Fivestarblog251

62% of marketers find Facebook to be the most important social media channel for their business–yet content organically posted to Facebook Pages only reach about 16% of fans.

This is why so many brands advertise on Facebook. Not only to reach more of their following but to reach the larger market, too.

But, just like any advertising campaign, crafting an effective Facebook ad that actually reaches your audience isn’t luck–it’s the result of testing.

From ad creative to call-to-action copy, it all needs careful consideration (and testing) in order to maximize the potential of every campaign.

And when it comes to ad creative, the image–and more recently the video–is often the star of the show. But, is one more effective than the other?

We wanted to drill down and see whether image-based ads are still driving engagement, or whether emerging video trends have impacted the success rate of video-based Facebook ads.

So, we asked 26 marketers whether they use video or text-based most often.

To make writing tests easier, Selenium project currently provides client drivers for PHP, Python, Ruby,.NET, Perl and Java. The Java driver can also be used with JavaScript (via the Rhino engine). An instance of selenium RC server is needed to launch html test case - which means that the port should be different for each parallel run. Jul 21, 2020 Databox surveyed product marketers to identify what KPIs they prioritized above all else. Broadly, product marketers are consistently focused on the customer according to the survey: “Amongst the group of experts we surveyed, we found that product marketing’s main goal is sign-ups.

The results were (almost) evenly split, as 52% of the marketers who responded say they leverage video more so than images, and the remaining 48% said the opposite.

But surprisingly, almost 60% of those marketers said video tends to drive more engagement:

Audi Westmont‘s Laura Gonzalez is one of those marketers who prefers video-based ads: “Even though images still drive traffic and clicks, providing video gives users more insight into who you are as a brand.”

As does Alex Vdovenko of Down the Hatchet, who says: “We’ve done some testing with both video and images, and video continues to work best. We create short videos of people throwing axes at our location, and others immediately want to watch and click on it. This continues to work well for us as we keep switching ad creatives over time.”

But why do videos tend to perform better? These marketers one strong theory.

“Video content by far generates more engagements with our users”, says Taylor Hurff of 1SEO I.T. Support & Digital Marketing, who believes the benefits boil down to the fact “videos force scrolling users to stop and pay an extra second of attention to the post before understanding the gist.”

He says: “As consumers, we’ve gotten better at digesting content while scrolling, making it easier to scroll through images without giving the posts the time of day. With videos, you inherently have an extra second to grab the user’s attention. Capitalizing on this with engaging video content to back it up is key.”

James Marques of Iconic Genius agrees: “In most cases, people can digest a photo in a second or two. A video grabs more attention and causes people to focus more on the video.”

*Editor’s note: Need an easy way to track and visualize which Facebook ad campaigns are performing best? Grab this free template and see which campaigns are performing best, and more importantly, which specific ads are driving low CPCs and seeing high impressions.

Do video-based ads actually work?

It’s all well and good to know the justification behind video-based Facebook ads performing well.

But you want to know what ‘well’ means–and whether the results they’re generating will be on-par (or beat!) those you’re already seeing, right?

These three businesses have seen incredible results from their video-based campaigns.

A 2x increase in clicks

Malin Wijenayake, a Paid Ads Specialist on the team at seoplus+, says: “Video ads typically trump image ads in terms of engagement”.

…So much so that “in one particular case for one of our fitness-related clients, an image ad for a product received 777 link clicks, whereas a video for the same product received 1432 link clicks — almost double.”

An increase of conversions by 20-30%

ClearPivot‘s Chantelle Stevenson is another marketer raving about the results video-based ads have generated.

Stevenson says: “We have found that videos exponentially drive clicks over images when it comes to Facebook ads. […] We have found our clients to have 20 to 30% more conversions when utilizing video over images when it comes to Facebook ads.”

A boost of CTR by 2-3x

Remember how we discussed the theory behind video-based ads?

William Carrillo of Ledger Bennett doesn’t think it’s solely down to the fact videos attract more attention in a crowded feed.

