How to make an explainer video
An explainer takes something the viewer does not understand and leaves them understanding it. That is a higher bar than describing something accurately.
The craft is almost entirely subtraction. Deciding what to omit is harder than deciding what to include, and it is what separates an explainer that lands from a summary that technically covers the topic.
This produces a finished vertical video with illustrated scenes, narration and captions.
Steps
Write the one-sentence version first
If you cannot explain the thing in one sentence, the video will not either. Write that sentence before anything else. Everything that follows elaborates on it, and anything that does not elaborate on it gets cut regardless of how interesting it is.
Find the misconception you are correcting
Strong explainers correct something rather than describing from a blank page. 'You would think X, but actually Y' gives a viewer a reason to keep watching that a neutral description never provides. If there is no common misunderstanding, you may be explaining something nobody was confused about.
Order by dependency
Each point should require only what came before it. Forward-referencing something the viewer has not been given yet is the most common structural failure in explainers, and it reads as confusing rather than as incomplete, so people blame themselves and leave.
Cut down to a single idea
A 60-second explainer holds one idea. Two means neither lands properly. If the second idea is genuinely good, it is the next video, and you now have a series instead of a muddle.
Generate, then watch as a stranger
Run it through Leaxor and watch it as though you do not already know the answer. The moment you would have been lost is almost always a missing dependency rather than a pacing problem, so fix the order before touching the timing.
What you end up with
A 45 to 90 second vertical video where each illustrated scene carries one step of the explanation, with captions that stand alone if the sound is off.
Watch sample videosWhen this isn't the right approach
If the thing needs screen recordings, real product footage, or a person's face for credibility, an illustrated explainer will be the weaker choice and viewers will notice the gap. Software walkthroughs in particular want a screen capture, not an illustration of a screen.
Ready to make one?
Make an explainerFrequently asked
How long should an explainer video be?
For a single idea, 45 to 90 seconds vertically. Longer explainers work well horizontally, but they need several genuinely dependent ideas to justify the runtime rather than one idea stretched to fill it.
Do I need to be an expert in the topic?
You need to understand it well enough to know what to leave out, which is a higher bar than being able to describe it. If you are still learning the subject, you will tend to include everything you found interesting rather than everything the viewer needs, and that is the difference between an explainer and a summary.
Should an explainer use analogies?
One, at most, and only if it survives scrutiny. A good analogy replaces a paragraph. A loose one creates a second thing to explain, and viewers who spot where it breaks stop trusting the rest of the video.
What makes an explainer rank rather than just perform?
Answering the specific question someone typed rather than the general topic around it. A video titled for the exact phrasing of the confusion tends to outrank a broader, better-produced one, because it matches what was asked.
How much can you actually explain in sixty seconds?
One idea, with one example. That is the honest ceiling, and treating it as the target rather than the limit is what separates explainers that land from ones that feel rushed. The common failure is compressing a five-minute explanation into sixty seconds, which produces something technically complete and practically useless. If the topic genuinely needs more, the format is a long-form video or a series, not a faster read of the same script.