I loved working on this group project. I have always enjoyed working with video editing software, but I have only used the basic features. This project allowed me to experience more of the features that video editing products have to offer. In addition to the content of the project, I was very pleased with my group members. We worked well together and communicated effectively.
My group was able to complete this project with ease through the use of clear organization and frequent communication. We were able to complete all phases of the project - pre-production, production, and post-production - quite successfully. We used our Google site as a central location to post ideas, feedback, and comments on each phase of the project. This helped organize our thoughts before coming together to meet on tinychat.com. By having all of or thoughts organized, we were able to discuss the specifics of each phase of the project with ease. It helped us to keep or face-to-face meeting time to minimum which was important for all due to our busy work and personal schedules. It was easy for us to make decisions regarding the PSA. Everything from shot selection to editing choices to the final delivery format seemed to come together very easily.
Our public service announcement had several strengths, but also some weaknesses. We feel strongly that our PSA i interesting and holds the attention of the audience. Natalie P. did an amazing job of telling her own personal story of cyber bullying, which strengthens the message of the PSA. The music has the correct tone for the message. It is light, but serious at he same time. It does a good job of sending the message that cyber bullying is an issue that parents should not take lightly. As fantastic as the PSA came out, it could still be improved in a few areas. The overall quality of the video could have been better. The PSA looks amazing considering we used a simple Flip Camera, but obviously the quality could have been improved by using a more sophisticated camera. Not only would a higher quality camera have improved the look of the shots throughout the video, but the lighting in the opening shot would have been better. All in all, my team agrees that the strengths o our PSA greatly outweigh the weaknesses.
We have obtained a Creative Commons License at the most restricted level for our work. All team members agree that the safety of Natalie P. is most important and we want to respect that. Our Creative Commons License s documented on the YouTube site where the video is posted.
Our team collaborated on all aspects of this project. We had ongoing communication throughout the project with the use of e-mail and our team's Google site. This kind of interaction allowed each member to pose questions, make comments, or read updates to the project at any time of the day. That asynchronous communication was very important for our team, as we all have busy schedules. We were each able to contribute an communicate on our own timelines. In addition to these flexible communication methods, we also met twice a week on tinychat.com. I attribute a lot of our success to this free Web 2.0 tool. Even though we were able to communicate throughout the week over e-mail and on the Google site, we were able to discuss ideas or changes to the PSA and make decisions immediately as a team. It also brought that "pesornal" element int the project, since we are all working from different location in Texas. All team members were respectful of each other's thoughts and ideas. We worked well together to create the best PSA that we could produce. Because of this, all team members felt like our project was a huge success.
I have never created a PSA before, bu I am so glad to have gone through the experience. I can now understand how meaningful this kind of project can be for students to complete as well. I have already thought of ways this can help to support technology objectives as well as higher level thinking in students.
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Video Editing Software Evaluation
Windows Movie Maker vs. Wax 2.0
When tacklng the Week 2 assignment, I selected Windows Movie Maker and Wax 2.0. I selected Windows Movie Maker because I am very famiiar with the program and have used it multiple times to create various projects in the past. I selected Wax 2. because I was under the impression that it was a pretty straightforward program that I would be able to figure out fairly easily. Both were desirable to me becausethey are free.
I decided to start with Wax 2.0, since I knew the least about the program. Right off the bat I was frustrated with the program. I was unable to upload videos that I had taken of my daughter. I quickly realized that it did not accept .mod fles (which is what my camcorderit set to apparently), but to my surprise it alsodoes not accept .wmv files. This was very frustrating, s that means it takes an extra step for me to use Wax 2.0 to edit my videos together. I also found the overall interface quite difficult to navigate. I consider myself a digital native, and I do not want to feel urged to read the instruction manual to figure out how things work. For basic programs anyway, I expect to be able to figure it out myself, and if I can't then I'll just move on to something that I can figure out with ease, which is basically what I did I did not enjoy the 30 minutes spent in the Wax proga and will promptly uninstall it from my computer.
On the other hand, I had a much more positive experience with Windows Movie Maker. While I have already created several "movies" in Movie Maker, I had actually never used videos or added effects to them in the program before this assignment. I had a particularly good time experimenting with videos of my children, imagining the way I could document their childhood in creative ways. One of the drawbacks I found with Move Maker was the need to convert my .mod files into another format. Windows Movie Maker accepts several formats, but unfortunately not this one. Once I was able to convert them into a compatible format, I was very easily able to upload them into the program and start editing. The Movie Maker program steps you through the process very easily with their numbered steps that tell you the activity during each step. After uploading, the next step is to add video effects which were also very simple to add. I also liked the fact that several video effects could be added to a single file with just a few clicks, and including video transitions between clips is just as easy. The variety of choices is impressive, especially for a free program. Previewing any changes helped me realize if I had achieved the desired result immediately. Then finishing up the movie is a very simple as well.
Both programs have pros and cons, but for me Wax 2.0 had too many cons for me to follow through with my project. I found it to be difficult to navigate and use without extensive reading through the instructions. Because I consider myself a "digital native" I am generally able to figure out new software programs with relative ease. For this reason, Windows Movie Maker i definitely my video editor of choice.
