Damn, randomly clicked on this video and first minute in i was like "holy shit this is good!" Loved the thesis + research obv, and the different locations and handdrawn elements, and your presentation style was SO good dude. Then, as I'm vibing, you randomly mentioned me and my brain short circuited for a good 5 seconds. Loved your take on that example too. Amazing work, refreshing as hell to see
Art with context is content. Or something like that no artist should get bogged down in the stupidity of claiming to know what there’s art will be perceived as. Whether it’s labeled art or content this doesn’t change the the objective reality of a finished work.
This is super cool, love the new editing style and multiple locations for filming. I really think it comes down to intention behind the creator because i think most people can tell subconciously if something leans more towards content or art. There are middle ground pieces or times when it can be hard to tell so i think the spectrum theory on your whiteboard really sums it up well.
personally, I don't like when something I consider to be art is called content is because it feels like it devalues the integrity and human emotion from the creation. It's like a personal insult when something I value on such an emotional level is referred to as "content". That being said, this video kicks ass. Keep at it
Glad you liked the video! Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Out of curiosity, what about the word content do you think devalues the integrity of the creation?
I think it's because the vast majority of content is not made to evoke the kind of emotion that art evokes, so when art is called content, it feels like it undermines the emotions that went into creating it
Really good and interesting video bro! This one turned me into the thinker man. If you're pumping out a bunch of videos in this style, oh man am I excited because this might be my 2nd or 3rd favorite video from you. Boxing doc at 1, but that's cheating. The one in 2nd or 3rd would be the taco video along with this.
Now this is the actual way of coming at the content vs. Art definitions. Content is a subset of Art. Therefore content can be called art as it has qualities of art in it. However art itself contains genuine expression of interest in one’s creation, this interest is something connected to the artist’s mind or will in itself. To put simply, Content is how art is perceived. Art is made by an artist and content is viewed by an audience. Art is what you refer your videos to yourself and if anyone else finds a similar interest in them, they can call it art. If an artist is detached from his work, then what they made is content. This is the clearest explanation I cooked up from research.
Great video. Thank you. It is outrageosly wrong to think that this video is content, not art. You literally labored and labored and labored to fill it with art (much of it not yours, and you are not stealing any of it, but it is still there). This video is art, more than content.
though you do say that the spectrum is arbitrary and who's to say what falls where? - there is still a bit of a essentialisation of the existence of the spectrum and the placement of, as well as shape of, its extremes. Like, I could make a spectrum called 'profit' and 'expression' and that would still fail to capture every artist who maximises their skill in a craft solely to be the biggest or solely to work with the best. This is inetresting to think about, thanks for making the video, massive fan. I guess where I tend to fall on this is that it is all art and content is only a modality of such. Comics and novel chapters have release schedules, audience monitoring and retention considerations, and an aspect of 'get it out for the money'. The intentionality only affects the decisions made in the production of the art, but that does not diminish its status as art. Outside of maybe not thinking a thing is artistically resonating with you, but that, again, does not mean something is 'less artistic' or in the context of the vid, 'more like content.'
I'm glad you enjoyed the video and I'm glad that you found it interesting. Thanks for sharing some of your thoughts. It truly is a hard concept to fully wrap my brain around. You bring up some really good points here. Just because something isn't artistically resonating with you doesn't mean that it's not art, I definitely agree with you on that
I feel like the word content is being used as the new way of calling something "entertainment" Like a lot of people will say something like a marvel movie was entertaining but they wouldn't call it art And while there is a lot of art(movies is what I'm mainly thinking of) that are entertaining there is certainly some that aren't Something like "Stalker" comes to mind where the movie is beautiful and a work of art I wouldn't call it entertaining In my mind at least the word Content=Entertainment
I loved hearing your thoughts on this and by and large agree with you and for sure the subjectivity of what is art and what is content makes it very tricky but at the end of the day both are needed and bring value to the world and joy to people's lives, brat by Charli XCX referenced a few times in the video which is thus far my 2024 AOTY and possibly might end up being my album of the decade 9i have been literally blasting it nonstop) is in my very subjective view both art and content.
100% agree with you about both being needed and bringing value into peoples lives. I'm actually working on a full video about Brat that dives into the marketing of the album that I think you'll enjoy very much :)
Thoughts before watching all the way through: Content can be art and art can be content, but they are not the same. A venn diagram if you will. AI slop is content but not art. The mona lisa is art but not content. When art and content overlap, it is art produced with a broad audience and reach in mind, and it is shaped by the media platform it inhabits. This video is in the overlap. After: Ah, interesting to see you put it on a spectrum, that does make some sense.
