Images vs videos in advertising/marketing

[Martinsx]

Everything about advertising and marketing is trying to persuade and influence the people's mind and decision into preferring a specific set of products and services. Now, advertisers and marketers have two major variables when they are planning their strategy and it's the use of images or videos or both of them. 

Which one do you think would have a major impact in swaying the people's decision? As a marketer or an advertiser, would you use either one of the variables - images or videos or would you use both? 

[jaybee]

For me, as a consumer videos make more impact in to my decision making than images. Some images are not that eye catchy but videos comes with audio and it helps with the entire effectiveness of an advertisement because it caters the sense of sight and hearing. 

If I would be a marketer or an advertiser, I would still use both. Why? because both of them are already proven and tested to be effective even though they differ in terms of the level of effectiveness. I'll use images on public places like the MRT, LRT, Bus Stations, and Malls because a lot of people can see them while videos, I'll put them in to YouTube, Other websites, and the Television if possible. 

[Ash]

It depends on what you want to advertise or market really. And it also depends on where you are putting the advertising up. For example, if you're advertising on YouTube then it would have to be a video advertisement because it would look pretty weird to only have an image advertisement on a video. I do think that videos just aren't as effective as advertising sometimes unless you can make it extremely interesting in the first few seconds which can captivate your audience and keep them watching your advertising. When seeing video advertisement on sites like YouTube, most of the time I will not pay attention or skip it straight away when they give me the chance unless it is interesting enough for me to watch (trailers etc.)

[Kakashi2020]

Well it all depends on the platform you're using and your budget. Generally images are more cheaper and more effective because of a lot of reasons. Images are easier to put up and cheaper.  It's still not moving, thus it can easily be seen unlike videos which you have to watch in full to grasp the message.  Videos are good in presentations, meetings, on TV, and in the web.  But I do believe that most offline advertisers still prefer images, because it's much simpler, cheaper, easier to make and like they say "a picture paints a thousand words."

[kd06]

I'd go with videos for it utilizes both hearing and visual at the same time. You just have to make sure that you video ad be ears and eye catchy. The good thing about video advertisement is that reaches out even the laziest person/customer in the market, for most people are to lazy to read-out the details about a certain product, they tend to rely on what video ads say. Plus, with this generation, videos are shareable, making you reach a far more vast range of potential customer. But please do keep in mind that people share because of emotions, so try hitting it using your ad. An example of this is this advertisement from my country.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuwZJTYnEM4

[Joey Mercado]

On 24/04/2018 at 3:19 PM, Martinsx said:

Everything about advertising and marketing is trying to persuade and influence the people's mind and decision into preferring a specific set of products and services. Now, advertisers and marketers have two major variables when they are planning their strategy and it's the use of images or videos or both of them. 

Which one do you think would have a major impact in swaying the people's decision? As a marketer or an advertiser, would you use either one of the variables - images or videos or would you use both? 

It depends upon if the images can tell the whole story in just one page image Why not? And if the video made was not more than 3 minutes because some people get bored watching especially if they did not get easily what was really the real implication of the video. So I prefer whether it is video or images, it must be precise, concrete and easy to understand but still the lesson was brilliant and it can be beneficial to all any ages. Thank you I hope it helps

 

[jaymish]

From my personal point of view I prefer video because watching is just easier and more entertaining. But it all depends on your audience. If you have the younger generation I would advise video, again because of the entertainment angle. If you're advertising to the older generation, images may do the trick,especially because they may not know how to even watch video. Be careful about images though. They have to be good images to achieve your advertising goals. 

[Martinsx]

On 4/25/2018 at 9:17 AM, jaybee said:

For me, as a consumer videos make more impact in to my decision making than images. Some images are not that eye catchy but videos comes with audio and it helps with the entire effectiveness of an advertisement because it caters the sense of sight and hearing. 

If I would be a marketer or an advertiser, I would still use both. Why? because both of them are already proven and tested to be effective even though they differ in terms of the level of effectiveness. I'll use images on public places like the MRT, LRT, Bus Stations, and Malls because a lot of people can see them while videos, I'll put them in to YouTube, Other websites, and the Television if possible. 

Video advertising is quite effective in persuading viewers especially when the video information is done well but it's not an easy thing making a good video advertisement. 

Combining both videos and images together with content will definitely make more impact than using just one. So therefore, I would go for using both of them. 

[blakfinn]

Images capture our attention immediately while a good video can keep us glued to our seats for th entire duration of the clip.

