Slug & Lede

I did my critique on the video, “Dollar Duo: A guide to Black Friday.”

This video automatically caught my attention because the information was really relevant since thanksgiving was just around the corner. Since this video was called “dollar duo,” I think J Pinkley, the video producer, did a neat little intro in the beginning where they both did a little duo talking and overlapping. That was pretty interesting and fitted the title very well. This was a great informative video to promote Black Friday. It showed that people who can’t actually go out or don’t really want to go out can shop online for sale opportunities as well. The actors were sounded really clear and enthusiastic. I like how there was a little bit of sound in the back like when she was on her laptop you could hear her typing on the keyboard and patting on it. That’s a good background sound and especially the fact the background was kind of quiet was a good thought too. It was really good how they showed all the deals online. I liked how it showed other vital objects in the video other than them talking the whole time.

I thought the acting was a little bit cheesy but it kind of fitted the video at some point. I didn’t like the beginning where it showed the spinning of the coins. I thought it was a little bit too loud and wasn’t really an attention getter for me. I didn’t really like how the guy was looking straight at the camera when he was talking because I didn’t know if he was talking to me or that lady. That’s why it seemed kind of cheesy. He should have addressed the audience if he was looking straight in the camera because this seemed to be more of a story scene. There wasn’t that many mistakes in the video. It had a good transition and was very clear. The only thing I would change about this was that it talked about “KOHLS” a lot. A lot of people don’t shop at KOHLS so it didn’t catch my interest. They should have also named other stuff at Wal Mart, since everyone basically shops there, that people would actually buy like a really cheap microwave, camera, or all the little miscellaneous stuff that people do use everyday in their home.

Bill Cuningham “On the Street: The Mark of a Gentleman”

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/11/22/fashion/20081123-street-feature/index.html

New York Times Photographer Bill Cunningham is well known for his contributions to the Sunday paper’s fashion section. With the audio slideshow “The Mark of a Gentleman” however, he takes his popular “On the Street” feature and gives it what it’s always been missing: Bill Cunningham.

Some critics express displeasure at his lack of focus on the human subject, insisting he merely catalogs their ensemble and that any personality that shines through is purely incidental. Cunningham is likely the first to agree, insisting that the clothing is his main interest, and that he is in fact a poor photographer.

While I agree that much of this may be fair, all parties and myself included must admit that despite his focus, he is an excellent photographer. His statements can be chalked up to modesty. The photos in this collection for the most part do just what was previously said, showcasing New York fall fashion. But at the same time, his subjects project strong, gentlemanly signals that emanate from more than simple clothing. One picture in the latter half of the slideshow really showcases this, and is really an excellent shot. It features a man wearing black with a pinstripe dress shirt underneath and loosely grasping his sunglasses with his gloved hand. The man is anonymous, as only his torso and upper legs are featured, but he screams “cool.” The canted angle of the shot only enhances this effect, whether accidental or otherwise.

The real joy from the piece comes from Cunningham’s own narration. While he rambles a bit at times, his voice exudes a cheery confidence that seems far more experienced than a photographer would be expected to have. At the same time, he is far removed from your typical radio personality. His use of local colloquialisms and his overall excitement with his subject matter is endearing and bit infectious. While “conversational tone” may have become cliché by this point, it is certainly applicable. You really feel like you’ve just asked the question “What prompted you to take these pictures?”

The answer is pretty engaging.

The UFC 91 piece was framed to show and highlight the new champion Brock Lesnar. The anticipation of the fight could be seen from the first still shot that the video showed of eager fans taking pictures of the fight. The strengths in the photography capture the emotion that is to be portrayed through the sport. In one frame, the picture shows blood flying through the air off of Lesnar’s face. Another shot that helped to emphasize the fight was the two face-to-face.