@@KyleReidfrfr The only other thing I would add is that perhaps art and content is not a spectrum per se but two properties. maybe something could be 100% art and 100% content, or 50% art and 100% content, etc.
“Art” is made for People, “Content” is made for Algorithms. “Art” is notoriously difficult to define, because at the core of Art is it’s potential for infinite possibilities. So in this sense, “Content” does not hold a potential for infinite possibilities, in-fact, content cannot hold infinite possibilities because it is beholden to categorization: “Content” is a word used by tech companies to define anything that can fill up space and hold the attention of it’s users. “Content” is created specifically to please algorithms. I see it as a spectrum. For example, a YT creator can create Art but tailor certain aspects of their video to the algorithm (Title, Thumbnail, etc), this, I consider to be “Art” because for me what makes something “Art” comes down to “Aesthetic Sincerity”. However on the other side of the spectrum we have Mr Beast and AI generated slop. These are not Art because they are created specifically to be general, inoffensive and most importantly, to please an algorithm. Edit: I just got the part where you outline the Art-Content spectrum.. lol.. I also agree that no one person has the authority to objectivity state what is and isn’t Art, however, I don’t believe that our subjective opinion doesn’t matter because Art is born from subjectivity and it will die in subjectivity. And to the point about the harm of “content”, I think it is very harmful because it created the AI generated hellscape we are currently living in. The reason we tend to devalue Art created for profit is that ultimately is removes the human from the equation and what is left is the exact opposite of Art, Content, something created just to fill up space. Even outside of AI slop the “MrBeastification” of YT is another great example and it’s very fitting that he is beginning to use AI in as many aspects of his videos as possible.
The truth is that the only difference is intent. I am halfway through the video so I dint know if you come to the same conclusion. Every piece of art can be content. Content is intended to benefit the creator and it can only do that through playing by the rulebook. Following trends, meta data etc. Advertising is inherently necessary for the success and livelyhood of the artist and their potential to create art. Art is not intended to chart or go viral, but to connect to the viewer. Arts most important part has always been conversation. And sometimes you need to make content to get to that conversation. To me art and content are just an extension of each other fulfilling a different purpose and there should be no shame in artists making content to gain acknowledgment.
Someone said in an article that I read that "artists need to make content to stand out and content creators need to be a bit more artistic to stand out." I thought it relevant to your comment so I wanted to share. It's an interesting concept
YT suggested this small channel to me so here's a comment to help with the algos. Edit: decent content homie 👍 Edit 2: Fantano & Hasan references? This guy's growing on me Edit 3: ok food for thought while I listen to you talk about Mr. Beast - you know Yes Theory? I think I'd call them art like documentaries made to inspire people & show the human spirit. Edit 4: okay last one. Say Kung Fu Panda is content as a movie, but can the work of the animators - the parts that compose the movie - still be art? Feels like it should count, I'm guessing you'd agree
I think if you're loose enough w/ your definition of art, literally everything is art whether or not you're even creating anything tangible. Content doesn't need to have such a negative connotation NOR art a positive one--there's so much bad art out there lmao
Ya this was kind of a loose point that I brought up in my research that I ended up cutting out of the final script. I compared it to a building for example, where someone can think nothing of it but then someone else can think it's a marvelous piece of art
Damn, randomly clicked on this video and first minute in i was like "holy shit this is good!" Loved the thesis + research obv, and the different locations and handdrawn elements, and your presentation style was SO good dude. Then, as I'm vibing, you randomly mentioned me and my brain short circuited for a good 5 seconds. Loved your take on that example too. Amazing work, refreshing as hell to see
Woah! Super cool to see you here. Thank you so much for the kind words. I have tons of respect for you as a creator so it means a lot!
I dont have a definition of art, but for me there is nothing wrong with "content" and content is just art that you put out for other people to see
Great video bro
Thanks bro, glad you liked it
saw this thinking it was going half viral and then realized its just 600, u deserve moreeee
haha thank you :)
Thank you, Kyle! This is a truly deeper concept than I thought and it was interesting to see how you showed that throughout the video and the spectrum
I'm glad you found it interesting!
Art with context is content. Or something like that no artist should get bogged down in the stupidity of claiming to know what there’s art will be perceived as. Whether it’s labeled art or content this doesn’t change the the objective reality of a finished work.
