jacobs

Towards the beginning of the Tufte article, there is much discussion about the failures of PowerPoint. Low resolution and use of Bullet Points just graze the surface of the topic, instead of a fantastic display of images and a lengthy description of each topic. I agree that the resolution is poor, but PowerPoint is only one tool a speaker can employ to keep the audience awake. If the future has extremely intricate designs and high-resolution pictures, it may take away from the meaning of the presentation. PowerPoint should only be a part of the presentation. Usually it is the bone structure for the speaker, merely addressing the points in which they will further develop in the speech. I feel as though these “failures” of PowerPoint do not lessen the product, but instead makes the oratory skills of the presenter more visible.

In the Discussion Thread on EdwardTufte.com, there was discussion regarding the use of none digital sources for presentations. IE – Slides and handouts. What I can not understand is why not do both. There are problems associated with using physical presentation tools like handouts. If there were no problems, there would be no need for PowerPoint. In the thread Bill Paton, July 7, 2002, brings up a good question regarding when to handout the handouts to fully maximize their effectiveness. If you use the PowerPoint hand-in-hand with the handout, the problems of both may be eliminated. The PowerPoint will be the framework for the speaker’s presentation. The handout can present the more in-depth information that the speaker presents but would be overwhelming in the PowerPoint. Thus, the audience will pay attention, because they won’t have to worry about taking notes, and the PowerPoint will not be cluttered with supporting information.

I feel as though PowerPoint is an instrumental program for professors and students in the digital age. Without the PowerPoint option for many projects, the same information would take longer to present, and in a less organized manner. PowerPoint helps students formulate arguments by breaking down their topic into smaller sub-topics. The speaker and the audience are able to visualize the presentation, and affectively understand the argument presented. Although everyone knows how to use PowerPoint, and it is widely available, it still maintains a professional façade. This gives a presentation legitimization and professionalism, even if it is a comical parody (Gettysburg Address Powerpoint). I still read through the entire PowerPoint and I would like to argue a majority of the audience did as well.

This is my website.

This is a photo of Saint Francis. I found this statue at The National Cathedral, and then altered it in Photoshop. I threw a few filters on it, and changed the color range to hues of blue. For an anthropology class I am currently enrolled in, we are viewing the interactions of indigenous people of South America and the early Spanish missions. Often times the priests would give relatable interpretations of some biblical text. I.E. Shepherd would be changed to coconut protector, because they had no bases for what a sheep or a herder is when distanced so far from Europe. I decided to change the image giving a traditional Catholic figure a Spanish style filter. My goal was to connect the two into a single image. When viewed at the size I originally made it, the image has a graininess that is often found in South American artwork, however I am not sure it this size and resolution will present the image to its fullest degree.

Reading about digitalization opened my eyes once again regarding the advances in technology as of recent.  Although the idea of a computer typing out the words of a speech is not new, it is still interesting.  With the latest technological advances transcending into media other than text and speech, it will be interesting to get a glimpse of the future.  What is the next step for digitalization?  Will a computer be able to watch a show, game or movie and type out a general description of the entire event creating a product similar to a novel?  I also wonder if they will be able to do the opposite; translate a novel of the past to a digital image.

Regarding the OCR technology and current print formats.  I have used scanners with OCR technology when trying to make an editable document in Word, but they proved unreliable.  I assume that since then there have been many advancements in OCR technology.  I wonder whether we will eventually stop using paper prints, but instead solely use digital formats, to make it easiest to transfer to the next advancement. Will we make the full transition from paper to disk or will continued paper use be prevalent?

I was thinking about the positives and negatives surrounding the digitalization of audio and video.  I think that it is a duel edged sword.  While digitalizing an old audio track may result in a better sounding, digitally remastered recording, it may also take away from the songs style.  I believe that it changes the feeling of the audio, thus altering the meaning of it.  Imagine a digital remastering of The Declaration of Independence.  Who will know if that is the real notions of our founding fathers?

While reading the first reading, a question arose regarding the preservation of materials for the future. While creating materials for data preservation, one has to keep in mind the ever-changing norms of formats. Should we keep original documents in their original form with hopes that further down the technological timeline we can find more effective and longer lasting formats, or should we continue to update the documents to the current format, taking time, money and resources each attempt to update the data to the present?

Regarding the second reading, I was surprised that historians use machines to organize the data off websites instead of viewing the data interactively. The future seems to be making interaction with the informational websites obsolete for historians. I question whether the money and technology to produce websites similar to The Valley of the Shadow: Two Communities in the American Civil War site is worth investing, while the main clientele, historians, respond by implementing technology to breakdown the websites to ascertain the basic data the website is attempting to display in a visually pleasing and attention grasping way?

Regarding the legitimacy of view responses in digital archive websites as accurate portrayals of the time range they originated. I relate this to the responses found on The Video Store Project. I worked at a video store for a few months during high school, it is interesting to read, and often times relate to the experiences of other video store workers. A response that reminded my of high school, where on the NYS Regents they would have you read accounts of different time periods written in dairy form or a format similar style. I always questioned whether they were real or simply created by the exam makers.

“Did you tend to rent or buy videos? Why?

rent… money issues… besides, my father soon got a second VCR and we figured out dubbing pretty quickly… so he’d rent movies, especially before a road trip, so we could watch the copies in the back of his new van with the new tiny tv and the “portable” vcr…. ahh the good old days before the stock market crash in ‘87!

During the period that you shopped at this store, what changes did you see?

they expanded… more than doubled in size overnight.

Is this store still open? If not, when did it close?

not open anymore… don’t know when it closed”

The responses in Regents exams always seemed to fit the time periods too well. But after reading the few questions in the response from The Video Store Project website (above) I can see how it can be used. I wonder how historians in the future will be able to decide which responses are accurate and which are purely false.