Circulating the internets right now is this video, picked up via
planet5d. It's being illustrated as an example of interactive, filmic, "d-print" content for a device such as the iPad for Viv magazine.
What I see here is where advertising is going. Banners suck: we know this. They have abysmal click-through rates, and as awareness media they're even less effective than bus huts. Banners blow. (Seriously, let's stop making them, soon, okay?)
What about print? It's pretty, especially that awesome European stuff you see in all the annuals with a little logo in the corner and one fantastically creative image. Problem is, it doesn't do any heavy lifting. Work that is that pure can't even bear the load of an offer without it being ruined. And in the digital era, the ROI on print is pretty low.
And then there's broadcast. It's really pretty and really engaging, which is good. It's also good and communicating a message in short amount of time, which is also good, because a short amount of time is all you're getting. It's also really fucking expensive and fun to make, which is great—if you work for the agency making it. Not so great for everyone else.
This video, in my mind, represents the beginning of the type of content we're going to start seeing made really soon.
It will be full-screen content with no limits to what you can do (or spend), like a TV spot. This stuff will be high quality and it's going to look great (especially on those super high resolution small OLED displays we're about to be surrounded with). But at the same time, it's also going to get a lot cheaper to get that quality (my thinking: mostly saved by in-house photographers and retouchers, and the sudden influx of pretty-darn-good new production companies thanks to HD video DSLRs like the Cannon 5D/7D, but that's for another blog post).
This stuff will also be able work like print, which is to say it lets the consumer take as long as they want to engage with it. (This of course means the creative needs to actually be good to keep people from just turning the page, but hey, that's our fucking job, right? Toughen up.)
And of course it's digital, so we can actually do shit.
Yo, automotive clients: want to let users who stare at your print ad in Esquire for a few seconds automatically see it transition into your broadcast sixty, and then let the reader "build their own" right there in the page? No fucking problem. Added a new offer? Update the existing media buys... in real time! Pharma guys—tired of all of those terms and conditions being tiny type in your print ads? Well let's just put them behind a button. You get the idea.
Get ready, digital creatives. Imagine if every ad you made was an Eyeblaster takeover with a real budget for creative, and instead of making 90 different banners you make 3. Imagine you had some real time to make them right. Imagine if you got the time, the budgets, the quality and the client attention that your above-the-line counterparts do.
I'm pretty sure this is where we are going folks. Just like now we talk about "is this rich media or a 40k?," we're moving into the era of "we need two set-top-box sixties with "click-to-learn-more", one rich digital spread, three still interactive spreads, and one mobile platform app"
And no more fucking banners.