Comments on: subtitles on nytimes.com http://dopeblog.com/2006/10/subtitles-on-nytimescom/ addicted to junk Sun, 09 Oct 2011 15:02:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: gabriel http://dopeblog.com/2006/10/subtitles-on-nytimescom/comment-page-1/#comment-371 gabriel Wed, 13 Dec 2006 18:50:43 +0000 http://www.dopeblog.net/?p=288#comment-371 as far as i know, kat, the reporters have no voice training. they're writers who are basically doing us the favor of calling in and giving us a summary of their story. ambient sounds aren't really a possibility yet, but as more photographers with multimedia experience (such as yourself) enter into the workforce, i expect that to change. subject narration would be good. but that's hard to do right. it is something we're looking at pursuing however. i wouldn't say that the narration or the images come first. both are flexible. we're allowed to cut the audio as we see fit. same with the photos. it's the idea of the total package. in the end, though, i totally agree. 10+ minutes is probably 5+ minutes too long. as far as i know, kat, the reporters have no voice training. they’re writers who are basically doing us the favor of calling in and giving us a summary of their story. ambient sounds aren’t really a possibility yet, but as more photographers with multimedia experience (such as yourself) enter into the workforce, i expect that to change.

subject narration would be good. but that’s hard to do right. it is something we’re looking at pursuing however.

i wouldn’t say that the narration or the images come first. both are flexible. we’re allowed to cut the audio as we see fit. same with the photos. it’s the idea of the total package.

in the end, though, i totally agree. 10+ minutes is probably 5+ minutes too long.

]]> By: kat http://dopeblog.com/2006/10/subtitles-on-nytimescom/comment-page-1/#comment-370 kat Mon, 04 Dec 2006 15:57:05 +0000 http://www.dopeblog.net/?p=288#comment-370 On provocation, I watched it again. I liked it better the second time. I agree that the images are powerful and the story is strong, but it is very difficult to listen to a person narrate for ten and a half minutes. It seems like she is just reading...? What kind of voice training do the reporters have? Some ambient sounds or subject narration would make an enormous quality difference -- do you have any idea if that was a possibility? The photographer seems to have gotten good access. The last story in the presentation (Kenia), is very long. I think the presentation could be stronger if the message was more concentrated because, although beautiful, some of the images are repetitive. I'm wondering which comes first, the narration or the images? I have a feeling it was the narration, because otherwise it would not have been so long. On provocation, I watched it again. I liked it better the second time.

I agree that the images are powerful and the story is strong, but it is very difficult to listen to a person narrate for ten and a half minutes. It seems like she is just reading…? What kind of voice training do the reporters have? Some ambient sounds or subject narration would make an enormous quality difference — do you have any idea if that was a possibility? The photographer seems to have gotten good access. The last story in the presentation (Kenia), is very long. I think the presentation could be stronger if the message was more concentrated because, although beautiful, some of the images are repetitive. I’m wondering which comes first, the narration or the images?

I have a feeling it was the narration, because otherwise it would not have been so long.

]]> By: gabriel http://dopeblog.com/2006/10/subtitles-on-nytimescom/comment-page-1/#comment-369 gabriel Fri, 01 Dec 2006 22:07:17 +0000 http://www.dopeblog.net/?p=288#comment-369 j.x. stand for my two middle names: Joseph Xavier the new section is long. i agree. too long probably. but i wasn't responsible for the newest section (that person is on vacation). i did feel that it was a really powerful story, though. with very powerful images and narration. so do you shorten it at the expense of the content? what do u think kat? j.x. stand for my two middle names:

Joseph Xavier

the new section is long. i agree. too long probably. but i wasn’t responsible for the newest section (that person is on vacation). i did feel that it was a really powerful story, though. with very powerful images and narration. so do you shorten it at the expense of the content?

what do u think kat?

]]> By: kat http://dopeblog.com/2006/10/subtitles-on-nytimescom/comment-page-1/#comment-368 kat Fri, 01 Dec 2006 21:30:36 +0000 http://www.dopeblog.net/?p=288#comment-368 also, why is the new section (madagascar) so long? also, why is the new section (madagascar) so long?

]]> By: kat http://dopeblog.com/2006/10/subtitles-on-nytimescom/comment-page-1/#comment-367 kat Fri, 01 Dec 2006 21:30:07 +0000 http://www.dopeblog.net/?p=288#comment-367 what does the j.x. stand for? what does the j.x. stand for?

]]>