I just reread the essay, and I saw that Tufte answers one of my questions in the conclusion. He says that Powerpoint should be used for low-resolution videos and pictures that can't be reproduced in handouts. Okay. I agree with that.
I have a new question. Tufte criticizes Powerpoint for forcing people to simplify whatever they're trying to say. What's wrong with simplification? "Simplifying" and "dumbing down" are not synonyms. Maybe this just shows that I'm stupid, but I think it's a good idea to use simple wording to express ideas. If you simplify your ideas well (without generalizing), you'll be able to express your ideas more clearly. People can spend more time thinking about your ideas, rather than trying to figure out what you're trying to say.
(although, I shouldn't be talking... I ramble on and on when I don't really have anything to say.)
Monday, October 29, 2007
The Cognative Style of Powerpoint (Kimberly)
Was it just me or is Tufte saying Powerpoint is Communist?
1. Is the responsibilty of the loss of information soley on the system Powerpoint or is the responsibily on the presenter (user) lack of being able to use it?
2. I understand the importance of documents and the written word and how it can translate information better than PP; however, aren't the purpose of presentations to provide the concised version of the information on the written documnet? Isn't the system Powerpoint just one of tool to help get the point across?
I agree that Powerpoint can't be the only source in which an information is given ( like in the case of the NASA presentation) but I don't see why it should be discarded in presenting "serious matters".
1. Is the responsibilty of the loss of information soley on the system Powerpoint or is the responsibily on the presenter (user) lack of being able to use it?
2. I understand the importance of documents and the written word and how it can translate information better than PP; however, aren't the purpose of presentations to provide the concised version of the information on the written documnet? Isn't the system Powerpoint just one of tool to help get the point across?
I agree that Powerpoint can't be the only source in which an information is given ( like in the case of the NASA presentation) but I don't see why it should be discarded in presenting "serious matters".
Tufte: The Cognative Style of Powerpoint
1) I'm curious as to why NASA used powerpoints during the Columbia Shuttle disaster. It seems counter to what a major scientific research organization would do. The problem here is with assumptions about what powerpoint was intended for. The idea of a powerpoint being sent in through email as a form of documentation defeats the purpose of any kind of a presentation intended to go along with it. What was NASA thinking?
2) Tufte's criticism of powerpoint in schools seemed harsh. As a recent high school graduate I feel that from my high school experience I was not taught that powerpoint and papers were comparable. Rather that they were merely a tool to be used with a strong presentation in order to convey a much more expansive issue, which in most cases should be documented anyway. Why does Tufte criticize powerpoint so much? It can be detrimental if used in the wrong situation, for example NASA, but used properly it can be an invaluable tool used to convey ideas to a large group cleanly an efficiently.
2) Tufte's criticism of powerpoint in schools seemed harsh. As a recent high school graduate I feel that from my high school experience I was not taught that powerpoint and papers were comparable. Rather that they were merely a tool to be used with a strong presentation in order to convey a much more expansive issue, which in most cases should be documented anyway. Why does Tufte criticize powerpoint so much? It can be detrimental if used in the wrong situation, for example NASA, but used properly it can be an invaluable tool used to convey ideas to a large group cleanly an efficiently.
Tufte's Powerpoint Essay
When I first learned how to use Powerpoint (I was in middle school), I was taught that a Powerpoint presentation should not stand alone. Presenters should be able to talk about the subject they're presenting without relying on Powerpoint. Most of what Tufte criticizes relates to overly generalized statements and misinterpreted statistics. What would happen if Powerpoint presentations didn't have any words at all, so that the Powerpoint only existed to serve as a visual aid for whatever the presenter was talking about? Would this solve the problems that Tufte talks about?
Also, I understand that Tufte says that the image quality goes down a lot in Powerpoints. I was confused. Is he talking about how people use Clipart instead of actual photographs? Or is he saying that the resolution of photographs is too low to be useful?
One more question. Artists and other non-mainstream people tend to have an anti-Microsoft bias. How much does this influence Tufte's point of view? If Powerpoint was developed by Apple, do you think that Tufte would hold the same point of view? (not that I know absolutely nothing about Tufte other than the fact that he wrote this essay. For all I know, he could work for Microsoft.)
Also, I understand that Tufte says that the image quality goes down a lot in Powerpoints. I was confused. Is he talking about how people use Clipart instead of actual photographs? Or is he saying that the resolution of photographs is too low to be useful?