When tacklng the Week 2 assignment, I selected Windows Movie Maker and Wax 2.0. I selected Windows Movie Maker because I am very famiiar with the program and have used it multiple times to create various projects in the past. I selected Wax 2. because I was under the impression that it was a pretty straightforward program that I would be able to figure out fairly easily. Both were desirable to me becausethey are free.
I decided to start with Wax 2.0, since I knew the least about the program. Right off the bat I was frustrated with the program. I was unable to upload videos that I had taken of my daughter. I quickly realized that it did not accept .mod fles (which is what my camcorderit set to apparently), but to my surprise it alsodoes not accept .wmv files. This was very frustrating, s that means it takes an extra step for me to use Wax 2.0 to edit my videos together. I also found the overall interface quite difficult to navigate. I consider myself a digital native, and I do not want to feel urged to read the instruction manual to figure out how things work. For basic programs anyway, I expect to be able to figure it out myself, and if I can't then I'll just move on to something that I can figure out with ease, which is basically what I did I did not enjoy the 30 minutes spent in the Wax proga and will promptly uninstall it from my computer.
On the other hand, I had a much more positive experience with Windows Movie Maker. While I have already created several "movies" in Movie Maker, I had actually never used videos or added effects to them in the program before this assignment. I had a particularly good time experimenting with videos of my children, imagining the way I could document their childhood in creative ways. One of the drawbacks I found with Move Maker was the need to convert my .mod files into another format. Windows Movie Maker accepts several formats, but unfortunately not this one. Once I was able to convert them into a compatible format, I was very easily able to upload them into the program and start editing. The Movie Maker program steps you through the process very easily with their numbered steps that tell you the activity during each step. After uploading, the next step is to add video effects which were also very simple to add. I also liked the fact that several video effects could be added to a single file with just a few clicks, and including video transitions between clips is just as easy. The variety of choices is impressive, especially for a free program. Previewing any changes helped me realize if I had achieved the desired result immediately. Then finishing up the movie is a very simple as well.
Both programs have pros and cons, but for me Wax 2.0 had too many cons for me to follow through with my project. I found it to be difficult to navigate and use without extensive reading through the instructions. Because I consider myself a "digital native" I am generally able to figure out new software programs with relative ease. For this reason, Windows Movie Maker i definitely my video editor of choice.
Monday, September 6, 2010
Web Conference - September 6, 2010
This week in my Multimedia Video Technology course, I had to evaluate two video editing software products, and then create a podcast tutorial. There was major confusion regarding the assignments, as one assignment was posted in the Courseware, but another assignment was sent out by the Instructional Associates. The web conference definitely helped to clarify this issue. In addition to the confusion about which assignment we were supposed to complete, there was also some ambiguity about the podcast element. Generally speaking, a podcast has no video. A podcast with video is usually referred to as a vodcast instead. So many of us wondered if we were required to use video and music. Dr. Abernathy was able to clarify this issue in the numerous web conferences she holds each week as well. I attended tonight's web conference live, but did refer to the chat notes from previous web conferences to get clarification on the assignment.
I am a tried and true "Digital Native". I had no problems considering an online format when shopping around for a masters program. I love the fact that I can have a job but also obtain a masters. I love the fact that I can work on assignments and readings at my convenience. I love the fact that I don't have to spend my precious time driving to and from classes during the week. I love the fact that technology allows me to connect, although on a different level, with others in the program in a similar manner to a traditional program. I do NOT, however, like the fact that I am not able to get clarification from professors and instructional associates regarding assignments on a regular basis. The online format does not provide the opportunity for me to ask a question after class, or go visit during office hours. There are many times where I need to "talk it out" for me to understand the answer to a question I have. The web conferences address this issue for me. Even though I would probably still prefer a face to face interaction, the web conferences are the closest thing to a face to face interaction. Most of the time Dr. Abernathy is able to address all questions which are typed in the chat box, and I love the fact that she will respond to those questions orally. By listening to her responses, I am able to pick up the important things that might be "lost in translation" in an email.
I am glad that Dr. Abernathy is so committed to this program that she is willing to hold "virtual office hours" via web conferencing. It helps clarify the expectations, which puts everybody's mind at ease!
I am a tried and true "Digital Native". I had no problems considering an online format when shopping around for a masters program. I love the fact that I can have a job but also obtain a masters. I love the fact that I can work on assignments and readings at my convenience. I love the fact that I don't have to spend my precious time driving to and from classes during the week. I love the fact that technology allows me to connect, although on a different level, with others in the program in a similar manner to a traditional program. I do NOT, however, like the fact that I am not able to get clarification from professors and instructional associates regarding assignments on a regular basis. The online format does not provide the opportunity for me to ask a question after class, or go visit during office hours. There are many times where I need to "talk it out" for me to understand the answer to a question I have. The web conferences address this issue for me. Even though I would probably still prefer a face to face interaction, the web conferences are the closest thing to a face to face interaction. Most of the time Dr. Abernathy is able to address all questions which are typed in the chat box, and I love the fact that she will respond to those questions orally. By listening to her responses, I am able to pick up the important things that might be "lost in translation" in an email.
I am glad that Dr. Abernathy is so committed to this program that she is willing to hold "virtual office hours" via web conferencing. It helps clarify the expectations, which puts everybody's mind at ease!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)