Posts: 3440
Registered: 15-10-2015
Member Is Offline

Quote: Originally posted by zts16
 Quote: Originally posted by JJay I started shooting a video for YouTube yesterday, but some of the clips are badly overexposed or out of focus, so I'm going to have to redo them. It's not easy to make professional-looking videos.... [Edited on 5-5-2016 by JJay]
Yeah, all the great YouTubers out there make it look so easy. I already shot and edited my first video (bromine), but I'm still not quite happy with the voiceover and feel like a few other things need to be added. And of course some of the camera angles are bad and the lighting is weird in a few shots... it's like the chemistry is the easy part!

That's exactly how it is... I have enough footage for four videos but the idea of finishing the editing on even one seems like a pretty tall order... I think having a really bright lights helps with lighting difficulties. I haven't done any voiceovers yet.... I remember doing lots of biology videos in high school, and it seemed so easy then....

[Edited on 18-5-2016 by JJay]

The Volatile Chemist
International Hazard

Posts: 1973
Registered: 22-3-2014
Location: 'Stil' in the lab...
Member Is Offline

Mood: Copious

Yes, I suppose camera isn't everything. But the iPhone camera is better than the video camera I have. Besides, you can't mount an iPhone on a stand unless you get a case for that.
And chemplayer, I assumed such, just threw it out there.

j_sum1

Posts: 5913
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: Unmoved
Member Is Offline

Mood: Possessor of a tidy and organised lab. Now to mess it up again.

I can't remember if this slick little gem of scientific abuse has been posted before. I have seen it before. It came up in my YT feed a moment ago.

The problem is that it appears reasonable and looks scientific. But the interpretation and application of the results is seriously deficient and misleading.

Enjoy... or not.

10 new (short) videos on sum_lab. Junior science physical and chemical change series.
CuReUS
International Hazard

Posts: 928
Registered: 9-9-2014
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

 Quote: Originally posted by j_sum1 The problem is that it appears reasonable and looks scientific. But the interpretation and application of the results is seriously deficient and misleading.

I agree with you,its quite misleading.Although I knew that making your body alkaline reduces infections(especially UTI ),too much alkalinity is not good.Infact,alkalosis is more dangerous than acidosis because your body can become alkaline faster than it becomes acidic.If someone drinks 8 glasses of water of pH10 a day,it won't take long for tetany to set in.Also won't those water companies sue him for showing their products like that ?

and I have never seen I2 being used as pH indicator
MrHomeScientist
International Hazard

Posts: 1806
Registered: 24-10-2010
Location: Flerovium
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

Can iodine really be used to test pH? I've never heard of that before.
XeonTheMGPony
International Hazard

Posts: 1626
Registered: 5-1-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

 Quote: Originally posted by j_sum1 I can't remember if this slick little gem of scientific abuse has been posted before. I have seen it before. It came up in my YT feed a moment ago. The problem is that it appears reasonable and looks scientific. But the interpretation and application of the results is seriously deficient and misleading. Enjoy... or not. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yi83kOB8ug

What a steaming pile of male bovine excrement!

I know way to many suckers that buy into that crap, I wish I had so little ethics or I'd be a millionair by now!

"Comments disabled" that is the big hint right there it is a bold faced scam.

[Edited on 19-5-2016 by XeonTheMGPony]
National Hazard

Posts: 409
Registered: 9-12-2014
Location: South Australia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

I like how he is skeptical of the supermarket bottled water claiming to be spring water and that his "test" proves they are lying haha, I did some work at the Kancoona plant about 6 years ago and I can assure him that the water comes from an underground spring, there's nothing else for miles! and the funny thing is, they bottled water for a number of different brands and the "gourmet" bottled water selling for $5 is exactly the same as the$0.95 bottled water selling next to it, all they do is change out the bottle style and labels
Tdep
International Hazard

Posts: 504
Registered: 31-1-2013
Location: Laser broken since Feb 2020 lol
Member Is Offline

Mood: *PhD Crisis Time*

 Quote: Originally posted by chemplayer... You can do 'gonzo' channels as well and narrate yourself as you go but this is probably a whole art form in its own different right (perhaps Mr TDep can elaborate on the secrets!).

Oh hi, guess I should reply seeing as I was named. For context, this is the youtube channel in question. I'd never heard the word gonzo before, but on looking it up, it is a good description.

In honesty, the way I film on Extractions&Ire creates a much less professional final product. It's quite similar to many new chem channels because it's easy to film: no tripod and no fancy camera (I used an iPad camera for these videos). No stuffing around with lighting and no voice overs.

So yes, less serious videos. But apart from being easier to film, I find it much more fun to film. You just point the camera at the thing and say "hey guys, today we're going do the science and I have no idea if it's going to work!" and then sometimes it does work and you get to share your real enthusiasm as you get a positive result in real time.

Properly filming is stressful and actually quite significantly more effort than not filming, and sometimes this takes away the fun of doing the chemistry. Just picking up a phone camera and talking while you're doing it seems to add to the fun.

