There’s some weight here, and I’m trying to figure out why I’m so into this.
- It takes actors I’m familiar with and couples it with B/W classic cinema style. so it accomplishes giving me a greater appreciation and attention to something i would otherwise overlook.
- no voice. total visual stimulation.
- music. top notch. reenforces the emotions we feel visually.
- singular. each video focuses on one emotion or message. but they must live together for an online experience. if only one of these videos were posted alone, it wouldn’t draw my time or interest nearly as much. my attention is held by giving me the option to explore. like crumbs leading to a feast…ok that’s probably too much.
Good read on some considerations of the role of text and metadata in new devices that bring multimedia potential.
Triangles are the strongest something. I forget what. Geometric support structure, maybe? OK here’s what happened:
As I sat with two friends over dinner at a cafe, I couldn’t help but realize the repeated pattern: a conversation of three people is, more often than not, easier sustained and engaging than two. It might be a personality thing, and don’t get me wrong; I’ve had great one-on-one conversations. But conversations between three are on the one hand intimate and focused (not too many people), and yet on the other are also diverse and livelier (not too few, or only two people. More of a group mentality going on).
Here’s the science of it as I see it right now on Sunday at 11pm: Person A talks to Person B. Person B is preoccupied on formulating a response. But Person C, they’re free. Free to think, less pressure to respond (knowing that Person B might also respond). Chances are Person C will provide a surprise response, or add another angle to the conversation that takes it to a whole new level, or steers the conversation towards different but related topics. Once this cycle runs a course, roles rotate and Persons repeat the cycle, the conversations continues.
Now here’s the multimedia / storytelling stretch: how often do two mere elements draw people in? I think about the usual header photo with an article. Or a photo essay.
Video is powerful because it combines the visual, the audible, and the sequential over time. Three. Multimedia “packages” hold potential impact because they combine both the focused quality while also have the diversified quantity. Unity/Diversity in other terms.
When you have tools available, but they don’t work together to reinforce each other, it’s like 3 people who got together to stare at each other. Points of engagement across the table have to be created. Lines of communication and inter-relatedness, in forms of question and response, must build in understanding, and over time.
Which leads me to think more about time. I think too often I think in terms of timeline as a multimedia element. But time is a part of a user experience no matter what. They will experience one intro video for those 2.5 minutes, or say, your opening quote and then a menu of options, and then part of a feature. The clock is ticking when they click your URL. From then on, it’s not “average site time” that dictates what they’ll see or not see, but how well you sustain the conversation over the course of their visit.
So maybe if we frame our multimedia packages or content as if it were a 3-person table conversation, that spanned real time, had a life of it’s own, and allowed for multiple voices with different perspectives, it might be more engaging and stimulating.
A trace of multimedia storytelling I observed over dinner.