Shooter 1721

[silvershooter589]

Imagine trying to have a relatively successful YouTube channel by only releasing hours of unedited screwing around.

The videos are 10 minutes. If you know his style you can gain useful information and be entertained by the videos.

I've not seen him try to give the impression he never misses a shot. My criticisms would be he usually tunes down the guns so we don't know full power performance, and he seems to be head over heels with every gun he shoots in these videos.

Still I watch all his videos and I'll never be that good a shot, nor do I have a face for the camera.

If Rick is reading this thread, well Happy New Year and hopefully this thread is mostly positive for you.

 

[HogKiller]

Have No idea why but there are people who want to believe what they see on video, especially YouTube is real life. It shows real life but only the shiny parts.
I would never dismiss any of the YouTube air gunners as hacks or lacking competence. But do you really want to watch all that goes into making a watchable video? It ain’t as easy as some would suggest.
You have to remember the average viewer’s attention span aint much longer than a 12 year old child. When you have a short window to get a point or message delivered you don’t waste any of it on mundane stuff.

There wzs a reason I was a fan of The Short Attention Span Theater.

 

[Dr. Kralenstein]

Imagine trying to have a relatively successful YouTube channel by only releasing hours of unedited screwing around.

The videos are 10 minutes. If you know his style you can gain useful information and be entertained by the videos.

I've not seen him try to give the impression he never misses a shot. My criticisms would be he usually tunes down the guns so we don't know full power performance, and he seems to be head over heels with every gun he shoots in these videos.

Still I watch all his videos and I'll never be that good a shot, nor do I have a face for the camera.

If Rick is reading this thread, well Happy New Year and hopefully this thread is mostly positive for you.

You didn't see the crosman icon video then lol. He had a hard time saying it was a good gun... C'mon man! Wooooo!

 

[Raider03]

He is a trick shooter, and he is paid; what do you expect? Notice the range when guns are reviewed. You won't usually see 50 yard groups for guns that don't group well past 30 yards. This is not a dis on shooter 1721, but the videos are what they are. I respect the guy, find his content entertaining, and respect what he does.

In a resent video he shot the FX Panthera on PRS style course (for fun). He did miss a few, but, it was still an entertaining video. I don't remember one that wasn't worth watching.

 

[athlon_oved]

Rule Number 1. Always be skeptical of what you see in videos and pictures.
Rule Number 2. Always follow "Rule Number 1".

 

[RM100GUY]

He was one of the few who did a review of the Taipan Veteran...very nice I might add...when the brand seemed to be shuned by other reviewers. I recommended it be watched by more than one person...watched it several times myself and I already had one...found his assignment of the Veteran to be spot on.

 

[shambozzie]

Guys, thanks for all the input. I have watched all his videos. Even tried his aspirin tablet off balloon trick. Popped 3 balloons but finally made it. I think we all agree the guy can flat-out shoot and is a great guy.

 

[maxtrouble]

I used to watch all these "review" videos. All the rifles are perfect and they all shoot one hole groups at 100 yards. Never seen a bad air rifle or a poor shooter.

 

[Trucker3573]

The beauty of editing video. Just shoot again and retape it. Not like he is doing live video feeds.

This exactly. I can think of another channel in particular that every gun shoots hole in hole and never in the history of mankind has a 40 yard plinking shot (hint hint) been missed. These channels are super entertaining and I watch the videos but place little to no weight in the “review” of the product aspect.

 

[Emu]

If he shoots with a $15.00 bucks rifle he make hole in hole at 130 yards, but if he shoots with an Airgun Technology rifle he hits everywhere.

Not objective nor trustable.

 

[Maineiac]

A good majority (not all) airgun related YouTube content these days is little more than marketing material unfortunately. I just have to remind myself that it’s just entertainment and not objective and enjoy it for what it is.

 

[tor47]

It can be a mixture of a hobby, and sponsorship for some. Think both Ted Bier, and Matt dubber started out as hobbyist. The thing is if you are gonna review airguns, and have to buy, or borrow every gun, you might not get the chance to test the latest guns. We also have to consider the hours, and cost of video equipment required to make youtube movies. I can totally understand some would prefer sponsorship. The good thing about shooter, and some other guys is that they are not brand specific, while some others are. In the case of Matt, he has started a airgun related career outside his youtube channel. Now be a co employee of FX, it is totally understandable he focus mainly on FX guns.

 

[tor47]

There is good non sponsored tubers out there also, which in some cases may be more trustworthy. None sponsored guys usually are not afraid to say what they do not like with a gun, while sponsored guys more often does not mention it, and only focus on the positive.

 

[PGinsandiego]

Video editing? Come on, guys, the man can shoot! Heck, I would be out in the field for a year doing my 9,768 outtake before I could take a 1720T and split a card in half in the standing position at 50 yards.

 

[Peashooter]

If anyone took a picture of me, and ran it thru paintshop, i would consider it a insult to my person, and the person a poor photographer.

I have contemplated making some of Ricks "trick" shots, but then why would i, just like him it will probably take a few shots ( on camera ) to get it, probably even more shots off camera or on the floor of the cutting booth.
I think i am better off carrying on with our fire shooting, as i cant recall seeing anyone doing that, and its not really a matter of being a crack shot, more like lucky getting the right camera settings and one of the multiple exposure pictures being just the right one.

No matter what i take pictures of, these days i take like 20 at least, CUZ digital are SO easy VS the analog photography i grew up with and learned the tricks of the trade with.

 

[crazyhorse]

I've seen him miss now and then.

 

[Peashooter]

Dont get me wrong i do like mixing it up with photos, so bracket shooting are one of my newer though not practiced much hobbies.
Taking 5 pictures of the same thing, each with a slightly different exposure parameter, and you can mix things up to be quite nice.

A example here :

First shot the single picture the camera would have taken ( just my dji osmo action camera )
EV 0

And then the same picture, but here 5 different exposed pictures mixed up in software.
EV -2 / EV -1 / EV 0 / EV +1 / EV +2
Now the 2 overexposed pictures, very bright but still usefull info in them that are not in the EV 0 picture or the 2 underexposed EV -1 and -2 pictures that pretty much only have interesting info around the sun itself a,d a little in the sky is you want to make it a darker blue.

Now i could have mixed it so the bushes / foreground was much brighter, but i like this little darker look letting you know that it will be dark soon as the setting sun in the back also indicate.

 

[jking]

One thing about ole Rick is that I don't hear him patting himself on the back all the time and I have seen him miss plenty of shots.

 

[Emu]

Video editing? Come on, guys, the man can shoot! Heck, I would be out in the field for a year doing my 9,768 outtake before I could take a 1720T and split a card in half in the standing position at 50 yards.

It s clear that he s an excellent shooter !!!!

Nobody has said the contrary.

It is clear that he can shoot better and shout louder than my self. No doubt at all.