WEBVTT 00:00:00.080 --> 00:00:02.430 The following content is provided under a Creative 00:00:02.430 --> 00:00:03.810 Commons license. 00:00:03.810 --> 00:00:06.050 Your support will help MIT OpenCourseWare 00:00:06.050 --> 00:00:10.160 continue to offer high quality educational resources for free. 00:00:10.160 --> 00:00:12.690 To make a donation or to view additional materials 00:00:12.690 --> 00:00:16.600 from hundreds of MIT courses, visit MIT OpenCourseWare 00:00:16.600 --> 00:00:17.240 at ocw.mit.edu. 00:00:21.730 --> 00:00:24.350 ELIZABETH CHOE: So today is the first screening 00:00:24.350 --> 00:00:26.270 of your rough cuts. 00:00:26.270 --> 00:00:30.610 And the way this will work is I will show one of the videos, 00:00:30.610 --> 00:00:31.780 and we'll all watch it. 00:00:31.780 --> 00:00:35.300 You guys can take notes on it while you watch. 00:00:35.300 --> 00:00:37.220 And after each screening we will give 00:00:37.220 --> 00:00:41.440 general high-level feedback to the creator. 00:00:41.440 --> 00:00:43.829 And that's what-- we'll just go through the whole class 00:00:43.829 --> 00:00:45.120 and do that for the first half. 00:00:45.120 --> 00:00:48.220 Now for the second half, there are a couple options 00:00:48.220 --> 00:00:49.510 that we could proceed. 00:00:49.510 --> 00:00:51.950 The first being what I usually do 00:00:51.950 --> 00:00:57.090 with Science Out Loud, which is to basically do Google 00:00:57.090 --> 00:00:59.187 Docs for detailed comments. 00:00:59.187 --> 00:01:00.770 And this is really useful because it's 00:01:00.770 --> 00:01:02.860 sort of like a check box when you're 00:01:02.860 --> 00:01:05.530 going back through and looking at feedback from another person 00:01:05.530 --> 00:01:06.670 when you edit. 00:01:06.670 --> 00:01:10.030 So this was for George's farts video. 00:01:10.030 --> 00:01:12.850 And I made some notes about where 00:01:12.850 --> 00:01:17.170 we should add some animations, where we should add overlays. 00:01:17.170 --> 00:01:18.810 So this is one option that we could do. 00:01:18.810 --> 00:01:21.600 Basically break you guys up to where you will end up 00:01:21.600 --> 00:01:24.320 commenting on at least two people's videos, 00:01:24.320 --> 00:01:27.490 and we would know who you would be assigned to. 00:01:27.490 --> 00:01:29.250 The other option is that we could just 00:01:29.250 --> 00:01:32.290 go ahead and pair you guys up or group you guys up, 00:01:32.290 --> 00:01:34.370 and instead of doing the Google Docs feedback, 00:01:34.370 --> 00:01:36.930 you can just talk to each other one on one. 00:01:36.930 --> 00:01:41.184 Do you people have preferences on how we do this? 00:01:41.184 --> 00:01:42.100 AUDIENCE: Google Docs. 00:01:42.100 --> 00:01:43.266 ELIZABETH CHOE: Google Docs. 00:01:45.620 --> 00:01:48.451 Anyone else? 00:01:48.451 --> 00:01:48.950 All right. 00:01:48.950 --> 00:01:51.560 So we'll do Google Docs. 00:01:51.560 --> 00:01:53.940 And I will give you the details on how 00:01:53.940 --> 00:01:57.580 that's going to happen during the second half of class. 00:01:57.580 --> 00:01:59.210 Sounds good? 00:01:59.210 --> 00:02:02.810 So, as it was for the table reads-- 00:02:02.810 --> 00:02:05.860 remember that repetitive comments are OK. 00:02:05.860 --> 00:02:08.759 It's OK if you feel the same sort of feedback 00:02:08.759 --> 00:02:10.710 that another person has already said 00:02:10.710 --> 00:02:12.980 because it'll draw attention to the creator 00:02:12.980 --> 00:02:14.640 and what they need to work on. 00:02:14.640 --> 00:02:17.240 Also remember that at the end of the day this is your video, 00:02:17.240 --> 00:02:22.690 so the feedback is for you to take or leave-- hey, Nathan. 00:02:22.690 --> 00:02:26.180 And this is probably going to be the most valuable class 00:02:26.180 --> 00:02:30.090 time the whole month because this is where you're really 00:02:30.090 --> 00:02:33.320 going to have concrete advice on implementing the stuff 00:02:33.320 --> 00:02:35.230 that we've talked about so far. 00:02:35.230 --> 00:02:37.010 So really take this as an opportunity 00:02:37.010 --> 00:02:39.610 to give as constructive and meaningful feedback as 00:02:39.610 --> 00:02:41.050 possible. 00:02:41.050 --> 00:02:42.087 All right? 00:02:42.087 --> 00:02:43.670 Does anyone have questions or comments 00:02:43.670 --> 00:02:44.720 before we start watching? 00:02:46.920 --> 00:02:47.420 No? 00:02:47.420 --> 00:02:49.441 Are you excited? 00:02:49.441 --> 00:02:49.940 OK. 00:02:49.940 --> 00:02:51.024 AUDIENCE: We need popcorn. 00:02:51.024 --> 00:02:53.314 ELIZABETH CHOE: I thought about making pop-- but then I 00:02:53.314 --> 00:02:55.840 thought that if people were taking notes on their computers 00:02:55.840 --> 00:02:58.997 and they had, like, butter on their fingers. 00:02:58.997 --> 00:03:00.330 We'll pop for another screening. 00:03:00.330 --> 00:03:01.310 AUDIENCE: --later for a snack. 00:03:01.310 --> 00:03:01.605 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 00:03:01.605 --> 00:03:01.900 AUDIENCE: That's fine. 00:03:01.900 --> 00:03:03.191 Maybe we should close the big-- 00:03:03.191 --> 00:03:06.112 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, I'll close the door. 00:03:06.112 --> 00:03:07.320 Does anyone want to go first? 00:03:10.200 --> 00:03:10.700 No? 00:03:16.035 --> 00:03:19.480 Does that show up on screen OK if I turn these lights off? 00:03:19.480 --> 00:03:21.470 OK. 00:03:21.470 --> 00:03:24.430 OK, well, then we will just go down the line. 00:03:24.430 --> 00:03:26.480 How about that? 00:03:26.480 --> 00:03:28.355 So lucky you, Nathan. 00:03:28.355 --> 00:03:30.230 Do you want to say anything before we screen, 00:03:30.230 --> 00:03:32.313 or do you want to just go ahead and watch and then 00:03:32.313 --> 00:03:33.815 talk about your process? 00:03:33.815 --> 00:03:35.190 AUDIENCE: I'm going to be honest, 00:03:35.190 --> 00:03:37.280 and I made a pretty bad mistake in putting 00:03:37.280 --> 00:03:40.928 off filming until yesterday. 00:03:40.928 --> 00:03:45.035 And so I only got to get in the editing this morning. 00:03:45.035 --> 00:03:47.410 And it really shows. 00:03:47.410 --> 00:03:49.530 ELIZABETH CHOE: Well, let's see what you have. 00:03:49.530 --> 00:03:52.580 And there is time, that's what tomorrow's for. 00:03:52.580 --> 00:03:55.210 AUDIENCE: I couldn't get the animations to work. 00:03:55.210 --> 00:03:56.860 ELIZABETH CHOE: OK. 00:03:56.860 --> 00:04:00.300 And do keep in mind that all day tomorrow and all day 00:04:00.300 --> 00:04:04.370 Thursday is open for you to incorporate feedback. 00:04:04.370 --> 00:04:06.550 After today's class ends, we're not 00:04:06.550 --> 00:04:09.770 meeting again until the screening on Thursday at 6:30. 00:04:09.770 --> 00:04:12.127 So as long as we get videos in by, like-- 6:00 00:04:12.127 --> 00:04:13.670 PM's the latest. 00:04:13.670 --> 00:04:16.029 Hopefully you're not working up until 6:00 PM. 00:04:16.029 --> 00:04:17.570 You have the rest of the day to work. 00:04:17.570 --> 00:04:19.805 PROFESSOR: But if you need our help, then e-mail us. 00:04:19.805 --> 00:04:21.149 And we can meet up if you want. 00:04:21.149 --> 00:04:21.982 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yes. 00:04:21.982 --> 00:04:25.015 We will be in the classroom tomorrow and Thursday 00:04:25.015 --> 00:04:25.848 if people need help. 00:04:29.434 --> 00:04:30.100 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 00:04:30.100 --> 00:04:33.202 -Why does your-- why does your fridge start to smell? 00:04:33.202 --> 00:04:34.407 [END PLAYBACK] 00:04:34.407 --> 00:04:35.990 ELIZABETH CHOE: The sound sounds good. 00:04:40.354 --> 00:04:41.020 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 00:04:41.020 --> 00:04:43.110 -Why does your fridge start to smell? 00:04:43.110 --> 00:04:45.610 And where does that icky black liquid come from? 00:04:45.610 --> 00:04:48.710 Wouldn't life just be easier if things didn't rot, 00:04:48.710 --> 00:04:50.560 if things lasted forever? 00:04:50.560 --> 00:04:52.260 Well, maybe, but probably not. 00:04:52.260 --> 00:04:54.670 According to the USDA, the average American household 00:04:54.670 --> 00:04:56.340 wastes 25% of its food. 00:04:56.340 --> 00:04:58.650 And a lot of restaurants are even worse. 00:04:58.650 --> 00:05:00.630 So if we didn't have decomposition, 00:05:00.630 --> 00:05:02.700 what would happen to the food we throw away? 00:05:02.700 --> 00:05:05.560 Food in landfills normally gets dealt with by bacteria, fungi, 00:05:05.560 --> 00:05:07.460 and protists that allow the nutrients in food 00:05:07.460 --> 00:05:09.990 to return to the soil and, eventually, other living 00:05:09.990 --> 00:05:11.140 things. 00:05:11.140 --> 00:05:13.960 These decomposers also break down other dead stuff, 00:05:13.960 --> 00:05:15.100 like trees. 00:05:15.100 --> 00:05:19.060 In fact, they're pretty much the only thing that can eat wood. 00:05:19.060 --> 00:05:22.087 So in a world without rot, while your home may not 00:05:22.087 --> 00:05:23.920 have to worry about being eaten by termites, 00:05:23.920 --> 00:05:25.536 who rely on protists in their stomach, 00:05:25.536 --> 00:05:26.910 pretty soon forests and landfills 00:05:26.910 --> 00:05:29.495 would be flooded with a lot of dead stuff. 00:05:29.495 --> 00:05:31.740 So how do we avoid this problem? 00:05:31.740 --> 00:05:35.410 Well, basically, in your fridge, on a forest floor, 00:05:35.410 --> 00:05:37.960 in a dumpster, almost anywhere, there 00:05:37.960 --> 00:05:40.620 are fungi, bacteria, and protists that live entirely 00:05:40.620 --> 00:05:41.506 by eating dead stuff. 00:05:41.506 --> 00:05:43.380 These dead things can be more or less divided 00:05:43.380 --> 00:05:44.820 into three categories. 00:05:44.820 --> 00:05:47.060 Carbohydrates-- sugar and starches. 00:05:47.060 --> 00:05:48.530 Lipids-- think fats. 00:05:48.530 --> 00:05:50.077 And proteins, like meats. 00:05:50.077 --> 00:05:51.660 All of these are chemically different, 00:05:51.660 --> 00:05:53.960 so they each get broken down by different enzymes 00:05:53.960 --> 00:05:57.160 in different ways before being absorbed by decomposers. 00:05:57.160 --> 00:06:00.160 For example, proteases break down proteins 00:06:00.160 --> 00:06:02.710 into amino acids, the cells building blocks. 00:06:02.710 --> 00:06:04.660 Lipids rely on lipases. 00:06:04.660 --> 00:06:08.870 And carbohydrates on things like amylase and cellulases. 00:06:08.870 --> 00:06:11.010 So how does a perfectly nice broccoli floret 00:06:11.010 --> 00:06:13.490 start giving off this foul black liquid? 00:06:13.490 --> 00:06:15.849 Fruits and vegetables are almost entirely made of water. 00:06:15.849 --> 00:06:17.390 So on the most basic level, you could 00:06:17.390 --> 00:06:20.470 say their cells are like extremely complex water 00:06:20.470 --> 00:06:21.270 balloons. 00:06:21.270 --> 00:06:23.220 The exterior-- a cell wall-- is made 00:06:23.220 --> 00:06:25.230 of cellulose, a complex carbohydrate that 00:06:25.230 --> 00:06:28.290 gets broken down by enzymes into small sugars the cell can 00:06:28.290 --> 00:06:29.580 get energy from. 00:06:29.580 --> 00:06:32.080 When bacteria or fungi uses cellulase to eat 00:06:32.080 --> 00:06:33.770 the exterior of a cell, it's like 00:06:33.770 --> 00:06:35.890 if I were to pop the balloon. 00:06:35.890 --> 00:06:38.230 That's the muck you see in your fridge. 00:06:38.230 --> 00:06:40.150 And that's how you get that icky black liquid. 00:06:40.150 --> 00:06:43.256 What about that stink? 00:06:43.256 --> 00:06:44.880 For fruits and vegetables a lot of time 00:06:44.880 --> 00:06:48.180 the smell happens after the icky black liquid forms. 00:06:48.180 --> 00:06:49.900 Other bacteria that weren't involved 00:06:49.900 --> 00:06:52.430 in the initial colonization move in 00:06:52.430 --> 00:06:54.410 and start to stink everything up. 00:06:54.410 --> 00:06:56.700 Meat gets smelly when lipases break down 00:06:56.700 --> 00:06:59.500 fat in the meat into glycerol and fatty acids-- 00:06:59.500 --> 00:07:00.930 two energy sources. 00:07:00.930 --> 00:07:03.610 And fatty acids are kind of gross. 00:07:03.610 --> 00:07:07.620 And so while your food rotting may smell absolutely terrible, 00:07:07.620 --> 00:07:09.850 because of it the environment's able to recycle 00:07:09.850 --> 00:07:11.680 crucial nutrients it needs. 00:07:11.680 --> 00:07:14.270 And, well, that's why we have all this. 00:07:14.270 --> 00:07:18.770 [END PLAYBACK] 00:07:19.106 --> 00:07:20.231 PROFESSOR: Are you kidding? 00:07:20.231 --> 00:07:21.807 That was awesome. 00:07:21.807 --> 00:07:22.890 ELIZABETH CHOE: All right. 00:07:22.890 --> 00:07:23.870 General feedback? 00:07:23.870 --> 00:07:25.846 PROFESSOR: Well, I want to hear what you think 00:07:25.846 --> 00:07:27.514 before we give you feedback. 00:07:27.514 --> 00:07:29.180 ELIZABETH CHOE: Like what are the things 00:07:29.180 --> 00:07:30.594 that you like about what you did, 00:07:30.594 --> 00:07:32.260 and what are the things that you already 00:07:32.260 --> 00:07:36.050 know you want to change or add? 00:07:36.050 --> 00:07:37.259 AUDIENCE: The audio. 00:07:37.259 --> 00:07:37.758 ELIZABETH CHOE: The audio. 00:07:37.758 --> 00:07:39.091 AUDIENCE: The lack of animation. 00:07:41.750 --> 00:07:43.740 The main things. 00:07:43.740 --> 00:07:45.240 ELIZABETH CHOE: What was the hardest 00:07:45.240 --> 00:07:49.220 part about making this video? 00:07:49.220 --> 00:07:53.390 AUDIENCE: Actually going and doing the shooting. 00:07:53.390 --> 00:07:56.079 I kind of put that off as long as I really feasibly 00:07:56.079 --> 00:08:00.795 could have because I really didn't want to do it. 00:08:00.795 --> 00:08:02.170 ELIZABETH CHOE: Was it as painful 00:08:02.170 --> 00:08:04.120 as you thought it would be once you started? 00:08:04.120 --> 00:08:04.577 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 00:08:04.577 --> 00:08:05.452 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 00:08:08.000 --> 00:08:11.110 Well, I will say that the script is very, very 00:08:11.110 --> 00:08:12.850 tight in this video. 00:08:12.850 --> 00:08:15.000 And it has come a very long way from 00:08:15.000 --> 00:08:17.150 your initial brainstorming. 00:08:17.150 --> 00:08:18.930 And if you come to the screening, 00:08:18.930 --> 00:08:21.690 you'll get to actually see all the pictures. 00:08:21.690 --> 00:08:25.180 So, just a plug to come to the screening if you want to. 00:08:25.180 --> 00:08:27.190 But the script is super tight. 00:08:27.190 --> 00:08:29.660 And I know that you spent a long time honing that, 00:08:29.660 --> 00:08:33.840 and I think that really paid off. 00:08:33.840 --> 00:08:38.150 It's two thirty-three, which is a great time. 00:08:38.150 --> 00:08:41.329 So I think that as far as the content goes 00:08:41.329 --> 00:08:43.370 it's really strong, and I can tell that you spent 00:08:43.370 --> 00:08:44.750 a lot of time developing that. 00:08:47.390 --> 00:08:49.490 Does anyone want to add some more feedback? 00:08:49.490 --> 00:08:52.082 I mean, I can talk to-- yes, Yuliya. 00:08:52.082 --> 00:08:54.432 AUDIENCE: I like the transitions. 00:08:54.432 --> 00:08:56.015 There weren't too many of them, but it 00:08:56.015 --> 00:08:58.540 was nice to see a change of background and scene. 00:08:58.540 --> 00:09:00.240 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 00:09:00.240 --> 00:09:01.290 And clean cuts. 00:09:01.290 --> 00:09:03.370 No funky swirls, no fades. 00:09:03.370 --> 00:09:03.870 It's nice. 00:09:03.870 --> 00:09:04.995 AUDIENCE: Yeah, definitely. 00:09:06.720 --> 00:09:08.720 I was going to say something else, but I forgot. 00:09:08.720 --> 00:09:09.803 ELIZABETH CHOE: That's OK. 00:09:09.803 --> 00:09:12.980 We can come back if you remember. 00:09:12.980 --> 00:09:13.480 Anyone else? 00:09:13.480 --> 00:09:15.030 Yes, Andrea. 00:09:15.030 --> 00:09:17.630 Sorry. 00:09:17.630 --> 00:09:19.950 AUDIENCE: I really like the pacing of it. 00:09:19.950 --> 00:09:22.830 It's a little rushed in a couple of places, 00:09:22.830 --> 00:09:24.750 but that's-- that happens. 00:09:24.750 --> 00:09:26.670 But I like the pacing in general. 00:09:26.670 --> 00:09:30.990 And I also like the water balloon example 00:09:30.990 --> 00:09:36.822 and the different camera angles, and I 00:09:36.822 --> 00:09:40.581 thought it was just really artistically very well done, 00:09:40.581 --> 00:09:43.350 very well composed. 00:09:43.350 --> 00:09:46.690 ELIZABETH CHOE: What was so terrible about actually 00:09:46.690 --> 00:09:47.190 shooting? 00:09:47.190 --> 00:09:50.525 Was it being on camera? 00:09:50.525 --> 00:09:51.150 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 00:09:51.150 --> 00:09:52.025 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 00:09:52.025 --> 00:09:56.190 AUDIENCE: And also, each one took a lot of takes. 00:09:56.190 --> 00:09:57.710 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 00:09:57.710 --> 00:09:59.700 I will say-- because I know that a lot of you 00:09:59.700 --> 00:10:02.290 expressed sort of concern and hesitation 00:10:02.290 --> 00:10:04.882 about being on camera, and I feel like a lot of this class 00:10:04.882 --> 00:10:07.720 has been like actually no, you're really great on camera. 00:10:07.720 --> 00:10:10.660 The opening shot is delivered really, really well. 00:10:10.660 --> 00:10:13.176 And there are spots where, like Andrea said, 00:10:13.176 --> 00:10:14.800 you're rushing your words a little bit. 00:10:14.800 --> 00:10:17.130 And I'm sure you'll see it when you go back through. 00:10:17.130 --> 00:10:20.350 And whenever you guys do your Google Doc comments, 00:10:20.350 --> 00:10:24.570 point out spaces where maybe his delivery changes. 00:10:24.570 --> 00:10:26.520 It is a little inconsistent between scenes, 00:10:26.520 --> 00:10:28.040 but there are some scenes where it 00:10:28.040 --> 00:10:30.750 is delivered so perfectly and so clearly, 00:10:30.750 --> 00:10:35.210 and you seem really, really comfortable on screen. 00:10:35.210 --> 00:10:35.850 Yeah. 00:10:35.850 --> 00:10:40.090 AUDIENCE: I will say-- did you shoot it by yourself? 00:10:40.090 --> 00:10:44.640 AUDIENCE: I did shoot it mostly by myself, since I put it off. 00:10:44.640 --> 00:10:47.420 AUDIENCE: Because I found that it was a lot easier to have 00:10:47.420 --> 00:10:52.411 someone shoot it than, like, when we were doing 00:10:52.411 --> 00:10:54.412 those first blogs and stuff at the beginning, 00:10:54.412 --> 00:10:56.590 I thought that was a lot harder doing it by myself 00:10:56.590 --> 00:10:58.080 than having someone there. 00:10:58.080 --> 00:11:02.310 I felt less comfortable being alone than with someone. 00:11:02.310 --> 00:11:03.809 Which is kind of-- I thought it'd 00:11:03.809 --> 00:11:06.184 be the other way around when I first started the project. 00:11:09.118 --> 00:11:11.563 Other than that, like, how I think he used-- 00:11:11.563 --> 00:11:12.541 went to Star Market. 00:11:12.541 --> 00:11:15.876 So representing a local grocer too. 00:11:15.876 --> 00:11:16.750 AUDIENCE: Yeah, yeah. 00:11:16.750 --> 00:11:17.600 I agree. 00:11:17.600 --> 00:11:20.208 I like the part where he talked about the smell. 00:11:20.208 --> 00:11:20.708 You know? 00:11:20.708 --> 00:11:21.134 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 00:11:21.134 --> 00:11:23.304 AUDIENCE: And I like the cut on the fridge. 00:11:23.304 --> 00:11:24.627 AUDIENCE: The visual, yeah. 00:11:24.627 --> 00:11:26.210 ELIZABETH CHOE: What do you guys think 00:11:26.210 --> 00:11:27.450 about the visuals in general? 00:11:27.450 --> 00:11:30.390 Because it's always hard to do a chemistry or biology 00:11:30.390 --> 00:11:33.340 video because the visualizations are always 00:11:33.340 --> 00:11:35.210 somewhat impossible to do. 00:11:35.210 --> 00:11:36.625 Yeah, Yuliya. 