I need some information about "switch method"

[Trixtvil]

If I understand correctly, this method allows you to stitch videos without adding your own 3 seconds of recording. My question is, does the viral potential remain the same when using the regular stitch method that includes 3 seconds of your own recording?

 

[Antecti]

If I understand correctly, this method allows you to stitch videos without adding your own 3 seconds of recording. My question is, does the viral potential remain the same when using the regular stitch method that includes 3 seconds of your own recording?

I've actually had the same question, my friend. By the way, could you share your method for discovering popular videos to edit and remix?

 

[Bourgis]

If I understand correctly, this method allows you to stitch videos without adding your own 3 seconds of recording. My question is, does the viral potential remain the same when using the regular stitch method that includes 3 seconds of your own recording?

Indeed, a concise 5-second video has a significantly higher likelihood of becoming viral compared to a longer 8+ second video. This is primarily due to the concept of retention rate.

The average attention span of a TikTok user is approximately 2 seconds. If you add an extra 3 seconds to your video, those additional seconds must be captivating enough to retain the viewer's interest until the end. Failing to do so diminishes any chance of your video going viral.

The stitch method serves as a means to "borrow" viral content (i.e., content that successfully retained viewers' attention) and present it as original content through the stitch feature. This method is considered legitimate because you're not personally marking or stealing the content; TikTok itself offers this option.

 

[Poplec]

I've actually had the same question, my friend. By the way, could you share your method for discovering popular videos to edit and remix?

I currently have no specific plan for this. At the moment, I am experimenting with various videos in my local language. However, it might be worth considering exploring viral videos created by other content creators on platforms like Stitcher.

Indeed, a concise 5-second video has a significantly higher likelihood of becoming viral compared to a longer 8+ second video. This is primarily due to the concept of retention rate.

The average attention span of a TikTok user is approximately 2 seconds. If you add an extra 3 seconds to your video, those additional seconds must be captivating enough to retain the viewer's interest until the end. Failing to do so diminishes any chance of your video going viral.

The stitch method serves as a means to "borrow" viral content (i.e., content that successfully retained viewers' attention) and present it as original content through the stitch feature. This method is considered legitimate because you're not personally marking or stealing the content; TikTok itself offers this option.

I understand and agree with this, for real. I will attempt to understand and apply this approach, but it might still be valuable even without that highly confidential technique.

 

[Natela]

If I understand correctly, this method allows you to stitch videos without adding your own 3 seconds of recording. My question is, does the viral potential remain the same when using the regular stitch method that includes 3 seconds of your own recording?

It havees equivalent potential.

The issue is that people in this vicinity are unwilling to capture anything for a duration of 3 seconds.

 

[RomanceLinkin]

It havees equivalent potential.

The issue is that people in this vicinity are unwilling to capture anything for a duration of 3 seconds.

In reality, the potential of the two approaches is different because the engagement metrics are evaluated separately for each group of views. The video created using the mentioned method will have superior metrics and will receive more promotion compared to a video created using one's own 3-second recording.

 

[Allith]

In reality, the potential of the two approaches is different because the engagement metrics are evaluated separately for each group of views. The video created using the mentioned method will have superior metrics and will receive more promotion compared to a video created using one's own 3-second recording.

With the recent revelation about a department responsible for determining viral content, does this approach truly take advantage of TikTok or is it an undiscovered treasure?

 

[Relenier]

Indeed, a concise 5-second video has a significantly higher likelihood of becoming viral compared to a longer 8+ second video. This is primarily due to the concept of retention rate.

The average attention span of a TikTok user is approximately 2 seconds. If you add an extra 3 seconds to your video, those additional seconds must be captivating enough to retain the viewer's interest until the end. Failing to do so diminishes any chance of your video going viral.

The stitch method serves as a means to "borrow" viral content (i.e., content that successfully retained viewers' attention) and present it as original content through the stitch feature. This method is considered legitimate because you're not personally marking or stealing the content; TikTok itself offers this option.

What prevents people from making one-second videos that end just as they are about to be scrolled past?

 

[Verbtern]

In reality, the potential of the two approaches is different because the engagement metrics are evaluated separately for each group of views. The video created using the mentioned method will have superior metrics and will receive more promotion compared to a video created using one's own 3-second recording.

So, this is the content of the email you sent out, which made me laugh... a confidential technique, by the way.

 

[Adtecarmp]

I finally discovered the technique, haha. It only took me around five minutes, although I must confess that I've been attempting it for months. However, this time I approached it from a different angle.

 

[Enuentis]

I finally discovered the technique, haha. It only took me around five minutes, although I must confess that I've been attempting it for months. However, this time I approached it from a different angle.

Can you share what actions you took? I've come across various methods that others have employed.

 

[GotBuzz]

Can you share what actions you took? I've come across various methods that others have employed.

I am aware of two methods, although it is impossible for me to reveal which one is being used. The first method I have discovered recently and it consistently proves effective. The second method involves the capcut button, but I seldom rely on it as it rarely becomes available.