One more question. Artists and other non-mainstream people tend to have an anti-Microsoft bias. How much does this influence Tufte's point of view? If Powerpoint was developed by Apple, do you think that Tufte would hold the same point of view? (not that I know absolutely nothing about Tufte other than the fact that he wrote this essay. For all I know, he could work for Microsoft.)
I disagree.
i pretty much learned nothing in this, lol. regarding powerpoint and any essay in general, information is always broken down, even if your writing an essay, because you edit it out and change it and you still can't get everything on your mind across. i think the idea should not be how to present better, but how to organize your thoughts more. if you can talk about whatever you have to present fluently it doesent really matter what kind of method you use to get your point across.
book about power point
i have no idea why the columbia space deaster was because of power point?
with power point you show alot of people simple broken down information, but wont this leave them lacking information and details of what is happening?
with power point you show alot of people simple broken down information, but wont this leave them lacking information and details of what is happening?
The Cognative Style of Powerpoint
There was not a lot that i didn't understand about this reading - except for the fact that the whole time, i thought that the objective of the book was to describe how much more effective powerpoints were, whew - but my two questions are:
1. What was the pitch style that they were describing on page 11 durring the topic of the unnessary outline?
2.They lost me on p 16-17: "Identifying specific agents of action may also eventually assist forensic accountants and prosecutors in targetting those responsiblr for excessively accelerated recognition of revenue." -they lost me right here i have no clue what that sentance says or means... i think its just too verbose maybe, iono.
1. What was the pitch style that they were describing on page 11 durring the topic of the unnessary outline?
2.They lost me on p 16-17: "Identifying specific agents of action may also eventually assist forensic accountants and prosecutors in targetting those responsiblr for excessively accelerated recognition of revenue." -they lost me right here i have no clue what that sentance says or means... i think its just too verbose maybe, iono.
the cognitive style of powerpoint.
two questions;
1. i feel like i learned nothing from reading this, except maybe some about nasa &the columbia shuttle. i don't understand why tufte is so bitter &cynical toward powerpoint. if he believes there is a better way to make presentations, then why not just make better presentations? tufte has all kinds of negative criticisms, but as seen in the one-page "improving presentations" out of a thirty-page writing, no real suggestions.
2. does tufte understand that powerpoint is taught to children in schools to teach them public speaking? i doubt many legitimate educators dismiss essays &papers &replace them with powerpoint presentation assignments. it is true that the rules of the english language and syntax are ignored or lost in the formation of data on powerpoint slides, but recalling data by the prompt of a bullet note &being able to speak well &give a coherent presentation before a group of people is a skill i believe children gain from learning in school.
1. i feel like i learned nothing from reading this, except maybe some about nasa &the columbia shuttle. i don't understand why tufte is so bitter &cynical toward powerpoint. if he believes there is a better way to make presentations, then why not just make better presentations? tufte has all kinds of negative criticisms, but as seen in the one-page "improving presentations" out of a thirty-page writing, no real suggestions.
2. does tufte understand that powerpoint is taught to children in schools to teach them public speaking? i doubt many legitimate educators dismiss essays &papers &replace them with powerpoint presentation assignments. it is true that the rules of the english language and syntax are ignored or lost in the formation of data on powerpoint slides, but recalling data by the prompt of a bullet note &being able to speak well &give a coherent presentation before a group of people is a skill i believe children gain from learning in school.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
2 questions
The Work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction.
1. Reproduction: it is made by people who want to fill selfishness. They wanted to have quality of the art in low prices. However, the reproduction has positive and negative parts such as people could earn education or the lost of aura of real one, the value of the work, are missing. The reproduction are deep into our lives if it is can not be reject there could be many ways to make this to more positive. What people need to do? Moreover, what is aura? What is value of the work? In the book, the author mentions “the accent is on the value”, “the exhibition value of the work.” What is different?
2. There are some of step of reproduction such as copying the work, by the photo, by computer, movie, and advertising. Furthermore, what is gab between audience and artist? Is that really impact the audience because there are mechanical system between art work and audience? Moreover, is mechanical reproduction not art?
===============================================================
The cognitive style of power point: pitching out corrupts within
1. Even the Power Point lost their meaning; there are many great power points that are use for the business. It could be unmeaning or no useful but there are plenty ways to make this power point work better.
2. The Edward R. Tufte’s idea of the good power point might works good for most people. However, I think it is more personal thing. I mean it could be more weight on personal opinion. I greed with simplify of the design of presentation and text. They are good ideas but sometime people need more word or more expiation. I think people need develops their own way to make good presentation.