00:11:36.625 --> 00:11:39.810 AUDIENCE: I think it would be nice to show some 00:11:39.810 --> 00:11:42.760 of the scientific vocabulary, so we can see it and not 00:11:42.760 --> 00:11:43.320 just hear it. 00:11:43.320 --> 00:11:45.330 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, like a label on top or something. 00:11:45.330 --> 00:11:47.110 AUDIENCE: And then for the backgrounds, 00:11:47.110 --> 00:11:49.450 like, the plants backgrounds worked really well 00:11:49.450 --> 00:11:51.030 and, like, the fridge and all that. 00:11:51.030 --> 00:11:52.738 But there was a part where there was just 00:11:52.738 --> 00:11:58.250 a random penguin or random pictures on the wall that 00:11:58.250 --> 00:12:03.340 maybe could be overlaid with animation. 00:12:03.340 --> 00:12:06.300 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 00:12:14.220 --> 00:12:14.860 [END PLAYBACK] 00:12:14.860 --> 00:12:17.387 ELIZABETH CHOE: Like this shot. 00:12:17.387 --> 00:12:18.970 I like that you have the kitchen space 00:12:18.970 --> 00:12:20.110 as sort of your home base. 00:12:20.110 --> 00:12:22.322 Because your centered on the question of why things 00:12:22.322 --> 00:12:23.780 rot in your fridge, and that's what 00:12:23.780 --> 00:12:25.530 allows you to explore decomposition 00:12:25.530 --> 00:12:27.790 at greater length. 00:12:27.790 --> 00:12:33.060 But this is doing that whole thing that a lot of web videos 00:12:33.060 --> 00:12:34.847 do, where you center the subject. 00:12:34.847 --> 00:12:36.430 And I was talking to Chris [INAUDIBLE] 00:12:36.430 --> 00:12:38.940 about why it's so common that SciShow does it 00:12:38.940 --> 00:12:40.100 and Vsauce does it. 00:12:40.100 --> 00:12:47.060 And it sort of gives off an air of it being not as formal. 00:12:47.060 --> 00:12:50.010 But it's also a little bit comical, too. 00:12:50.010 --> 00:12:51.510 And I think that if you just-- even 00:12:51.510 --> 00:12:53.259 if you zoomed in just a little bit and got 00:12:53.259 --> 00:12:55.980 rid of, like, this spray thing on the side 00:12:55.980 --> 00:12:58.920 and the cooking things on that side, 00:12:58.920 --> 00:13:00.470 it might help with this one. 00:13:00.470 --> 00:13:05.920 Also remember to tuck your mic in under your shirt if you can. 00:13:05.920 --> 00:13:06.420 Let's see. 00:13:06.420 --> 00:13:09.100 But you were talking about this penguin here, right? 00:13:09.100 --> 00:13:11.090 Yeah, so this-- I mean, you could 00:13:11.090 --> 00:13:13.520 play around with keeping this footage, if you like, 00:13:13.520 --> 00:13:14.780 and just zoom in a little bit. 00:13:14.780 --> 00:13:18.110 See if you can digitally zoom in on the editing software. 00:13:18.110 --> 00:13:20.580 If the resolution kind of goes kaput, 00:13:20.580 --> 00:13:22.160 you may have to re-film that part. 00:13:22.160 --> 00:13:26.530 But again, I think Yuliya is right in that 00:13:26.530 --> 00:13:29.040 be careful about having visual distractors 00:13:29.040 --> 00:13:31.930 when you don't really need them there. 00:13:31.930 --> 00:13:34.450 I do agree with-- was it Andrea? 00:13:34.450 --> 00:13:37.671 Who said something about the pacing? 00:13:37.671 --> 00:13:39.920 Yeah, I think the pacing of your cuts are pretty good. 00:13:39.920 --> 00:13:44.400 Like, nothing lasts a little too long, nothing's too short. 00:13:44.400 --> 00:13:47.020 If you have B-roll, it might give you 00:13:47.020 --> 00:13:49.640 a little bit of breathing room in between shots 00:13:49.640 --> 00:13:52.265 where you're talking really fast and you have a lot of content. 00:13:57.600 --> 00:13:59.330 But yeah, like stuff like this-- I 00:13:59.330 --> 00:14:00.456 don't remember what you're talking about here. 00:14:00.456 --> 00:14:00.880 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 00:14:00.880 --> 00:14:03.255 - --while your home may not have to worry about being eaten by-- 00:14:03.255 --> 00:14:03.530 [END PLAYBACK] 00:14:03.530 --> 00:14:04.792 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, so-- 00:14:04.792 --> 00:14:06.167 AUDIENCE: Comical note on that, I 00:14:06.167 --> 00:14:08.530 filmed in front of someone's house, 00:14:08.530 --> 00:14:10.732 and they actually came out and asked me to stop. 00:14:10.732 --> 00:14:11.531 And so I kind of-- 00:14:11.531 --> 00:14:11.982 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, no. 00:14:11.982 --> 00:14:14.050 AUDIENCE: --gave up on actually filming at home. 00:14:14.050 --> 00:14:17.360 ELIZABETH CHOE: Filming in front of a house. 00:14:17.360 --> 00:14:18.835 I mean, is this in your dorm room? 00:14:18.835 --> 00:14:19.460 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 00:14:19.460 --> 00:14:19.860 ELIZABETH CHOE: OK. 00:14:19.860 --> 00:14:22.380 AUDIENCE: That's what my backup idea was, since it's my home. 00:14:22.380 --> 00:14:24.838 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, actually, I think that it works fine. 00:14:24.838 --> 00:14:29.100 And I would say for this one, do a wider shot for this one 00:14:29.100 --> 00:14:31.980 because it doesn't quite establish 00:14:31.980 --> 00:14:33.460 that you're in your own place. 00:14:33.460 --> 00:14:35.700 Like, if you can see you sitting on your actual bed, 00:14:35.700 --> 00:14:38.860 that might help a little bit more. 00:14:38.860 --> 00:14:41.230 So again, it's not a matter of using wide or close-up 00:14:41.230 --> 00:14:45.340 shots for the sake of using them on principle, but like what 00:14:45.340 --> 00:14:48.987 the background actually reveals and sets for the audience. 00:14:48.987 --> 00:14:51.320 AUDIENCE: I was wondering, can you go back a little bit? 00:14:51.320 --> 00:14:52.778 Because there was-- I was wondering 00:14:52.778 --> 00:14:56.804 what your vision was for this. 00:14:56.804 --> 00:14:57.720 AUDIENCE: Right there. 00:14:57.720 --> 00:14:59.760 Yes. 00:14:59.760 --> 00:15:02.165 I'm still missing stock footage. 00:15:02.165 --> 00:15:02.706 AUDIENCE: OK. 00:15:02.706 --> 00:15:04.747 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, so this is like a placeholder 00:15:04.747 --> 00:15:05.526 for the rough cut. 00:15:05.526 --> 00:15:06.975 I figured that was the case. 00:15:06.975 --> 00:15:07.578 AUDIENCE: --what you were planning to do here. 00:15:07.578 --> 00:15:10.339 I was like, I'm not sure what I'm looking at. 00:15:10.339 --> 00:15:10.839 OK. 00:15:10.839 --> 00:15:11.714 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 00:15:14.600 --> 00:15:16.245 Oh, the dumpster shot. 00:15:16.245 --> 00:15:18.789 Yeah, I wanted to say something about this, too. 00:15:18.789 --> 00:15:20.830 If this is something that you decide to re-shoot, 00:15:20.830 --> 00:15:24.000 I would also maybe scoot back a little bit as well. 00:15:24.000 --> 00:15:26.920 Because it's hard to tell that it's really a dumpster 00:15:26.920 --> 00:15:28.330 until you actually say it. 00:15:28.330 --> 00:15:29.582 Where was this? 00:15:29.582 --> 00:15:31.290 AUDIENCE: It's down at the loading docks. 00:15:31.290 --> 00:15:32.230 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, OK. 00:15:32.230 --> 00:15:34.355 AUDIENCE: I had a lot of trouble with the dumpsters 00:15:34.355 --> 00:15:36.730 I'd planned on going to. 00:15:36.730 --> 00:15:39.970 By Walker is a bit of a wind tunnel. 00:15:39.970 --> 00:15:46.627 And the Stata Center, out behind W20 was really noisy. 00:15:46.627 --> 00:15:47.960 ELIZABETH CHOE: Which one's W20? 00:15:47.960 --> 00:15:49.168 AUDIENCE: The student center. 00:15:49.168 --> 00:15:50.310 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, OK. 00:15:50.310 --> 00:15:52.460 I mean, there is an optimal dumps-- 00:15:52.460 --> 00:15:55.050 if you guys are ever in need of an optimal dumpster 00:15:55.050 --> 00:15:56.470 to fill up, let me tell you. 00:15:56.470 --> 00:15:59.910 Right behind the MIT Museum-- by D-Lab actually-- 00:15:59.910 --> 00:16:05.130 there are some prime dumpster spots for shooting. 00:16:05.130 --> 00:16:07.730 And that's where we shot George's farts one, too. 00:16:07.730 --> 00:16:09.317 So if you need to. 00:16:09.317 --> 00:16:11.150 But in this one, I mean, I think it's really 00:16:11.150 --> 00:16:13.050 matter of the camera angle. 00:16:13.050 --> 00:16:15.385 Did you shoot this on a tripod? 00:16:15.385 --> 00:16:16.010 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 00:16:16.010 --> 00:16:16.830 ELIZABETH CHOE: OK. 00:16:16.830 --> 00:16:19.987 Were you limited by how far you could let your mic cable go? 00:16:19.987 --> 00:16:20.612 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 00:16:20.612 --> 00:16:23.305 ELIZABETH CHOE: OK. 00:16:23.305 --> 00:16:26.500 Yeah, maybe think about this one as a potential one to re-shoot. 00:16:26.500 --> 00:16:31.670 Because I think the visual background makes a lot of sense 00:16:31.670 --> 00:16:35.040 and is a really good transition-- 00:16:35.040 --> 00:16:37.400 it's a really good change from the kitchen setting. 00:16:37.400 --> 00:16:40.852 So I would really love to see that it's actually a dumpster. 00:16:40.852 --> 00:16:42.390 AUDIENCE: And if you are refilming-- 00:16:42.390 --> 00:16:44.970 only if you are refilming-- something that I noticed 00:16:44.970 --> 00:16:48.060 is that when you're talking you bounce a little. 00:16:48.060 --> 00:16:49.905 So just-- like in some of the film 00:16:49.905 --> 00:16:51.350 when your up close we see that. 00:16:51.350 --> 00:16:52.755 And it's just maybe something that if you 00:16:52.755 --> 00:16:54.575 can be aware of that while you're filming. 00:16:54.575 --> 00:16:57.550 It was just one moment, I can't remember exactly where it was. 00:16:57.550 --> 00:16:58.960 Where is it? 00:16:58.960 --> 00:17:01.780 When you were talking, a little towards the end. 00:17:01.780 --> 00:17:06.500 And I noticed it a little more, this sort of gentle 00:17:06.500 --> 00:17:08.759 bounce while you talk. 00:17:08.759 --> 00:17:10.050 That you don't do all the time. 00:17:10.050 --> 00:17:12.900 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 00:17:26.187 --> 00:17:26.770 [END PLAYBACK] 00:17:26.770 --> 00:17:27.995 ELIZABETH CHOE: Maybe we can find the-- 00:17:27.995 --> 00:17:29.360 AUDIENCE: I'll look at it more carefully, because there 00:17:29.360 --> 00:17:30.270 was a point where I was like-- 00:17:30.270 --> 00:17:32.192 AUDIENCE: I think it was the end of [INAUDIBLE]. 00:17:32.192 --> 00:17:33.530 AUDIENCE: Do you know what I'm talking about? 00:17:33.530 --> 00:17:34.314 OK. 00:17:34.314 --> 00:17:36.730 ELIZABETH CHOE: Maybe we can note that in the Google Docs, 00:17:36.730 --> 00:17:39.210 whoever's commenting on Nathan's. 00:17:39.210 --> 00:17:41.700 And again, stuff like this, I think it's great, but maybe 00:17:41.700 --> 00:17:44.590 just like crop this framing a little bit more 00:17:44.590 --> 00:17:47.940 so it's a little more rule of thirds. 00:17:47.940 --> 00:17:50.620 Because the rule of thirds works really well for this shot. 00:17:50.620 --> 00:17:53.680 And [INAUDIBLE] pointed out a really good tip. 00:17:53.680 --> 00:17:55.650 When you do rule of thirds, use the eyes 00:17:55.650 --> 00:17:58.860 as sort of the point instead of, like, your face. 00:17:58.860 --> 00:18:00.670 Because there's just a little too much room 00:18:00.670 --> 00:18:02.628 on the top and right-hand side of this framing. 00:18:06.540 --> 00:18:08.640 How did you film the opening? 00:18:08.640 --> 00:18:09.930 Like, were you by yourself? 00:18:09.930 --> 00:18:11.555 Was it the first thing that you filmed? 00:18:14.440 --> 00:18:24.030 AUDIENCE: I was by myself, and that was the-- no, it wasn't. 00:18:24.030 --> 00:18:29.270 It was like second place I went. 00:18:29.270 --> 00:18:30.530 ELIZABETH CHOE: OK. 00:18:30.530 --> 00:18:32.220 Because whatever conditions you were 00:18:32.220 --> 00:18:34.280 filming under for this scene, I think 00:18:34.280 --> 00:18:36.590 you should really try to remember 00:18:36.590 --> 00:18:37.774 what it was that you did. 00:18:37.774 --> 00:18:38.690 Because this opening-- 00:18:38.690 --> 00:18:38.910 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 00:18:38.910 --> 00:18:39.830 - --start to smell? 00:18:39.830 --> 00:18:42.230 And where does that icky black liquid come from? 00:18:42.230 --> 00:18:45.037 Wouldn't life just be easier if things didn't rot? 00:18:45.037 --> 00:18:45.620 [END PLAYBACK] 00:18:45.620 --> 00:18:46.290 ELIZABETH CHOE: Like that question 00:18:46.290 --> 00:18:48.160 is posed actually quite naturally. 00:18:48.160 --> 00:18:50.743 I think the tendency for a lot of people when they're starting 00:18:50.743 --> 00:18:53.870 would be to sort of overly cheese that question up. 00:18:53.870 --> 00:18:56.370 And that's sort of what happened in early readings 00:18:56.370 --> 00:18:58.650 that a lot of you guys did. 00:18:58.650 --> 00:19:00.450 But this one just sounds very natural, 00:19:00.450 --> 00:19:04.030 like how you would actually pose that question in real life. 00:19:04.030 --> 00:19:07.390 So whatever conditions that you were under filming this one, 00:19:07.390 --> 00:19:11.240 really try to apply that to whatever you re-shoot. 00:19:11.240 --> 00:19:14.290 Were you there with him for this one by chance? 00:19:14.290 --> 00:19:15.230 Hmm. 00:19:15.230 --> 00:19:16.950 Maybe it's an energy level thing. 00:19:16.950 --> 00:19:17.798 Like-- 00:19:17.798 --> 00:19:19.430 AUDIENCE: I think it was I was inside. 00:19:19.430 --> 00:19:20.850 ELIZABETH CHOE: You were inside, so you weren't as 00:19:20.850 --> 00:19:22.100 nervous about filming outside. 00:19:22.100 --> 00:19:25.682 Yeah, actually, that does a lot to people's deliveries. 00:19:25.682 --> 00:19:27.390 But yeah, just something to keep in mind. 00:19:27.390 --> 00:19:29.098 Does anyone have final thoughts before we 00:19:29.098 --> 00:19:30.340 move on to the next video? 00:19:35.250 --> 00:19:38.400 Do you know who we had paired up to comment on Nathan's? 00:19:47.116 --> 00:19:49.489 PROFESSOR: Andrea and Kenneth. 00:19:49.489 --> 00:19:50.280 ELIZABETH CHOE: OK. 00:19:50.280 --> 00:19:52.830 So basically, for the rough cut thing, 00:19:52.830 --> 00:19:55.900 we will pair you up with two people. 00:19:55.900 --> 00:19:58.840 One of those people is going to be the person who 00:19:58.840 --> 00:20:01.370 helped film your video, and the other person 00:20:01.370 --> 00:20:03.620 is just someone completely new. 00:20:03.620 --> 00:20:06.431 So Kenneth and Andrea are commenting on Nathan's. 00:20:08.986 --> 00:20:11.360 Andrea, do you want to say anything about yours before we 00:20:11.360 --> 00:20:14.225 screen? 00:20:14.225 --> 00:20:17.704 AUDIENCE: There are lots of placeholders for stuff, 00:20:17.704 --> 00:20:18.698 like similar. 00:20:24.165 --> 00:20:25.159 It's really boring. 00:20:28.141 --> 00:20:31.550 ELIZABETH CHOE: We will be the judge of that. 00:20:31.550 --> 00:20:32.050 All right. 00:20:32.050 --> 00:20:33.372 This is Andrea's. 00:20:33.372 --> 00:20:34.710 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 00:20:34.710 --> 00:20:38.680 -Eating is one of the great pleasures and necessities 00:20:38.680 --> 00:20:39.940 of life. 00:20:39.940 --> 00:20:45.180 And to enjoy everything from energy bars to apples, 00:20:45.180 --> 00:20:47.180 we rely on one part of our bodies 00:20:47.180 --> 00:20:49.640 to do an important job-- our teeth. 00:20:52.660 --> 00:20:57.260 Teeth are the hardest substances in our bodies. 00:20:57.260 --> 00:20:59.650 They're harder than our bones, and they're 00:20:59.650 --> 00:21:02.550 even harder than iron or steel. 00:21:02.550 --> 00:21:04.800 While we chew our teeth experience 00:21:04.800 --> 00:21:09.020 forces of up to 225 pounds. 00:21:09.020 --> 00:21:10.650 Hmm. 00:21:10.650 --> 00:21:13.610 So why doesn't our jaw just crumble 00:21:13.610 --> 00:21:16.430 under all of those forces? 00:21:16.430 --> 00:21:18.750 Between your tooth and your jawbone, 00:21:18.750 --> 00:21:20.570 there is a specialized piece of tissue 00:21:20.570 --> 00:21:25.820 called the periodontal ligament, or PDL for short. 00:21:25.820 --> 00:21:28.530 The PDL can easily absorb the normal forces 00:21:28.530 --> 00:21:32.980 that a tooth experiences when we chew, say, an apple, cushioning 00:21:32.980 --> 00:21:36.760 or protecting our jawbone from our teeth. 00:21:36.760 --> 00:21:40.290 And inside the PDL there are all kinds of cells. 00:21:40.290 --> 00:21:42.830 One type, called mechanoreceptors, 00:21:42.830 --> 00:21:45.760 sense forces of movement or pressure applied to the tooth. 00:21:48.850 --> 00:21:53.140 Teeth sound like they're already perfectly designed. 00:21:53.140 --> 00:21:56.070 But sometimes we really need to force them 00:21:56.070 --> 00:21:58.432 in a certain direction. 00:21:58.432 --> 00:21:59.140 Like with braces. 00:22:13.720 --> 00:22:17.710 As the braces slowly force the teeth to move, 00:22:17.710 --> 00:22:21.070 the PDL gets squeezed in one direction 00:22:21.070 --> 00:22:25.350 and stretched in the other, kind of like a rubber band. 00:22:25.350 --> 00:22:27.180 Here's where it gets interesting. 00:22:27.180 --> 00:22:29.460 To make room, the mechanoreceptors 00:22:29.460 --> 00:22:33.570 in the PDL trigger cells called osteoclasts 00:22:33.570 --> 00:22:36.020 that actually come in and dissolve part 00:22:36.020 --> 00:22:38.690 of your jaw to make extra room. 00:22:38.690 --> 00:22:41.650 The mechanoreceptors also trigger another kind of cell, 00:22:41.650 --> 00:22:43.980 called an osteoblast, which comes in 00:22:43.980 --> 00:22:46.800 and builds up part of the jawbone. 00:22:46.800 --> 00:22:50.270 This allows the PDL to get back into its regular cushioning 00:22:50.270 --> 00:22:54.820 shape, thus holding the tooth securely in position. 00:22:54.820 --> 00:22:59.220 So if braces use osteoblasts to physically reposition teeth 00:22:59.220 --> 00:23:01.120 for cosmetic reasons, what if we want 00:23:01.120 --> 00:23:04.680 to use them to replace things in our bodies? 00:23:04.680 --> 00:23:06.910 Dental implants replace teeth that 00:23:06.910 --> 00:23:10.820 are damaged or missing to restore chewing function. 00:23:10.820 --> 00:23:13.460 And MIT engineers are using the properties 00:23:13.460 --> 00:23:17.110 of osteoblasts and osteoclasts that are already in our bodies 00:23:17.110 --> 00:23:20.180 to create a chemical coding for these implants. 00:23:20.180 --> 00:23:22.310 Just like in a mouth with braces, 00:23:22.310 --> 00:23:24.860 this coding helps create natural bone 00:23:24.860 --> 00:23:27.870 to help lock the implant into place. 00:23:27.870 --> 00:23:29.780 Your jaw isn't the only place where 00:23:29.780 --> 00:23:31.800 these osteoblasts and osteoclasts are 00:23:31.800 --> 00:23:33.640 altering your bone structure. 00:23:33.640 --> 00:23:36.530 In fact, this bony remodeling process 00:23:36.530 --> 00:23:39.040 is happening throughout your entire body. 00:23:39.040 --> 00:23:42.200 And these implants aren't just limited to teeth. 00:23:42.200 --> 00:23:49.240 Doctors can replace knees, hips, and even spinal disks. 00:23:49.240 --> 00:23:51.430 Right now, these implants are designed 00:23:51.430 --> 00:23:54.040 to have the exact same functionality as the parts 00:23:54.040 --> 00:23:55.510 that they're replacing. 00:23:55.510 --> 00:23:58.190 But in the future, scientists may even 00:23:58.190 --> 00:24:01.260 use implants to improve our brains. 00:24:01.260 --> 00:24:04.960 Just like with braces, we could modify our bodies 00:24:04.960 --> 00:24:08.710 to be more perfect. 00:24:08.710 --> 00:24:12.260 Once we've tasted the forbidden fruit of perfection, 00:24:12.260 --> 00:24:13.240 will we still be human? 00:24:18.440 --> 00:24:22.886 [END PLAYBACK] 00:24:24.197 --> 00:24:25.280 ELIZABETH CHOE: All right. 00:24:25.280 --> 00:24:28.479 So, Andrea, why do you think your video is boring? 