Thanks for the video Kyle
Thank YOU for watching the video!
This is super cool, love the new editing style and multiple locations for filming. I really think it comes down to intention behind the creator because i think most people can tell subconciously if something leans more towards content or art. There are middle ground pieces or times when it can be hard to tell so i think the spectrum theory on your whiteboard really sums it up well.
EASILY your best video omg i need more people to see this!! kyle reid revival wooooooooooooooo
Thank you!!! The Kyle Reid revival is here!
personally, I don't like when something I consider to be art is called content is because it feels like it devalues the integrity and human emotion from the creation. It's like a personal insult when something I value on such an emotional level is referred to as "content".
That being said, this video kicks ass. Keep at it
Glad you liked the video! Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Out of curiosity, what about the word content do you think devalues the integrity of the creation?
I think it's because the vast majority of content is not made to evoke the kind of emotion that art evokes, so when art is called content, it feels like it undermines the emotions that went into creating it
@@jamiestonks I think that's a fair way of thinking about it.
Great video! Art vs. content is a fascinating concept and you explored it in a really cool way here.
Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed it
Nice choice on the floating points track
Haha, thanks. You got some good taste
new kyle video HELLO!
he’s back!
Yes!!!! Ryan Higa was one of the most creative people on the platform. I miss videos like that on here. >
Really good and interesting video bro! This one turned me into the thinker man. If you're pumping out a bunch of videos in this style, oh man am I excited because this might be my 2nd or 3rd favorite video from you. Boxing doc at 1, but that's cheating. The one in 2nd or 3rd would be the taco video along with this.
I'm glad you liked the video! Definitely more to come
Now this is the actual way of coming at the content vs. Art definitions. Content is a subset of Art. Therefore content can be called art as it has qualities of art in it. However art itself contains genuine expression of interest in one’s creation, this interest is something connected to the artist’s mind or will in itself.
To put simply, Content is how art is perceived. Art is made by an artist and content is viewed by an audience. Art is what you refer your videos to yourself and if anyone else finds a similar interest in them, they can call it art. If an artist is detached from his work, then what they made is content. This is the clearest explanation I cooked up from research.
this is so dystopian
Yooo kyle reid is back? Killer vid man ❤ I didn't get a notif
I am now even more confused than ever! Well done, love the video! - Kyle’s Dad
Haha thanks dad!
The amount of time this must have taken to shoot, and then edit 😭 I have a big appreciation for this bro
Great video. Thank you. It is outrageosly wrong to think that this video is content, not art. You literally labored and labored and labored to fill it with art (much of it not yours, and you are not stealing any of it, but it is still there). This video is art, more than content.
I'm glad you enjoyed the video!
Art is 'expression' or the communication of some deep feeling from inside the creator. Content is almost impersonal in its creation and delivery.
though you do say that the spectrum is arbitrary and who's to say what falls where? - there is still a bit of a essentialisation of the existence of the spectrum and the placement of, as well as shape of, its extremes.
Like, I could make a spectrum called 'profit' and 'expression' and that would still fail to capture every artist who maximises their skill in a craft solely to be the biggest or solely to work with the best.
This is inetresting to think about, thanks for making the video, massive fan. I guess where I tend to fall on this is that it is all art and content is only a modality of such. Comics and novel chapters have release schedules, audience monitoring and retention considerations, and an aspect of 'get it out for the money'. The intentionality only affects the decisions made in the production of the art, but that does not diminish its status as art. Outside of maybe not thinking a thing is artistically resonating with you, but that, again, does not mean something is 'less artistic' or in the context of the vid, 'more like content.'
I'm glad you enjoyed the video and I'm glad that you found it interesting. Thanks for sharing some of your thoughts. It truly is a hard concept to fully wrap my brain around. You bring up some really good points here. Just because something isn't artistically resonating with you doesn't mean that it's not art, I definitely agree with you on that
I feel like the word content is being used as the new way of calling something "entertainment"
Like a lot of people will say something like a marvel movie was entertaining but they wouldn't call it art
And while there is a lot of art(movies is what I'm mainly thinking of) that are entertaining there is certainly some that aren't
Something like "Stalker" comes to mind where the movie is beautiful and a work of art I wouldn't call it entertaining
In my mind at least the word Content=Entertainment
Ya I honestly agree with this. Really interesting point. The word content does seem to be synonymous with the word entertainment these days
I loved hearing your thoughts on this and by and large agree with you and for sure the subjectivity of what is art and what is content makes it very tricky but at the end of the day both are needed and bring value to the world and joy to people's lives, brat by Charli XCX referenced a few times in the video which is thus far my 2024 AOTY and possibly might end up being my album of the decade 9i have been literally blasting it nonstop) is in my very subjective view both art and content.
100% agree with you about both being needed and bringing value into peoples lives. I'm actually working on a full video about Brat that dives into the marketing of the album that I think you'll enjoy very much :)
@@KyleReidfrfr I cannot wait for your upcoming video on Brat it will be amazing :)
Thoughts before watching all the way through:
Content can be art and art can be content, but they are not the same. A venn diagram if you will. AI slop is content but not art. The mona lisa is art but not content. When art and content overlap, it is art produced with a broad audience and reach in mind, and it is shaped by the media platform it inhabits. This video is in the overlap.
After:
Ah, interesting to see you put it on a spectrum, that does make some sense.
Yup.. We pretty much had the same idea here
@@KyleReidfrfr The only other thing I would add is that perhaps art and content is not a spectrum per se but two properties. maybe something could be 100% art and 100% content, or 50% art and 100% content, etc.
Good work
“Art” is made for People, “Content” is made for Algorithms.
“Art” is notoriously difficult to define, because at the core of Art is it’s potential for infinite possibilities.
So in this sense, “Content” does not hold a potential for infinite possibilities, in-fact, content cannot hold infinite possibilities because it is beholden to categorization:
“Content” is a word used by tech companies to define anything that can fill up space and hold the attention of it’s users.
“Content” is created specifically to please algorithms.
I see it as a spectrum. For example, a YT creator can create Art but tailor certain aspects of their video to the algorithm (Title, Thumbnail, etc), this, I consider to be “Art” because for me what makes something “Art” comes down to “Aesthetic Sincerity”.
However on the other side of the spectrum we have Mr Beast and AI generated slop. These are not Art because they are created specifically to be general, inoffensive and most importantly, to please an algorithm.
Edit: I just got the part where you outline the Art-Content spectrum.. lol.. I also agree that no one person has the authority to objectivity state what is and isn’t Art, however, I don’t believe that our subjective opinion doesn’t matter because Art is born from subjectivity and it will die in subjectivity.
And to the point about the harm of “content”, I think it is very harmful because it created the AI generated hellscape we are currently living in. The reason we tend to devalue Art created for profit is that ultimately is removes the human from the equation and what is left is the exact opposite of Art, Content, something created just to fill up space.
Even outside of AI slop the “MrBeastification” of YT is another great example and it’s very fitting that he is beginning to use AI in as many aspects of his videos as possible.
good content
The truth is that the only difference is intent. I am halfway through the video so I dint know if you come to the same conclusion.
Every piece of art can be content. Content is intended to benefit the creator and it can only do that through playing by the rulebook. Following trends, meta data etc. Advertising is inherently necessary for the success and livelyhood of the artist and their potential to create art. Art is not intended to chart or go viral, but to connect to the viewer. Arts most important part has always been conversation. And sometimes you need to make content to get to that conversation.
To me art and content are just an extension of each other fulfilling a different purpose and there should be no shame in artists making content to gain acknowledgment.
Someone said in an article that I read that "artists need to make content to stand out and content creators need to be a bit more artistic to stand out." I thought it relevant to your comment so I wanted to share. It's an interesting concept
i clicked cause godfatherr
YT suggested this small channel to me so here's a comment to help with the algos.
Edit: decent content homie 👍
Edit 2: Fantano & Hasan references? This guy's growing on me
Edit 3: ok food for thought while I listen to you talk about Mr. Beast - you know Yes Theory? I think I'd call them art like documentaries made to inspire people & show the human spirit.
Edit 4: okay last one. Say Kung Fu Panda is content as a movie, but can the work of the animators - the parts that compose the movie - still be art? Feels like it should count, I'm guessing you'd agree
I think if you're loose enough w/ your definition of art, literally everything is art whether or not you're even creating anything tangible. Content doesn't need to have such a negative connotation NOR art a positive one--there's so much bad art out there lmao
Ya this was kind of a loose point that I brought up in my research that I ended up cutting out of the final script. I compared it to a building for example, where someone can think nothing of it but then someone else can think it's a marvelous piece of art