1. Reproduction: it is made by people who want to fill selfishness. They wanted to have quality of the art in low prices. However, the reproduction has positive and negative parts such as people could earn education or the lost of aura of real one, the value of the work, are missing. The reproduction are deep into our lives if it is can not be reject there could be many ways to make this to more positive. What people need to do? Moreover, what is aura? What is value of the work? In the book, the author mentions “the accent is on the value”, “the exhibition value of the work.” What is different?
2. There are some of step of reproduction such as copying the work, by the photo, by computer, movie, and advertising. Furthermore, what is gab between audience and artist? Is that really impact the audience because there are mechanical system between art work and audience? Moreover, is mechanical reproduction not art?
===============================================================
The cognitive style of power point: pitching out corrupts within
1. Even the Power Point lost their meaning; there are many great power points that are use for the business. It could be unmeaning or no useful but there are plenty ways to make this power point work better.
2. The Edward R. Tufte’s idea of the good power point might works good for most people. However, I think it is more personal thing. I mean it could be more weight on personal opinion. I greed with simplify of the design of presentation and text. They are good ideas but sometime people need more word or more expiation. I think people need develops their own way to make good presentation.
2 questions on cognitive style of powerpoint
1. When the article refers to the shuttle columbia, Tufte explains how NASA created a series of powerpoints in a life or death situation. I don't really understand why they created powerpoints. If someone was in a life or death situation shouldn't NASA get together and have a meeting about the factors they could do, beside send everyone a powerpoint email about the situation?
2. Tufte constantly refers to stupid people making powerpoints in serious cases. He stresses that powerpoints should be presented, rather than printed out or sent through an e-mail. NASA never created formal documentation about the shuttle Columbia; instead they made powerpoints. My question is: why didn't people make a formal document? Why did these people make a powerpoint slide when they could have easily written up a document? I don't understand why people would consider a powerpoint slide a documentation for a specific period, even though a powerpoint is meant to be presented rather than used for hard copy.
2. Tufte constantly refers to stupid people making powerpoints in serious cases. He stresses that powerpoints should be presented, rather than printed out or sent through an e-mail. NASA never created formal documentation about the shuttle Columbia; instead they made powerpoints. My question is: why didn't people make a formal document? Why did these people make a powerpoint slide when they could have easily written up a document? I don't understand why people would consider a powerpoint slide a documentation for a specific period, even though a powerpoint is meant to be presented rather than used for hard copy.
Tufte read
I have to say That I agree with Tufte on the subject of teaching powerpoint to children. I had to write reports as a child and I benefitted from the task. Question one is why in this day and age of children having more and more less satisfactory testing scores do we feel the need to dumb down the lessons. When did it become more beneficial to substitute powerpoint for the tried and true test of research that is the report? Secondly how can we justify the use of such unreliable methods of analysis (powerpoint) in billion dollar government institutions that are funded by taxpayers dollars? I mean, I am not a rocket scientist yet I could have presented an equally informative PP. Who is setting the standards here? Microsoft?
Monday, October 22, 2007
Powerpoint Reading
1) Tufte is very negative towards Powerpoint, and i don't understand why. i love Powerpoint. but anyway, i had some issues with a few things he said. first, he was very against students being taught powerpoint in school. why? i think it is beneficial in that it organizes thoughts, they will need to use it when they are older, and it teaches to paraphrase. i understand that writing papers are better, but i think that powerpoint is a useful tool to know. so i guess my question is, why is teaching powerpoint to children so bad?
2) one part in the book where i didn't underatnd what Tufte was explaining was when he was talking about showing multiple slides on page 6 in the 3rd papragraph. i don't understand what he is saying and how this is beneficial.
2) one part in the book where i didn't underatnd what Tufte was explaining was when he was talking about showing multiple slides on page 6 in the 3rd papragraph. i don't understand what he is saying and how this is beneficial.
Monday, October 15, 2007
right brain vs. left brain
this is a really cool link that i found.
try this and see what side of your brain you use more!
click here!
try this and see what side of your brain you use more!
click here!
Monday, October 1, 2007
brennans art and age
in film whould you consider the director the soal artistof the film,
in photography why is the first print worth more thatn the rest if they are identical? couldent you switch them?
in photography why is the first print worth more thatn the rest if they are identical? couldent you switch them?
Two Questions
Is the act of captioning a photograph the same detraction from the original functionality of art the way photography itself as another way to simply gian the aura of reality in the pursuit of the real thing?
