Which does the better job?
Why or why not?
What difference does sound make?
Slideshow (With Audio)
A Boxer's First Professional Fight
Audio Slideshow
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/audioslideshow/2013/oct/02/boxing-george-kean
Slideshow (With No Audio)
Driving the Lincoln Highway
Slideshow (With No Audio)
Driving the Lincoln Highway
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2013/07/07/travel/07LINCOLN.html
Photo Gallery
Photo Gallery
Iconic Washington Post images: Buy reader favorites
Both the slideshows and the photo galley provided most excellent storytelling tools. With or with out audio they are very exceptional and I was able to understand what was going on. They went into a good story format, they each had a beginning, middle and finish. I have always know that pictures can tell a story just as well as words.
If I had to pick favorites, I would have to go with the slideshow with audio. I liked its narration and had the best storyline from start to finish. The audio narration went along nicely with it too. Each photo went along with the audio narration and it went from when he started in the locker room getting ready for the fight and then it brings us to the ring where he claims the victory. Like I mentioned earlier the way the audio wen along with the photos made me as the viewer feel like I was there at the fight and watching it.
In the slideshow or photo galleries, sound really dosen't make the difference. It is okay to add it into it if you choose, but you can do without it. All that really matters is that the slideshow or photo gallery is being viewed by people. In my mind, sound would be nice, but only if it helps narrate the photos. Also I guess a little background music couldn't hurt as well. Background music gives the slideshow a little theme and helps with the transition of photos a little bit. Overall sound can used only if the person wants it.
No comments:
Post a Comment