How is publishing in JoVE (a "video journal") perceived? There are many questions 'should I publish in journal x', but this is not that.  The journal JoVE (Journal of Visualized Experiments) claims to be the world’s first video journal.  It seems to have a specific mission, and if the mission becomes well accepted, can be a big change in how knowledge is disseminated through the academic community.

It’s not on Beall's list.  It does not have an impact factor, although the journal says it expects to be included soon.

I cannot find many discussions on this journal, as opposed to, PLOS, on which many people seem to have opinions.

Does anyone know of negative feedback to the journal or publishing in the journal? Such as administration or peers believing it is not inline with academic publishing.  

Some examples of 'reputable' schools (in my perspective), UPenn Yale Johns Hopkins Harvard
Based on our work with them, it seems to be a high quality publication. We published a JoVE article last year and several of the protocols we use in the lab are adapted from other JoVE articles. So it seems effective in its mission. The video format really works for certain protocols, and it may make it easier for people to reproduce your work (thereby getting you more citations).

That said, there is the price tag to consider, and the editorial process is extensive and time consuming (you write an article, then go through normal peer review, then work with them to turn it into a screenplay, then get everyone together with the videographer they provide, etc.). So I would say that if your method does not specifically benefit from the video format, there isn't an advantage over a conventional methods journal.

As far as how it's received, I haven't noticed any differences from any other small journal.