 

[Runninger]

With the recent revelation about a department responsible for determining viral content, does this approach truly take advantage of TikTok or is it an undiscovered treasure?

At this magnitude, relying on human labor to determine what content should go viral is not practical. Instead, AI becomes indispensable. The most human workers can accomplish is flagging potentially problematic videos for manual review by moderators.

 

[Glitzer]

I am aware of two methods, although it is impossible for me to reveal which one is being used. The first method I have discovered recently and it consistently proves effective. The second method involves the capcut button, but I seldom rely on it as it rarely becomes available.

Haha! It's quite apparent that I am unable to reveal.

 

[Relenier]

What prevents people from making one-second videos that end just as they are about to be scrolled past?

The potential for a video to go viral cannot be accurately measured by a single metric alone, which is why it is complex.

In the scenario mentioned earlier, the video in question was a stitched video that already managed to capture the attention of users. If my video is 5 seconds long and has a 60% retention rate, resulting in 300 hours of watchtime, your 1-second video would have a 95% retention rate but only generate 40 hours of watchtime.

If you were TikTok, which video would you choose to promote on the "For You" page? Would you go for the one that keeps the audience on the platform for a longer time or the other one?

That's why I mentioned that the viral potential is the same if you know what you're doing. If your 8-second video ends with 3 seconds of nothingness, your retention rate will decrease, making my video more significant based on that single factor (because it's the same viral video stitched together). If all the other metrics are similar, but I have an 80% retention rate while you have 50%, it's evident which one is more likely to succeed.

However, the case you mentioned is not exactly the same. We won't have similar metrics, so TikTok will obviously not prioritize something that generates only 40 hours of watchtime after 400,000 views.

 

[Standia]

Haha! It's quite apparent that I am unable to reveal.

Sure, buddy, I'll openly reveal my techniques right here, allowing everyone to exploit them, which may result in a TikTok fix just because Mrwhite2018 desires it. I recall that you were consistently frustrated when people were unwilling to share their knowledge. Rather than criticizing others for their reluctance to divulge valuable insights they've put considerable thought into, perhaps you should concentrate on conducting your own experiments and discovering them independently.

 

[Ratnt]

The potential for a video to go viral cannot be accurately measured by a single metric alone, which is why it is complex.

In the scenario mentioned earlier, the video in question was a stitched video that already managed to capture the attention of users. If my video is 5 seconds long and has a 60% retention rate, resulting in 300 hours of watchtime, your 1-second video would have a 95% retention rate but only generate 40 hours of watchtime.

If you were TikTok, which video would you choose to promote on the "For You" page? Would you go for the one that keeps the audience on the platform for a longer time or the other one?

That's why I mentioned that the viral potential is the same if you know what you're doing. If your 8-second video ends with 3 seconds of nothingness, your retention rate will decrease, making my video more significant based on that single factor (because it's the same viral video stitched together). If all the other metrics are similar, but I have an 80% retention rate while you have 50%, it's evident which one is more likely to succeed.

However, the case you mentioned is not exactly the same. We won't have similar metrics, so TikTok will obviously not prioritize something that generates only 40 hours of watchtime after 400,000 views.

Excellent, I appreciate this response. The explanation provided was concise and simplified in such a manner that it is practically impossible to misunderstand. As someone unfamiliar with viewer metrics and related aspects, it is valuable to gain knowledge about this subject. I face challenges in creating videos that fail to reach 1,000 views, even on newly established accounts. However, armed with this newfound information, I can now take additional steps to enhance the visibility and popularity of my videos.

 

[Hanumbi]

Excellent, I appreciate this response. The explanation provided was concise and simplified in such a manner that it is practically impossible to misunderstand. As someone unfamiliar with viewer metrics and related aspects, it is valuable to gain knowledge about this subject. I face challenges in creating videos that fail to reach 1,000 views, even on newly established accounts. However, armed with this newfound information, I can now take additional steps to enhance the visibility and popularity of my videos.

Please don't hesitate to message me privately or mention me if you have any further inquiries. I'll do my utmost to provide you with the answers you seek.

 

[Pellico]

Please don't hesitate to message me privately or mention me if you have any further inquiries. I'll do my utmost to provide you with the answers you seek.

I have another thought-provoking question for you: Which option gets better results—photo slideshows or standard videos? Currently, I have a page that receives an average of 20,000 views for photo slideshows capturing moments during a journey, such as "what AI thinks the world will be like in X years" or "history taking a selfie." However, I'm curious if I could potentially attract more views by sticking to standard TikTok videos. I would appreciate hearing your thoughts on this matter.

 

[Coanetq]

I have another thought-provoking question for you: Which option gets better results—photo slideshows or standard videos? Currently, I have a page that receives an average of 20,000 views for photo slideshows capturing moments during a journey, such as "what AI thinks the world will be like in X years" or "history taking a selfie." However, I'm curious if I could potentially attract more views by sticking to standard TikTok videos. I would appreciate hearing your thoughts on this matter.

Hasn't TikTok removed the feature of slideshows in their latest update? If that's the case, you should consider switching to regular videos before slideshows are disabled.