The collaborative video project has been a lot like writing in that making a movie involves many of the same processes. After our group decided on a topic, each member thought about what he or she wanted to say, and what was to be included in the film. The brainstormin part of the process reminded me of writing because we were simply generating ideas and reworking the ones that we liked. This was very much like the peer review aspect of writing an essay; everyone helped each other improve upon their ideas.
For the individual essay portion of the project, I think that I will use Ong and Baron as reference points for drawing similarities about the different processes. Both writing and film making involve a lot of creativity. This is something that Ong touches on-- that text is very malleable and can be shaped into almost anything. Film making applies a lot of the same concepts in forming the final product.
Baron speaks about the evolution of writing and of processes that could eventually be replaced by film/video. The statement that struck me as being possible pertains to writing becoming a way to record and validate business transactions. I plan on comparing that process to one that could be done with video.
Of course, the videos that we saw can relate. Many of our video projects were inspired by what was shown in those YouTube clips and will likely incorporate some of the same concepts.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
YouTube-- Good, Bad, Writing?
The process of making a simple video has been pretty fun and easy-going thus far. I think that the most difficult part has been the initial decision making process of choosing an idea and running with it. Once our group picked an idea that we could all agree on, the ideas began to flow and shots started coming together. The rest of the process should be fairly painless; iMovie seems like a program that will be easy enough to use.
The writing process has differed from the video-making process in that this project is the most collaborative thing that we've done. Peer review works toward making everyone's individual projects as spectacular as they can be, while the video making collaboration is supposed to achieve a great product that the whole group can put their name on. I have yet to start the essay portion of this assigment, but I imagine it will be more like writing about a team sport than the individually themed essays that we've been used to.
I think that the process of making a simple film, or any film, is very much like writing. The preparation and thought that go into creating an idea, script, and list of shots and how they'll be edited together use a lot of writing. For instance, our video will feature writing on paper and screen, as well as dialogue and movement. All of these pieces have to first be written before they can be put onto film. Everything in a particular shot is there for a reason-- just as every word written down or spoken has been planned. Creating a script is like creating a detailed outline of a paper. And just like a paper, a viedo has a beginning, middle, and end that has been written down, thought out, and decided upon.
The writing process has differed from the video-making process in that this project is the most collaborative thing that we've done. Peer review works toward making everyone's individual projects as spectacular as they can be, while the video making collaboration is supposed to achieve a great product that the whole group can put their name on. I have yet to start the essay portion of this assigment, but I imagine it will be more like writing about a team sport than the individually themed essays that we've been used to.
I think that the process of making a simple film, or any film, is very much like writing. The preparation and thought that go into creating an idea, script, and list of shots and how they'll be edited together use a lot of writing. For instance, our video will feature writing on paper and screen, as well as dialogue and movement. All of these pieces have to first be written before they can be put onto film. Everything in a particular shot is there for a reason-- just as every word written down or spoken has been planned. Creating a script is like creating a detailed outline of a paper. And just like a paper, a viedo has a beginning, middle, and end that has been written down, thought out, and decided upon.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Peer Review vol. 3
The third edition of the peer review saga has been the most successful, thus far. As I stated in my very first peer review blog, that session was mostly-- for me-- about reviewing grammatr, sentence structure, etc. and less about content. The second time around, I was a bit more content-oriented in my reviewing of my peers' work, but frustrated with WetPaint. Our third attempt has been the most fluid because using GoogleDocs is much easier than WetPaint, and everyone seems to be sure about their job description.
This peer review has been the most helpful for me, as a writer, because I get the opinions of three peers. The first review only lent me two other opinions, which were helpful, but the first run is always a little shaky. By this, I mean that people, myself included, were unsure about what to review, and how to review it. The three other people in my group have given greatly descriptive and suggestive advice, not just corrections of comma usage and so forth. For the Style Rule project, I only had one person review my work. While this person gave me some helpful stuff, one person's review is not enough.
Reading other people's blogs is always a fun experience and I should really do it more often. I agree with Jeff's positive review of the threads in WetPaint. I did not like much about reviewing with that site, but I did enjoy the threads. It was a lot easier to read someone's comment at the bottom of the page-- with their name and time of posting there next to it. This business of threads also eliminated much of the in-text commenting that would foul up an essay's format and make it that much more of a task to read when you are the second or third reviewer.
Throughout the process of peer review, I have learned that pretty much everyone in this class takes pride in their writing and wants it to be the best it can possibly be. My classmates-- through their feedback-- have shown an aptitude for nosing out good and bad, that has been helpful in this process.
This peer review has been the most helpful for me, as a writer, because I get the opinions of three peers. The first review only lent me two other opinions, which were helpful, but the first run is always a little shaky. By this, I mean that people, myself included, were unsure about what to review, and how to review it. The three other people in my group have given greatly descriptive and suggestive advice, not just corrections of comma usage and so forth. For the Style Rule project, I only had one person review my work. While this person gave me some helpful stuff, one person's review is not enough.
Reading other people's blogs is always a fun experience and I should really do it more often. I agree with Jeff's positive review of the threads in WetPaint. I did not like much about reviewing with that site, but I did enjoy the threads. It was a lot easier to read someone's comment at the bottom of the page-- with their name and time of posting there next to it. This business of threads also eliminated much of the in-text commenting that would foul up an essay's format and make it that much more of a task to read when you are the second or third reviewer.
Throughout the process of peer review, I have learned that pretty much everyone in this class takes pride in their writing and wants it to be the best it can possibly be. My classmates-- through their feedback-- have shown an aptitude for nosing out good and bad, that has been helpful in this process.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)