00:24:28.479 --> 00:24:30.354 AUDIENCE: It's really dense with information. 00:24:36.198 --> 00:24:39.120 It also doesn't have very good settings in it, 00:24:39.120 --> 00:24:40.094 except for the office. 00:24:40.094 --> 00:24:43.016 And even in the office, the lighting-- 00:24:43.016 --> 00:24:45.960 there was just nothing I could do about the lighting. 00:24:45.960 --> 00:24:49.174 ELIZABETH CHOE: I think that one of the quickest fixes that you 00:24:49.174 --> 00:24:51.340 can do, and one that'll make the biggest difference, 00:24:51.340 --> 00:24:54.900 is that it's very slow moving. 00:24:54.900 --> 00:24:58.550 And I think it's because you are so conscious of fighting 00:24:58.550 --> 00:25:01.170 the tendency that most people have to deliver their lines too 00:25:01.170 --> 00:25:04.730 quickly that you're talking a lot slower than you usually do 00:25:04.730 --> 00:25:08.860 in real life, in a way that is clearly not you. 00:25:08.860 --> 00:25:12.270 And you could actually just play with speeding up 00:25:12.270 --> 00:25:13.519 how fast the video plays. 00:25:13.519 --> 00:25:15.060 We did that for one of the people who 00:25:15.060 --> 00:25:16.399 did Science Out Loud, actually. 00:25:16.399 --> 00:25:17.690 The same thing happened to her. 00:25:17.690 --> 00:25:19.273 As soon as the camera started rolling, 00:25:19.273 --> 00:25:22.070 she would talk just way slower than she normally does, 00:25:22.070 --> 00:25:25.630 and it just felt really unnaturally paced. 00:25:25.630 --> 00:25:29.620 And once we bumped up the speed to, like, 115%, 00:25:29.620 --> 00:25:34.000 it read a lot more normally and flowed a lot better. 00:25:34.000 --> 00:25:36.580 And I think in general, look at where 00:25:36.580 --> 00:25:40.120 you're cutting into new spaces. 00:25:40.120 --> 00:25:43.210 I think that you erred on the right side 00:25:43.210 --> 00:25:45.370 for your rough cut, which is to leave a little bit 00:25:45.370 --> 00:25:48.690 too much room at the beginning of each of your clips. 00:25:48.690 --> 00:25:51.600 But when you go in, really, you can shave off 00:25:51.600 --> 00:25:54.740 like a good second, half a second off of some of the clips 00:25:54.740 --> 00:25:57.630 that you're cutting, too. 00:25:57.630 --> 00:26:00.980 Instead of having a beat and then your action starting, 00:26:00.980 --> 00:26:04.510 just go straight into the action already happening. 00:26:04.510 --> 00:26:08.661 So I think that happen a couple times. 00:26:08.661 --> 00:26:09.660 [SKIPPING THROUGH VIDEO] 00:26:13.360 --> 00:26:15.300 For this opening shot I mean, just 00:26:15.300 --> 00:26:17.420 start it like half a beat before you say, 00:26:17.420 --> 00:26:20.190 eating is one of life's great necessities. 00:26:20.190 --> 00:26:23.150 I think you take these nice long pauses 00:26:23.150 --> 00:26:27.469 in between some of your thoughts to really let the viewer gather 00:26:27.469 --> 00:26:28.760 or comprehend what you've said. 00:26:28.760 --> 00:26:31.620 But some of the gaps are just really long. 00:26:31.620 --> 00:26:34.270 So you can either cut those out and maybe cut to a close 00:26:34.270 --> 00:26:38.910 up of you talking, or cut to B-roll in those cases. 00:26:38.910 --> 00:26:40.940 But I think that'll help a lot with just 00:26:40.940 --> 00:26:44.260 the sense of the movement of the overall video. 00:26:44.260 --> 00:26:47.420 Did anyone have other comments? 00:26:47.420 --> 00:26:48.800 Yeah, Kenneth. 00:26:48.800 --> 00:26:51.058 AUDIENCE: I remember in there you were a little scared 00:26:51.058 --> 00:26:52.056 to start filming. 00:26:52.056 --> 00:26:56.444 But I thought you felt pretty natural in front of us, 00:26:56.444 --> 00:27:00.539 and it didn't feel you were nervous or anything. 00:27:03.533 --> 00:27:06.277 Apart from the slow speed, I think actually you 00:27:06.277 --> 00:27:09.022 look quite natural. 00:27:09.022 --> 00:27:11.349 AUDIENCE: I was going to say that too. 00:27:11.349 --> 00:27:12.515 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, David? 00:27:12.515 --> 00:27:16.008 AUDIENCE: I was thinking that one way to cut 00:27:16.008 --> 00:27:19.002 that down is when you look at a clip or you look at a song, 00:27:19.002 --> 00:27:20.501 so you cut right before the song. 00:27:20.501 --> 00:27:21.959 And then it's like a straight line. 00:27:23.944 --> 00:27:25.110 ELIZABETH CHOE: Wait, sorry. 00:27:25.110 --> 00:27:26.200 I didn't hear that. 00:27:26.200 --> 00:27:29.823 AUDIENCE: Plus, when you put the video as well as the sound. 00:27:29.823 --> 00:27:30.906 ELIZABETH CHOE: The sound? 00:27:30.906 --> 00:27:31.403 AUDIENCE: The sound wave. 00:27:31.403 --> 00:27:31.900 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, yeah. 00:27:31.900 --> 00:27:32.397 The sound wave. 00:27:32.397 --> 00:27:33.391 Yeah, the sound wave. 00:27:33.391 --> 00:27:34.385 That's a very good tip. 00:27:34.385 --> 00:27:37.864 AUDIENCE: Then I was thinking that I like the transitions. 00:27:37.864 --> 00:27:39.852 I find the transition very meaningful, 00:27:39.852 --> 00:27:42.337 and they help you continue the story. 00:27:45.897 --> 00:27:47.730 ELIZABETH CHOE: What were you having planned 00:27:47.730 --> 00:27:48.820 on this big section here? 00:27:48.820 --> 00:27:52.504 Was it supposed to be an animated section? 00:27:52.504 --> 00:27:57.330 AUDIENCE: I've been looking for images. 00:27:57.330 --> 00:27:59.850 FEMALE IN VIDEO: This is when we chew, say, an apple. 00:28:03.315 --> 00:28:05.130 AUDIENCE: I think one part that will 00:28:05.130 --> 00:28:08.265 help that felt really slow-- but maybe you 00:28:08.265 --> 00:28:11.730 put in there for a visual pause-- is the middle section 00:28:11.730 --> 00:28:14.974 when you were talking about putting on braces, 00:28:14.974 --> 00:28:16.515 and you did the whole sequence of you 00:28:16.515 --> 00:28:18.660 like putting on gloves like an orthodontist would. 00:28:22.620 --> 00:28:25.104 And it's good for comedic effect, 00:28:25.104 --> 00:28:28.422 but it kind of interrupted the video for me. 00:28:28.422 --> 00:28:31.320 And I think this is an instance of killing your darlings, 00:28:31.320 --> 00:28:34.701 where I don't know how long it took to film this. 00:28:34.701 --> 00:28:37.599 AUDIENCE: So should cut out everything in the office? 00:28:37.599 --> 00:28:41.730 AUDIENCE: No, I like-- like when we all laughed, 00:28:41.730 --> 00:28:43.175 that was a great reveal. 00:28:43.175 --> 00:28:45.050 And I think you can almost cut from this shot 00:28:45.050 --> 00:28:46.550 to the one with you with braces-- 00:28:46.550 --> 00:28:48.313 like when you say, with braces. 00:28:48.313 --> 00:28:51.019 Because you don't even say anything over this part. 00:28:51.019 --> 00:28:52.220 It was just kind of silent. 00:28:54.502 --> 00:28:55.960 AUDIENCE: I think she could keep it 00:28:55.960 --> 00:28:59.040 if she tightened it to like one second. 00:28:59.040 --> 00:29:00.420 We can get enough out of you just 00:29:00.420 --> 00:29:02.590 putting on-- starting to put on the glove 00:29:02.590 --> 00:29:04.410 and then transitioning to the next one. 00:29:04.410 --> 00:29:06.080 I think it's fun. 00:29:06.080 --> 00:29:08.550 I think that I agree with you that it's too long, 00:29:08.550 --> 00:29:10.810 but I think you could tighten it, really, 00:29:10.810 --> 00:29:12.597 and it would still get the impact. 00:29:12.597 --> 00:29:14.680 ELIZABETH CHOE: Comedy is really hard to pull off, 00:29:14.680 --> 00:29:17.120 like George was saying in the earlier workshop. 00:29:17.120 --> 00:29:20.700 But a lot of comedy that works in these types of videos, 00:29:20.700 --> 00:29:23.950 and that you'll see in SciShow or Veritasium 00:29:23.950 --> 00:29:26.070 or pretty much any popular YouTube channel, 00:29:26.070 --> 00:29:27.260 is that they're very quick. 00:29:27.260 --> 00:29:31.570 They're quick insertions of someone making a face or sort 00:29:31.570 --> 00:29:34.790 of an unexpected B-roll shot. 00:29:34.790 --> 00:29:37.490 And I think that I agree with Jaime. 00:29:37.490 --> 00:29:39.260 And you can play around with this. 00:29:39.260 --> 00:29:41.320 Play around with taking this part out completely, 00:29:41.320 --> 00:29:42.900 play around with shortening it. 00:29:42.900 --> 00:29:48.719 But it has a funnier effect when it's a lot shorter, 00:29:48.719 --> 00:29:51.010 because one, it doesn't interrupt the flow of the video 00:29:51.010 --> 00:29:51.880 as much. 00:29:51.880 --> 00:29:53.920 And also just gives a chance for the viewer 00:29:53.920 --> 00:29:56.150 to be like, wait, what just actually happened? 00:29:56.150 --> 00:29:59.650 It keeps them on their toes a little bit more. 00:29:59.650 --> 00:30:02.780 AUDIENCE: For that, I really like that part. 00:30:02.780 --> 00:30:04.200 The only thing I would suggest is 00:30:04.200 --> 00:30:08.360 that at the end when you reveal the braces to kind of show them 00:30:08.360 --> 00:30:11.430 for half a second longer so the viewers 00:30:11.430 --> 00:30:13.199 can notice that it's braces. 00:30:13.199 --> 00:30:15.365 AUDIENCE: Yeah, I think the braces shot was actually 00:30:15.365 --> 00:30:16.850 a little too short. 00:30:22.886 --> 00:30:24.427 ELIZABETH CHOE: And like right here-- 00:30:24.427 --> 00:30:26.912 AUDIENCE: How did you do that? 00:30:26.912 --> 00:30:27.906 The braces shot? 00:30:27.906 --> 00:30:30.400 Did they just put pretend braces on you for a minute? 00:30:30.400 --> 00:30:31.983 ELIZABETH CHOE: It was like a denture. 00:30:31.983 --> 00:30:32.847 AUDIENCE: Oh, OK. 00:30:32.847 --> 00:30:34.430 ELIZABETH CHOE: And this is an example 00:30:34.430 --> 00:30:37.510 of shaving off some of the beginnings of a clip. 00:30:40.320 --> 00:30:44.000 That is exactly where it starts, it's a good half a second. 00:30:44.000 --> 00:30:45.610 Which doesn't seem like much, but when 00:30:45.610 --> 00:30:48.235 you're watching a video it seems like an eternity-- half second 00:30:48.235 --> 00:30:51.128 that you can just take out completely. 00:30:51.128 --> 00:30:55.046 AUDIENCE: So how close to when the sound starts? 00:30:55.046 --> 00:30:58.700 Should you do it right there? 00:30:58.700 --> 00:31:02.150 ELIZABETH CHOE: I don't have a best practice of do it like 0.2 00:31:02.150 --> 00:31:03.500 seconds before it starts. 00:31:03.500 --> 00:31:07.120 But I think that, in general, having it as close to when 00:31:07.120 --> 00:31:09.120 you start talking is best. 00:31:09.120 --> 00:31:12.590 Because otherwise, it reads a little bit newscastery. 00:31:12.590 --> 00:31:15.470 Because you'll notice that on a Dateline special, 00:31:15.470 --> 00:31:18.880 the host will go, and I'll start talking. 00:31:18.880 --> 00:31:22.620 And that's what gives it the newscastery feel, versus a lot 00:31:22.620 --> 00:31:24.490 of YouTube channels and SciShow, they just 00:31:24.490 --> 00:31:29.302 go immediately as close to the soundwave starting as possible. 00:31:29.302 --> 00:31:31.266 AUDIENCE: Bring us two frames back. 00:31:31.266 --> 00:31:31.757 ELIZABETH CHOE: Two frames back? 00:31:31.757 --> 00:31:33.721 AUDIENCE: I usually go like two and three frames back. 00:31:33.721 --> 00:31:35.439 And then if that doesn't sound good, 00:31:35.439 --> 00:31:36.667 then adjust it from there. 00:31:43.080 --> 00:31:48.014 ELIZABETH CHOE: And who's doing Google Docs for Andrea? 00:31:48.014 --> 00:31:49.180 AUDIENCE: Nathan and Yuliya. 00:31:49.180 --> 00:31:52.720 ELIZABETH CHOE: Nathan and Yuliya. 00:31:52.720 --> 00:31:54.060 Any last comments for Andrea? 00:31:56.650 --> 00:31:59.850 I do want to emphasize-- and for the people who are just here 00:31:59.850 --> 00:32:02.880 for today-- it is a crazy amount of work 00:32:02.880 --> 00:32:05.100 that they're doing in such a small amount of time. 00:32:05.100 --> 00:32:07.820 We basically spent the first week not really 00:32:07.820 --> 00:32:09.460 touching cameras whatsoever. 00:32:09.460 --> 00:32:11.440 I mean, they were doing assignments them, 00:32:11.440 --> 00:32:13.860 but pre-production takes up so much time. 00:32:13.860 --> 00:32:17.770 So I think that the scripts that you guys have 00:32:17.770 --> 00:32:20.290 are really, really tight and really good. 00:32:20.290 --> 00:32:23.270 And I know that you're working under limited time and very, 00:32:23.270 --> 00:32:24.375 very limited resources. 00:32:24.375 --> 00:32:26.250 Like you were saying, you didn't have lights. 00:32:26.250 --> 00:32:28.708 And that makes a huge difference in what your final product 00:32:28.708 --> 00:32:30.350 looks like, so 00:32:30.350 --> 00:32:32.880 I'm really happy to see that people can identify-- 00:32:32.880 --> 00:32:35.387 this is what I think it's off about this video, 00:32:35.387 --> 00:32:37.220 I think this is what it would have improved. 00:32:37.220 --> 00:32:38.969 That's the stuff that really is important. 00:32:38.969 --> 00:32:42.550 And I think the scripts, and you guys really constructing 00:32:42.550 --> 00:32:44.350 compelling narratives around the topics 00:32:44.350 --> 00:32:46.890 that you were talking about, they've come such a long way 00:32:46.890 --> 00:32:47.860 from the first day. 00:32:47.860 --> 00:32:51.348 So I'm really happy to see that. 00:32:51.348 --> 00:32:52.794 AUDIENCE: It's ready, but I think 00:32:52.794 --> 00:32:53.758 you have to refresh the page. 00:32:53.758 --> 00:32:54.722 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, OK. 00:32:59.070 --> 00:32:59.810 This one? 00:32:59.810 --> 00:33:00.700 All right. 00:33:00.700 --> 00:33:03.873 Any words before we screen? 00:33:03.873 --> 00:33:04.914 AUDIENCE: No disclaimers. 00:33:07.487 --> 00:33:08.570 AUDIENCE: Yeah, it's good. 00:33:08.570 --> 00:33:09.750 It's fine, I hope. 00:33:09.750 --> 00:33:13.220 I just didn't like how I cut it, but I 00:33:13.220 --> 00:33:15.884 think it still is quite well. 00:33:15.884 --> 00:33:17.300 I haven't finished the animations, 00:33:17.300 --> 00:33:19.560 but yeah, some of it's in. 00:33:30.830 --> 00:33:32.820 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 00:33:32.820 --> 00:33:34.890 -Imagine holding a party, and then 00:33:34.890 --> 00:33:38.410 sending out invitations after the party. 00:33:38.410 --> 00:33:40.839 Wait a minute-- that doesn't make any sense. 00:33:40.839 --> 00:33:42.630 Are my friends are going to be able to time 00:33:42.630 --> 00:33:44.840 travel back just so it's at my party? 00:33:44.840 --> 00:33:46.870 In 2009, Stephen Hawking actually 00:33:46.870 --> 00:33:50.280 conducted such an experiment to disprove time travel. 00:33:50.280 --> 00:33:53.760 What exactly is time travel, and how does it work? 00:33:53.760 --> 00:33:56.655 It actually has a lot to do with speed. 00:33:56.655 --> 00:33:58.780 A lot of what we know about time traveling actually 00:33:58.780 --> 00:34:02.120 comes from Einstein's theory of special and general relativity. 00:34:02.120 --> 00:34:04.340 We are actually time traveling right now, but not 00:34:04.340 --> 00:34:07.020 in the manner that sci-fi phi films have depicted them. 00:34:07.020 --> 00:34:11.199 We are, in fact, time traveling at a pace of one hour per hour. 00:34:11.199 --> 00:34:14.350 In other words, every hour I experience, the world around me 00:34:14.350 --> 00:34:16.600 experiences a singular hour too. 00:34:16.600 --> 00:34:19.709 Now, it may sound simple and trivial, but stay with me. 00:34:19.709 --> 00:34:21.125 This is where it gets interesting. 00:34:24.920 --> 00:34:28.260 Now, the lat part of Einstein's theory of special relativity 00:34:28.260 --> 00:34:31.360 is actually a phenomenon known as time dilation. 00:34:31.360 --> 00:34:33.679 Effectively, this means that the faster you travel, 00:34:33.679 --> 00:34:35.870 the slower time passes around you. 00:34:35.870 --> 00:34:37.510 It potentially means that I could 00:34:37.510 --> 00:34:41.400 travel at maybe more than one hour per hour. 00:34:41.400 --> 00:34:44.330 This phenomenon, however, is only noticeable at really, 00:34:44.330 --> 00:34:47.690 really high speeds-- speeds near the speed of light. 00:34:47.690 --> 00:34:51.810 This rocket here, not even close. 00:34:51.810 --> 00:34:54.159 Say I do a spaceship now that travels 00:34:54.159 --> 00:34:56.090 at 90% the speed of light. 00:34:56.090 --> 00:34:58.660 And I have a pair newborn twins. 00:34:58.660 --> 00:35:02.170 I bring one of them with me on this journey for 10 years. 00:35:02.170 --> 00:35:05.980 When I return, one of them will have turned 23 years old 00:35:05.980 --> 00:35:08.697 while the one with me will have only turned 10 years old. 00:35:08.697 --> 00:35:10.780 While we have experienced 10 years on a spaceship, 00:35:10.780 --> 00:35:13.020 23 years have actually passed on Earth. 00:35:13.020 --> 00:35:16.250 This amount of time actually increases exponentially 00:35:16.250 --> 00:35:19.190 as you get closer to the speed of light. 00:35:19.190 --> 00:35:23.613 So we could potentially travel forward in time. 00:35:23.613 --> 00:35:26.571 But what about backwards in time? 00:35:26.571 --> 00:35:28.543 That's a whole other issue. 00:35:31.501 --> 00:35:33.966 Now, remember our previous graph. 00:35:33.966 --> 00:35:36.210 The time that passed on Earth was 00:35:36.210 --> 00:35:38.341 asymptopic to the speed of light. 00:35:38.341 --> 00:35:40.632 Looks like we're seeing maybe the secret to time travel 00:35:40.632 --> 00:35:43.470 lies on the other side of the line. 00:35:43.470 --> 00:35:45.620 In other words, we may have to travel faster 00:35:45.620 --> 00:35:50.372 than the speed of light just to be able to travel back in time. 00:35:50.372 --> 00:35:53.858 Now, when you do travel near the speed of light, 00:35:53.858 --> 00:35:56.846 something called relativistic mass comes into play. 00:35:56.846 --> 00:36:00.830 In other words, as your speed goes up, your mass increases. 00:36:00.830 --> 00:36:03.316 As your mass increases, you require more energy 00:36:03.316 --> 00:36:04.316 to move the same object. 00:36:04.316 --> 00:36:08.051 This might mean that you need an infinite amount of energy 00:36:08.051 --> 00:36:10.790 just to move an object beyond the speed of light. 00:36:10.790 --> 00:36:13.944 The more energy you put into an object, the more likely 00:36:13.944 --> 00:36:16.019 you are to increase its mass rather than 00:36:16.019 --> 00:36:17.762 to increase its speed. 00:36:17.762 --> 00:36:20.252 Therefore, to get an object past the speed of light, 00:36:20.252 --> 00:36:23.830 quite impossible at this point in time. 00:36:23.830 --> 00:36:27.790 So why are we still so obsessed with time travel? 00:36:27.790 --> 00:36:32.040 Time travel does come with its own set of problems. 00:36:32.040 --> 00:36:33.690 Take for example my party before. 00:36:33.690 --> 00:36:36.964 If I were to send out my invitations after the party, 00:36:36.964 --> 00:36:39.172 my friends would have come back in time to attend it. 00:36:39.172 --> 00:36:41.450 And if they did come back in time to attend it, 00:36:41.450 --> 00:36:43.733 I wouldn't have sent out my invitations. 00:36:43.733 --> 00:36:46.150 And if I didn't send out my invitations, 00:36:46.150 --> 00:36:48.002 they wouldn't be at my party. 00:36:48.002 --> 00:36:51.360 It doesn't make any sense at all that they are both at my party 00:36:51.360 --> 00:36:52.750 and not at my party. 00:36:52.750 --> 00:36:55.370 This is what we call the grandfather paradox. 00:36:55.370 --> 00:36:57.250 It's one of three time travel problems 00:36:57.250 --> 00:36:59.250 that we currently have. 00:36:59.250 --> 00:37:02.000 So it seems that we may not be able to time travel 00:37:02.000 --> 00:37:05.810 yet, based on what physics tells us, at least. 00:37:05.810 --> 00:37:09.150 For now, if you are planning a party, 00:37:09.150 --> 00:37:11.250 be sure to send out the invites. 