Simplicity & Clarity: Why Better Video Isn’t About More Visuals

It’s easy to assume that better video means more.

More scenes.

More motion.

More visual detail.

But research in learning science and instructional design consistently shows that elaborate visuals don’t guarantee understanding.

When it comes to communicating knowledge through video, clarity often has more impact than polish.

The problem isn’t video length. It’s design quality.

One of the most common misconceptions in video-led learning is that shorter is always better.

Research doesn’t support that.

Well-designed videos can be effective at a range of lengths when cognitive load is managed properly. The real issue isn’t duration. It’s whether the viewer’s attention is being directed or divided.

Learning designer and researcher Dr Philippa Hardman frequently highlights that learning effectiveness is driven by instructional design choices, not production value alone.

Source:

Hardman, P. Applied research and writing on evidence-based learning design and instructional effectiveness.

Why complexity breaks understanding

Cognitive Load Theory helps explain why “more” often works against learning.

First introduced by educational psychologist John Sweller, the theory explains that working memory has limited capacity. When instructional materials overload it, comprehension and retention suffer.

Cognitive load is commonly described in three parts:

• Intrinsic load – the inherent complexity of the content
• Germane load – the effort required to process and understand
• Extraneous load – unnecessary effort caused by poor design

Unnecessary visual complexity increases extraneous load, leaving less mental capacity for actual understanding.

Sources:

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning.

Sweller, J. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: Twenty years later.

What this means for video

In practice, this leads to a pattern we see repeatedly in learning content:

• More scenes does not guarantee clarity
• More motion does not guarantee understanding
• More visuals do not guarantee impact

When visuals compete for attention instead of supporting the message, they actively work against learning.

This does not mean video should be dull or stripped of personality. It means every visual element needs a clear instructional purpose.

Why removing detail can improve learning

This principle is reinforced by Richard Mayer’s research on multimedia learning, particularly the Coherence Principle.

The Coherence Principle shows that learners perform better when irrelevant visual and auditory material is removed, even if that material is interesting or visually impressive.

Extra detail might look good, but if it doesn’t support the instructional goal, it makes comprehension harder.

Sources:

Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning.

Mayer, R. E. (2020). The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning.

When simplicity works best

Simplicity is most effective when it:

• Supports the message
• Reduces distraction
• Focuses attention

The goal isn’t an overproduced video.

It’s a clear one.

This doesn’t mean abandoning quality or realism. It means choosing the right level of detail for the audience, the context, and the message being delivered.

Designing video with the audience in mind

At Colossyan, this thinking shapes how we approach video creation.

We support realistic avatars, expressive delivery, and cinematic quality. But those capabilities are always in service of clarity, not spectacle.

That philosophy extends to the product experience itself. Our UX is designed to help creators stay focused on the message, which is why it has been recognised with a Red Dot Award.

Final thought

If video is meant to transfer knowledge, success isn’t measured by how impressive it looks.

It’s measured by whether the message lands.

Create with your audience in mind.

Not with distractions.

‍