Carrillo thinks it’s because “Facebook as a company, is pushing to be a video-first platform and often prioritizes video assets to align with that mindset. Facebook traffic is 90-95% mobile and vertical video formats allow for much more real estate on the screen than horizontal videos. This allows for more visibility and better opportunity to produce a click.”

Since actively testing the difference between video and static images, he says: “The findings showed that video assets drove an 11% higher conversion rate than statics.”

But if that wasn’t already good enough, William explains: “Not only did video drive stronger conversion, but also generated the most efficient cost per lead, and 75% of the overall click volume. This is also consistent in customer engagement campaigns. Throughout various iterations and tests with my client, we found that videos consistently drove 2-3x higher CTRs than statics.”

A CTR increase of 47%

Cardinal Digital Marketing‘s Alex Membrillo is another marketer who’s seen a rise in CTR with video ads.

“For a recent A/B test for a client in the travel and tourism industry, we found that with all other factors being the same, the Video Ads generated a 47% higher CTR, despite Facebook generating a higher Reach (i.e. Impressions) for the Image-based Ad,” Membrillo says.

“Additionally, we found that the CTR from people who viewed the video was over 10 times greater than people who saw the ad but did not view the video.”

Fancy getting in on the action? Here is advice from eight marketers, who share how you can maximize the videos you’re creating to see similar results.

1. Keep it simple

“I have noticed that videos which are short (less than a minute) and use subtitles or text overlays tend to work better,” Shafi Khan of Optiux Marketing explains.

Khan says: “Videos with texts helps the ad watchers understand about the product/service being promoted and convinces them to click to know more. If we go by the numbers, videos bring 20 percent more clicks than the image and also has a multi-fold share count.”

2. Use subtitles

We Accelerate Growth‘s Conner King agrees with Shafi’s advice to “keep videos ads no longer 3 minutes (4 at a push)”, but he also recommends to “use subtitles where possible” because “the avg. person has there phone volume set to low / off”.

King is right. 85% of all video content uploaded to Facebook is watched without sound.

But, that’s not the only reason to use subtitles.

“Of course there is the component of auto-muted videos on social media making subtitles more important, but there’s also an advantage with subtitles in the ads specifically. Subtitles provide you with a way to inject well-written ad copy into your video scripts that increase overall engagement and conversions.” added Gabriel Marguglio of Nextiny Marketing.

3. Show something unique

Take a wild guess on volume Facebook content you’re competing with. I’ll bet your answer is “somewhere in the millions”–and you’re right.

To date, Facebook users have made over 2.5 trillion posts–making a lot of noise on the platform.

But Srish Agrawal of Infographic Design Team thinks that should be your motivation, rather than an obstacle, to create video-based Facebook ads: “Most people on Facebook are just rapidly scrolling through updates, so you need to make a video that is very visually appealing within the first few seconds, and makes them want to keep watching.”

Srish says: “For Facebook Ads, we’ve definitely seen much better results with video ads. From what we’ve experienced, you need to make them short and eye-catching.”

4. Target TOFU audiences

Chances are, you’re targeting different audiences with your Facebook ads.

And by that, I don’t just mean people with different interests; I mean people lingering at different stages within the marketing funnel:

Carma Levene, who forms part of the team at Carma The Social Chameleon, says video ads should be targeting people towards the top of the funnel because “video will potentially get more clicks on the ad (people clicking to play, tagging a friend, etc.) but definitely in my experience a lower CTR.”

Levene says: “I put it down to the fact that you’re asking people to watch a video – they’re passive video watchers. They might remember your brand and have a passing interest but they don’t have a high intent to do anything about that while they’re in video watching mode.”

“That’s one of the reasons it’s so effective to use Video at the top of the funnel – you can separate the longer watchers as having a higher intent and retarget them with other ad formats to help more [move] them down the funnel.”

Jackie Kossoff also uses this approach: “In my opinion, the level of user action required by an ad matches the engagement level of the ad medium. Attending a webinar or event is a high-engagement call to action, which matches the high-engagement medium of video. Likewise, a quiz or PDF download is a lower-level call to action, which matches the lower engagement level of images.”

Jonathan Aufray of Growth Hackers summarizes perfectly: “[…] Videos are better for views, engagement (Likes and comments) but images are actually better for clicks. People will watch videos and spend more time watching your ads but images are more easily scannable. When scrolling, people will decide within 3 seconds if they want to click your photo ads whereas it will take them more time when it comes to videos.”

In the end, the type of video you’re creating depends massively on the people viewing it.

5. Retarget video viewers

Are you following Carma’s advice and using Facebook video ads to target TOFU audiences?

Two of our marketers say you can maximize those results even further–and nurture those video viewers until they convert into customers–by retargeting them with future campaigns.

“Also, through video ads, you may create audiences based on the engagement that they had with your video”, explains Gray Group International‘s Violeta Morales, because “this is highly useful for retargeting purposes.”

Here’s Paul Fairbrother of AdEspresso explaining how he puts that into practice: “I use a 10-second video view audience based on the last 7 days and retarget them with a direct response ad, preferably including an offer.”

Is there still space for image-based Facebook ads?

At one point, Facebook image ads were all-the-rage.

“There was a period of time (when videos were new on Facebook) where videos drove more clicks for me”, says The Advisor Coach‘s James Pollard.

However, Pollard now reports “that effect has died off and images are now driving more clicks”–something he thinks is because “an image has more potential to provide a pattern interrupt to get a person to stop scrolling and pay attention.”

Referencing a survey done by Visual Objects, Clutch.co‘s Kristen Herhold backs this up: “Next to offers/promotions, images are the top content type to influence people to click on a link on social media. Images are most likely to influence 25 percent of people to click through to a website from social media. Videos are third, at 16 percent. Videos are still a successful content type, but images are more successful at driving clicks.”

Evan Roberts of Dependable Homebuyers is a marketer using Facebook image ads, after discovering that “most people scroll quickly through their Facebook feeds on their mobile device. This means that we are only given a fraction of a second to grab the attention of a potential home seller when they scroll past our ad.”

But here’s the real question: Why is he favoring image over beloved video-based ads?

Evan says: “With video, this is not enough time to create a compelling call to action, but with images, we have more control over what is shown to the client and that gives us a better chance of converting a click.”

The time investment for video vs. image ads

Cardswitcher‘s Christopher Fear thinks “images will work better for some approaches and videos for some approaches.”

Yet Fear continues to say something really interesting:

“Whilst videos can be better for driving clicks and engagement they are often more labor intensive to create, taking a long time to craft into something usable and requiring a fairly high level of investment.”

…We wanted to know whether that was the case for other advertisers, so we dug deeper. Our survey found the majority of video-based Facebook ads take between 2-6 hours to produce:

Whereas an image-based ad, on the other hand, took less than an hour:

“We only run image based Facebook ads, simply because of how little time it takes to create and test multiple image ads,” says Sam Schuler of Instasize.

However, Schuler adds: “If video production was more streamlined or we had a backlog of video content that could be formatted for Facebook ads, we definitely would, but currently the time it takes to create video content for ads outweighs the conversion rate benefit.”

Video vs. image ads: Which works for your audience?

If you’ve reached this point and are still confused as to which type of Facebook ad will work, don’t panic.

The majority of our marketers have a preference–but we have a handful of seasoned advertisers who advise you to take a deeper look at your business, product or services before deciding.

“Between video vs image ads, it definitely depends on the product/service you are promoting”, says SL Development‘s Afshan Santi.

“The best way to find out which drives more click activity is through testing both against each other. We do this by keeping the text & call to action the same & changing only the creative type (image vs video). This creates a controlled test & helps to optimize for the best click/conversion activity.”

Isabella Federico of Webizz agrees–answering “it depends” when asked which format drives the most clicks: “Behind any creative strategy there must be a compelling product or a brilliant idea. Both targeted to the right audience.”