Doing voice overs and editing is a grind. Wish I thought of using an automated voice first. It takes me many hours to make a video. As much as I try, I can't really go from a working idea to video any quicker than 2-3 weeks. And then there's all the time finding an idea that works

[Edited on 22-5-2016 by Tdep]
glymes
Hazard to Self

Posts: 53
Registered: 16-5-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: Fiddly

@Tdep the only thing that irritates me about ExtractionsandIre is how you cut out any 'swearing a lot and shouting.' Other than that, love the vids.
The Volatile Chemist
International Hazard

Posts: 1973
Registered: 22-3-2014
Location: 'Stil' in the lab...
Member Is Offline

Mood: Copious

The earmark of Tdep's channel (E&F) is it's looseness and lack of exact-ness - And the surprisingly great results he gets
Great channel, though looking at his first videos is fun.

glymes
Hazard to Self

Posts: 53
Registered: 16-5-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: Fiddly

ItZ Linkzy is truly shit. He makes hexamethylene triperoxide diamine with cheerful music, with a method for 'amateurs' and then calls it explosive flour and makes firecrackers out of it.
Fidelmios
Hazard to Others

Posts: 104
Registered: 28-4-2016
Location: Witty Chemistry Joke
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

Not sure if mentioned but the infamous Crazy Russian Hacker made an air conditioning unit out of a 5 gal bucket and a few pounds of Dry Ice.
Praxichys
International Hazard

Posts: 1063
Registered: 31-7-2013
Location: Detroit, Michigan, USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Coprecipitated

 Quote: Originally posted by Fidelmios Not sure if mentioned but the infamous Crazy Russian Hacker made an air conditioning unit out of a 5 gal bucket and a few pounds of Dry Ice.

This whole thing is such a farce.

Thunderf00t then denounces the video as both "copyright infringement" and "dangerous" - both assertions are vehemently incorrect.

First, copyrights apply to media and not ideas. If the initial poster chose to go public with the idea, that is his choice. Even if that was a patentable idea, making a video about how to make it is in no way "copyright infringement". Besides, this idea has been around forever and is already patented. See the recent US 7748235 B1, and many others. (Remember, this is how refrigerators worked about 70 years ago)

Second, the air conditioner is not particularly dangerous. A tiny house might have a volume of about 200 cubic meters (approx 900 sq. ft. with 8ft ceilings). The CDC reports that "a 30-minute exposure at 50,000 ppm produces signs of intoxication". The tiny house in this calculation contains roughly 245kg of air, which means you would need to evaporate more than 12kg (27 lb) of dry ice to bring it to a concentration with noticeable effect, which would take quite some time. Of course, the house would have to be completely airtight for the entire evaporation process, which is unrealistic. Based on the data, loss of consciousness would require twice as much dry ice, or a sealed room half the size.

On top of this, buildup of CO2 in the blood triggers a panic response called hypercampnia, which would warn occupants of the danger and likely cause them to leave the premises for fresh air. This response is unique to CO2 and is also why people who commit suicide using asphyxiant gases tend to use helium, nitrogen, or argon instead - because CO2 will make you feel ill and panicky like you're starved for air.

Could it be dangerous? Yes, maybe if you were handcuffed in a closet with it, or you put it inside a tent with an unsupervised infant. Otherwise, not likely.

However, the air conditioner is not particularly effective anyway. The specific heat of CO2 is around 0.77 kJ/kgK at these temperatures, and the enthalpy of sublimation is 521 kJ/kg. 27 pounds of dry ice would allow for a room enthalpy change of -7176 kJ, or about 6800 BTU. A typical window AC unit for a 900 square foot home (recommended by the Home Depot) is 15k-18k BTU per hour. So, even if the dry ice air conditioner could evaporate all the CO2 in one hour, it is still not going to make a lot of difference on the temperature of a house. Going further, if you wanted to cool that 900 square foot house with dry ice (which is about \$2 per pound here), you would spend more on dry ice than a typical window A/C unit costs in less than 4 hours.

It's a dumb response to a dumb idea, if I may be so bold.

Fidelmios
Hazard to Others

Posts: 104
Registered: 28-4-2016
Location: Witty Chemistry Joke
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

Never made the claim he did those things. I said its a dumb idea, because it IS a dumb idea. I get that the normal person won't make this, and even the people who would make this probably wouldn't kill themselves with it. You're right, its dubious that anyone would kill themselves with it, the potential is there, like you said a small child or a really enclosed area. We agree that the methods the guy uses is crap.

As to the copyright claim I think thunderf00t refers to the design was identical to one previously made (he posted it in one of his videos). Which, while doesn't violate the laws legally, I think it does so spiritually. To replace a single substance in a device, and not even pretend to change anything, come on man...

In short they are both dumb haha. As such I think it deserves a spot in the BAD chem thread.

