Website Brainstorming

So I have to make a website. Something I've never done before. Am I nervous? Of course! But here are some ideas that I'm thinking about for the site:

Strategy: 

What are your site objectives?

I hope to complete a site that is easy to navigate and is aesthetically pleasing. In terms of content, I hope to make the information that I present easy to understand and easy to relate to. I would like users to be able to see what I can do as well as my potential for other things.

What are your objectives as a producer?

As a producer, I hope to make the site's navigation easy and to effectively deal with obstacles that come my way.

Do you want an internship? Grad school acceptance? A job? What field specifically?

As of right now, I'm not looking for a job through this website. If someone would offer me a job, I would definitely take a look at it to see if I was interested. Although it is not my primary goal, I would still like to have the site to show potential employers what I am capable of.

Who is your audience? 

My audience is whoever comes across my site. I hope that my audience finds the answers they are looking for within my site. I hope to be able to show possible employers my skill set. 

What are their user needs? 

The user would need to have easy access to the information that they want, perhaps a search bar is in order? The audience would also need to be able to see information about me and be able to contact me either in the form of comments or email. They would also 

What all might they need to find out about you on your site? 

My users would need to know that I am a junior at Furman University, plus my experience. This could be included in a short biography or contact info section. Other information would be included in a resume.

Scope:

In my site, I would like to include content on my experiences, my other social media accounts (twitter, tumblr, pinterest), a contact form, materials that I have created from my digital communications course, writing samples, my resume, and photos or experience blurbs about what I have done in the past, professional or not.

Website design inspirations:

1) Plentific: I really like their intro page. The search bar is very obvious and the background is large and a photo. They also have a very simple navigation down at the bottom of the page. Since I am a photographer, I might incorporate this aspect into the site.

2) Amp Music: Like the first site, the site title is backed by a photo (it is actually a gif of people at a concert). Also, I really liked the links to Twitter and Facebook at the top right hand corner. I definitely want to include my other sites on my personal website.

3) Names for Change: This website is very interactive and simple. I would recommend actually checking this one out because a screenshot would not do it justice (plus the screen changes as you scroll down)

4) The Stapleton: This site is also simplistic, while being aesthetically pleasing. It offers an insight into the site creator as well as grabs its readers as soon as they read the words.

5) Tillamook: This site is also a scroll down site, but I did particularly like their intro. They proposed a story and literally invite the reader to see what their path was. It is simple and inviting, but not intimidating.

People! People! People!

          In Redish's Letting Go of the Words, Chapter 2 discusses how to create a web site with good communication. The steps that she tells the reader to include on how to get a better sense of her readers are as follows:

1. List your major audiences
2. Gather information about your audiences
3. List major characteristics for each audience
4. Gather your audiences' questions, tasks, and stories
5. Use your information to create personas
6. Include the persona's goals and tasks
7. Use your information to write scenarios for your site

One of the most communication heavy sites that I can think of is Facebook. It literally was created in order for people to communicate. It was initially only open to Harvard students and from there expanded to other colleges, to all students, and finally, to the rest of the world. The developers for Facebook had to have gone through all these steps whether they knew it or not. Do you agree? Do you think Facebook was one of the pioneers of communication online? What about Myspace or Friendster? Why did they fail?

1. Major audiences: College students
2. Info: they want to communicate with each other
3. Characteristics: Lazy, want to know what's going on without much effort
4. Questions, tasks, stories: want to connect to people, tell their own stories
5. Personas: each individual created their own profile, thereby allowing the developers to know about them
6. Goals and Tasks: to let students see information about their fellow students and be able to share information about themselves
7. Scenarios: the navigation used by the audience, they want to change a certain setting, add a new picture, etc.

          In chapter 3, "Starting Well: Home Pages", Redish discusses what to put and not put on a home page. She also tells the reader what the audience will expect from a home page and what they will not pay much attention to. She explains that the user experience is a key aspect of the site, making sure the audience can get to where they want to go without much trouble. Using Facebook again, it is relatively easy to add a new picture or change your status, but when it comes to deactivating an account, the pathways to get there are much trickier. This is because Facebook does not want its users to deactivate their accounts. This is their way of controlling their users. Do you agree? Does it just so happen that this portion of their site is more difficult than the rest? Or is their a hidden motive for it?

User Experience

          In Jesse James Garrett's The Elements of User Experience, Chapter 1 "User Experience and Why It Matters" discusses what user experience is and what role it plays in a customer or client's choices. The most obvious example of a service that is used by a wide volume of individuals that came to my mind is Google. Google has a large diversity of people that they help each and every day. When Bing came along, it faced the large Google audience to persuade. The only problem was that Google had build up a loyalty with its users, and those users also saw no reason to switch to Bing. There is nothing wrong with Google, and since it is now linked to many other parts of their users' lives, it makes finding what the user wants easier than ever. Bing promoted a "Bing It On" campaign in which users could do a search and choose which engine they liked the most. It was anonymous as to which search engine was on which side of the page, which gave the site credibility. This was because they were letting the user choose what they liked instead of putting forth their own page and the results and claiming that their page was superior. What do you think? Do you like Google or Bing better? Why? Why do you think people choose Google over Bing?

          Another common comparison of user experience is the Mac vs. PC debate. Mac came in with their computers, boasting an extremely friendly user base in which people who were not as tech savy could now navigate a computer, specifically a Mac. This converted a large amount of people from the harder to understand PC to the user friendly Mac. Are you a Mac person? Why or why not? Does it have to do with the user experience of that particular product?