A killer combination is when both images and video are used to deliver a killer ad which will definitely lead to conversions.

For those on a tight budget images is the first port of call or favorite medium but those with deeper pockets usually go for videos.

[jaybee]

17 hours ago, Martinsx said:

Video advertising is quite effective in persuading viewers especially when the video information is done well but it's not an easy thing making a good video advertisement. 

Combining both videos and images together with content will definitely make more impact than using just one. So therefore, I would go for using both of them. 

Exactly @Martinsx. As an enthusiast in video editing and short film making I also think that making good video advertisements are very hard. Films have promotional videos and I do some whenever I make a short film, and that's really hard to make. Just thinking abut a good concept and an eye-catching line that would support the video, it's really hard. 

Edited April 27, 2018 by jaybee

[Martinsx]

On 4/25/2018 at 12:59 PM, Ash said:

It depends on what you want to advertise or market really. And it also depends on where you are putting the advertising up. For example, if you're advertising on YouTube then it would have to be a video advertisement because it would look pretty weird to only have an image advertisement on a video. I do think that videos just aren't as effective as advertising sometimes unless you can make it extremely interesting in the first few seconds which can captivate your audience and keep them watching your advertising. When seeing video advertisement on sites like YouTube, most of the time I will not pay attention or skip it straight away when they give me the chance unless it is interesting enough for me to watch (trailers etc.)

What you said is absolutely true, when it comes to choosing the channel for an advertisement, the preferred channel would determine if the advert would be a video or image - content advertisement. 

Just like you pointed out about the use of YouTube for an advertisement, using just an image when it's widely known that the platform is meant for video advertisements would ruin the advertisement from the start. 

[Kakashi2020]

I'll definitely choose images because images in marketing has a more broader market base unlike videos.  One can access images very easily unlike videos.  Images also has more engagements than videos. I think in a realistic advertising point of view images are more effective and more cost effective than videos.

[Martinsx]

On 4/26/2018 at 11:32 PM, blakfinn said:

Images capture our attention immediately while a good video can keep us glued to our seats for th entire duration of the clip.

A killer combination is when both images and video are used to deliver a killer ad which will definitely lead to conversions.

For those on a tight budget images is the first port of call or favorite medium but those with deeper pockets usually go for videos.

There is no denying that video advertising have more impact than just only image advertisements but the cost of making video adverts is a serious deterrence for most companies. 

Also making a good video requires great expertise and experience to pull off an incredible job that would enforce customers to patronize the commodity of on the advert. 

[Martinsx]

On 4/27/2018 at 10:48 AM, jaybee said:

Exactly @Martinsx. As an enthusiast in video editing and short film making I also think that making good video advertisements are very hard. Films have promotional videos and I do some whenever I make a short film, and that's really hard to make. Just thinking abut a good concept and an eye-catching line that would support the video, it's really hard. 

It's true what you just mentioned and I'm sure that it's why most people fail with video advertising because they find it difficult to make great ones that would have a better impact on viewers. Some of video adverts are very boring and with such video, there is no way it would achieve the objective why it was made. 

[jaybee]

On 4/30/2018 at 7:38 PM, Martinsx said:

It's true what you just mentioned and I'm sure that it's why most people fail with video advertising because they find it difficult to make great ones that would have a better impact on viewers. Some of video adverts are very boring and with such video, there is no way it would achieve the objective why it was made. 

Exactly. I remember when I watched a documentary (I guess if I'm not mistaken) about video advertisements and how to create them, a professional on that field said that what makes video advertisements hard to create is the catchy-thingy elements you have TO add in to the advertisement as well as the concept. Those things are actually non-existent in most of the commercials on tv right now and for me it's such a waste of resources knowing how expensive run-times are. If I'll be a businessman, I'd do my best to hire good video advertisement making agencies and to also advertise online.

[Martinsx]

4 hours ago, jaybee said:

Exactly. I remember when I watched a documentary (I guess if I'm not mistaken) about video advertisements and how to create them, a professional on that field said that what makes video advertisements hard to create is the catchy-thingy elements you have TO add in to the advertisement as well as the concept. Those things are actually non-existent in most of the commercials on tv right now and for me it's such a waste of resources knowing how expensive run-times are. If I'll be a businessman, I'd do my best to hire good video advertisement making agencies and to also advertise online.

There are advertising firms that offer good services when it comes to making excellent marketing campaigns videos that would possibly yield positive results. I would recommend using experts in the field to create such advertising campaigns video instead of trying to have it done by oneself. Trying to save money by doing it would yield no positive result but rather kill the products image. 

[jaybee]

19 hours ago, Martinsx said:

There are advertising firms that offer good services when it comes to making excellent marketing campaigns videos that would possibly yield positive results. I would recommend using experts in the field to create such advertising campaigns video instead of trying to have it done by oneself. Trying to save money by doing it would yield no positive result but rather kill the products image. 

I agree. It's pointless to buy run-times with just a mediocre video advertisement. Advertising firms are a trend right now and it hasn't been that long since I knew about their existence tho. Funny but during my childhood days, while watching TV I thought that commercials are just made by the companies themselves. Never thought there's a creative team behind it and they are a separate firm. 

Edited May 2, 2018 by jaybee

[Martinsx]

5 hours ago, jaybee said:

I agree. It's pointless to buy run-times with just a mediocre video advertisement. Advertising firms are a trend right now and it hasn't been that long since I knew about their existence tho. Funny but during my childhood days, while watching TV I thought that commercials are just made by the companies themselves. Never thought there's a creative team behind it and they are a separate firm. 

From the onset, even if companies are being the one carrying out its advertising plan and campaign, they have in-house advertising department that takes care of the project. Ordinary staff cannot be hired and tasked to carry out a professional advertising campaign. This would be a total failure should the management decide to move in such direction. 

[jaybee]

21 hours ago, Martinsx said:

From the onset, even if companies are being the one carrying out its advertising plan and campaign, they have in-house advertising department that takes care of the project. Ordinary staff cannot be hired and tasked to carry out a professional advertising campaign. This would be a total failure should the management decide to move in such direction. 

Really? Oh well I'm learning so much things from you tho, thank you @Martinsx. So meaning companies can also establish their own advertising departments and not just hire advertising firms for their advertisements. I didn't know such a thing exist in companies because I'm still a student right now and I also lack research about it. Well, do you know if small companies also have this kind of department? I actually think only big companies can do this because I guess it would cost a lot to have such a team in your company. 

[Martinsx]

2 hours ago, jaybee said:

Really? Oh well I'm learning so much things from you tho, thank you @Martinsx. So meaning companies can also establish their own advertising departments and not just hire advertising firms for their advertisements. I didn't know such a thing exist in companies because I'm still a student right now and I also lack research about it. Well, do you know if small companies also have this kind of department? I actually think only big companies can do this because I guess it would cost a lot to have such a team in your company. 

Yes my dear, it's something obtainable in so many big companies, it's very expensive hiring the expertise of advertising firms to carry out advertisements for a company. It's actually why some of these companies set out to have their own in-house advertising department tasked with taking care of their public image marketing and advertising. They would only seek out-house advertising when such advertisements need extra per of hands to get a better job done. 

[jessie271]

Both images and videos are good in advertising but I prefer videos more because it gives you more experience and more information about what is being advertised. The video can give you further explanation than by just looking at the image. Why not use both? I think that would be even more effective.

[MelanthaKrasos]

Business advertisement nowadays come in a handful of different scheme to attract potential clients. Videos add more sense and life to an advertisement, although it is more costly than images. I would personally go for videos but would never mind using both in persuading customers.

[Frank]

On 4/26/2018 at 11:32 PM, blakfinn said:

Images capture our attention immediately while a good video can keep us glued to our seats for th entire duration of the clip.

A killer combination is when both images and video are used to deliver a killer ad which will definitely lead to conversions.

For those on a tight budget images is the first port of call or favorite medium but those with deeper pockets usually go for videos.

Well stated,I think both should always be used because it will create utmost impact than any other way. Personally I like images or videos of any ads,it gives a better description and help capture our interest and focus.

[mhingnhormz]

Images vs videos in advertising/marketing: For me It depend on what your advertising for ang where are you going to advertise. For me if onlibe advertisement the images are more effective than the video one because in offline most of people ignore videos for the reason that they reallybneed to finiah the video first before they will appreciate the product your advertising while in online advertisement the video is more effective I guess.

[Corzhens]

The video is making waves in blogging that more and more bloggers are becoming vloggers maybe because the video is now easier to produce. It is no surprise that videos will also be more popular in the advertising industry. But for a user like me the video is not appealing. The main reason is the amount of time that I have to spend for the video while the image is easy to see. Even at a glance I already get the gist of the advertisement.