Edits because forum wizardry

[Edited on 27-5-2016 by Fidelmios]

Firmware21
Harmless

Posts: 33
Registered: 22-1-2015
Member Is Offline

Mood: Ņ͈̣̭̺̈ͬ͊̔i̓̿͑ͯ̂ͪ҉̸̺̀t͉̣͕͙̟̪̅͐͂̏͌ͭ͗̑͝ṙ̶̛̙̥̝̻̟̓ͬ̾ͧ͒͘ͅa͒͊ͯ̾̑̏̌̓̕҉͚͚͓͔͙͚̥t͆̌͑ͩ̐͗ ͖̻̲̪̲̙͘ͅe͙͕͙̙̤̤̫̒ͩͣ̅̊̍̉͒ͬ́͟ͅs͈̬̮̥̻͂ͥͨ̂ͮͨ͒́͠ !!!

I don't know why meth enthusiasts even bother with complicated chemistry and exotic reagents when they can make funky drugs out of ascorbic acid and kitty litter...

[Edited on 3-6-2016 by Firmware21]
National Hazard

Posts: 409
Registered: 9-12-2014
Location: South Australia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

Be sure not to breath the NaOH5 gas
The Volatile Chemist
International Hazard

Posts: 1973
Registered: 22-3-2014
Location: 'Stil' in the lab...
Member Is Offline

Mood: Copious

LOLOL that was hilarious Why does it have an age restriction? And the whole George Foreman Grill thing is so funny...Actually, that isn't a bad chemistry video, it's a rather good one. Some of the pamphlets they pass out in boy scouts get all the sources wrong for where drugs come from hah.

ficolas
Hazard to Others

Posts: 146
Registered: 14-5-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

So I recently found bigclivedotcom channel on youtube. He mostly makes videos where he buys some random chinese contraption, and he disasembles it to show how it is an electrical death trap.
In this video thought: https://youtu.be/lxcfouJ4F4A he, acording to my chemistry knowledge, he may have created a death trap, by making a enclosed ketene lamp.
Wouldnt what he just made create ketene, that will acumulate over the time of the lamp is used a lot, and when it breals (Its not a weird thing if it break, after all its a glass bulb where pressure will raise up) it will free the ketene?
Im making this as a questiom because im not entirelly sure if those conditions are enough for ketene to be made in a significant amount over time, and if I am right, its quite a bad youtube video that is related to chemistry.

[Edited on 6-6-2016 by ficolas]
j_sum1

Posts: 5913
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: Unmoved
Member Is Offline

Mood: Possessor of a tidy and organised lab. Now to mess it up again.

 Quote: Originally posted by Firmware21 https://m.youtube.com/verify_age?next=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DvM9qHL1... I don't know why meth enthusiasts even bother with complicated chemistry and exotic reagents when they can make funky drugs out of ascorbic acid and kitty litter... [Edited on 3-6-2016 by Firmware21]

Someone right now is separating the blue crystals of their kitty litter or dropping shots of pepto bismol into impure magnesium sulfate solutions.
This would be hilarious if it wasn't so pitifully sad.

10 new (short) videos on sum_lab. Junior science physical and chemical change series.
Deathunter88
National Hazard

Posts: 494
Registered: 20-2-2015
Location: Beijing, China
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

 Quote: Originally posted by ficolas So I recently found bigclivedotcom channel on youtube. He mostly makes videos where he buys some random chinese contraption, and he disasembles it to show how it is an electrical death trap. In this video thought: https://youtu.be/lxcfouJ4F4A he, acording to my chemistry knowledge, he may have created a death trap, by making a enclosed ketene lamp. Wouldnt what he just made create ketene, that will acumulate over the time of the lamp is used a lot, and when it breals (Its not a weird thing if it break, after all its a glass bulb where pressure will raise up) it will free the ketene? Im making this as a questiom because im not entirelly sure if those conditions are enough for ketene to be made in a significant amount over time, and if I am right, its quite a bad youtube video that is related to chemistry. [Edited on 6-6-2016 by ficolas]

Well to be fair oxidation of acetone is a very common demonstration as can be seen by these videos:
ficolas
Hazard to Others

Posts: 146
Registered: 14-5-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

 Quote: Well to be fair oxidation of acetone is a very common demonstration as can be seen by these videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEXXUeAh8kA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bczUv043XtY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEdK4BQCr_8

But isnt ketene more toxic than HCN?
The problem is that he didnt do it on purpose, he didnt know he could be oxidating the acetone, he just wanted to make bubbles
Pages:  1  ..  6    8    10

 Sciencemadness Discussion Board » Fundamentals » Miscellaneous » List some BAD chemistry YouTube videos Select A Forum Fundamentals   » Chemistry in General   » Organic Chemistry   » Reagents and Apparatus Acquisition   » Beginnings   » Responsible Practices   » Miscellaneous   » The Wiki Special topics   » Technochemistry   » Energetic Materials   » Biochemistry   » Radiochemistry   » Computational Models and Techniques   » Prepublication Non-chemistry   » Forum Matters   » Legal and Societal Issues