Besides the still photographs, the video of Randy Couture training was another positive strength of the video. The voice over that takes place during the sparing session of Couture coincides with what is taking place on the screen and foreshadows what is about to happen next. The voice over tells the audience that this is the first fight for Couture in over a year in the UFC. Another positive is the post fight commentary by the two fighters. This helps to add insight into what the fighters were thinking about during and after the fight.  The post fight interviews of the two are put together nicely in the video because it shows the fighters in the press conference and then shows still photos of the two fighting.  The fighters’ voice overs of the pictures tell a story of what is going on in the fight.  The story that is told is something that viewer might not know if the pictures were not accompanied by the voices of the fighters’. 

Some weakness with the piece comes in the post fight interviews. Both fighters are positioned in the middle of the screen, in actuality they are supposed to be either off centered to the left or the right. Also the sequence of the piece is not correct. The piece does not show the training session with Couture until after still photographs were shown of the fight. It would have been better if the training session was before the still shots of the two, because the video would have been a better transition into describing the fight with the pictures. Also, the transition between Lesnar’s commentary and Couture’s was rough and choppy. The video did not seem to flow correctly and pauses very quickly.

If I was doing the video for the piece I would have started it off with the reporter at the venue and have him lead into the Couture training session. Then I would have proceeded with the fight pictures, Lesnar’s commentary, Couture’s commentary, and then finish with more still photos of Lesnar posing with the new championship. The piece would conclude with the reporter wrapping up the story at the venue. I would have also edited the video’s sound better because there are distracting background noises that can be heard throughout the commentary of both fighters’. The noise can be distracting and annoying at times to listen to.

This video is highlighting the events at a convention where new toys are being showcased. The shaky videotaping, among other flaws, made this video not live up to its potential.
The video opens with the website’s logo being shown and the voiceover begins immediately. This creates some confusion with the viewer. They are being told about an event that is in its sixth year but we are seeing the website logo. Having video match up with the picture is an important mistake that could have been avoided.
Throughout the entire video one man’s voice is being used. It is not until the middle of the clip that we are shown who it is and why his expertise matters. It would have been nice to been able to put the voice with a face right off the bat.
The clips does do a nice job of showing kids playing with the toys and then has shots of the toy on display. The interviews with the young children helped interest the viewer and even showed how one game was played.
Overall this is a clip I would not recommend to a friend. There are points when the shots are blurry and the cameraman was very shaky. If given the choice to view this video or read a paragraph with the same information and look at a picture I would most definitely pick the latter choice.
http://www.thestar.com/fpLarge/video/529409

http://mediastorm.org/0023.htm

            The video I watched was Common Ground by Scott Strazzante. While the piece had a lot of strengths that contributed to the overall success, I believe a few improvements can be made to solidify the message even more.

            One of the major strengths of the piece was that Strazzante utilized text, video, and audio. I felt that the background music was appropriate and well selected. In addition, the audio was very clear; it was easy to understand each of the people talking. I also liked the fact that what was being said was demonstrated through pictures as well. I felt that the text throughout the piece was well done and necessary in order to give more detail without boring the viewer. Another strength was that each time someone was being interviewed, his or her name was on the screen. This factor personalized the video and made it more relatable. Also, the framing of the different shots was well done. The interview framing was perfect, and the wider shots were done appropriately.

            The only flaw and major weakness I found was the credits, which interrupted the end of the piece. The conclusion to any piece, in my opinion, is one of the most important parts of a piece, as it is suppose to leave the viewer thinking. I felt that having the credits and then continuing with the piece after really interrupted the flow of the video. The credits should have come at the very end.

            I enjoyed the video and felt it was well done. The only improvement I can offer is to place the credits at the end of the piece, as to not interrupt the flow and impact of the ending.

            Overall, this video was interesting and well produced; I found very few flaws and areas for improvement.

