I never really got into comics as a child but during high school I was able to make a couple of those flip through books with a simple animation. I also made simple animations using Adobe Photoshop which helped me better relate to the reading. The way I would make my animations longer in Photoshop was either by making slight adjustments of the content of each frame or by tweening in between frames which meant that there would be more time to get from one frame to the next. I never really thought about how the shape of the frame could make it seem longer or shorter.
Throughout school I always thought PowerPoint was the “way to go” probably because it was instilled in us through teachers. I guess because it was so simple and easy to use and as mentioned in the reading it made us get to some kind of point in some kind of organized manner. But when making a PowerPoint to be presented in front of an audience the content wasn’t suppose be read word for word but rather a guideline to make sure you did not forget something or veer off track. After reading Tufte’s text I realized how there is this limit that we can cut out before the point we are trying to get across is no longer true or just doesn’t make sense. I also realized because of the NASA PowerPoint presentations that I need to make sure I bullet or emphasize the important points as not to be misleading or detract from information that may be more relevant.
4 comments:
PowerPoint has its limits. Plain and simple enough for me to accept, especially after reading Tufte. I still think it's merits are worth mentioning after sitting through lecture today. Merits: PP is simple to learn. Great, instrucors should pick up here and explain to students the limits of PP, its failure at capturing fine detail and critical minutuia should be explained. Tufte enlightened me, now I'll go about my PP differently. Instructors should do the same. Here's where it gets tricky. PP is ubiquitious now and I, personally never used it until 3 years ago. I had a presentation to give and basically figured the thing out on my own. My presentation was horrible but relative to some others students' it really wasn't that bad. So how do we positively affect change upon a blunt object of a tool like PP if its already so ubiquitious. Seems a little hard to do.
I dont believe its powerpoint that is entirely to blame. Statistitions and a cynical world is are just as important. Powerpoint only conveys the message that the author describes and cannot be at blame for misleading if thats the data the author uses. Most graphs and charts are manipulated by companies in advertisments and business proposals to help thier pad thier effectiveness.
It is rather sad that a program implemented in the early stages of interactive media understanding in primary school is being used by the most promising innovators of the space frotier at NASA in a similar simplistic fashion. Now I am not saying simplicity is anything less than great because it can be if used right. But NASA's use of the PP simplicity was unable to provide the correct message that lead to the tragic death of some of the bravest brightest minds worldwide in the Columbia crash. The failure to analyze the dangers of the situation was not the fault of PP but rather the use of it in a fashion to simple for the complexity of the project. PP is applicable for a guide, I agree. A guide or enabler of a presenter but not as a leader of the presentation or complete replacement. In fact when used right PP is a great product. Today I went to the middleton discussion on the origins of the universe where Steven Weinberg beautifully used the PP to aid in explaining his compiling theories on the multi-universe, black matter and our place in the topic.
I agree. I was brought up to believe that the powerpoint was an outline, too. It was supposed to help with the major topic points so you didn't forget to talk about something, not actually BE what you were talking about. That is why it is so short- you aren't supposed to be able to fit the entire presentation on 10 slides or whatever it is. To this day, I still think it is a good tool for presentations, as long as it is used correctly, which I am sad to say is usually no longer the case. What I really wonder is where the program veered away from its original purpose. Who originally misused it? I don't have an answer, I'm really curious to know. On a related note, I really enjoyed the keynote by Dick Hardt we saw in class the other day. I have never seen a powerpoint style program used in that way and it was very entertaining and kept my attention the whole way through.
Post a Comment