Does the lack of the actor's connection with the audience force us to only watch the most universal actors, that is ones whose performance can translate beyond the limited scope of the film?
Does the lack of the actor's connection with the audience force us to only watch the most universal actors, that is ones whose performance can translate beyond the limited scope of the film?
Mechanical Reproduction
First of all... let me just say that this reading was thoroughly exhausting!
My questions came straight out of the reading:
1. What does this mean or what is it referring to: "In the case of the art object, a most sensitive nucleus - namely, its authenticity - is interfered with whereas no natural object is vulnerable on that score."
2. What specifically are they referring to when they say the "cult of beauty"?
My questions came straight out of the reading:
1. What does this mean or what is it referring to: "In the case of the art object, a most sensitive nucleus - namely, its authenticity - is interfered with whereas no natural object is vulnerable on that score."
2. What specifically are they referring to when they say the "cult of beauty"?
first things first &the work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction.
two questions;
1. why did the 22 visual designers feel the need to write &sign the 2000 design manifesto when the work an artist does is truly the individual artist's choice? designers are not being forced to put their talents toward certain areas. artists who feel their expertise &help is needed in the areas of cultural interventions, social marketing campaigns, books, magazines, exhibitions, educational tools, television programs, films, charitable causes, etc., should focus their work toward these areas. artists who believe their skills are more useful in advertising, marketing, and brand development should not be made to feel guilty if that is the work they choose to utilize their talents in. artists should create what they want to &what they feel is important, not what other designers tell them to. who decides what is "worthwhile use?"
2. in reading the paragraph that introduces the idea of the surgeon &the magician in "the work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction," the preceding material in the essay gave me the idea that benjamin was referring to the painter as the surgeon &the cameraman as the magician. did anyone else feel this way, that benjamin would consider the painter a surgeon, diminishing the distance between himself and his work, and the cameraman a magician, creating in hiding "multiple fragments which are assembled under a new law?" i was confused &surprised when his opinions were clarified in the following paragraph ("the painter maintains in his work a natural distance from reality, the cameraman penetrates deeply into its web") because i was originally so intrigued by the comparison.
1. why did the 22 visual designers feel the need to write &sign the 2000 design manifesto when the work an artist does is truly the individual artist's choice? designers are not being forced to put their talents toward certain areas. artists who feel their expertise &help is needed in the areas of cultural interventions, social marketing campaigns, books, magazines, exhibitions, educational tools, television programs, films, charitable causes, etc., should focus their work toward these areas. artists who believe their skills are more useful in advertising, marketing, and brand development should not be made to feel guilty if that is the work they choose to utilize their talents in. artists should create what they want to &what they feel is important, not what other designers tell them to. who decides what is "worthwhile use?"
2. in reading the paragraph that introduces the idea of the surgeon &the magician in "the work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction," the preceding material in the essay gave me the idea that benjamin was referring to the painter as the surgeon &the cameraman as the magician. did anyone else feel this way, that benjamin would consider the painter a surgeon, diminishing the distance between himself and his work, and the cameraman a magician, creating in hiding "multiple fragments which are assembled under a new law?" i was confused &surprised when his opinions were clarified in the following paragraph ("the painter maintains in his work a natural distance from reality, the cameraman penetrates deeply into its web") because i was originally so intrigued by the comparison.
Essay Questions, etc.
I realize that I'm posting this less than an hour before class starts, so the chances of someone seeing this are slim, but I'd like to respond to Bill's post... I agree that we are getting back into the t echnical aspects of art with the advent of film. I feel like any time there is a new medium, it's a good idea to explore the technical aspects of the medium (and try to "hide our hands"), and really understand the way that medium works, before exploring the conceptual possibilities of that medium (uhh, sorry if that didn't make any sense...).
Okay, now here are my questions:
1. What is the value of a painting or a drawing in today's society, where we have photography and video and digital art? Do paintings still have a function? I think the essay may have explained this, but I didn't understand.
2. Benjamin talked about the function of art changing in today's society. I just want to clarify... I thought that Benjamin felt that before photography, a piece of art was important because it was a piece of art. Because art was not easily accessible, a painting was precious... sort-of in thte same way that a diamond is precious. And now, after photography, art isn't so precious... more people can view art, so art for the sake of art doesn't really exist any more. So, the purpose of art is... different. I'm not sure what Benjamin said, but I think it's to communicate an idea.
Is this right? Or, am I just putting words into Benjamin's mouth?
Okay, now here are my questions:
1. What is the value of a painting or a drawing in today's society, where we have photography and video and digital art? Do paintings still have a function? I think the essay may have explained this, but I didn't understand.
