Success keys

[rakn]

Hi all,

I have spent some time downloading tons of slideshows from Beechbrook etc, and while watching these I started to think about what it is that gives a slideshow that great impression. I would say that :

#1 is an interesting theme, or "story". This is the most important "key". Very personal of course...

#2 is beautiful images, in terms of both technical and artistical quality.

Also #2 is the music/sound. And it adds a lot if there are sound effects included, not just music.

#3 is big sized images (I'm no fan of framing).

#4 is careful use of "PTE/Photoshop Magic". Here I would say that "less is more" ...

Of course these are my very personal preferences. What are your thoughts ?

So, which are my favourite slideshows ? Here they are (so far), (no particular order) :

- "Kula" by Mitchell Silver (varying image quality, but a what a beatiful "content". And the music is just WONDERFUL).

- "Oradour" by Tillman Kleinhans and Stuart Kingston (the history told here really has a great impact).

- "Vosges" by Patrick Bantzhaff (SO VERY beatiful pictures, nice music, and just a small touch of "Photoshop magic" at the end).

- "Jadore tecrire" by Stephane Bidouze (great pictures, and a masterpiece in "PTE and Photoshop Magic").

- "WeddingDreams" by Cindy Singleton (superior pictures, very tastefully treated).

- "Jukebox" by Nickles (What a creative idea. I wish I had the full version).

But I'm sure there are many more that are worth mentioning out there. Which ones are your favourites ?

Ragnar

[moritz]

Hi Ragnar:

A thing is what one says and another one what one does.

I think that all the presentations have something interesting, by the single fact of to have dedicated time in doing them.

The words the wind takes to them away. So that make a presentation and so you will see the difficult thing that it is to do it.

What do you had made?

I would like see it.

Moritz

Excuse my english.

[LumenLux]

Thank you Ragnar for your careful thoughts. I like that you share your thought process of what factors contribute to "successful" slide shows. ("Successful" is my liberty with what you are saying.) A "great impression" (your term) is also a good way to look at it. Certainly all the points you mention are very important and I have even thought of some of them myself as I have more casually addressed the subject as I have made my own presentations. At the moment, I think perhaps for me the most encompassing criteria of "success" is the "enjoyment" resulting to the producer and the viewer. (I know that "enjoyment" may not be a real good word for every show. Sometime a viewer may be very "bothered" or "uncomfortable" with a show and still see it as a "success" and even a "great" show.) Some recent shows have really shown how much can be added/achieved with sound effects. Yet in many instances (at least personally) I am not willing to devote the necessary time & effort or to develop my skill to the point where it might not be so time consuming. Or maybe I am more interested in learning the V5 skills, or ? I know for sure there is a lot of satisfaction for each of us that takes photos and uses PTE to present them in so many possible ways. I think you have started a very useful topic here as long as it doesn't become a heated discussion as to what is "the best" way. But I also have no problem and do welcome anyone's list of their "favorites."

[rakn]

Hi Ragnar:

A thing is what one says and another one what one does.

I think that all the presentations have something interesting, by the single fact of to have dedicated time in doing them.

The words the wind takes to them away. So that make a presentation and so you will see the difficult thing that it is to do it.

What do you had made?

I would like see it.

Moritz

Excuse my english.

Hi Moritz,

I'm just a PTE beginner, and I have much to learn before I am ready to upload anything.

Still, it can be interesting to hear what other people think.

I have no intention of criticizing, just curious on what you like (if you have thought about it).

[rakn]

Thank you Ragnar for your careful thoughts. I like that you share your thought process of what factors contribute to "successful" slide shows. ("Successful" is my liberty with what you are saying.) A "great impression" (your term) is also a good way to look at it. Certainly all the points you mention are very important and I have even thought of some of them myself as I have more casually addressed the subject as I have made my own presentations. At the moment, I think perhaps for me the most encompassing criteria of "success" is the "enjoyment" resulting to the producer and the viewer. (I know that "enjoyment" may not be a real good word for every show. Sometime a viewer may be very "bothered" or "uncomfortable" with a show and still see it as a "success" and even a "great" show.) Some recent shows have really shown how much can be added/achieved with sound effects. Yet in many instances (at least personally) I am not willing to devote the necessary time & effort or to develop my skill to the point where it might not be so time consuming. Or maybe I am more interested in learning the V5 skills, or ? I know for sure there is a lot of satisfaction for each of us that takes photos and uses PTE to present them in so many possible ways. I think you have started a very useful topic here as long as it doesn't become a heated discussion as to what is "the best" way. But I also have no problem and do welcome anyone's list of their "favorites."

Thank you for your thoughts, LumenLux.

I see what you mean, enjoyment is not always the correct word. I'm thinking of the "Oradour" slideshow by Tillman Kleinhans and Stuart Kingston. That one really had a great imression on me.

I think that slideshows could be compared to music : If you can "develop" some kind of emotions in the audience, then there is "success"... It's like sending some kind of emotional message.

As in any kind of art, there is no right or wrong. What is fantastic for one person might be without interest for another. Still, it can be interesting to share different preferences.