In the piece Dollar Duo: A Black Friday guide John Ewoldt, and Kara McGuire dish about the shopping deals the Friday after Thanksgiving.
I thought this video could have been improved. I feel like the producer could have taken more advantage of the fact that the piece wasn’t audio, it was video. There could have been shots of people shopping in the stores they were talking about (like Banana Republic), and shots of specific items they listed (like the plasma TV on sale at Wal-Mart). I understand they were looking at it from the point of view of someone that wanted to stay at home and shop online, but they still could have gotten more creative visually.
I also think the reporters over acted and that distracted from what they were talking about. It seemed like a battle between why you should go out and shop vs. why you should stay in and shop online. However, the caption describes the video as the reporters talking about shopping deals the Friday after Thanksgiving. They did mention deals, but I feel like it wasn’t emphasized enough, and again it would have been more effective paired with visual cues.

The short film, “Immersion“, by Robbie Cooper displays the intensity and focus of video gamers while playing a game.  There is no narrative, merely a shot of the young adult playing an unnamed video game.  The game’s sounds can be heard in the background.  While the video is not very long in length, I believe it carries a strong message to the overwhelming power technology has over our society.

Some strong factors of this video, I thought, were the use of the medium shot, and no narrative.  Not zooming in on the players, or varying the camera angle, the audience is able to really see how focused the player is on the video game.  Their actions are more highlighted because there is nothing to distract the audience.  The gray/black background, with the white light surrounding the person, draws attention to them.  All the audience sees, is the  facial expression.  I think it provides a rather comical relief because the gamer can seem like they are in an almost trance-like state and do not realize what their faces are doing.  Some talk to themselves, others bite their lips, and squint their eyes.

Another strong factor is the absence of the narrative.  Without the small summary beneath the video, I would not have realized what the film was supposed to be about at first.  However, it carries a strong message.  Not having a narrative exemplifies the focus of the gamers.  The audience members themselves become engulfed in observing the gamers play, which is really almost ironic.  Robbie Cooper seemed to be showing us inadvertantly how caught up in technology the world is getting, and how to some, it can appear ridiculous.

One thing I would have liked to see improved is the length of the film.  It is barely four minutes.  The rotation of gamers shows progression through their individual games, but there is no explanation.  I would have liked to see maybe some close-up shots of their faces, to maybe exemplify their concentration.  It feels as if the whole thing was filmed from a camera sitting atop a television.  I feel including more angles would have really added to the power of the film, and made it more interesting. 

There is also no conclusive end.  It just cuts off.  I would have liked to have some sort of closing scene, or maybe a gamer turning off the system before leaving.  It just feels like there could be more that could be added.  Overall though, I believe this piece was entertaining, and I enjoyed watching the gamers faces.

Chris Clark

Dead Ringers: A Critique

Saul Schwartz’s video “Dead Ringers” includes interviews and real-life clips of celebrity look-a-likes who have made careers out of acting like other people. The video follows look-a-likes of George Bush, Madonna, Johnny Depp, Mike Meyers and others. The actors discuss the experiences they have had from living their life as other people, how they became professional look-a-likes and how they are perceived and treated in public when they are acting versus not acting.

I liked the video for a lot of reasons. First, I think the video was the best medium for this piece because it allows the audience to see each person as their character and as their individual personality. If the piece were published in another medium, like print for example, it would not capture the essence of each individual’s similarities to the person their imitating. The video allows the audience to see the look-a-likes act like the celebrities and to see the public react to the look-a-likes. Another reason I thought the video worked well overall is because it was organized in a way that was very easy to follow. Schwartz organizes the video by different topics and alternates through personalities. The video keeps me interested and entertained throughout because the clips incorporate the most important thoughts from the celebrity look-a-likes and the alternating between personalities keeps the clips fresh and intriguing.

There were a couple things I thought Schwartz could have done better with the video. The first thing I noticed was that the music at the beginning was a little bit distracting. It was good music, but it was a little bit too loud for the volume of the voices that were playing in the introduction of the video. Another thing I found confusing about the video was that some of the time it was confusing to determine if the people in the video were doing impressions of their celebrity or if they were acting themselves and answering a question from the interviewer. Also, some of the clips have breaks between them that seem to make the video a little choppy.