2. Benjamin talked about the function of art changing in today's society. I just want to clarify... I thought that Benjamin felt that before photography, a piece of art was important because it was a piece of art. Because art was not easily accessible, a painting was precious... sort-of in thte same way that a diamond is precious. And now, after photography, art isn't so precious... more people can view art, so art for the sake of art doesn't really exist any more. So, the purpose of art is... different. I'm not sure what Benjamin said, but I think it's to communicate an idea.
Is this right? Or, am I just putting words into Benjamin's mouth?
Questions about Benjamin reading...
1. In the second section, Benjamin states that, "The presence of the original is the prerequisite to the concept of authenticity." This statement caught my attention because it relates to some of the questions brought up by our Manovich reading. It seems a common element in discussing reproduced art is the concept of the original. In this day and age, however, most of our mass produced digital art really has no true original. According to Benjamin's statement, doesn't that fact jeopardize the art's authenticity?
2. Right from the very beginning of this reading, Benjamin jumps into a whole batch of political ideas dealing with Marx, and fascism. I understand how he incorporates capitalism into his points, but I'm having trouble finding relevance in his other political mentionings. I'm not personally very familiar with politics, fascism especially, so I'm sure that doesn't help much, but Benjamin's whole preface just seems to be a jumble of political analysis. I think he's talking about present day modes of production, and their effects on art, but that small point seems to be lost in his philosophical wordiness.
2. Right from the very beginning of this reading, Benjamin jumps into a whole batch of political ideas dealing with Marx, and fascism. I understand how he incorporates capitalism into his points, but I'm having trouble finding relevance in his other political mentionings. I'm not personally very familiar with politics, fascism especially, so I'm sure that doesn't help much, but Benjamin's whole preface just seems to be a jumble of political analysis. I think he's talking about present day modes of production, and their effects on art, but that small point seems to be lost in his philosophical wordiness.
emily's questions-walter benjamin
this reading was tough. i think i understood the part about film the most. i kind of want just a general explanation, but here are my 2 specific questions-
"the result was that one could expect it not only to exploit the proletariat with increasing intensity, but ultimately to create conditions which would make it possible to abolish capitalism itself." what? how?
he compares art that is in a fixed place to art that can be moved to different locations. is it more important for the art to be viewed in its original location, or for the art to be accessible to lots of people?
"the result was that one could expect it not only to exploit the proletariat with increasing intensity, but ultimately to create conditions which would make it possible to abolish capitalism itself." what? how?
he compares art that is in a fixed place to art that can be moved to different locations. is it more important for the art to be viewed in its original location, or for the art to be accessible to lots of people?
kim's questions #2
1. what is the relationship between the aura, the audience, the authenticity, and tradition. Does the aura diminish when the relationship of the audience and the art diminishes or is it when the audience becomes "absent-minded".
2. The functionality of art was questioned in this paper, the function of l'art pour l'art, the "negative theology", is it the destruction of the "aura"?
2. The functionality of art was questioned in this paper, the function of l'art pour l'art, the "negative theology", is it the destruction of the "aura"?
walter benjamin questions
my first question is from section 8. benjamin is giving an example of how the audience identifies with the actor through what the camera portrays. in this paragraph is he trying to show an example of exhibition value which he mentioned earlier, but i felt he never really explained?
my second question is from the epilogue. i understood the whole reading pretty well, but the epilogue really confused me. i don't understand how he relates facism to reproduction and the other things in the reading. so i guess my question is, how does fascism relate to the reading?
my second question is from the epilogue. i understood the whole reading pretty well, but the epilogue really confused me. i don't understand how he relates facism to reproduction and the other things in the reading. so i guess my question is, how does fascism relate to the reading?
Two Questions 10/ 01/ 07
1.)With the advent of computer animation in film are we finally giving back the technical and hands on aspects of art back to the artist and at the same time losing the need for the actor?
2.) If so would it be appropriate to disregard this as Duhamel regards it as being "a pastime for helots"?
2.) If so would it be appropriate to disregard this as Duhamel regards it as being "a pastime for helots"?
charde post
1. does the author feel that the actor takes away the value or artistry of films?
2. because an audeince are given what to see instead of devoloping there own observation, does it lack authenticity, have the movie-makers removed art out films, and does that really matter any more in today society?
2. because an audeince are given what to see instead of devoloping there own observation, does it lack authenticity, have the movie-makers removed art out films, and does that really matter any more in today society?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)