I feel like my presentation went very well overall, but i definitely did notice some things during the presentation that could have gone a lot better. First of all, the thing that stuck out the most for me was our overall presentation and how much we were able to make it seem like we were pitching an idea. I was trying to be as enthusiastic as possible and explain things more in depth to give the feel of a sales pitch but I'm not sure if it went as well as i thought.
The biggest weakness that i can think of during our presentation was basically a lack of organization. There were a couple times where the group would stop talking and expect another group member to read the next slide, but some were less willing to read than others. I feel like a little bit of organization before the presentation would have made the pitch flow a lot better than it did.
The thing that i felt was the easiest to explain were the mechanics of the game. I feel this way because many games that were presented seemed to have very similar mechanics which makes it easier for the people to relate and understand. Another reason that mechanics are easy to explain and understand is because many people who are majoring in some type of media have played video games at some point. By playing the video games, they are able to relate our mechanics to mechanics of games that they have played before and understand them a lot easier.
Overall, I would say that my presentation went very well except for the few things that i listed that weren't as clear as i would have wanted them to be. I believe that my group was able to successfully make the presentation seem like a real sales pitch, and get people excited about our idea for a game.
Monday, May 30, 2011
Blog 8A
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/178/superpowers (Audio clip about super powers)
Friday, May 27, 2011
Blog 7
Video 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDfLSiEBcow&feature=channel_video_title
Video 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UC0mwOwq2O8&feature=channel_video_title
The two videos that were filmed by my group were based off of the same joke but had some very noticeable differences. These differences include the way we used and manipulated space and movement in the videos. As well as the ways these videos contrasted, i will also discuss the affinities between the two.
First of all, the big difference that you can notice while viewing these two videos is the way we used space when filming. The first video that we filmed made use of deep space because the characters were in no way limited in the scene. This was achieved by shooting the video outdoors where there wasn't anything limiting movement except for trees. The second video that we made was filmed entirely indoors in one of our dorm's study lounges which gave the viewer a sense of very limited space.
The second thing that we took into consideration to make the same joke different was the way we used movement in the videos. This first video used a lot more spastic and quick movement while the second had very limited movement. In the first video, we made a lot of spastic movement while the characters were talking such as hand gestures to get our points across not only using audio, but also using visuals. We also used some quick camera movement such as zooming into one of the character's faces to show his emotion and give the audience an idea of how that character acted. In the second video, we did not use a lot of movement in general, and the characters were sitting down for the majority of the scene. The movement that we did use in the second video was very lethargic and limited compared to the first video.
There are many ways that the viewer can draw contrasts between the two videos, but there aren't that many noticeable affinities. One of the huge contrasts between these two videos that i did not mention yet is the way they make the audience feel. The first video focuses more on the emotion of the characters which makes it a lot more didactic than the other video. The characters in the second video did not show much emotion which makes it active and allows the audience to draw their own conclusions. As far as the affinities between the two videos go, they obviously share the same joke, but also the same visual rhythm. The two videos flow in the same way, and neither one is faster than the other.
In conclusion, each video shares things that makes them similar, but for the most part they are very different because they are totally different approaches to the same joke.
Video 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UC0mwOwq2O8&feature=channel_video_title
The two videos that were filmed by my group were based off of the same joke but had some very noticeable differences. These differences include the way we used and manipulated space and movement in the videos. As well as the ways these videos contrasted, i will also discuss the affinities between the two.
First of all, the big difference that you can notice while viewing these two videos is the way we used space when filming. The first video that we filmed made use of deep space because the characters were in no way limited in the scene. This was achieved by shooting the video outdoors where there wasn't anything limiting movement except for trees. The second video that we made was filmed entirely indoors in one of our dorm's study lounges which gave the viewer a sense of very limited space.
The second thing that we took into consideration to make the same joke different was the way we used movement in the videos. This first video used a lot more spastic and quick movement while the second had very limited movement. In the first video, we made a lot of spastic movement while the characters were talking such as hand gestures to get our points across not only using audio, but also using visuals. We also used some quick camera movement such as zooming into one of the character's faces to show his emotion and give the audience an idea of how that character acted. In the second video, we did not use a lot of movement in general, and the characters were sitting down for the majority of the scene. The movement that we did use in the second video was very lethargic and limited compared to the first video.
There are many ways that the viewer can draw contrasts between the two videos, but there aren't that many noticeable affinities. One of the huge contrasts between these two videos that i did not mention yet is the way they make the audience feel. The first video focuses more on the emotion of the characters which makes it a lot more didactic than the other video. The characters in the second video did not show much emotion which makes it active and allows the audience to draw their own conclusions. As far as the affinities between the two videos go, they obviously share the same joke, but also the same visual rhythm. The two videos flow in the same way, and neither one is faster than the other.
In conclusion, each video shares things that makes them similar, but for the most part they are very different because they are totally different approaches to the same joke.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Monday, May 9, 2011
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Blog 5A
There are many reasons why I chose this image, but from when I very first saw it this image caught my eye. The reason that is image caught my eye has nothing to due with the nudity in it, but the way the artist makes the painting flow from one object to the other. He uses many techniques that we discussed in class to guide the viewers eye through the painting and succeed in allowing the viewer to appreciate everything.
First of all, through the rule of thirds, my eye started out on the left side of the painting and was able to easily travel through the painting because of the way Dali links the objects that he uses. He also makes good use of visual rhythm by repeating the image of the tiger once. The way this painting flows is very unique because he connects the images by having them come out of each other's mouths.
The way this painting makes use of lines is very interesting because the image starts of at a spherical object which morphs into a fish that has a tiger jumping out of its mouth which also has a tiger jumping out of its mouth. The last tiger has a gun right in front of it which leads you to look at the nude woman at the bottom of the image. Lines are also used well to show the elephant in the back of the image by making its legs extremely long.
Dali also uses affinity of the tigers to create repetition and to extend the image out to point to the middle of the picture and guide you to other images. Like I mentioned before, this guides your eye through the image to make sure none of the parts in the painting are left not to be looked at. Although this painting makes use of affinity, this painting is very subjective because nothing else but the two tigers seem to relate.
Overall, I like this painting very much because it is very abstract and odd. Dali is a genius at guiding your eye through the image which helps me appreciate every part of the painting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)