Overall, I thought this video was a success. I think the video was the best medium for the piece because it was the best way to show the piece to the audience.

Street Racing Aftermath

The video ‘Street Racing Aftermath’ was a video done in Canada, by the Toronto Star, after an alleged organized street race ended in a car being severed in half by a poll.  The police used this video in hopes that it would discourage people from participating in any form of street racing. 

The video itself was very compelling and it was definitely a heart stopper.  This was a very good use of video and there were quite a few things that I liked very much.  First, the opening shot was of a car, cut in half, with its insides spilling out.  I thought this was a great use of video.  They could have done a shot of the police working the scene as well as the car, but I think that they did a great job in just having the car show first, as if to say this is what happened to the car, and there is nothing to distract the viewer.  Second, I really liked how the camera man got a bunch of different angles of the car, he took several wide, medium and tight shots so that the viewer could see what was going on from all angles.  I really liked the second shot of the car, right after the interview because it was framed so you could see police talking in the background, it allowed for some movement in the video, which was a nice bonus so it all the shots were not of just the car.

While the video was very compelling I thought there were some things that could have been improved.  The major thing that I found was that the video was a bit long and they could have used different video, such as people driving cars, what other cars involved in street racing looks like, maybe even what an actual street race looks like if they could get some video like that.  Another thing is the story itself could have been trimmed down, the inspector would say things like the vehicle was cut in half, well we can see that the car was cut in half in the video.  They could have let the video tell a little more of the story without actually having the inspector say it.  I think that they should have had a second person talk and maybe just use the inspectors voice during the interview, that way the viewer will pay more attention to what the officer is saying, and it will have a larger impact on the story.  The framing of the inspector during the interview was okay but if I had done it I would have left more space above his head, not too much but it was cutting the top of his head off.  I also would have placed him on the right side, looking off to the left, instead of on the left side looking off to the right.  The shot should be from left to right, and when the right side is cut off like that it looks a little strange, especially since the lower thirds was on the same side as his body directly underneath him. If he was standing on the right side of the frame the viewer will look at it like a Z, look at him on the top right and then his name on the bottom left, balancing it out. 

I think this was the best medium for this type of story, especially since seeing the car and seeing the inspector talk made it more life like and made it have a much larger impact on the viewer.   A little more variety of different video would have been nice, but the story and the video they had was very good. 

 http://www.thestar.com/fpLarge/video/517891

The video I watched was about Geocachers in Nevada who hide and find treasures using GPS coordinates. Geocachers may hide a “cache” of something, be it a small treasure or box filled with things, then punch in the GPS coordinates of where they hid it and post it online for other people to find. This video focuses on a group trying to find a cache that someone else had posted on the internet. The video is fairly short and I was disappointed by that. I feel as though it did a good job explaining what it was, but it didn’t give us much of the experience of doing it.

The video does have good wide shots of people trying to find treasures and does some nice tilt shots from the rocks looking up at people cascading the mountains and also looking down at a woman talking to another man. The wide shots really capture how cast the wilderness is in Nevada and the territory they are working with. The also do a nice panning shot of people walking along a ridge after an interview.

The closest shots are those of the people they interview. The interview a man named Lynn Storton who is the Geocacher coordinator and the camera does a nice job of framing him sitting on the rocks while he speaks. It gives the viewer a good feeling of the atmosphere and surroundings. The other interview is with a woman named Judi McDonald, a geocacher in the group. They focus on her a bit throughout the video, but I feel the footage of her giving the interview is too shaky and doesn’t frame her well. While she is in the first “third” of the shot, her head is a bit cut off.

The do eventually show what a cache looks like, but it’s a mere few seconds towards the end of the video. I wish they would’ve shown us more of the entire process. The interviews were good from the coordinator’s stand point to a person who is just a fan of participating in the fun. Overall, it was a nice video.