00:37:11.250 --> 00:37:13.210 Your friends can't time travel yet. 00:37:13.210 --> 00:37:15.162 [END PLAYBACK] 00:37:15.162 --> 00:37:18.090 [APPLAUSE] 00:37:20.050 --> 00:37:22.920 ELIZABETH CHOE: All right, any comments from Kenneth first? 00:37:22.920 --> 00:37:25.545 AUDIENCE: OK, I didn't know that the warp stabilizer on YouTube 00:37:25.545 --> 00:37:26.767 was like that. 00:37:26.767 --> 00:37:29.100 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, you tried the stabilizer on YouTube. 00:37:29.100 --> 00:37:32.870 AUDIENCE: Because I new I had to stabilize some of my footage, 00:37:32.870 --> 00:37:35.815 and they were taking a very long time on Premier. 00:37:35.815 --> 00:37:37.190 So I just popped it on to YouTube 00:37:37.190 --> 00:37:38.648 and just let YouTube stabilized it. 00:37:38.648 --> 00:37:41.430 But I didn't know that it did it very liberally. 00:37:44.066 --> 00:37:47.085 So I realize a lot of my shots got like this warpy effect, 00:37:47.085 --> 00:37:50.270 and some of my text got cut out, and what not. 00:37:50.270 --> 00:37:53.015 But yeah, and I'm sorry that the audio for this whole chunk 00:37:53.015 --> 00:37:55.390 just kind of got warped because I 00:37:55.390 --> 00:37:57.702 had to use my other camera, which I didn't want to. 00:37:57.702 --> 00:38:00.160 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, you used your DSLR for the middle part, 00:38:00.160 --> 00:38:00.660 right? 00:38:00.660 --> 00:38:02.250 I mean it's a trade-off, because it 00:38:02.250 --> 00:38:05.060 looks way better than the camcorders that we have. 00:38:05.060 --> 00:38:06.860 But the camera that he has doesn't 00:38:06.860 --> 00:38:10.370 have an input for the mic. 00:38:10.370 --> 00:38:12.910 Yeah, it's really hard to understand that part. 00:38:12.910 --> 00:38:13.410 Yeah, PJ? 00:38:13.410 --> 00:38:14.910 AUDIENCE: With these scenes, though, 00:38:14.910 --> 00:38:16.912 we were talking about doing this walking down. 00:38:16.912 --> 00:38:19.372 It was just tough to have a ten foot tether 00:38:19.372 --> 00:38:20.848 to do some of these. 00:38:20.848 --> 00:38:25.276 And I thought that came out really good-- that video part. 00:38:25.276 --> 00:38:28.570 AUDIENCE: Could you try a voiceover? 00:38:28.570 --> 00:38:31.420 AUDIENCE: Yeah, I was thinking about putting that in. 00:38:31.420 --> 00:38:33.189 AUDIENCE: Because it's far away enough 00:38:33.189 --> 00:38:35.630 where I don't think it matters. 00:38:35.630 --> 00:38:38.290 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, you could try lip dubbing basically. 00:38:38.290 --> 00:38:41.140 I have one pair of wireless mics, 00:38:41.140 --> 00:38:45.090 if you do want to try shooting it. 00:38:45.090 --> 00:38:47.312 I mean, it may be a little too much 00:38:47.312 --> 00:38:49.020 to throw in at the last minute, because I 00:38:49.020 --> 00:38:51.800 do agree that this part is-- 00:38:51.800 --> 00:38:52.900 [SKIPPING THROUGH VIDEO] 00:38:53.400 --> 00:38:55.130 It's hard, but I mean, I also think 00:38:55.130 --> 00:38:56.720 that having that wide of an angle 00:38:56.720 --> 00:38:58.210 is important in that shot. 00:38:58.210 --> 00:39:00.540 So I understand using the mic was sort 00:39:00.540 --> 00:39:03.320 of not really an option there. 00:39:03.320 --> 00:39:08.850 But I do think that voiceover is a good option. 00:39:08.850 --> 00:39:10.120 And especially this part. 00:39:10.120 --> 00:39:11.980 It's a long walk and talk, and-- 00:39:11.980 --> 00:39:13.730 MALE IN VIDEO: --example, my party before. 00:39:13.730 --> 00:39:15.830 If I were to send out my message-- 00:39:15.830 --> 00:39:19.820 ELIZABETH CHOE: And the audio is so distractingly unclear, 00:39:19.820 --> 00:39:22.964 and this is such a crucial sort of inherently 00:39:22.964 --> 00:39:24.380 hard to understand portion anyway, 00:39:24.380 --> 00:39:27.900 that I think that it's really important to have clear audio. 00:39:27.900 --> 00:39:31.320 And I don't know if you can just shoot B-roll to do voiceover 00:39:31.320 --> 00:39:33.170 for this. 00:39:33.170 --> 00:39:37.700 Because it's a little-- the setting and what you're saying 00:39:37.700 --> 00:39:41.240 don't necessarily match up to me right away. 00:39:41.240 --> 00:39:44.214 But I also like the feel that you were going 00:39:44.214 --> 00:39:45.380 for with this walk and talk. 00:39:45.380 --> 00:39:49.040 I can tell that you were drawing a lot of Veritasium influences 00:39:49.040 --> 00:39:52.240 with the beginning, and you did the whole Michael Stevens 00:39:52.240 --> 00:39:55.300 Vsauce head up, which I think are fun. 00:39:55.300 --> 00:39:57.680 Because you're taking something that is typically 00:39:57.680 --> 00:40:03.550 a very robust science topic and sort of presenting it in a very 00:40:03.550 --> 00:40:05.500 casual, like, I'm just your friend 00:40:05.500 --> 00:40:07.646 talking about time travel type of way that makes 00:40:07.646 --> 00:40:08.770 it a lot less intimidating. 00:40:08.770 --> 00:40:09.978 Which I think is really nice. 00:40:09.978 --> 00:40:11.490 It's a nice feel for the video. 00:40:14.610 --> 00:40:17.120 Any comments from anyone else? 00:40:17.120 --> 00:40:18.100 Yeah. 00:40:18.100 --> 00:40:21.390 AUDIENCE: It's sounded really well in its complete form. 00:40:21.390 --> 00:40:23.550 Even though-- like the script, there 00:40:23.550 --> 00:40:25.200 was a lot of technical detail. 00:40:25.200 --> 00:40:27.370 It didn't read like that at all. 00:40:27.370 --> 00:40:30.260 The only part here was that when you were walking and describing 00:40:30.260 --> 00:40:34.260 the grandfather paradox, I know we also shot the party. 00:40:34.260 --> 00:40:36.250 AUDIENCE: Yeah, I was thinking of putting 00:40:36.250 --> 00:40:38.160 that in split screen, but I-- 00:40:38.160 --> 00:40:40.340 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, you actually shot a fake party? 00:40:40.340 --> 00:40:40.710 AUDIENCE: Yeah 00:40:40.710 --> 00:40:42.570 ELIZABETH CHOE: I think that it would be a really good option 00:40:42.570 --> 00:40:44.195 to try playing around with that footage 00:40:44.195 --> 00:40:45.762 and just using voiceover there. 00:40:45.762 --> 00:40:47.470 AUDIENCE: I only put it at half a screen, 00:40:47.470 --> 00:40:49.579 because I'm keeping to the left of the screen 00:40:49.579 --> 00:40:50.870 so I have it on the right side. 00:40:50.870 --> 00:40:51.870 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 00:40:51.870 --> 00:40:54.330 Is it super important that you maintain 00:40:54.330 --> 00:40:56.050 this footage of you talking? 00:40:56.050 --> 00:40:58.640 Or can you just cut to straight B-roll of the party? 00:40:58.640 --> 00:41:00.723 AUDIENCE: I thought it would be a nice transitions 00:41:00.723 --> 00:41:02.079 to walk into the last scene. 00:41:02.079 --> 00:41:03.120 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, yeah. 00:41:03.120 --> 00:41:05.370 I mean, I can tell that you were very conscious of how 00:41:05.370 --> 00:41:07.426 your cuts were being made. 00:41:07.426 --> 00:41:09.176 MALE IN VIDEO: --the grandfather paradox-- 00:41:12.031 --> 00:41:14.280 ELIZABETH CHOE: I think that this opening one and some 00:41:14.280 --> 00:41:16.690 of your pans are really slow. 00:41:16.690 --> 00:41:19.950 So you could cut the clip right before it lands on you 00:41:19.950 --> 00:41:21.570 and just speed up the pan. 00:41:24.640 --> 00:41:26.910 This part especially. 00:41:26.910 --> 00:41:28.149 It just feels very nice. 00:41:28.149 --> 00:41:30.190 MALE IN VIDEO: --sci-fi films have depicted them. 00:41:30.190 --> 00:41:34.560 We are, in fact, time traveling at a pace of one hour per hour. 00:41:34.560 --> 00:41:37.190 ELIZABETH CHOE: The script is a lot better here. 00:41:37.190 --> 00:41:39.224 It's really good. 00:41:39.224 --> 00:41:40.640 MALE IN VIDEO: --speeds near the-- 00:41:40.640 --> 00:41:43.223 ELIZABETH CHOE: And this too is a really good visual reference 00:41:43.223 --> 00:41:44.552 there. 00:41:44.552 --> 00:41:45.927 AUDIENCE: I really liked whatever 00:41:45.927 --> 00:41:47.667 you did to animate the graph. 00:41:47.667 --> 00:41:49.655 I was like, mind blown. 00:41:49.655 --> 00:41:51.146 I don't know if I could do that. 00:41:51.146 --> 00:41:53.631 But it looked really nice because it followed your finger 00:41:53.631 --> 00:41:54.630 and everything. 00:41:54.630 --> 00:41:56.990 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, how did you do that? 00:41:56.990 --> 00:41:59.365 AUDIENCE: I kept a screenshot there, 00:41:59.365 --> 00:42:02.380 and I imported for the shot that I drew everything over. 00:42:02.380 --> 00:42:04.512 This amount of time actually increases-- 00:42:04.512 --> 00:42:06.970 ELIZABETH CHOE: But YouTube cut it off right at the bottom. 00:42:06.970 --> 00:42:07.720 OK, that's what I figured what happened. 00:42:07.720 --> 00:42:08.730 AUDIENCE: Yeah, it was supposed to be nice frame. 00:42:08.730 --> 00:42:10.972 I don't know why they even warped this. 00:42:10.972 --> 00:42:13.180 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, I mean, take the stabilizer out 00:42:13.180 --> 00:42:15.900 and just do a closeup shot of you. 00:42:15.900 --> 00:42:17.750 Because that's really nice. 00:42:17.750 --> 00:42:20.840 Are you going to do it for this part too? 00:42:20.840 --> 00:42:22.600 AUDIENCE: I was thinking that I should. 00:42:22.600 --> 00:42:23.320 ELIZABETH CHOE: I think you should, 00:42:23.320 --> 00:42:25.340 just because like you're throwing in the graph 00:42:25.340 --> 00:42:28.664 and you have the asymptote, and it's just such a key part. 00:42:28.664 --> 00:42:31.080 Something that I didn't know until you read the script out 00:42:31.080 --> 00:42:32.720 loud to us-- really cool, the idea 00:42:32.720 --> 00:42:35.080 of looking at the other side of the graph. 00:42:35.080 --> 00:42:37.680 So, I know it's more work for you, 00:42:37.680 --> 00:42:39.030 but I think it would look cool. 00:42:42.140 --> 00:42:43.980 Who's commenting on Kennith's? 00:42:47.740 --> 00:42:49.630 AUDIENCE: Yuliya and Andrea. 00:42:49.630 --> 00:42:52.182 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yuliya and Andrea, great. 00:42:52.182 --> 00:42:53.640 AUDIENCE: I really like the ending. 00:42:53.640 --> 00:42:55.973 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, the beginning and ending, you book 00:42:55.973 --> 00:42:57.910 ended it very nicely. 00:42:57.910 --> 00:43:00.330 Very good. 00:43:00.330 --> 00:43:03.320 I'm very happy with how people have taken their scripts 00:43:03.320 --> 00:43:05.980 and really created a point and a story around it. 00:43:05.980 --> 00:43:08.300 I don't think any of these drafts 00:43:08.300 --> 00:43:10.680 are instructional videos whatsoever. 00:43:10.680 --> 00:43:12.730 You've taken all these concepts-- 00:43:12.730 --> 00:43:14.230 and we talked a lot at the beginning 00:43:14.230 --> 00:43:18.400 about tying specific examples and allowing 00:43:18.400 --> 00:43:21.160 a specific instance to let you hit these bigger points. 00:43:21.160 --> 00:43:23.800 And I think everyone's really done a nice job of doing that 00:43:23.800 --> 00:43:24.591 with their scripts. 00:43:27.680 --> 00:43:30.040 All right, next up we have Joshua. 00:43:30.040 --> 00:43:31.550 You ready? 00:43:31.550 --> 00:43:32.790 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 00:43:32.790 --> 00:43:34.106 ELIZABETH CHOE: Any comments? 00:43:34.106 --> 00:43:36.310 AUDIENCE: I haven't put in the animations yet, 00:43:36.310 --> 00:43:38.782 so there will be a part where there's a blank space. 00:43:38.782 --> 00:43:40.990 But the blank table is supposed to be the animations. 00:43:43.884 --> 00:43:44.550 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 00:43:44.550 --> 00:43:46.690 -Hi, have you found it particularly difficult 00:43:46.690 --> 00:43:49.370 to find a specific item in your house? 00:43:49.370 --> 00:43:51.570 Let's say you're looking for a pair of gloves, 00:43:51.570 --> 00:43:54.890 but you just can't find it and you spend your entire afternoon 00:43:54.890 --> 00:43:56.400 looking for it. 00:43:56.400 --> 00:43:58.790 Well, you've just encountered the same problem 00:43:58.790 --> 00:44:01.590 that companies like Google or Microsoft 00:44:01.590 --> 00:44:04.390 encounter every single day. 00:44:04.390 --> 00:44:06.660 And that's the problem of search. 00:44:06.660 --> 00:44:09.500 Just like a house, which stores thousands of different items, 00:44:09.500 --> 00:44:13.870 Google stores 45 billion index pages of information. 00:44:13.870 --> 00:44:16.400 When if every page was a sheet of paper 00:44:16.400 --> 00:44:18.415 and we stick them up real high, we 00:44:18.415 --> 00:44:24.430 will create a tower 600 times taller than Mount Everest. 00:44:24.430 --> 00:44:27.000 Well can Google find my results so quickly 00:44:27.000 --> 00:44:31.240 when I find so difficult to find a pair of gloves? 00:44:31.240 --> 00:44:32.800 Well, searching on Google is kind 00:44:32.800 --> 00:44:37.220 of looking for a person in a big school. 00:44:37.220 --> 00:44:40.130 Let's say you're looking for James in the row of classrooms. 00:44:40.130 --> 00:44:41.850 One of the easiest method would be 00:44:41.850 --> 00:44:47.180 to go to every classroom nearest to you until you find James. 00:44:47.180 --> 00:44:50.310 There's a better method known as binary search. 00:44:50.310 --> 00:44:52.180 Let's say the students were arranged 00:44:52.180 --> 00:44:57.280 from A to Z in an increasing number of the classrooms. 00:44:57.280 --> 00:45:00.040 And let's say we head to the middle room first, 00:45:00.040 --> 00:45:02.880 and if the person in the middle room isn't James, 00:45:02.880 --> 00:45:05.600 but his name starts with a letter before j, 00:45:05.600 --> 00:45:06.890 we head to the right. 00:45:06.890 --> 00:45:08.950 If not, we head to the left. 00:45:08.950 --> 00:45:13.440 We then approach the middle room in the newly sectioned area. 00:45:13.440 --> 00:45:15.320 We rinse and repeat. 00:45:15.320 --> 00:45:18.910 Eventually we will find James just like the first method, 00:45:18.910 --> 00:45:24.350 but we find him in a much faster way with the second method. 00:45:24.350 --> 00:45:26.560 How much faster would that be? 00:45:26.560 --> 00:45:29.560 Well, that depends on the number of students in the school. 00:45:29.560 --> 00:45:32.700 Let's say there are 500 students and we're looking for one, 00:45:32.700 --> 00:45:35.350 it would take about 80 minutes in the first manner, 00:45:35.350 --> 00:45:38.880 but one and a half minutes with binary search. 00:45:38.880 --> 00:45:41.510 But let's say they are 1,000 students in the school, 00:45:41.510 --> 00:45:45.260 it would take 160 minutes with the first method 00:45:45.260 --> 00:45:49.310 but 1.6 minutes with the second method. 00:45:49.310 --> 00:45:52.390 Now, that's a whole lot of difference. 00:45:52.390 --> 00:45:54.050 So a name is just a word. 00:45:54.050 --> 00:45:57.720 But Google searches a combination of words, 00:45:57.720 --> 00:46:00.770 making it a little bit more complicated. 00:46:00.770 --> 00:46:04.240 So just like how we identify the first letter of each alphabet 00:46:04.240 --> 00:46:08.970 of the name, Google identifies 200 unique factors making 00:46:08.970 --> 00:46:11.840 your search terms faster. 00:46:11.840 --> 00:46:14.480 If you recall, the effectiveness of binary search 00:46:14.480 --> 00:46:17.890 depends on the prearrangement of data. 00:46:17.890 --> 00:46:20.190 And that's why computer scientist are actively 00:46:20.190 --> 00:46:24.290 looking for ways to sort, manage, and eventually retrieve 00:46:24.290 --> 00:46:27.310 data fast and better. 00:46:27.310 --> 00:46:31.090 In the same way, the TV remote goes near the TV, 00:46:31.090 --> 00:46:34.900 the shoes go to the shoe rack, the coats go into the cupboard 00:46:34.900 --> 00:46:38.300 and the winter gloves go into the winter jacket. 00:46:38.300 --> 00:46:39.260 Aha! 00:46:39.260 --> 00:46:40.760 So that's where my gloves are. 00:46:40.760 --> 00:46:42.656 [END PLAYBACK] 00:46:42.656 --> 00:46:45.974 [APPLAUSE] 00:46:48.109 --> 00:46:49.900 ELIZABETH CHOE: Joshua, what are the things 00:46:49.900 --> 00:46:52.108 that you like about your cut, and what are the things 00:46:52.108 --> 00:46:54.970 that you don't like about it? 00:46:54.970 --> 00:46:56.880 AUDIENCE: I guess I like the opening. 00:46:56.880 --> 00:47:02.110 But I realize-- there were times where 00:47:02.110 --> 00:47:06.120 I realized I have a better take, but it's 00:47:06.120 --> 00:47:10.622 because they clicked it but I started earlier. 00:47:10.622 --> 00:47:12.080 ELIZABETH CHOE: So there were takes 00:47:12.080 --> 00:47:13.970 where you got cut off just at the beginning 00:47:13.970 --> 00:47:14.960 or something like that. 00:47:14.960 --> 00:47:18.030 AUDIENCE: So I realize I should have much, 00:47:18.030 --> 00:47:20.680 much more takes, because you never know what happens. 00:47:20.680 --> 00:47:25.140 And I had to scrap out an entire scene 00:47:25.140 --> 00:47:27.430 because I was in a location where they had just 00:47:27.430 --> 00:47:29.350 started preparing for some event, 00:47:29.350 --> 00:47:31.152 and then everything became very noisy. 00:47:31.152 --> 00:47:33.610 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, so there were like last minute things 00:47:33.610 --> 00:47:36.570 that came up in your locations. 00:47:36.570 --> 00:47:38.930 AUDIENCE: I do recognize that the one where 00:47:38.930 --> 00:47:42.370 I'm supposed to do animations the sound is off, 00:47:42.370 --> 00:47:46.047 and the visuals are not really there yet. 00:47:46.047 --> 00:47:47.630 ELIZABETH CHOE: You mean the one where 00:47:47.630 --> 00:47:49.001 you're looking at the desk? 00:47:49.001 --> 00:47:50.250 AUDIENCE: Yeah, at the black-- 00:47:50.250 --> 00:47:51.579 [SKIPPING THROUGH VIDEO] 00:47:51.579 --> 00:47:53.870 AUDIENCE: Yeah, there's supposed to be animations here, 00:47:53.870 --> 00:47:56.670 but I guess this is not probably the best one. 00:47:56.670 --> 00:47:59.253 ELIZABETH CHOE: You were going to have your animations come up 00:47:59.253 --> 00:48:00.940 here with your hotel room-- or your-- 00:48:00.940 --> 00:48:02.440 AUDIENCE: If I have to redo a scene, 00:48:02.440 --> 00:48:06.036 this scene is the most inconsistent among the rest. 00:48:06.036 --> 00:48:08.410 ELIZABETH CHOE: This was one where you were filming later 00:48:08.410 --> 00:48:09.070 in the day. 00:48:09.070 --> 00:48:11.430 AUDIENCE: Yes, this one was my first day, 00:48:11.430 --> 00:48:13.070 but later in the evening. 00:48:13.070 --> 00:48:14.960 And then the next day the rest. 00:48:14.960 --> 00:48:18.389 Everything else in the next day except this. 00:48:18.389 --> 00:48:20.884 AUDIENCE: I think in this piece, because A, 00:48:20.884 --> 00:48:22.381 we don't have the animation, but B, 00:48:22.381 --> 00:48:25.305 your eyes are looking at the animation as opposed 00:48:25.305 --> 00:48:28.340 to still talking to the screen-- and I 00:48:28.340 --> 00:48:30.840 think, from my perspective, I feel like there's a little bit 00:48:30.840 --> 00:48:34.340 more of balance at play there of connecting with the audience 00:48:34.340 --> 00:48:35.549 a little with your eyes. 00:48:35.549 --> 00:48:37.340 Like if you're going to reshoot it, for me, 00:48:37.340 --> 00:48:40.550 I think balancing looking down and still looking back 00:48:40.550 --> 00:48:42.710 instead of just looking down during the animation 00:48:42.710 --> 00:48:45.550 and then looking back at the end. 00:48:45.550 --> 00:48:47.722 ELIZABETH CHOE: Looking at the animation is good. 00:48:47.722 --> 00:48:48.930 It's kind of fun thing to do. 00:48:48.930 --> 00:48:52.779 But again, look and acknowledge the audience as well. 00:48:52.779 --> 00:48:54.570 I think this one, it's really just a matter 00:48:54.570 --> 00:48:56.370 of energy level here. 00:48:56.370 --> 00:48:59.220 Overall, your delivery is very nice. 00:48:59.220 --> 00:49:01.410 It's a very natural. 