Here’s the process Isabella uses to identify potential audiences: “We can use an interesting Facebook feature to come out with the best ad creative (video or image) for them: the Facebook Split Testing Tool. This feature allows you to create A/B test not only for ads, but also for audiences, placements and delivery. This way you can identify the best creative for a specific audience.”

Jesse Särmö of Advance B2B agrees with both Isabella and Afshan, explaining why split-testing campaign creatives is a fantastic idea:

“In the end, you can’t say directly which drives more clicks. It really depends on the content. We have cases where images perform better and cases where video perform better. It’s all about testing what works with different campaigns and with different targeting.”

You don’t have to stop there, though.

Ampmycontent‘s Daniel Daines-Hutt summarizes with an idea to repurpose video while split-testing: “It can take hours to create a video ad, not including testing any different variations. What do I recommend? Test and find a winning image ad–test the copy, CTA, etc.–then turn it into video and see how it performs.”

There is no definitive answer

As you can see, the line between image and video-based Facebook ads can get pretty blurry.

But regardless of which format generates the most clicks, Kent Raju, author of The Trick of Advertising, says you’ll need to double-check the clicks you’re encouraging are from the right people.

Raju says: “You want people to take a specific action on your website, not just traffic. And since you are paying for each click on the image or video, you better make sure there are as few clicks by the wrong audience as possible. Five high-quality clicks are always better than 5000 low-quality clicks.”

Selenium is a portable framework for testingweb applications. Selenium provides a playback tool for authoring functional tests without the need to learn a test scripting language (Selenium IDE). It also provides a test domain-specific language (Selenese) to write tests in a number of popular programming languages, including C#, Groovy, Java, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby and Scala. The tests can then run against most modern web browsers. Selenium runs on Windows, Linux, and macOS. It is open-source software released under the Apache License 2.0.

History[edit]

Selenium was originally developed by Jason Huggins in 2004 as an internal tool at ThoughtWorks. Huggins was later joined by other programmers and testers at ThoughtWorks, before Paul Hammant joined the team and steered the development of the second mode of operation that would later become 'Selenium Remote Control' (RC). The tool was open sourced that year.

In 2005 Dan Fabulich and Nelson Sproul (with help from Pat Lightbody) made an offer to accept a series of patches that would transform Selenium-RC into what it became best known for. In the same meeting, the steering of Selenium as a project would continue as a committee, with Huggins and Hammant being the ThoughtWorks representatives.^[3]

In 2007, Huggins joined Google. Together with others like Jennifer Bevan, he continued with the development and stabilization of Selenium RC. At the same time, Simon Stewart at ThoughtWorks developed a superior browser automation tool called WebDriver. In 2009, after a meeting between the developers at the Google Test Automation Conference, it was decided to merge the two projects, and call the new project Selenium WebDriver, or Selenium 2.0.^[4]

In 2008, Philippe Hanrigou (then at ThoughtWorks) made 'Selenium Grid', which provides a hub allowing the running of multiple Selenium tests concurrently on any number of local or remote systems, thus minimizing test execution time. Grid offered, as open source, a similar capability to the internal/private Google cloud for Selenium RC. Pat Lightbody had already made a private cloud for 'HostedQA' which he went on to sell to Gomez, Inc.

The name Selenium comes from a joke made by Huggins in an email, mocking a competitor named Mercury, saying that you can cure mercury poisoning by taking selenium supplements. The others that received the email took the name and ran with it.^[5]

Components[edit]

Selenium is composed of several components with each taking on a specific role in aiding the development of web application test automation.^[6]

Selenium IDE[edit]

Selenium IDE is a complete integrated development environment (IDE) for Selenium tests. It is implemented as a Firefox Add-On and as a Chrome Extension. It allows for recording, editing and debugging of functional tests. It was previously known as Selenium Recorder. Selenium-IDE was originally created by Shinya Kasatani and donated to the Selenium project in 2006. Selenium IDE was previously little-maintained.^[7] Selenium IDE began being actively maintained in 2018.^{[8][9][10][11]}

Scripts may be automatically recorded and edited manually providing autocompletion support and the ability to move commands around quickly. Scripts are recorded in Selenese, a special test scripting language for Selenium. Selenese provides commands for performing actions in a browser (click a link, select an option) and for retrieving data from the resulting pages.