          In Chapter 2, "Meet the Elements" Garrett puts forth five planes, or layers, of a website. This includes the surface plane, the skeleton plane, the structure plane, the scope plane, and the strategy plane. These planes are claimed to be the layers of a website interface that a user has to face. The surface plane would be the images of a product that a user could purchase, the skeleton plane would be the button placement and controls of the site, the structure plane would be the navigational aspect of the site, the scope of the site is what is appropriate for that particular site, and the strategy plane is determined by what the users want as well as what the people running the site want.

Shi Center Video

Here's my video project on the Shi Center at Furman:

Getting It Right?

          In Brian Carroll's Writing for Digital Media, Chapter 6, titled "Getting it Right", discussed the processes that an online page has to or should go through before becoming published.

          In particular, Carroll talks about some differences between online editors and print editors. The main difference that he pointed out that caught my eye, was that online editors need to possess different skill sets than print editors. Online editors need to be able to "create a simple web page and have a basic understanding of XHTML and CSS" (128). I have been surrounded by people that all tell me that knowing how to code and use interface is a very valued skill set. Not many people are incredibly good at it, and a lot of people have never coded anything. I fit very nicely into this category. One website that I have been told of is Code Academy. It walks you through very basic things and has tutorials to help. It is a good way to learn how to use computer coding without a time pressure or grades hanging over your shoulder. You can learn to code at your own rate. Do you think coding is as important as everyone thinks? Should it be a mandatory thing taught in schools? Why or why not?

An example of a Code Academy tutorial

          I also thought it was very interesting that Carroll pointed out that online editors should print out the webpage that they are editing and read it aloud. If they printed out the page, couldn't it technically be called print editing? This was something that confused me. Should editors have a chance to work at both mediums? Should their be different training for each since they are apparently so different? Why or why not?

Point of View

          In chapter 3, "Point of View", of John Douglass and Glenn Harnden's The Art of Technique, the different points of view in literary form as well as film are discussed. One of the first things that are pointed out, is that "POV refers to a camera shot taken as if seen through the eyes of a character" (31). This made me think of a movie that I had recently watched, Psycho. In
it, there are several scenes which take on the point of view from the main character, Marion, as well as different opposing viewpoints. The money that she has stolen, for example, takes on a point of view role as well as Norman Bates, the owner of the motel that she stays at later in the film. The first example of this that I notices, was in the scene where Marion is packing. The audience takes on her point of view, but as the camera shows the money, it then portrays the money's point of view. It looks from the bags that Marion is packing to her. The audience sees what is happening from that point of view instead of Marion's. Another example would be when Marion first stays at the motel. After she gets settled in, the audience takes on the point of view of Norman as he peeps through a hole in the wall to look at Marion. The audience thereby takes on his point of view.

All the Houses in Game of Thrones

          In literary texts as well as films, there are three different types of point of view. The first is first person, in which the point of view of one person is followed throughout the narrative. Second person is not a very common point of view, but it is when the audience or the reader is the main character. The things in the novel happen to the audience or reader. A good example are the books that are "choose your own". The reader is able to choose what path he or she takes. The final perspective is third person. In this type of narrative, the audience is a viewer to a multitude of things happening that the characters may or may not be aware of. This is the easiest and the most common type of narrative, since the audience can see things that come into play that the main characters might not. A good example of third person is Game of Thrones. If this narrative was told in first person, the reader would only be able to follow one person throughout the whole storyline. George Martin uses third person, which allows the reader to see what is happening in all different parts of the world in Game of Thrones.

The Unrecognized Skills of Editing

          "I keep telling my editors, if you win an award for editing, I won't work with you anymore. Your editing shows". This is a quote from Louis Malle, director. He makes a point of how editing should not be a heavily noticed thing. If it shows, you are not doing a good job. 
          Potential setbacks to an editing session include limited footage, nonexistent natural sound, and a lack of continuity options (Osgood and Hinshaw 227). These are pointed out by Ronald Osgood and M. Joseph Hinshaw from their chapter "The Aesthetics of Editing" from the book Visual Storytelling. This stuck me especially since I just went through filming a couple of interviews for our class. I had to use a microphone so that the background noise would not overpower the interviewee's voice. There was one instance in which a cat came by and rubbed itself on the microphone and I was terrified that it would interrupt the sound quality. Thankfully it did not affect the sound and the voice of my interviewee came out clear. This also makes sense in that sometimes voices are b-rolled over a scene when the actors are too far away to make out their voices clearly. Do you think there should be more innovation where editors and filmmakers are concerned? Are they good where they stand? Why or why not?

Here is a video that shows some popular editing cuts that have mistakes in them:

          Later on, the authors mention the stylistic changes that the editors took into play as the years went on. The specific argument they use is the example of the music video narrative versus the artistic video. In other words, the story versus the dance music video. This as well as television commercials gave editors the chance to break into new territory editorial wise. They were able to play with different set ups and narratives, which set up the media industry as it is today. Do you think the industry should pick one type of narrative over the other? How do you think the changes came about? Was the culture an influence to the narratives or vice versa?

Here are a couple of music videos to compare narrative forms:

The story narrative:

The artistic narrative:

Here are a few advertisements from now and the past:

The past:

Now: