doublevr They are not bringing any points to the table any more, just repeating the same mantra all the time.
I feel that I have brought some points and suggestions to the table, but just like how every time in the past, when I try to give you some legitimate feedback, you give me a blanket response and don't ever actually respond to all of my points. This dates back to bitrates, "like" metrics, scene-splitting, alternative ways of handling pass-through, etc. I still remember how myself and others uploaded direct screenshots comparing original bitrates to lower bitrates with clear degradation in picture quality, especially around the face and closeups, and you just denied the fact that there was any difference. Opinions are one thing, but facts are facts.
doublevr The number of likes tells it all.
What about other metrics? Retention? Play duration? Unique users? Downloads? Correlation to models? Release strategy (ie, not releasing 2 PTs back to back, 2 BGGGs back to back, same models back to back)? Whether or not the video releases with script? Human vs AI? If you have a data analytics team that has actually studied this and you are not basing PT's success solely on "likes", then please elaborate. Of course, I'm not expecting you to divulge every bit of data that you have collected over the years, but all you ever cite is just "likes". I guarantee that if you were a bit more forthcoming and specific in your proclamations to us, they would be received better.
doublevr Just skip PT videos. SLR is content overdose, there are plenty of other great videos to watch.
That's well and fine, and I've stated that I can accept that. I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade here. But when we see SLRO scenes are going from 10% PT, to 20%, to 40% and to 50% PT... well then that means we are skipping more and more SLRO videos. Then, on top of the fact, there are definitely more than "6 users" that love Nash's bread and butter work, and now we are hearing that Nash may be filming some PT scenes too... Is it that difficult to see why customers are upset?
And does trolling customers ever seem like the right thing to do? I know customers can be annoying and frustrating to deal with. I also work in the video tech industry with 100x louder and angrier customers than SLR with their tweet storms and reddit threads insulting and throwing shade at the product and the people behind the product, but I would never belittle them. And I'm not even the CEO/founder. I'm just a worker-bee. Can you imagine any other scenario where the CEO/founder of a company can interact with their customers like this?
doublevr We just need a better passthrough.
Wasn't that what the Q3 was supposed to be? I know progress takes time, and the Q3 was a great leap forward, but if there are obvious technical limitations outside of SLR's hands, then why pour so much focus on it before the technology has matured? Just to be first? To be innovators? I can get behind those reasons 100%, but I wouldn't shift my entire business strategy around something that isn't technically viably there yet.
doublevr Now we need some directors with a good sense to make it really cool
Okay, I can understand this, and NOW I see why you want Nash to give it a go. At least with this kind of context, I can see the reasoning. You want Nash to help improve the PT experience and push it further versus you want Nash to get on the PT train because that's what's "cool". It's this kind of communication that can go a long way, instead of just trolling people that disagree with you left and right.