The 2.x version of the Selenium IDE for Firefox stopped working^[12] after the Firefox 55 upgrade and has been replaced by Selenium IDE 3.x.^[13]

In addition to the official Selenium IDE project, two alternative Selenium IDE browser extensions are actively maintained:^[14] Kantu (Open-SourceGPL license) and Katalon Recorder (Closed Source).

Selenium client API[edit]

As an alternative to writing tests in Selenese, tests can also be written in various programming languages. These tests then communicate with Selenium by calling methods in the Selenium Client API. Selenium currently provides client APIs for Java, C#, Ruby, JavaScript, R and Python.

With Selenium 2, a new Client API was introduced (with WebDriver as its central component). However, the old API (using class Selenium) is still supported.

Selenium Remote Control[edit]

Selenium Remote Control (RC) is a server, written in Java, that accepts commands for the browser via HTTP. RC makes it possible to write automated tests for a web application in any programming language, which allows for better integration of Selenium in existing unit test frameworks. To make writing tests easier, Selenium project currently provides client drivers for PHP, Python, Ruby, .NET, Perl and Java. The Java driver can also be used with JavaScript (via the Rhino engine). An instance of selenium RC server is needed to launch html test case - which means that the port should be different for each parallel run.^{[citation needed]} However, for Java/PHP test case only one Selenium RC instance needs to be running continuously.^[15]

Selenium Remote Control was a refactoring of Driven Selenium or Selenium B designed by Paul Hammant, credited with Jason as co-creator of Selenium. The original version directly launched a process for the browser in question, from the test language of Java, .NET, Python or Ruby. The wire protocol (called 'Selenese' in its day) was reimplemented in each language port. After the refactor by Dan Fabulich and Nelson Sproul (with help from Pat Lightbody) there was an intermediate daemon process between the driving test script and the browser. The benefits included the ability to drive remote browsers and the reduced need to port every line of code to an increasingly growing set of languages. Selenium Remote Control completely took over from the Driven Selenium code-line in 2006. The browser pattern for 'Driven'/'B' and 'RC' was response/request, which subsequently became known as Comet.

Selenium RC served as the flagship testing framework of the entire project of selenium for a long-standing time. And significantly Selenium RC is the first and foremost automated web testing tool that enabled users to adopt their preferred programming language. ^[16][17]

With the release of Selenium 2, Selenium RC has been officially deprecated in favor of Selenium WebDriver.

Selenium WebDriver[edit]

Selenium WebDriver is the successor to Selenium RC. Selenium WebDriver accepts commands (sent in Selenese, or via a Client API) and sends them to a browser. This is implemented through a browser-specific browser driver, which sends commands to a browser and retrieves results. Most browser drivers actually launch and access a browser application (such as Firefox, Google Chrome, Internet Explorer, Safari, or Microsoft Edge); there is also an HtmlUnit browser driver, which simulates a browser using the headless browser HtmlUnit.

Unlike in Selenium 1, where the Selenium server was necessary to run tests, Selenium WebDriver does not need a special server to execute tests. Instead, the WebDriver directly starts a browser instance and controls it. However, Selenium Grid can be used with WebDriver to execute tests on remote systems (see below). Where possible, WebDriver uses native operating system level functionality rather than browser-based JavaScript commands to drive the browser. This bypasses problems with subtle differences between native and JavaScript commands, including security restrictions.^[18]

Drivers Databox Lbp

In practice, this means that the Selenium 2.0 API has significantly fewer calls than does the Selenium 1.0 API. Where Selenium 1.0 attempted to provide a rich interface for many different browser operations, Selenium 2.0 aims to provide a basic set of building blocks from which developers can create their own domain-specific language (DSL). One such DSL already exists: the Watir project in the Ruby language has a rich history of good design. Watir-webdriver implements the Watir API as a wrapper for Selenium WebDriver in Ruby. Watir-webdriver is created entirely automatically, based on the WebDriver specification and the HTML specification.