00:49:01.410 --> 00:49:02.990 I love the script. 00:49:02.990 --> 00:49:05.900 Again, you're taking something that's very hard to visualize, 00:49:05.900 --> 00:49:07.030 and that's why-- 00:49:07.030 --> 00:49:08.120 You know, we were trying to figure out 00:49:08.120 --> 00:49:09.994 what topic to do when you were brainstorming, 00:49:09.994 --> 00:49:14.060 and there were just no videos on binary search, which 00:49:14.060 --> 00:49:15.110 was shocking to me. 00:49:15.110 --> 00:49:17.680 Or there aren't very many good ones. 00:49:17.680 --> 00:49:20.600 And there aren't very many videos on how Google works, 00:49:20.600 --> 00:49:21.426 period. 00:49:21.426 --> 00:49:23.300 And it's because it's very hard to visualize. 00:49:23.300 --> 00:49:25.730 And I think you've done a nice job. 00:49:25.730 --> 00:49:29.226 The only thing is this last scene. 00:49:29.226 --> 00:49:32.470 The delivery is great. 00:49:32.470 --> 00:49:35.180 But I almost would like to see this done in a computer 00:49:35.180 --> 00:49:38.170 lab or something instead of in front of the Microsoft Office. 00:49:38.170 --> 00:49:42.200 I know that you were trying to work with sort of that Kendall 00:49:42.200 --> 00:49:46.490 Tech area, but it reads like a little maybe product 00:49:46.490 --> 00:49:49.020 placement-y. 00:49:49.020 --> 00:49:51.240 So if you want to reshoot that one if you have time, 00:49:51.240 --> 00:49:54.090 I would say there are computer labs here that I can 00:49:54.090 --> 00:49:55.770 help get you into if you want. 00:49:59.000 --> 00:50:02.040 Were you going to have animations in this scene? 00:50:02.040 --> 00:50:05.580 AUDIENCE: This would be just a number that pops up 00:50:05.580 --> 00:50:07.290 and then a number below. 00:50:07.290 --> 00:50:09.657 ELIZABETH CHOE: I think that sparing use of labels 00:50:09.657 --> 00:50:11.740 will also help this video too, like when you first 00:50:11.740 --> 00:50:14.390 introduce the term binary search, have come up. 00:50:14.390 --> 00:50:16.230 When you talk about the numbers. 00:50:16.230 --> 00:50:18.190 Numbers are hard to keep track of in a video, 00:50:18.190 --> 00:50:20.310 so just having those pop up. 00:50:20.310 --> 00:50:25.766 AUDIENCE: So it would just be first measure 80 minutes 00:50:25.766 --> 00:50:27.224 and binary search 1.5. 00:50:27.224 --> 00:50:28.270 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, something like that. 00:50:28.270 --> 00:50:29.270 Something really simple. 00:50:29.270 --> 00:50:31.480 And you've got a good background for it, 00:50:31.480 --> 00:50:34.770 so I would go and take advantage of it. 00:50:34.770 --> 00:50:36.769 AUDIENCE: You have such a smiley presence that's 00:50:36.769 --> 00:50:38.650 so engaging on the camera. 00:50:38.650 --> 00:50:40.640 You have such positive energy up there. 00:50:40.640 --> 00:50:43.182 It's like you kind of want to smile while you're watching it. 00:50:43.182 --> 00:50:44.556 ELIZABETH CHOE: And again, you're 00:50:44.556 --> 00:50:47.070 taking something that is a seemingly intimidating subject, 00:50:47.070 --> 00:50:50.340 which again is why it's very hard to find videos on computer 00:50:50.340 --> 00:50:54.930 science, and even more rare to find a live hosted video 00:50:54.930 --> 00:50:56.110 on computer science. 00:50:56.110 --> 00:50:57.960 All the ones that are out there are usually 00:50:57.960 --> 00:51:01.000 some sort of voiceover animated tutorial, 00:51:01.000 --> 00:51:04.340 and I think that having you on screen being 00:51:04.340 --> 00:51:07.540 the guide for the audience with this is very, very nice. 00:51:07.540 --> 00:51:08.520 It's very powerful. 00:51:08.520 --> 00:51:12.240 AUDIENCE: Could you go back to the beginning of that, where 00:51:12.240 --> 00:51:14.564 you're in front of the desk and about to point 00:51:14.564 --> 00:51:17.870 at the animation? 00:51:17.870 --> 00:51:20.020 MALE IN VIDEO: --find James. 00:51:20.020 --> 00:51:23.043 There's a better method known as binary-- 00:51:23.043 --> 00:51:25.382 AUDIENCE: I feel like someone just told you a joke 00:51:25.382 --> 00:51:26.340 and we missed the joke. 00:51:26.340 --> 00:51:29.420 And you're like kind of about to die laughing. 00:51:29.420 --> 00:51:32.360 I don't know if you guys felt that same way when you saw it. 00:51:32.360 --> 00:51:34.320 Did someone tell you something really funny? 00:51:34.320 --> 00:51:35.160 AUDIENCE: I couldn't figure it out. 00:51:35.160 --> 00:51:36.870 I don't know why I behaved like that. 00:51:36.870 --> 00:51:38.044 I do remember a joke. 00:51:38.044 --> 00:51:38.960 I did remember a joke. 00:51:41.920 --> 00:51:44.262 AUDIENCE: I wanted to be like, what was so funny? 00:51:44.262 --> 00:51:46.722 There's something funny going on here? 00:51:46.722 --> 00:51:49.430 AUDIENCE: I must have saw something that he was doing. 00:51:49.430 --> 00:51:51.175 Maybe he was in an awkward position. 00:51:53.999 --> 00:51:55.582 AUDIENCE: I mean, I think you're going 00:51:55.582 --> 00:51:57.860 to refilm this one anyway, but if you 00:51:57.860 --> 00:52:00.909 do-- it was funny because in this moment I was thinking, 00:52:00.909 --> 00:52:03.440 there was something funny that must have just happened, 00:52:03.440 --> 00:52:06.020 and I don't know what it is. 00:52:06.020 --> 00:52:08.630 ELIZABETH CHOE: What was I going to say? 00:52:08.630 --> 00:52:11.780 For the shots that you did at the Koch Institute, 00:52:11.780 --> 00:52:14.580 I think you can just center this. 00:52:14.580 --> 00:52:16.119 Center it close enough. 00:52:16.119 --> 00:52:18.160 Because I know you're trying rule of thirds here, 00:52:18.160 --> 00:52:23.200 but there's sort of like-- it's non-homogeneous distribution 00:52:23.200 --> 00:52:24.907 of this pattern in the background, 00:52:24.907 --> 00:52:27.240 so it looks a little weird to have all this extra space. 00:52:27.240 --> 00:52:29.040 So I would go ahead and just center this. 00:52:29.040 --> 00:52:31.955 What do you guys think about the music in this video? 00:52:31.955 --> 00:52:33.260 It's good? 00:52:33.260 --> 00:52:35.020 It's a little light-hearted. 00:52:35.020 --> 00:52:38.610 It doesn't play into the whole computer science 00:52:38.610 --> 00:52:39.830 trope, which is nice. 00:52:39.830 --> 00:52:41.562 I would bring-- go ahead. 00:52:41.562 --> 00:52:44.418 AUDIENCE: I thought it was like 1950s suburbia, middle America 00:52:44.418 --> 00:52:46.165 thing. 00:52:46.165 --> 00:52:48.040 ELIZABETH CHOE: I would bring down the levels 00:52:48.040 --> 00:52:49.280 just a little bit. 00:52:49.280 --> 00:52:52.230 In the opening it's fine, but as it progressed, 00:52:52.230 --> 00:52:56.340 I would either up your recorded levels for your own audio 00:52:56.340 --> 00:52:59.120 or lower the music. 00:52:59.120 --> 00:53:02.230 Once the bass starts driving, it gets a little distracting. 00:53:06.166 --> 00:53:07.150 Any final comments? 00:53:07.150 --> 00:53:09.610 Who's doing the Google Docs for Joshua? 00:53:12.562 --> 00:53:15.514 AUDIENCE: David and Nathan. 00:53:15.514 --> 00:53:18.220 Also, just as a comment, I think you 00:53:18.220 --> 00:53:20.434 did a really, really excellent job 00:53:20.434 --> 00:53:22.402 with the pacing of your cuts. 00:53:22.402 --> 00:53:24.616 We never explicitly stated it, but I 00:53:24.616 --> 00:53:28.967 think Elizabeth and I said it in the computer lab last week. 00:53:28.967 --> 00:53:31.258 You did a really good job leaving a little bit of space 00:53:31.258 --> 00:53:33.770 at the end of something that you said for people to absorb. 00:53:33.770 --> 00:53:35.810 But then when you starting your new scene, 00:53:35.810 --> 00:53:37.490 you cut it right before you dialog. 00:53:37.490 --> 00:53:40.801 And so the video itself just felt really, really well-paced 00:53:40.801 --> 00:53:41.747 because of that. 00:53:41.747 --> 00:53:43.810 There was never any point of it where 00:53:43.810 --> 00:53:45.660 I was waiting for something to happen. 00:53:45.660 --> 00:53:47.569 It was all just like-- 00:53:47.569 --> 00:53:49.110 AUDIENCE: If I were to add, they have 00:53:49.110 --> 00:53:52.350 that actually I didn't feel-- I cut once, 00:53:52.350 --> 00:53:53.620 and I felt it was awkward. 00:53:53.620 --> 00:53:57.820 And then I cut again, until it reached so near to the audio. 00:53:57.820 --> 00:54:03.330 So it was a few times I had to cut to realize that it awkward. 00:54:03.330 --> 00:54:08.199 Like even for 0.3 seconds, it would be awkward. 00:54:08.199 --> 00:54:11.160 AUDIENCE: You have really good instincts to do that. 00:54:11.160 --> 00:54:13.670 ELIZABETH CHOE: And I know that I have said this ad 00:54:13.670 --> 00:54:16.470 nauseum in the emails, but I feel like there's 00:54:16.470 --> 00:54:18.850 this sense of fear. 00:54:18.850 --> 00:54:20.690 And maybe it's just the training that we 00:54:20.690 --> 00:54:22.960 have in our traditional educational system, 00:54:22.960 --> 00:54:25.530 but we all want to measure like 20 times 00:54:25.530 --> 00:54:27.740 because heaven forbid we cut more than once, right? 00:54:27.740 --> 00:54:29.520 And here you're literally cutting. 00:54:29.520 --> 00:54:33.170 But it's through the process of cutting and trying 00:54:33.170 --> 00:54:36.970 different things that you learn what feels right 00:54:36.970 --> 00:54:38.400 and what makes sense in the video. 00:54:38.400 --> 00:54:41.770 And I don't know of anyone who has ever made 00:54:41.770 --> 00:54:44.110 a video on their first try. 00:54:44.110 --> 00:54:47.370 Even if they've perfected the shot list, gotten the best 00:54:47.370 --> 00:54:51.960 script ever, have their production date down 00:54:51.960 --> 00:54:56.100 to the second, something will ultimately 00:54:56.100 --> 00:54:58.729 end up happening that makes you reconsider 00:54:58.729 --> 00:55:00.020 how you're going to cut things. 00:55:00.020 --> 00:55:00.580 And it should. 00:55:00.580 --> 00:55:01.288 It really should. 00:55:01.288 --> 00:55:03.930 I mean, I am really happy to hear that that's 00:55:03.930 --> 00:55:08.230 what you discovered, because I think that that goes maybe 00:55:08.230 --> 00:55:10.450 a little against how we traditionally 00:55:10.450 --> 00:55:13.140 go through school. 00:55:13.140 --> 00:55:16.370 So I'm glad to hear that you try different things. 00:55:16.370 --> 00:55:18.950 It's OK, do not be discouraged by having 00:55:18.950 --> 00:55:20.080 to try different cuts. 00:55:20.080 --> 00:55:25.280 It's a productive process that moves you forward. 00:55:25.280 --> 00:55:29.420 OK, any thoughts from PJ before we screen? 00:55:29.420 --> 00:55:33.025 AUDIENCE: So there's parts of the audio that I'm 00:55:33.025 --> 00:55:34.830 moving so I can get the-- 00:55:34.830 --> 00:55:35.480 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, you hear a little bit. 00:55:35.480 --> 00:55:35.550 Yeah. 00:55:35.550 --> 00:55:37.394 AUDIENCE: So yeah, after we do that. 00:55:37.394 --> 00:55:39.699 And then it was really hard trying 00:55:39.699 --> 00:55:44.136 to keep it-- there's no-- after watching it, 00:55:44.136 --> 00:55:46.630 it's like two videos. 00:55:46.630 --> 00:55:48.559 It's hard because it's in one setting, 00:55:48.559 --> 00:55:50.874 and they complete their form. 00:55:50.874 --> 00:55:53.540 And I couldn't find like-- 00:55:53.540 --> 00:55:54.790 ELIZABETH CHOE: Music is hard. 00:55:54.790 --> 00:55:57.434 It's so much harder than you initially think it will be. 00:55:57.434 --> 00:56:00.100 You think, oh you just like slap something on in the background, 00:56:00.100 --> 00:56:00.750 it'll be fine. 00:56:00.750 --> 00:56:02.920 But it's very time consuming. 00:56:02.920 --> 00:56:05.100 So it's very like-- I don't know. 00:56:05.100 --> 00:56:08.282 It seemed very inspirational at the beginning. 00:56:08.282 --> 00:56:10.406 ELIZABETH CHOE: Like inappropriately inspirational. 00:56:10.406 --> 00:56:13.072 AUDIENCE: Friday Night Lights kind of thing. 00:56:13.072 --> 00:56:14.155 ELIZABETH CHOE: All right. 00:56:14.155 --> 00:56:15.360 Well, let's see. 00:56:15.360 --> 00:56:16.026 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 00:56:16.026 --> 00:56:20.000 -When we take complex things and break them into smaller pieces, 00:56:20.000 --> 00:56:22.280 we find out that we know a lot more about things 00:56:22.280 --> 00:56:23.274 than we think. 00:56:35.220 --> 00:56:37.302 Now let's take this box-- ORCA I-- 00:56:37.302 --> 00:56:39.290 and create damage below the water line, which 00:56:39.290 --> 00:56:40.373 I've indicated right here. 00:56:54.500 --> 00:56:57.845 As we can see, we've damaged ORCA I right here. 00:56:57.845 --> 00:57:00.136 Now let's put ORCA I on the water and see what happens. 00:57:19.976 --> 00:57:23.944 [GURGLING] 00:57:26.430 --> 00:57:29.740 The ORCA I sank due to the weight of the added water. 00:57:29.740 --> 00:57:35.160 What if the ORCA I contained cargo, or oil, or even people? 00:57:35.160 --> 00:57:38.939 Now let's take ORCA II and do the same thing. 00:57:56.930 --> 00:57:58.950 So we can see that ORCA II did not sink, 00:57:58.950 --> 00:58:01.790 although it is sitting on an angle towards the bow. 00:58:01.790 --> 00:58:04.470 So why didn't ORCA II sink? 00:58:04.470 --> 00:58:06.750 As easy as it sounds, this simple demonstration 00:58:06.750 --> 00:58:10.900 is essential to the design of huge complex ships-- ships 00:58:10.900 --> 00:58:13.430 that are responsible for carrying about 90% 00:58:13.430 --> 00:58:14.420 of all our stuff. 00:58:14.420 --> 00:58:16.810 As naval architects, how do we design 00:58:16.810 --> 00:58:19.820 ships carrying our stuff to make it into port safely and not 00:58:19.820 --> 00:58:20.636 sink? 00:58:20.636 --> 00:58:22.124 Well, why don't we find out? 00:58:34.030 --> 00:58:37.050 Here we have ORCA I and ORCA II from before. 00:58:37.050 --> 00:58:39.740 Although ORCA I and ORCA II don't engage in international 00:58:39.740 --> 00:58:42.560 trade, they behave just as a 1,000-foot container ship 00:58:42.560 --> 00:58:43.990 would. 00:58:43.990 --> 00:58:46.689 Now, let's take a look in ORCA I. We can 00:58:46.689 --> 00:58:47.980 see that there's nothing in it. 00:58:47.980 --> 00:58:50.500 It's just a box. 00:58:50.500 --> 00:58:53.910 But if we look at ORCA II, we can 00:58:53.910 --> 00:58:56.970 see that it's subdivided into these watertight compartments 00:58:56.970 --> 00:58:59.790 by these transverse watertight bulkheads. 00:58:59.790 --> 00:59:01.790 Now, what that means is that if we 00:59:01.790 --> 00:59:03.950 were to damage this ship right here, 00:59:03.950 --> 00:59:06.260 water would only flow into this compartment. 00:59:06.260 --> 00:59:09.390 It would not go into this one, this one, or this one. 00:59:09.390 --> 00:59:12.510 That would cause the ship to be angled or trimmed in the water, 00:59:12.510 --> 00:59:15.890 but it would not cause the ship to sink completely. 00:59:15.890 --> 00:59:18.490 We refer to ORCA II as being subdivided, 00:59:18.490 --> 00:59:21.726 and we can see subdivision in many of these ship's plans. 00:59:21.726 --> 00:59:23.780 It is unclear when subdivision first 00:59:23.780 --> 00:59:26.970 started being used in ships, but accounts of 5th century 00:59:26.970 --> 00:59:29.500 Chinese trade ships indicate that water 00:59:29.500 --> 00:59:31.920 would be able to enter the vessel without sinking. 00:59:31.920 --> 00:59:34.740 So let's find out why this happens. 00:59:34.740 --> 00:59:38.670 Let's imagine a barge divided into 10 equal compartments. 00:59:38.670 --> 00:59:41.360 One of them springs a leak from damage. 00:59:41.360 --> 00:59:44.180 Since the ship is subdivided, only the first compartment 00:59:44.180 --> 00:59:46.250 floods, and the ship remains afloat, 00:59:46.250 --> 00:59:48.710 protecting both its people and cargo. 00:59:48.710 --> 00:59:51.020 Although the added water causes a ship to trim, 00:59:51.020 --> 00:59:53.760 it still has enough buoyancy to return to port for repairs. 00:59:58.080 --> 00:59:59.680 Ships still sink, though. 00:59:59.680 --> 01:00:01.460 It's both expensive and impractical 01:00:01.460 --> 01:00:03.377 to try to design the unsinkable ship, 01:00:03.377 --> 01:00:04.960 especially when these ships will never 01:00:04.960 --> 01:00:06.900 see that amount of damage. 01:00:06.900 --> 01:00:08.570 That's why, as naval architects, we 01:00:08.570 --> 01:00:13.160 use computer programs to help us out with subdivision. 01:00:13.160 --> 01:00:15.650 Computers make it easy to simulate certain damage 01:00:15.650 --> 01:00:18.470 cases in practically no time. 01:00:18.470 --> 01:00:21.770 With different software, we can damage certain compartments, 01:00:21.770 --> 01:00:24.190 and see how the ship responds to it. 01:00:24.190 --> 01:00:26.390 This gives the naval architect a good idea 01:00:26.390 --> 01:00:30.110 of what parts to improve on the ship, if any. 01:00:30.110 --> 01:00:33.710 So even though ships seem like these intricate, complex 01:00:33.710 --> 01:00:36.350 things, they're really just based on principles 01:00:36.350 --> 01:00:37.511 that we all already know. 01:00:56.000 --> 01:00:59.360 [APPLAUSE] 01:00:59.360 --> 01:01:00.330 [END PLAYBACK] 01:01:00.330 --> 01:01:01.913 ELIZABETH CHOE: Just out of curiosity, 01:01:01.913 --> 01:01:03.502 did you shoot this video in sequence? 01:01:03.502 --> 01:01:05.460 Like, you shot the first scenes first, second-- 01:01:05.460 --> 01:01:07.720 AUDIENCE: So the first scenes were second. 01:01:07.720 --> 01:01:08.929 The second scenes were first. 01:01:08.929 --> 01:01:09.886 ELIZABETH CHOE: Really? 01:01:09.886 --> 01:01:10.522 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 01:01:10.522 --> 01:01:12.860 That wasn't out of design, it was 01:01:12.860 --> 01:01:16.330 just because the the only time we could go there was day. 01:01:16.330 --> 01:01:20.130 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, it's a location practicality there. 01:01:20.130 --> 01:01:22.387 Any comments for PJ? 01:01:22.387 --> 01:01:24.220 AUDIENCE: I didn't feel the change of music, 01:01:24.220 --> 01:01:25.895 as in, it was natural. 01:01:25.895 --> 01:01:28.089 I didn't feel like there was a sudden change. 01:01:28.089 --> 01:01:28.630 AUDIENCE: OK. 01:01:28.630 --> 01:01:30.296 ELIZABETH CHOE: I liked the second song. 01:01:30.296 --> 01:01:33.192 I agree that the first one is a little Friday Night Lights. 01:01:33.192 --> 01:01:40.920 [LAUGHTER] 01:01:40.920 --> 01:01:43.460 ELIZABETH CHOE: The thing with-- just like comedy, 01:01:43.460 --> 01:01:47.150 pulling off drama is also really hard to do in YouTube videos, 01:01:47.150 --> 01:01:50.732 because you're not working with, like, a sweeping epic 01:01:50.732 --> 01:01:51.440 or a documentary. 01:01:51.440 --> 01:01:53.520 It's like a little YouTube blurb, 01:01:53.520 --> 01:01:55.420 and we had trouble with that with Farts 01:01:55.420 --> 01:02:01.290 when he talks about how Clostridium difficile kills 01:02:01.290 --> 01:02:04.680 some thousand Americans a year. 01:02:04.680 --> 01:02:08.220 We didn't want to have grandpa's banjo playing in the background 01:02:08.220 --> 01:02:11.510 when he says that, obviously. 01:02:11.510 --> 01:02:16.380 But it's not like we were going to insert music 01:02:16.380 --> 01:02:20.710 from Gone with the Wind in the background either. 01:02:20.710 --> 01:02:24.225 AUDIENCE: Well, one thing that I wanted to try music 01:02:24.225 --> 01:02:28.085 because a lot of the places I was in, there was-- you 01:02:28.085 --> 01:02:30.956 can see there's a lot of cuts, so where it goes to, 01:02:30.956 --> 01:02:33.788 and if there's not anything underneath, 01:02:33.788 --> 01:02:35.680 it's very pronounced. 