While I’ll admit it would have been a lot nicer to hear this lecture 2 weeks ago when I was staring blankly at Adobe Premiere on my Mac, I did still appreciate it.
That’s what is so cool about journalism, things that we have been exposed to our entire lives, finally get explained. Through out the lecture, (specifically through the examples used by Sarah Hill) I was able to see how the narration really does make a difference during newscasts.
Even as a visual person, I was able to remember back to when we watched videos without sound and how much different it was. Actually, I remember how unenjoyable it was.
It’s a packaged deal. A women talking about losing her husband is sad, yes, but a women talking about losing her husband with video of her crying over his casket, really seals the deal and tugs at a person’s heart strings.
It kind of makes me wonder what journalists did before really good camera and audio recorders, or even programs to make video play smoothly. It really is crazy how things have changed just in the past 30 years. This is a clip from a 1980’s newscast. Notice how there are little to no clips or footage shown and more so just the news anchor talking. While this is a clip from earlier this week. The difference is pretty obvious, the picture is clearer, the sound is better and it all just comes together to tell a story. Each clip, soundbite and narration builds on top of one another to create the best video possible.
Words, pictures and videos are all great separately, but put them all together and it’s truly something amazing.