As of early 2012, Simon Stewart (inventor of WebDriver), who was then with Google, and David Burns of Mozilla were negotiating with the W3C to make WebDriver an Internet standard. In July 2012, the working draft was released and the recommendation followed in June 2018.^[19] Selenium WebDriver (Selenium 2.0) is fully implemented and supported in Python, Ruby, Java, and C#.

Selenium Grid[edit]

Selenium Grid is a server that allows tests to use web browser instances running on remote machines. With Selenium Grid, one server acts as the central hub. Tests contact the hub to obtain access to browser instances. The hub has a list of servers that provide access to browser instances (WebDriver nodes), and lets tests use these instances. Selenium Grid allows running tests in parallel on multiple machines and to manage different browser versions and browser configurations centrally (instead of in each individual test).

The ability to run tests on remote browser instances is useful to spread the load of testing across several machines and to run tests in browsers running on different platforms or operating systems. The latter is particularly useful in cases where not all browsers to be used for testing can run on the same platform.^[20]

Drivers Database

See also[edit]

References[edit]

1. ^'Releases - SeleniumHQ/selenium'. Retrieved September 28, 2018 – via GitHub.
2. ^'Downloads'. Selenium.
3. ^'Selenium History'. www.selenium.dev.
4. ^'The Selenium Project'. NewCircle. Retrieved June 29, 2014.
5. ^Krill, Paul (April 6, 2011). 'Open source Selenium web app test suite to support iPhone and Android'. InfoWorld. Retrieved May 9, 2012. Selenium was so named because Huggins, dissatisfied with testing tools on the market, was seeking a name that would position the product as an alternative to Mercury Interactive QuickTest Professional commercial testing software. The name, Selenium, was selected because selenium mineral supplements serve as a cure for mercury poisoning, Huggins explained.
6. ^Moizuddin, Khaja (June 7, 2018). 'Components of the Selenium Automation Tool'. dzone.com. DevOps Zone. Retrieved July 10, 2019.
7. ^Evans, Jim. 'Selenium Users - Selenium IDE seems dated and lacks features'. groups.google.com. Retrieved February 7, 2016.
8. ^'It's back! Selenium IDE Reborn with Dave Haeffner'. testingpodcast.com.
9. ^'Selenium IDE Is Dead, Long Live Selenium IDE!'. Selenium IDE Official Blog. August 6, 2018. Retrieved November 27, 2019 – via seleniumhq.wordpress.com.
10. ^Colantonio, Joe (November 27, 2018). 'Stunning return of Selenium IDE'. testguild.com. Retrieved November 27, 2019.
11. ^'List of new Selenium IDE features'. applitools.com.
12. ^'Firefox 55 and Selenium IDE'. Official Selenium Blog. August 9, 2017. Retrieved August 21, 2017.
13. ^'Selenium IDE Download Site'. seleniumhq.org. Retrieved May 10, 2018.
14. ^'Selenium IDE rises like a phoenix from the ashes'. Automation Technology Blog. Retrieved April 8, 2019.
15. ^'Selenium Remote-Control'. seleniumhq.org. Retrieved November 13, 2019.
16. ^'Selenium 1 (Selenium RC) :: Documentation for Selenium'. www.selenium.dev. Retrieved December 20, 2020.
17. ^sparkdatabox_author. 'Selenium | Spark Databox'. Retrieved December 20, 2020.
18. ^'The Architecture of Open Source Applications: Selenium WebDriver'. aosabook.org. Retrieved February 7, 2016.
19. ^Smith, Michael. 'WebDriver motors on to W3C Recommendation'. W3C Blog. Retrieved September 10, 2018.
20. ^'Selenium Grid'. The Selenium Browser Automation Project. Retrieved September 9, 2020.

External links[edit]

• Official website