01:02:35.680 --> 01:02:38.526 And I tried editing a lot of it out. 01:02:43.067 --> 01:02:44.150 ELIZABETH CHOE: Let's see. 01:02:44.150 --> 01:02:46.005 So I know that you were hesitant about being 01:02:46.005 --> 01:02:47.150 in front of the camera too. 01:02:47.150 --> 01:02:48.176 AUDIENCE: So natural. 01:02:48.176 --> 01:02:49.550 ELIZABETH CHOE: And I'm surprised 01:02:49.550 --> 01:02:50.910 that you said you filmed them in the rivers, 01:02:50.910 --> 01:02:52.870 because I feel like the stuff that you have in the end 01:02:52.870 --> 01:02:55.220 is really, really natural, and I thought that you would 01:02:55.220 --> 01:02:57.380 have maybe done that second. 01:02:57.380 --> 01:03:01.250 It's hard to host while you're doing a demo. 01:03:01.250 --> 01:03:03.360 You just have a million things to think about. 01:03:03.360 --> 01:03:06.380 But in general, the hosting is really nice. 01:03:06.380 --> 01:03:11.560 It's really, really natural, especially this part. 01:03:11.560 --> 01:03:15.370 I can tell that Yuliya and-- who was it-- 01:03:15.370 --> 01:03:16.560 David was filming with you? 01:03:16.560 --> 01:03:17.310 AUDIENCE: Kenneth. 01:03:17.310 --> 01:03:19.270 ELIZABETH CHOE: Kenneth was filming with you. 01:03:19.270 --> 01:03:20.720 They probably tried to make you laugh in some of them 01:03:20.720 --> 01:03:20.874 and smile. 01:03:20.874 --> 01:03:23.040 AUDIENCE: Yeah, they were really good at doing that. 01:03:23.040 --> 01:03:24.660 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 01:03:24.660 --> 01:03:27.701 I think this scene is your strongest hosting. 01:03:27.701 --> 01:03:29.950 Just, like, going back and forth between the computer, 01:03:29.950 --> 01:03:32.630 this scene just plays out very nicely. 01:03:32.630 --> 01:03:35.290 And again, taking a seemingly intimidating subject, 01:03:35.290 --> 01:03:38.310 and welcoming and inviting the viewers in. 01:03:38.310 --> 01:03:40.230 It's very nice. 01:03:40.230 --> 01:03:42.560 I would say, in general, the cutting advice 01:03:42.560 --> 01:03:44.880 that [INAUDIBLE] gave, which is to leave 01:03:44.880 --> 01:03:48.560 the room at the end of cuts-- or at the end of scenes-- 01:03:48.560 --> 01:03:50.590 and cut very close to when you start 01:03:50.590 --> 01:03:55.133 talking at the beginning of scenes, might help with this. 01:03:55.133 --> 01:03:55.758 There was one-- 01:03:58.926 --> 01:04:01.550 AUDIENCE: Is it the moment where Yuliya's in the picture with-- 01:04:01.550 --> 01:04:01.890 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh, yeah. 01:04:01.890 --> 01:04:03.578 That's, like, a weird insert thing. 01:04:03.578 --> 01:04:04.994 AUDIENCE: I was, like, who is she? 01:04:04.994 --> 01:04:07.424 What is she doing here? 01:04:07.424 --> 01:04:09.860 She needs to get cut out. 01:04:09.860 --> 01:04:12.780 ELIZABETH CHOE: In general, I love the speed up walk, 01:04:12.780 --> 01:04:14.762 and how you open the door into the lab. 01:04:14.762 --> 01:04:15.970 I love seeing the background. 01:04:15.970 --> 01:04:17.210 It's very cool. 01:04:17.210 --> 01:04:19.855 I think you can speed up you damaging ORCA I. 01:04:19.855 --> 01:04:20.397 AUDIENCE: OK. 01:04:20.397 --> 01:04:22.605 ELIZABETH CHOE: And I think, you say something like-- 01:04:22.605 --> 01:04:25.030 AUDIENCE: Let's take this box-- ORCA I-- and create damage 01:04:25.030 --> 01:04:27.520 below the water line, which I've indicated right here. 01:04:27.520 --> 01:04:27.780 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 01:04:27.780 --> 01:04:30.230 I think you can actually cut that part out completely, 01:04:30.230 --> 01:04:32.892 because after you cut it, you say, as you can see, 01:04:32.892 --> 01:04:35.350 we've damaged ORCA I, so I think that's enough information. 01:04:37.929 --> 01:04:39.970 And I get what you're saying with the water line, 01:04:39.970 --> 01:04:43.130 but I don't think it's super relevant to the point 01:04:43.130 --> 01:04:46.080 of the video, so I think it's OK if you cut that out entirely. 01:04:46.080 --> 01:04:47.935 Oh, yeah, when you go from this scene-- 01:04:47.935 --> 01:04:50.025 AUDIENCE: --in the weight of the added water. 01:04:50.025 --> 01:04:54.075 What if the ORCA I contained cargo, or oil, or even people? 01:04:54.075 --> 01:04:54.950 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 01:04:54.950 --> 01:04:58.910 The music here is, like, it's like trying 01:04:58.910 --> 01:05:02.400 to pull out my heartstrings. 01:05:02.400 --> 01:05:06.034 AUDIENCE: Now let's take ORCA II and do the same thing. 01:05:10.390 --> 01:05:14.500 We can see that ORCA II did not sink-- ORCA II sink. 01:05:14.500 --> 01:05:16.750 As easy as it sounds, this simple demonstration 01:05:16.750 --> 01:05:20.860 is essential to the design of huge complex ships. 01:05:20.860 --> 01:05:22.755 So why didn't ORCA II sink? 01:05:22.755 --> 01:05:24.380 ELIZABETH CHOE: So this is an example-- 01:05:24.380 --> 01:05:28.435 it happened one other time where you leave a gap in between some 01:05:28.435 --> 01:05:31.070 of your sentences, and the gap is a little long. 01:05:31.070 --> 01:05:38.720 So you can cut to a digital zoom of the same shot 01:05:38.720 --> 01:05:41.220 to clean up the gap a little bit. 01:05:41.220 --> 01:05:43.640 Because I think that you were doing it to help you host, 01:05:43.640 --> 01:05:45.640 and, like, help you get through the lines, which 01:05:45.640 --> 01:05:48.020 is totally OK and understandable, 01:05:48.020 --> 01:05:50.340 but I would just hide that gap a little. 01:05:50.340 --> 01:05:53.975 AUDIENCE: I stuttered here, and I kept looking back 01:05:53.975 --> 01:05:55.987 to the boat, so it was weird, like I 01:05:55.987 --> 01:05:57.445 was using that almost as my crutch, 01:05:57.445 --> 01:05:59.890 that I had this prop that I could kind of like square up. 01:05:59.890 --> 01:06:01.130 ELIZABETH CHOE: I think you actually were-- 01:06:01.130 --> 01:06:02.670 your delivery was fine here. 01:06:02.670 --> 01:06:03.760 I wasn't distracted by it. 01:06:03.760 --> 01:06:05.884 AUDIENCE: --II did not sink, although it is sitting 01:06:05.884 --> 01:06:07.620 an angle towards the bow. 01:06:07.620 --> 01:06:08.914 So why didn't ORCA II sink? 01:06:08.914 --> 01:06:11.080 ELIZABETH CHOE: I like the way you ask the question. 01:06:11.080 --> 01:06:13.127 That's, like, how you would normally. 01:06:13.127 --> 01:06:14.460 AUDIENCE: As easy as it sounds-- 01:06:14.460 --> 01:06:16.110 ELIZABETH CHOE: And see how that gap feels just a little bit 01:06:16.110 --> 01:06:16.610 too long. 01:06:16.610 --> 01:06:18.790 AUDIENCE: --this simple demonstration is essential 01:06:18.790 --> 01:06:21.550 to the design of huge complex ships-- 01:06:21.550 --> 01:06:24.545 ships that are responsible for carrying about 90%-- 01:06:24.545 --> 01:06:26.700 ELIZABETH CHOE: Do you have B-roll or pictures 01:06:26.700 --> 01:06:27.800 of some of these ships? 01:06:27.800 --> 01:06:29.110 That was the one thing I was thinking 01:06:29.110 --> 01:06:30.526 throughout this video was, like, I 01:06:30.526 --> 01:06:33.070 would love to see what the things look like in real life. 01:06:33.070 --> 01:06:35.170 AUDIENCE: I could probably do something like that. 01:06:35.170 --> 01:06:36.340 ELIZABETH CHOE: I think this would be a great place 01:06:36.340 --> 01:06:38.160 to cut to B-roll or pictures. 01:06:38.160 --> 01:06:40.510 You can just keep the audio, but that would help mix 01:06:40.510 --> 01:06:42.610 up the visuals a lot too. 01:06:42.610 --> 01:06:44.319 AUDIENCE: --of all our stuff is-- 01:06:44.319 --> 01:06:45.110 ELIZABETH CHOE: OK. 01:06:45.110 --> 01:06:47.160 So this cut was a little-- this was 01:06:47.160 --> 01:06:52.310 what I was talking about with the line of sight 01:06:52.310 --> 01:06:54.190 when I gave the editing lecture. 01:06:54.190 --> 01:06:59.476 In the one scene, you're kind of sitting like this, right? 01:06:59.476 --> 01:07:03.576 And you have, like-- this is a terrible drawing. 01:07:03.576 --> 01:07:06.460 But you have your boat in the water, and it's sort of, like, 01:07:06.460 --> 01:07:07.600 a weird semi-bird's-eye. 01:07:07.600 --> 01:07:11.110 And then you cut, and you're not quite 01:07:11.110 --> 01:07:13.132 in a different enough position, so it feels 01:07:13.132 --> 01:07:14.340 just, like, slightly jarring. 01:07:14.340 --> 01:07:16.210 It feels like someone just tipped the camera 01:07:16.210 --> 01:07:17.410 over a little bit. 01:07:17.410 --> 01:07:22.220 So either cut to a closer shot of you 01:07:22.220 --> 01:07:28.500 like that, to hide that a little bit, or do B-roll there. 01:07:28.500 --> 01:07:30.685 If you're coming out of B-roll here, 01:07:30.685 --> 01:07:32.310 then this transition won't be as weird, 01:07:32.310 --> 01:07:36.420 and my comment is totally irrelevant, but just 01:07:36.420 --> 01:07:39.471 something to think about. 01:07:39.471 --> 01:07:41.544 AUDIENCE: I mean, so-- sorry, I'm, 01:07:41.544 --> 01:07:47.050 like, 10 steps ahead of my head, where I am in actual reality. 01:07:47.050 --> 01:07:49.960 You never put your Coast Guard outfit on. 01:07:49.960 --> 01:07:50.930 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 01:07:50.930 --> 01:07:53.597 I felt like if I wanted to try to make 01:07:53.597 --> 01:07:58.390 it seem like less, like, me talking, 01:07:58.390 --> 01:08:01.283 that would have just put on a whole different persona. 01:08:01.283 --> 01:08:03.074 So I kind of, like, I'm wearing boat shoes, 01:08:03.074 --> 01:08:05.785 so that's hard to do. 01:08:05.785 --> 01:08:06.326 AUDIENCE: OK. 01:08:06.326 --> 01:08:10.260 I just wonder if at the very, very last scene, where 01:08:10.260 --> 01:08:14.048 you have your finale comment about a very simple concept 01:08:14.048 --> 01:08:17.229 as floating, if ever there were a moment 01:08:17.229 --> 01:08:21.100 to put that hat on, and have your awesome Coast Guard 01:08:21.100 --> 01:08:23.677 outfit on, that would be it. 01:08:23.677 --> 01:08:25.760 ELIZABETH CHOE: If you don't want to shoot it now, 01:08:25.760 --> 01:08:27.593 we're going to make you do it next week when 01:08:27.593 --> 01:08:28.785 we shoot season 3, OK? 01:08:28.785 --> 01:08:29.410 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 01:08:29.410 --> 01:08:30.660 Got to go to the dry cleaners. 01:08:32.207 --> 01:08:34.040 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah, that's a good comment. 01:08:34.040 --> 01:08:35.415 AUDIENCE: The thing that you have 01:08:35.415 --> 01:08:37.575 that's so cool is, I mean, we talked about the fact 01:08:37.575 --> 01:08:40.729 that you actually, legitimately, are out there 01:08:40.729 --> 01:08:41.895 in the Coast Guard. 01:08:41.895 --> 01:08:45.364 And you say that, but showing us that in your film 01:08:45.364 --> 01:08:46.600 is really powerful. 01:08:46.600 --> 01:08:48.680 And even if, at just the very end, 01:08:48.680 --> 01:08:51.693 you tie that real life application back, 01:08:51.693 --> 01:08:53.609 I think that would be really, incredibly cool. 01:08:53.609 --> 01:08:55.567 ELIZABETH CHOE: Just for the last sentence too. 01:08:55.567 --> 01:08:57.270 And again, like, time permitting, right? 01:08:57.270 --> 01:08:59.660 Because I know that you guys don't have a ton of time 01:08:59.660 --> 01:09:03.800 to incorporate all this stuff. 01:09:03.800 --> 01:09:05.555 You've already gotten plenty of footage 01:09:05.555 --> 01:09:07.479 of you talking in this setting, so it 01:09:07.479 --> 01:09:09.189 wouldn't be very jarring to have you 01:09:09.189 --> 01:09:14.061 say the last sentence, like, out by the sea, or by the boats. 01:09:14.061 --> 01:09:15.727 AUDIENCE: Or even if when you say, like, 01:09:15.727 --> 01:09:19.136 I'm a Coast Guard, whatever, even if you quickly 01:09:19.136 --> 01:09:23.020 have a picture of even photos of you in uniform, to just put-- I 01:09:23.020 --> 01:09:23.520 don't know. 01:09:23.520 --> 01:09:25.020 I don't know how that would look. 01:09:25.020 --> 01:09:27.662 But just something that shows us, and doesn't tell us 01:09:27.662 --> 01:09:31.466 this totally authentic side to yourself would be cool. 01:09:31.466 --> 01:09:35.714 AUDIENCE: So do you have access to the base here? 01:09:35.714 --> 01:09:37.130 AUDIENCE: To the one in North End? 01:09:37.130 --> 01:09:37.755 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 01:09:37.755 --> 01:09:39.557 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 01:09:39.557 --> 01:09:40.807 AUDIENCE: Because one of our-- 01:09:40.807 --> 01:09:42.667 AUDIENCE: They have shirts there. 01:09:42.667 --> 01:09:43.292 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 01:09:43.292 --> 01:09:46.771 I mean, one of the Sloan fellows is also an officer. 01:09:46.771 --> 01:09:47.762 AUDIENCE: OK. 01:09:47.762 --> 01:09:48.262 [INAUDIBLE]? 01:09:48.262 --> 01:09:50.703 AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. 01:09:50.703 --> 01:09:51.244 AUDIENCE: No. 01:09:51.244 --> 01:09:54.569 He's based in there. 01:09:54.569 --> 01:09:56.110 ELIZABETH CHOE: So again, I know it's 01:09:56.110 --> 01:09:58.770 short notice-- you'd have to do it between today and tomorrow, 01:09:58.770 --> 01:10:00.650 basically, so it's OK if you can't do it, 01:10:00.650 --> 01:10:05.120 but something to think about, if you want 01:10:05.120 --> 01:10:07.100 to do it for Science Out Loud. 01:10:07.100 --> 01:10:08.450 All right. 01:10:08.450 --> 01:10:10.115 Yuliya, you ready? 01:10:10.115 --> 01:10:10.740 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 01:10:10.740 --> 01:10:13.559 So there are-- the beginning and the end, we filmed outside. 01:10:13.559 --> 01:10:15.850 There's a lot of wind, and I couldn't connect the mike, 01:10:15.850 --> 01:10:17.430 because I was standing far away. 01:10:17.430 --> 01:10:19.020 So I tried to do voiceover. 01:10:19.020 --> 01:10:21.335 I don't know how it sounds, because honestly, I 01:10:21.335 --> 01:10:24.400 was just tired of hearing my voice at that point. 01:10:24.400 --> 01:10:27.310 And then, there is this, actually, like the thumbnail, 01:10:27.310 --> 01:10:29.600 this is where the animation is supposed to be. 01:10:29.600 --> 01:10:33.583 So the white screen is animations. 01:10:33.583 --> 01:10:34.581 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah? 01:10:34.581 --> 01:10:36.577 AUDIENCE: David and Kenneth are the ones 01:10:36.577 --> 01:10:40.070 who are Google Doc commenting on this. 01:10:40.070 --> 01:10:41.567 ELIZABETH CHOE: Thank you. 01:10:41.567 --> 01:10:43.608 And we'll go through it again if you guys forget. 01:10:46.058 --> 01:10:47.056 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 01:10:47.056 --> 01:10:50.549 [MUSIC PLAYING] 01:10:53.543 --> 01:10:54.560 -Hi. 01:10:54.560 --> 01:10:58.400 What do snowflakes and cellphones have in common? 01:10:58.400 --> 01:11:01.590 Well, let me start by drawing a snowflake first. 01:11:01.590 --> 01:11:05.220 I draw an equilateral triangle, divide each side 01:11:05.220 --> 01:11:09.730 into three parts, and draw another equilateral triangle 01:11:09.730 --> 01:11:11.600 on top of each one. 01:11:11.600 --> 01:11:13.900 Then take out the middle, and repeat 01:11:13.900 --> 01:11:17.520 the process, this time with 1, 2, 3, 4 times 01:11:17.520 --> 01:11:19.650 3, which is 12 sides. 01:11:19.650 --> 01:11:22.970 Eventually, the shape will start looking something like this. 01:11:22.970 --> 01:11:26.010 In mathematics, this is called a Koch snowflake. 01:11:26.010 --> 01:11:28.820 If I repeated my process again and again, 01:11:28.820 --> 01:11:32.570 I would see this same pattern anywhere I looked. 01:11:32.570 --> 01:11:36.180 This is a Koch snowflake, this time drawn on a computer. 01:11:36.180 --> 01:11:38.720 Such neverending patterns, that on any scale, 01:11:38.720 --> 01:11:40.800 on any level of zoom, look roughly the same, 01:11:40.800 --> 01:11:42.780 are called fractals. 01:11:42.780 --> 01:11:45.660 Computer scientists can program these patterns 01:11:45.660 --> 01:11:48.300 by repeating an often simple mathematical process 01:11:48.300 --> 01:11:49.810 over and over. 01:11:49.810 --> 01:11:54.300 In the 1990s, a radio astronomer by the name of Nathan Cohen 01:11:54.300 --> 01:11:58.480 used fractals to revolutionize wireless communications. 01:11:58.480 --> 01:12:01.810 At the time, Cohen was having troubles with his landlord. 01:12:01.810 --> 01:12:04.230 The man wouldn't let him put an antenna on his roof. 01:12:04.230 --> 01:12:09.810 So Cohen designed a more compact fractal radio antenna instead. 01:12:09.810 --> 01:12:12.770 The landlord didn't notice it, and it worked better 01:12:12.770 --> 01:12:14.470 than the ones before. 01:12:14.470 --> 01:12:18.010 Working further, Cohen designed a new antenna, 01:12:18.010 --> 01:12:22.016 this time using a fractal called the Menger sponge. 01:12:22.016 --> 01:12:24.234 The Menger sponge is not really the sponge 01:12:24.234 --> 01:12:25.650 you'd be scrubbing your back with, 01:12:25.650 --> 01:12:27.875 but you can still think of it like that. 01:12:27.875 --> 01:12:30.850 Imagine both water and soap getting through your sponge's 01:12:30.850 --> 01:12:34.660 holes, except the water is Wi-Fi, and the soap is, 01:12:34.660 --> 01:12:36.400 say, Bluetooth. 01:12:36.400 --> 01:12:38.150 The fractal's infinite sponginess 01:12:38.150 --> 01:12:40.690 allows it to receive many different frequencies 01:12:40.690 --> 01:12:41.640 simultaneously. 01:12:41.640 --> 01:12:44.150 Before Cohen's invention, antennas 01:12:44.150 --> 01:12:47.400 had to be cut for one frequency, and that was the only frequency 01:12:47.400 --> 01:12:48.590 they could operate at. 01:12:48.590 --> 01:12:51.032 Without Cohen's sponge, your cell phone 01:12:51.032 --> 01:12:52.990 would have to look something like a [INAUDIBLE] 01:12:52.990 --> 01:12:55.480 to receive multiple signals, including 01:12:55.480 --> 01:12:58.260 the one your friends use when they call. 01:12:58.260 --> 01:13:00.740 Cohen later proved that only fractal shapes 01:13:00.740 --> 01:13:03.090 could work with such a wide range of frequencies. 01:13:03.090 --> 01:13:05.650 Today, millions of wireless devices, 01:13:05.650 --> 01:13:07.990 such as laptops and bar code scanners, 01:13:07.990 --> 01:13:10.680 use Cohen's fractal antenna. 01:13:10.680 --> 01:13:12.730 Cohen's genius invention, however, 01:13:12.730 --> 01:13:15.520 was not the first application of fractals in the world. 01:13:15.520 --> 01:13:17.530 Nature has been doing it the whole time, 01:13:17.530 --> 01:13:19.100 and not just the snowflakes. 01:13:19.100 --> 01:13:21.890 Natural selection favors the most efficient systems 01:13:21.890 --> 01:13:24.480 and organisms, often of a fractal form. 01:13:24.480 --> 01:13:26.120 The spiral fractal, for example, is 01:13:26.120 --> 01:13:30.100 present in seashells, broccoli, and hurricanes. 01:13:30.100 --> 01:13:32.850 The fractal tree is relatively easy to program, 01:13:32.850 --> 01:13:35.600 and can be used to study river systems, blood 01:13:35.600 --> 01:13:38.150 vessels, and lightning bolts. 01:13:38.150 --> 01:13:40.770 So many natural systems previously thought off limits 01:13:40.770 --> 01:13:45.248 to mathematicians can now be explained in terms of fractals. 01:13:45.248 --> 01:13:48.375 Mathematics allows us to learn nature's best practices 01:13:48.375 --> 01:13:51.450 and then apply them to solve real world problems. 01:13:51.450 --> 01:13:54.616 Much like Cohen's antenna revolutionized the field 01:13:54.616 --> 01:13:58.186 of telecommunications, other fractal research 01:13:58.186 --> 01:14:00.310 is changing medicine, weather prediction, 01:14:00.310 --> 01:14:05.886 and building design here at MIT and everywhere in the world. 01:14:05.886 --> 01:14:06.878 Look around you. 01:14:06.878 --> 01:14:09.358 What beautiful patterns do you see? 01:14:17.207 --> 01:14:17.790 [END PLAYBACK] 01:14:17.790 --> 01:14:20.766 [APPLAUSE] 01:14:21.667 --> 01:14:22.750 ELIZABETH CHOE: All right. 01:14:27.730 --> 01:14:29.635 Any thoughts from anyone? 01:14:29.635 --> 01:14:31.530 Should we dive right in? 01:14:31.530 --> 01:14:35.555 Yuliya, what are your favorite and least favorite parts 01:14:35.555 --> 01:14:36.290 about this cut? 01:14:42.807 --> 01:14:43.640 AUDIENCE: Let's see. 01:14:43.640 --> 01:14:46.930 There was some scenes that I liked better than others. 01:14:46.930 --> 01:14:49.190 That's mostly because of the lighting and the sound. 01:14:49.190 --> 01:14:53.595 I think the one in the classroom had 01:14:53.595 --> 01:14:57.020 a nice sound and nice lighting. 01:14:57.020 --> 01:15:01.595 So I guess the indoor scenes were a lot easier to shoot. 01:15:07.690 --> 01:15:12.680 ELIZABETH CHOE: So I think, in general, again, 01:15:12.680 --> 01:15:14.020 very nice script. 01:15:14.020 --> 01:15:18.280 This came such a long way from the initial ideation phase, 01:15:18.280 --> 01:15:21.357 and I think it is, like computer science-- I mean, 01:15:21.357 --> 01:15:23.940 my favorite thing about all the videos that you guys have done 01:15:23.940 --> 01:15:27.190 is the topics are so unique, and so different than what 01:15:27.190 --> 01:15:28.569 people normally get in school. 01:15:28.569 --> 01:15:30.110 And they're taking all these concepts 01:15:30.110 --> 01:15:32.235 that they've learned in school, but just putting it 01:15:32.235 --> 01:15:33.402 in a very different context. 01:15:33.402 --> 01:15:35.818 And it's hopefully because you're talking about the things 01:15:35.818 --> 01:15:36.910 that you're excited about. 01:15:36.910 --> 01:15:41.770 And so I'm really happy with how you've transformed, like, 01:15:41.770 --> 01:15:43.850 math, which is, again, a very hard video 01:15:43.850 --> 01:15:48.269 to do if you don't do it in the style of Vi Hart, 01:15:48.269 --> 01:15:49.810 and putting your face and hosting it. 01:15:49.810 --> 01:15:51.560 It's done nicely. 01:15:51.560 --> 01:15:56.070 I think, in general, the video has a very fast pace to it, 01:15:56.070 --> 01:15:59.380 and I don't know if it's because the cuts are happening 01:15:59.380 --> 01:16:02.480 so frequently, or you're naturally a very animated 01:16:02.480 --> 01:16:06.860 person, which is nice, but leave a little bit of room, 01:16:06.860 --> 01:16:10.350 like, a little bit of breathing space to compensate for that. 01:16:10.350 --> 01:16:13.280 I think maybe the reason why it was hard for me 01:16:13.280 --> 01:16:15.800 to follow a little bit was the opening 01:16:15.800 --> 01:16:18.310 seemed a little too short. 01:16:18.310 --> 01:16:20.970 And I know that you had edited it from the last time I had 01:16:20.970 --> 01:16:22.836 seen it, but let's-- 01:16:22.836 --> 01:16:23.502 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 01:16:23.502 --> 01:16:30.270 [MUSIC PLAYING] 01:16:30.270 --> 01:16:30.770 -Hi. 01:16:30.770 --> 01:16:34.564 What do snowflakes and cell phones have in common? 01:16:34.564 --> 01:16:37.637 Well, let me start by drawing a snowflake first. 01:16:37.637 --> 01:16:38.220 [END PLAYBACK] 01:16:38.220 --> 01:16:39.095 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 01:16:39.095 --> 01:16:41.620 It seems like it's so overly condensed. 01:16:41.620 --> 01:16:44.930 And I know you had brought it down from something that 01:16:44.930 --> 01:16:46.440 was a little bit bigger, but I think 01:16:46.440 --> 01:16:49.880 that it's just so, like, it comes out of nowhere, like, hi. 01:16:49.880 --> 01:16:51.335 What do these have in common? 01:16:51.335 --> 01:16:52.600 It's like, wait, what? 01:16:52.600 --> 01:16:54.740 Like, I wouldn't have had that question. 01:16:54.740 --> 01:16:57.530 And even getting rid of the hi helps with that. 01:16:57.530 --> 01:16:58.800 It's a nice question. 01:16:58.800 --> 01:17:03.660 What do snowflakes and cell phone antennas have in common? 01:17:03.660 --> 01:17:06.550 But there's not enough of a lead into you 01:17:06.550 --> 01:17:10.560 going into describing what a fractal is, yet 01:17:10.560 --> 01:17:13.100 fractals is on the title. 01:17:13.100 --> 01:17:14.992 I think that maybe you could do a little bit 01:17:14.992 --> 01:17:16.450 with the transition there, and I'll 01:17:16.450 --> 01:17:18.680 brainstorm with you, because I can't think of anything 01:17:18.680 --> 01:17:19.513 off the top my head. 01:17:19.513 --> 01:17:22.620 Do you guys have any suggestions for that opening? 01:17:22.620 --> 01:17:23.760 Yeah, Andrea. 01:17:23.760 --> 01:17:27.030 AUDIENCE: Maybe like, I don't know exactly how 01:17:27.030 --> 01:17:31.610 you could do it, but almost like the first shot, where you're 01:17:31.610 --> 01:17:34.630 saying, what do snowflakes-- and then you see, like, 01:17:34.630 --> 01:17:37.447 sort of an image of a snowflake and cell phones, 01:17:37.447 --> 01:17:39.030 and then it sort of zooms out, and you 01:17:39.030 --> 01:17:42.564 realize that the picture is on the cell phone. 01:17:42.564 --> 01:17:43.230 AUDIENCE: Maybe. 01:17:43.230 --> 01:17:46.100 AUDIENCE: Sort of have in common. 01:17:46.100 --> 01:17:48.620 And then, you're-- and then you. 01:17:48.620 --> 01:17:50.120 ELIZABETH CHOE: I mean, I think it's 01:17:50.120 --> 01:17:52.009 OK to introduce the idea of fractals, 01:17:52.009 --> 01:17:53.800 as long as you set it up a little bit more. 01:17:53.800 --> 01:17:56.300 So something like, what do snowflakes and cell phones 01:17:56.300 --> 01:17:57.810 have in common? 01:17:57.810 --> 01:18:02.310 Neverending repeating patterns called fractals. 01:18:02.310 --> 01:18:05.400 And then do a little bit of a slower transition 01:18:05.400 --> 01:18:08.050 into you at the blackboard here. 01:18:08.050 --> 01:18:09.800 Something a little bit more like that. 01:18:09.800 --> 01:18:12.130 I think the visuals help a lot. 01:18:12.130 --> 01:18:15.290 I know that you had filmed up in Stata, because eventually you 01:18:15.290 --> 01:18:18.170 talk about how it affects architecture, 01:18:18.170 --> 01:18:20.520 but I don't think that this location is super 01:18:20.520 --> 01:18:22.750 vital to the opening, and I think 01:18:22.750 --> 01:18:26.010 you can get cleaner audio if you do VO, 01:18:26.010 --> 01:18:28.257 or if you just re-shoot it with you on the table, 01:18:28.257 --> 01:18:30.590 and then you have a picture of a snowflake that comes up 01:18:30.590 --> 01:18:34.680 in a picture of a cell phone, or something like Andrea said. 01:18:34.680 --> 01:18:38.640 But I think having the audience onboard from the get-go 01:18:38.640 --> 01:18:43.290 will help with the pacing of the video as it continues. 01:18:43.290 --> 01:18:47.700 I know that you had struggled with the music too, 01:18:47.700 --> 01:18:51.490 and I think-- I don't know-- so much of music 01:18:51.490 --> 01:18:53.120 is personal taste. 01:18:53.120 --> 01:18:56.290 To me, all I can think about when 01:18:56.290 --> 01:19:00.520 I hear this music is, like, old Korean soap operas. 01:19:00.520 --> 01:19:02.860 And so I don't know if it is, like, 01:19:02.860 --> 01:19:06.350 the most appropriate tone, and maybe I 01:19:06.350 --> 01:19:10.040 feel that way because of experiences of my parents 01:19:10.040 --> 01:19:14.260 watching them, but I think you could play around 01:19:14.260 --> 01:19:15.230 with some other pieces. 01:19:15.230 --> 01:19:18.750 I like the general tempo of the music, 01:19:18.750 --> 01:19:21.540 and how it's sort of this same melody on loop 01:19:21.540 --> 01:19:24.040 in the background, so it's not super distracting, 01:19:24.040 --> 01:19:25.020 and it's a good volume. 01:19:25.020 --> 01:19:27.690 But I would play around with a couple other songs, 01:19:27.690 --> 01:19:29.750 and I can help you with that, if you 01:19:29.750 --> 01:19:32.056 want to run some options by me. 01:19:32.056 --> 01:19:33.930 AUDIENCE: I wanted to use this one because it 01:19:33.930 --> 01:19:39.000 was kind of calming, so kind of to offset the general fast pace 01:19:39.000 --> 01:19:40.985 and animated talking to something 01:19:40.985 --> 01:19:42.110 soothing in the background. 01:19:42.110 --> 01:19:45.970 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah So I think it's a good tone to start with, 01:19:45.970 --> 01:19:50.550 and again, maybe it's just my personal preference, 01:19:50.550 --> 01:19:54.770 but something about it made me fixate on the music 01:19:54.770 --> 01:19:56.450 more than on the text. 01:19:56.450 --> 01:19:58.040 Did anyone else have-- maybe it really 01:19:58.040 --> 01:19:59.820 is, just, like I can't get over how much it reminds 01:19:59.820 --> 01:20:01.020 me of Korean soap operas. 01:20:02.530 --> 01:20:04.440 AUDIENCE: It stood out for me at the start, 01:20:04.440 --> 01:20:07.270 like, especially for this scene, it 01:20:07.270 --> 01:20:11.770 gave me the feeling like it was going to something romantic. 01:20:11.770 --> 01:20:12.947 I don't know. 01:20:12.947 --> 01:20:14.530 ELIZABETH CHOE: It's very sentimental, 01:20:14.530 --> 01:20:17.390 like the music evokes something very sentimental, 01:20:17.390 --> 01:20:21.510 just like the opening of the ships one 01:20:21.510 --> 01:20:24.700 evokes a mood that's very different from what 01:20:24.700 --> 01:20:25.700 you're about to go into. 01:20:25.700 --> 01:20:28.120 And especially if you open with something like that, 01:20:28.120 --> 01:20:30.657 if you'd open with a banjo thing-- or not the banjo-- 01:20:30.657 --> 01:20:32.240 whatever you had for the second piece, 01:20:32.240 --> 01:20:34.480 I think it would have been fine. 01:20:34.480 --> 01:20:36.180 But something about opening with music 01:20:36.180 --> 01:20:38.550 that sets a tone that's very different from what you're 01:20:38.550 --> 01:20:42.880 intending to achieve, it threw me off a little bit. 01:20:42.880 --> 01:20:46.700 But luckily, it's something that it's easily fixable. 01:20:46.700 --> 01:20:49.130 You can easily play around with different types of music. 01:20:51.720 --> 01:20:54.660 AUDIENCE: Because for me, you give us, 01:20:54.660 --> 01:20:56.495 because there was a Digicom video, 01:20:56.495 --> 01:21:00.940 and there was the idea that you could use something calming, 01:21:00.940 --> 01:21:03.470 so I tried to use something calming, 01:21:03.470 --> 01:21:05.390 but as you see, I didn't choose that, 01:21:05.390 --> 01:21:08.470 because I realized the calming one will make 01:21:08.470 --> 01:21:12.320 my video feel very monotonous. 01:21:12.320 --> 01:21:16.530 But when I observe the Digicom audio closer, 01:21:16.530 --> 01:21:19.490 I realized there was some percussion notes, 01:21:19.490 --> 01:21:20.196 so that helped. 01:21:20.196 --> 01:21:21.570 So maybe you could find something 01:21:21.570 --> 01:21:24.920 similar to what you have right now, but with a little bit-- 01:21:24.920 --> 01:21:31.282 not too much-- percussion here would help with the pacing. 01:21:31.282 --> 01:21:32.740 ELIZABETH CHOE: That's really good. 01:21:32.740 --> 01:21:36.424 And again, with music, there's no hard and fast rules with 01:21:36.424 --> 01:21:37.590 what works and what doesn't. 01:21:37.590 --> 01:21:39.100 I mean, a lot of it is just, like, 01:21:39.100 --> 01:21:42.340 your gut feeling when you hear it, if it makes sense, 01:21:42.340 --> 01:21:44.780 or if it doesn't. 01:21:44.780 --> 01:21:47.244 And obviously, my gut feeling was very different from 01:21:47.244 --> 01:21:47.910 everyone else's. 01:21:47.910 --> 01:21:49.542 Yeah, Jamie? 01:21:49.542 --> 01:21:53.218 AUDIENCE: First of all, compared to where we started, this is 01:21:53.218 --> 01:21:54.562 isn't, like, oh my goodness. 01:21:54.562 --> 01:21:57.197 This is way, way more awesome than I ever thought 01:21:57.197 --> 01:21:59.590 was possible, with our first conversation 01:21:59.590 --> 01:22:02.330 about it's not real, so this is like-- 01:22:02.330 --> 01:22:05.134 and what I loved with the fractal piece at the beginning, 01:22:05.134 --> 01:22:07.600 where you really explained, because we gave you 01:22:07.600 --> 01:22:09.485 that feedback in the last time, was 01:22:09.485 --> 01:22:12.319 you need to set us up for success in explaining what 01:22:12.319 --> 01:22:13.819 a fractal actually is, and I thought 01:22:13.819 --> 01:22:15.591 you did a really fantastic job. 01:22:15.591 --> 01:22:17.090 One think that you may want to think 01:22:17.090 --> 01:22:22.030 about is you have a very sing-songy voice. 01:22:22.030 --> 01:22:25.240 Your voice is high, and it's kind of sing-songy. 01:22:25.240 --> 01:22:26.920 And at the beginning, you set up this-- 01:22:26.920 --> 01:22:28.920 I don't know if you've ever seen Mrs. Doubtfire, 01:22:28.920 --> 01:22:31.810 but it's this movie where Robin Williams is dressed up 01:22:31.810 --> 01:22:33.745 as this old grandmother, and is just 01:22:33.745 --> 01:22:36.820 kind of this hilarious figure. 01:22:36.820 --> 01:22:39.235 And I think there's an unintended humor 01:22:39.235 --> 01:22:42.135 to your sing-songy-ness at the very beginning that 01:22:42.135 --> 01:22:45.637 makes me feel less credible wanting to watch you. 01:22:45.637 --> 01:22:47.470 And I think there's a very simple fix, which 01:22:47.470 --> 01:22:50.810 is just grounding your voice in a lower register. 01:22:50.810 --> 01:22:53.455 When you talk with your voice later on, 01:22:53.455 --> 01:22:55.865 just listen to that as you watch yourself. 01:22:55.865 --> 01:22:59.980 I notice that the times when your voice is a little lower 01:22:59.980 --> 01:23:03.885 is when I don't notice that as much, and so since you are 01:23:03.885 --> 01:23:06.890 thinking of reworking this first scene, 01:23:06.890 --> 01:23:09.355 you may want to think about consciously grounding 01:23:09.355 --> 01:23:11.860 your voice a little bit more in your chest, 01:23:11.860 --> 01:23:14.275 so that we don't, like, unintentionally 01:23:14.275 --> 01:23:17.515 think it's funny when it's not intended to be. 01:23:17.515 --> 01:23:18.890 ELIZABETH CHOE: And I know George 01:23:18.890 --> 01:23:20.850 had said the camera calms you down, 01:23:20.850 --> 01:23:23.990 and in general it does, and you compensate with higher energy, 01:23:23.990 --> 01:23:26.769 but again, this is what I saying before, and oftentimes, 01:23:26.769 --> 01:23:28.810 hopefully, this stuff that we were saying earlier 01:23:28.810 --> 01:23:31.435 in the class makes a little more sense after you guys have gone 01:23:31.435 --> 01:23:34.070 through it, but sometimes the tendency is to compensate 01:23:34.070 --> 01:23:36.930 or equate higher energy to higher pitch, higher 01:23:36.930 --> 01:23:40.390 volume, like, higher everything, and it's really not 01:23:40.390 --> 01:23:40.910 that at all. 01:23:40.910 --> 01:23:42.330 A lot of it is just the mentality of, 01:23:42.330 --> 01:23:44.538 like, I'm going to be really present here, right now, 01:23:44.538 --> 01:23:46.600 and really give it 100% here. 01:23:46.600 --> 01:23:49.474 AUDIENCE: There's actually a really good TED 01:23:49.474 --> 01:23:54.875 Talk that's about how to speak to be listened to. 01:23:54.875 --> 01:23:59.300 And it's basically, you do these little vocal exorcises, 01:23:59.300 --> 01:24:01.985 and they both relax you, and they'll 01:24:01.985 --> 01:24:06.562 drop your register down, like, just going through them. 01:24:06.562 --> 01:24:10.418 And I had to do those prior to doing-- 01:24:10.418 --> 01:24:13.212 I learned something similar when I was first 01:24:13.212 --> 01:24:14.254 learning public speaking. 01:24:14.254 --> 01:24:15.670 ELIZABETH CHOE: It's a great thing 01:24:15.670 --> 01:24:17.920 to think about not just with making these videos, 01:24:17.920 --> 01:24:20.480 but when you're giving talks later on. 01:24:20.480 --> 01:24:22.952 Again, like, when you're nervous or excited, 01:24:22.952 --> 01:24:25.160 your tendency is to talk a lot with your hands, which 01:24:25.160 --> 01:24:28.282 I know I do, and talk really high pitched. 01:24:28.282 --> 01:24:30.490 So it's just a good thing to think about, in general, 01:24:30.490 --> 01:24:31.380 after this class. 01:24:31.380 --> 01:24:32.325 AUDIENCE: Number two. 01:24:32.325 --> 01:24:34.283 AUDIENCE: At the beginning of those voiceovers, 01:24:34.283 --> 01:24:37.660 I was trying to match the video in my room. 01:24:37.660 --> 01:24:40.015 And it did feel a little bit off as well. 01:24:40.015 --> 01:24:41.259 I wasn't sure how to-- 01:24:41.259 --> 01:24:43.300 ELIZABETH CHOE: I think you could do the opening, 01:24:43.300 --> 01:24:45.840 like, just you set up a tripod, and sitting 01:24:45.840 --> 01:24:48.379 in your room or something, just something really simple. 01:24:48.379 --> 01:24:49.920 What do this and this have in common? 01:24:49.920 --> 01:24:52.680 Well, it's actually neverending repeating 01:24:52.680 --> 01:24:56.550 patterns called fractals, and then you go into fractals. 01:24:56.550 --> 01:24:58.050 AUDIENCE: On a very practical level, 01:24:58.050 --> 01:25:00.814 like, I do a lot of helping of people get ready for talks 01:25:00.814 --> 01:25:04.170 in my lab, and just, like, grounding your feet wherever 01:25:04.170 --> 01:25:06.928 you are, feeling like you're grounded to the earth, 01:25:06.928 --> 01:25:11.437 and then getting a really deep breath, like way from in here 01:25:11.437 --> 01:25:14.450 before you speak, that will help you fight that tendency 01:25:14.450 --> 01:25:15.860 to go way up high. 01:25:19.282 --> 01:25:21.240 ELIZABETH CHOE: And I think the animations here 01:25:21.240 --> 01:25:22.690 will look really good. 01:25:22.690 --> 01:25:25.204 Again, like, visual cues, anything 01:25:25.204 --> 01:25:27.620 that you're going to add, even if it's just still pictures 01:25:27.620 --> 01:25:31.130 will make a big difference. 01:25:31.130 --> 01:25:34.480 And I would play around with the ending too. 01:25:34.480 --> 01:25:38.170 I like that you do the review, but again, the audio is hard 01:25:38.170 --> 01:25:41.330 when you're that far away. 01:25:41.330 --> 01:25:44.360 And you may be able to shoot this in the same room 01:25:44.360 --> 01:25:46.900 that you shoot the opening in-- or you re-shoot it, 01:25:46.900 --> 01:25:50.030 and then, I don't know, have a picture of Stata 01:25:50.030 --> 01:25:51.180 just pop up next to you. 01:25:51.180 --> 01:25:54.050 I think that's a way to compensate pretty easily. 01:25:54.050 --> 01:25:57.722 What is the world background for? 01:25:57.722 --> 01:25:59.680 AUDIENCE: It matches the world at the very end. 01:25:59.680 --> 01:26:00.305 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 01:26:00.305 --> 01:26:04.200 And it was just a nice background for titles. 01:26:04.200 --> 01:26:05.060 ELIZABETH CHOE: Oh. 01:26:05.060 --> 01:26:07.060 I would just go black, honestly. 01:26:07.060 --> 01:26:08.590 Just a black background. 01:26:08.590 --> 01:26:14.182 In general, I think simple reads more professional. 01:26:14.182 --> 01:26:14.950 Oh, I don't know. 01:26:14.950 --> 01:26:17.940 Professional's not the right word, but simple is better, 01:26:17.940 --> 01:26:19.690 I think. 01:26:19.690 --> 01:26:22.366 And I didn't make the connection of, like, look 01:26:22.366 --> 01:26:23.990 at the world when I saw the background. 01:26:23.990 --> 01:26:25.380 It's such a minor thing, though. 01:26:25.380 --> 01:26:29.260 I mean, it's just your credit, so it's OK, 01:26:29.260 --> 01:26:32.480 but just something to think about. 01:26:32.480 --> 01:26:36.084 Any final comments for Yuliya? 01:26:36.084 --> 01:26:39.486 AUDIENCE: I thought that one scene in the dorm 01:26:39.486 --> 01:26:42.402 was really good, where you inadvertently 01:26:42.402 --> 01:26:44.215 had all the stuff behind us. 01:26:44.215 --> 01:26:46.540 I didn't know that it was going to turn out like that. 01:26:46.540 --> 01:26:48.241 AUDIENCE: Oh, the one in the lounge. 01:26:48.241 --> 01:26:48.865 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 01:26:48.865 --> 01:26:49.330 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 01:26:49.330 --> 01:26:51.450 And I think it was the best lighting, too, of all of them. 01:26:51.450 --> 01:26:52.408 AUDIENCE: That's great. 01:26:56.737 --> 01:26:57.820 ELIZABETH CHOE: All right. 01:26:57.820 --> 01:26:59.403 So who's going to comment on Yuliya's? 01:27:02.720 --> 01:27:06.650 AUDIENCE: PJ and Josh. 01:27:06.650 --> 01:27:07.840 ELIZABETH CHOE: All right. 01:27:07.840 --> 01:27:10.609 Last one, and then we'll take a break. 01:27:10.609 --> 01:27:12.775 David, do you want to say anything before we screen? 01:27:15.497 --> 01:27:17.080 Your video will just speak for itself. 01:27:19.048 --> 01:27:21.016 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 01:27:21.016 --> 01:27:24.460 [MUSIC PLAYING] 01:27:33.330 --> 01:27:35.430 -If I went out for a run now, dressed like this, 01:27:35.430 --> 01:27:37.860 you'd probably call me nuts, right? 01:27:37.860 --> 01:27:39.746 Because it's so cold outside that 01:27:39.746 --> 01:27:42.125 I'd probably die of hypothermia. 01:27:42.125 --> 01:27:44.460 However, in 2009, Wim Hof managed 01:27:44.460 --> 01:27:47.026 to run a full marathon in minus 20 degrees Celsius, 01:27:47.026 --> 01:27:48.150 wearing nothing but shorts. 01:27:48.150 --> 01:27:53.270 While most people would probably die, Wim Hof has survived. 01:27:53.270 --> 01:27:56.460 So what makes Wim Hof able to survive where others can't? 01:27:56.460 --> 01:27:58.040 The research team were suggesting 01:27:58.040 --> 01:28:01.687 that they subjected him to an icy bath for almost two hours. 01:28:01.687 --> 01:28:04.020 While most people would have their core body temperature 01:28:04.020 --> 01:28:07.117 drop to below 35 degrees, causing hypothermia to kick in, 01:28:07.117 --> 01:28:08.533 Wim Hof's body temperature dropped 01:28:08.533 --> 01:28:11.570 to a merely 37.4 degrees Celsius, 01:28:11.570 --> 01:28:13.210 staying surprisingly warm. 01:28:13.210 --> 01:28:15.500 And the funny thing is that the researchers couldn't 01:28:15.500 --> 01:28:17.880 find exactly what had happened. 01:28:17.880 --> 01:28:20.379 Maybe it's his genetic ancestry that saves him. 01:28:20.379 --> 01:28:21.920 In a sample study, studies have found 01:28:21.920 --> 01:28:24.040 that individuals with cold-climate ancestry, 01:28:24.040 --> 01:28:26.050 have been found to have mitochodria 01:28:26.050 --> 01:28:28.560 that can produce more heat and less chemical energy. 01:28:28.560 --> 01:28:30.615 Mitochondria is like a mini-furnace 01:28:30.615 --> 01:28:33.200 that burns the sugars from the food you eat 01:28:33.200 --> 01:28:35.440 into chemical and heat energy. 01:28:35.440 --> 01:28:38.052 Individuals like this are better able to survive the cold, 01:28:38.052 --> 01:28:41.620 however, scientists haven't fully studied Wim Hof's genome, 01:28:41.620 --> 01:28:44.030 so we don't really know. 01:28:44.030 --> 01:28:46.410 Wim Hof practices g-tummo, a Tibetan form 01:28:46.410 --> 01:28:48.420 of meditation and breathing, which allows 01:28:48.420 --> 01:28:50.062 him to double his metabolism. 01:28:50.062 --> 01:28:52.020 Remember those mitochondria I mentioned before? 01:28:52.020 --> 01:28:54.980 Wim Hop can produce enough heat through these mitochondria 01:28:54.980 --> 01:28:58.340 with special breathing, and massive contractions that 01:28:58.340 --> 01:29:02.032 can produce enough heat to body warm. 01:29:02.032 --> 01:29:03.990 Well, you might be tempted to believe that this 01:29:03.990 --> 01:29:06.680 is wishy-washy nonsense. 01:29:06.680 --> 01:29:08.685 However, participants in a study at NUS 01:29:08.685 --> 01:29:10.476 have been shown to increase their core body 01:29:10.476 --> 01:29:14.290 temperature using g-tummo, and they had no prior experience. 01:29:14.290 --> 01:29:15.595 Now, why is it so? 01:29:15.595 --> 01:29:17.470 Strong increases in brain waves were noticed, 01:29:17.470 --> 01:29:19.855 and many have theorized that this enables the body 01:29:19.855 --> 01:29:23.230 to effectively heat the center as well as distribute it 01:29:23.230 --> 01:29:24.940 to the extremities. 01:29:24.940 --> 01:29:26.880 We do not fully understand Wim Hof's methods. 01:29:26.880 --> 01:29:29.110 Although some have tried to follow in his footsteps, 01:29:29.110 --> 01:29:31.710 you would be unwise to do the same. 01:29:31.710 --> 01:29:34.030 And Wim Hof even claims that he can control 01:29:34.030 --> 01:29:35.430 other parts of his body. 01:29:35.430 --> 01:29:38.130 Now, if this is true, and scientifically a fact, 01:29:38.130 --> 01:29:39.780 who knows what doors could open. 01:29:39.780 --> 01:29:41.660 And since science hasn't figured it out yet, 01:29:41.660 --> 01:29:43.820 and I, myself, don't practice these methods, 01:29:43.820 --> 01:29:45.801 maybe I'd better be off donning more jackets. 01:29:58.723 --> 01:30:00.220 [END PLAYBACK] 01:30:00.220 --> 01:30:02.470 ELIZABETH CHOE: David, what was the hardest 01:30:02.470 --> 01:30:03.780 part about filming this video? 01:30:03.780 --> 01:30:05.979 AUDIENCE: I think it was following the script. 01:30:05.979 --> 01:30:07.520 ELIZABETH CHOE: Following the script. 01:30:07.520 --> 01:30:09.603 Just, like, remembering it when you were shooting. 01:30:11.911 --> 01:30:12.536 AUDIENCE: Yeah. 01:30:12.536 --> 01:30:14.036 I really think that was the hardest, 01:30:14.036 --> 01:30:17.496 because trying to say everything while looking at a camera 01:30:17.496 --> 01:30:18.984 felt very, very real. 01:30:21.987 --> 01:30:22.820 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yep. 01:30:22.820 --> 01:30:24.010 That makes a lot of sense. 01:30:24.010 --> 01:30:27.380 And again, like, using your partner to the fullest 01:30:27.380 --> 01:30:30.500 extent when you're filming can really 01:30:30.500 --> 01:30:32.600 help with that sort of humanizing 01:30:32.600 --> 01:30:35.590 the mechanical element of production, 01:30:35.590 --> 01:30:38.110 trying to talk to the person behind the camera. 01:30:38.110 --> 01:30:42.070 I think that you didn't look uncomfortable on camera. 01:30:42.070 --> 01:30:46.040 The only thing is, in general, you talk really fast, 01:30:46.040 --> 01:30:48.870 and with the music that was in it, 01:30:48.870 --> 01:30:50.750 I think that you can take some of the music 01:30:50.750 --> 01:30:53.710 out, or drop the volume a ton, or play with, like, 01:30:53.710 --> 01:30:55.720 less busy music. 01:30:55.720 --> 01:30:59.210 But having someone who talks naturally fast, and then, like, 01:30:59.210 --> 01:31:00.670 very upbeat music in the background 01:31:00.670 --> 01:31:02.870 is just, like, exacerbate, it's, like, 01:31:02.870 --> 01:31:04.940 constructive interference. 01:31:04.940 --> 01:31:10.220 AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] calm music, 01:31:10.220 --> 01:31:14.540 but I felt like I put calm music in. 01:31:14.540 --> 01:31:15.500 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 01:31:15.500 --> 01:31:19.450 I mean, you can also experiment with not using music 01:31:19.450 --> 01:31:20.737 in certain parts of the video. 01:31:20.737 --> 01:31:23.070 You guys don't need to have music the whole way through. 01:31:23.070 --> 01:31:24.150 It's OK. 01:31:24.150 --> 01:31:29.070 And I think because you talk so fast naturally, 01:31:29.070 --> 01:31:33.270 the music can be-- remember, with music, first do no harm, 01:31:33.270 --> 01:31:34.140 right? 01:31:34.140 --> 01:31:39.300 It can be hard to understand just the sheer amount 01:31:39.300 --> 01:31:43.300 of content that you're saying when the music is 01:31:43.300 --> 01:31:45.312 so upbeat and so loud. 01:31:45.312 --> 01:31:48.204 AUDIENCE: I think the music was, at least for me, personally, 01:31:48.204 --> 01:31:51.096 it had the same effect as when Elizabeth was showing 01:31:51.096 --> 01:31:53.640 the choices for the heart video, where at the beginning, 01:31:53.640 --> 01:31:57.664 it was a little bit too much for me, and I got the giggles. 01:31:57.664 --> 01:32:00.730 I don't know what about you putting on running shoes, 01:32:00.730 --> 01:32:02.540 and, like, just the loudness of that music, 01:32:02.540 --> 01:32:05.620 it just seemed a little bit ridiculous, 01:32:05.620 --> 01:32:09.090 that I wasn't mentally ready for some serious facts 01:32:09.090 --> 01:32:10.689 at that point. 01:32:10.689 --> 01:32:12.230 AUDIENCE: I wanted to make it upbeat. 01:32:12.230 --> 01:32:15.974 I wanted it to be like I was going to run in the cold. 01:32:15.974 --> 01:32:16.640 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 01:32:16.640 --> 01:32:20.070 [MUSIC PLAYING] 01:32:22.237 --> 01:32:22.820 [END PLAYBACK] 01:32:22.820 --> 01:32:24.745 AUDIENCE: It's good, like, until the point 01:32:24.745 --> 01:32:27.782 where you ask the question. 01:32:27.782 --> 01:32:30.199 From, like, instead of being, like, oh, OK, it's OK to be, 01:32:30.199 --> 01:32:32.282 like, oh, this is me when I'm running in the cold. 01:32:32.282 --> 01:32:34.546 But then as soon as you switch to actual explanation-- 01:32:34.546 --> 01:32:35.420 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 01:32:35.420 --> 01:32:39.874 I would just duck it out after you ask the question. 01:32:39.874 --> 01:32:42.160 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 01:32:42.160 --> 01:32:44.220 -If I went out for a run now dressed like this, 01:32:44.220 --> 01:32:46.690 you'd probably call me nuts, right? 01:32:46.690 --> 01:32:48.576 Because it's so cold outside that 01:32:48.576 --> 01:32:50.340 I'd probably die of hypothermia. 01:32:50.340 --> 01:32:50.960 [END PLAYBACK] 01:32:50.960 --> 01:32:52.335 ELIZABETH CHOE: And also there, I 01:32:52.335 --> 01:32:54.620 mean, everyone's done this, where they take 01:32:54.620 --> 01:33:00.220 pauses in weird parts of their sentences-- I mean, 01:33:00.220 --> 01:33:04.170 if you wanted to make it funny, I don't know if you do. 01:33:04.170 --> 01:33:06.066 AUDIENCE: She's making-- 01:33:06.066 --> 01:33:08.436 ELIZABETH CHOE: I am so sorry. 01:33:08.436 --> 01:33:10.810 AUDIENCE: I think it's one of my favorite things-- 01:33:10.810 --> 01:33:12.180 ELIZABETH CHOE: The last time this happened, I was thinking, 01:33:12.180 --> 01:33:14.360 oh my gosh, this happens to be more 01:33:14.360 --> 01:33:16.237 than I would like to admit, but I was, like, 01:33:16.237 --> 01:33:18.070 I hope this doesn't happen during the class, 01:33:18.070 --> 01:33:21.526 and it ends up on the internet, but now it's going to anyway. 01:33:21.526 --> 01:33:24.202 [LAUGHTER] 01:33:30.030 --> 01:33:31.650 If you wanted to make it funny, you 01:33:31.650 --> 01:33:36.610 could zoom in-- as you-- nevermind. 01:33:36.610 --> 01:33:37.699 Don't make it funny. 01:33:37.699 --> 01:33:39.115 AUDIENCE: So if you wanted-- I was 01:33:39.115 --> 01:33:42.731 going to say-- every time you pause, cut out that pause, 01:33:42.731 --> 01:33:44.980 and then maybe a little bit closer to your face, like, 01:33:44.980 --> 01:33:45.790 what if I die? 01:33:45.790 --> 01:33:47.280 And then, like, zoom in, I'm cold. 01:33:50.400 --> 01:33:52.767 That's really comedic. 01:33:52.767 --> 01:33:55.100 ELIZABETH CHOE: It's kind of like the thing that we did, 01:33:55.100 --> 01:33:58.450 and it's not very good, like the extreme zoom, 01:33:58.450 --> 01:34:01.440 and you could make it, like-- with comedy, 01:34:01.440 --> 01:34:03.912 going big or going home works the best, because you really 01:34:03.912 --> 01:34:05.870 have to commit to it, so if you want it to have 01:34:05.870 --> 01:34:07.830 a huge comedic effect, you would, like, 01:34:07.830 --> 01:34:13.710 zoom in really close, and you would have, like, 01:34:13.710 --> 01:34:16.948 a weird sound effect. 01:34:16.948 --> 01:34:19.840 I'm so sorry, you guys. 01:34:19.840 --> 01:34:22.859 AUDIENCE: I think it's really funny to you. 01:34:22.859 --> 01:34:25.150 ELIZABETH CHOE: But if you don't want to make it funny, 01:34:25.150 --> 01:34:33.710 which I would recommend, either cut out the gaps and alternate 01:34:33.710 --> 01:34:36.520 between zooming in and out like Hank Green does on SciShow. 01:34:36.520 --> 01:34:39.930 There's one other time that happens, like, right here. 01:34:39.930 --> 01:34:43.310 In general, like, if your gaps are happening 01:34:43.310 --> 01:34:47.790 in places that are not at the ends of scenes, 01:34:47.790 --> 01:34:50.340 really be conscious of how long those last. 01:34:50.340 --> 01:34:52.555 And having two other people look at your video today 01:34:52.555 --> 01:34:53.930 will help, because sometimes it's 01:34:53.930 --> 01:34:55.680 hard to tell when you're watching yourself 01:34:55.680 --> 01:34:58.929 if something looks like it's lasting too long or not. 01:34:58.929 --> 01:35:00.720 But if you have gaps that are too long that 01:35:00.720 --> 01:35:02.095 are in the middle of your scenes, 01:35:02.095 --> 01:35:04.910 you can use the trick of digital zooming 01:35:04.910 --> 01:35:09.470 in and out to hide the cuts. 01:35:09.470 --> 01:35:13.490 Does anyone have general comments? 01:35:13.490 --> 01:35:14.751 Yes, Yuliya. 01:35:14.751 --> 01:35:16.000 AUDIENCE: I like the delivery. 01:35:16.000 --> 01:35:18.770 It was really natural. 01:35:18.770 --> 01:35:21.660 And the music was sometimes distracting. 01:35:21.660 --> 01:35:23.824 Another thing that had that effect 01:35:23.824 --> 01:35:26.240 were some of the backgrounds, so like the one where you're 01:35:26.240 --> 01:35:28.280 holding a trashcan, and there's a person, 01:35:28.280 --> 01:35:29.870 and then there's a trashcan. 01:35:29.870 --> 01:35:31.545 So I wasn't sure, like, did that mean 01:35:31.545 --> 01:35:34.930 the person was in the trashcan, like, what happened, 01:35:34.930 --> 01:35:38.970 and, like, yeah, like, this scene. 01:35:38.970 --> 01:35:41.430 And then there were some others, like the lab. 01:35:41.430 --> 01:35:46.700 I wasn't sure why the lab was there. 01:35:46.700 --> 01:35:48.640 Even though it was really cool. 01:35:48.640 --> 01:35:49.580 ELIZABETH CHOE: I know that you held up 01:35:49.580 --> 01:35:51.413 the trashcan because you were trying to say, 01:35:51.413 --> 01:35:53.850 like, he was in a bucket. 01:35:53.850 --> 01:35:56.720 But again, with the music, it's hard to hear that you're 01:35:56.720 --> 01:35:58.630 explaining the bucket thing, so I would just 01:35:58.630 --> 01:36:01.915 cut to the picture of him before you hold up the trashcan. 01:36:01.915 --> 01:36:02.640 [VIDEO PLAYBACK] 01:36:02.640 --> 01:36:05.150 - --team were suggesting that they subjected him to an icy 01:36:05.150 --> 01:36:06.000 bath for almost two hours. 01:36:06.000 --> 01:36:06.260 [END PLAYBACK] 01:36:06.260 --> 01:36:07.245 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 01:36:07.245 --> 01:36:08.870 I mean, in general, that line is spoken 01:36:08.870 --> 01:36:11.987 so quickly that it's hard to follow what you're doing. 01:36:11.987 --> 01:36:13.570 AUDIENCE: And it's not just the speed. 01:36:13.570 --> 01:36:15.444 I think you need to put a little more diction 01:36:15.444 --> 01:36:19.730 in between your words, so that, like, what I hear happening 01:36:19.730 --> 01:36:21.970 in they're kind of slurring all together, 01:36:21.970 --> 01:36:23.570 so it's not just a matter of speed, 01:36:23.570 --> 01:36:27.170 but it's that I'm having trouble actually separating 01:36:27.170 --> 01:36:30.177 this word from this word, and therefore, there 01:36:30.177 --> 01:36:32.010 are chunks that feel like one big long word, 01:36:32.010 --> 01:36:35.220 that they're actually made up of four or five words. 01:36:35.220 --> 01:36:38.430 I think there's a piece of slowing down, but then also, 01:36:38.430 --> 01:36:41.010 forcing yourself to use over-diction to clarify 01:36:41.010 --> 01:36:41.710 your words. 01:36:41.710 --> 01:36:44.970 That'll help a lot too, more so than you 01:36:44.970 --> 01:36:49.689 think, because it will help clean up those little spaces 01:36:49.689 --> 01:36:53.030 in between the words to then provide me with a little more, 01:36:53.030 --> 01:36:56.414 like, OK, I'm with you every single step of the way, if that 01:36:56.414 --> 01:36:57.310 makes sense. 01:36:57.310 --> 01:37:00.290 So if you are going to do any retaking of videos, 01:37:00.290 --> 01:37:03.824 try really hard to really tighten up the way 01:37:03.824 --> 01:37:05.282 that you say the words, in addition 01:37:05.282 --> 01:37:06.728 to slowing down a little bit. 01:37:06.728 --> 01:37:07.919 I think that'll help people. 01:37:07.919 --> 01:37:10.335 ELIZABETH CHOE: I think if you do that, that'll inherently 01:37:10.335 --> 01:37:12.420 help you slow down, because you're going to think 01:37:12.420 --> 01:37:16.080 about each word at a time. 01:37:16.080 --> 01:37:18.085 I like the use of pictures here. 01:37:18.085 --> 01:37:19.460 It's really helpful, because this 01:37:19.460 --> 01:37:21.540 is an instance where we just don't have access 01:37:21.540 --> 01:37:23.210 to shoot any of this. 01:37:25.970 --> 01:37:29.360 I would play around with, in general, zooming in and out, 01:37:29.360 --> 01:37:31.010 when you're doing long takes. 01:37:31.010 --> 01:37:32.850 I forgot to mention this, but I thought 01:37:32.850 --> 01:37:35.730 that was a really nice thing that Yuliya did in her video, 01:37:35.730 --> 01:37:39.454 was-- because we had talked about this last week-- 01:37:39.454 --> 01:37:40.870 how to clean up some of the gaps-- 01:37:40.870 --> 01:37:43.410 and she does some nice work with cutting into, 01:37:43.410 --> 01:37:45.560 just like her hand drawing the fractals, 01:37:45.560 --> 01:37:48.720 and I think that, in general, people 01:37:48.720 --> 01:37:50.620 can take more advantage of that technique. 01:37:54.810 --> 01:37:56.430 Oh. 01:37:56.430 --> 01:37:59.120 So here you're cutting in between closeups, 01:37:59.120 --> 01:38:01.590 but this is another thing with the iTrace, where 01:38:01.590 --> 01:38:04.840 in the first scene you're on the left, and on the second scene, 01:38:04.840 --> 01:38:07.100 you're on the right, and you're also not 01:38:07.100 --> 01:38:11.430 in the same 3D plane of field as you were before. 01:38:11.430 --> 01:38:17.970 So in the previous scene, you were close to the bench, 01:38:17.970 --> 01:38:19.660 and here, did you scoot up forward? 01:38:22.900 --> 01:38:28.810 So it's not terrible-- it's not like the end of the world 01:38:28.810 --> 01:38:31.020 or anything, but it's, like, a little jarring, 01:38:31.020 --> 01:38:33.730 and I guess I'm subconsciously taking time 01:38:33.730 --> 01:38:36.850 to adjust my sense of space and where 01:38:36.850 --> 01:38:39.850 you are when that cut happens. 01:38:39.850 --> 01:38:42.380 I don't necessarily think you have to re-shoot it, 01:38:42.380 --> 01:38:46.790 but I would either-- let's watch it. 01:38:46.790 --> 01:38:48.980 AUDIENCE: And they had no prior experience. 01:38:48.980 --> 01:38:50.285 Now, why is it so? 01:38:50.285 --> 01:38:52.160 Strong increases in brain waves were noticed, 01:38:52.160 --> 01:38:54.540 and many have theorized that this enables the body 01:38:54.540 --> 01:38:57.700 to effectively heat the center as well as distribute it 01:38:57.700 --> 01:38:59.465 to the extremities. 01:38:59.465 --> 01:39:00.840 ELIZABETH CHOE: Is there a B-roll 01:39:00.840 --> 01:39:02.060 that you could use there? 01:39:02.060 --> 01:39:04.680 Because I think that's a really good opportunity to-- it's 01:39:04.680 --> 01:39:07.470 a key point that you're connecting 01:39:07.470 --> 01:39:09.180 what someone is doing with their mind, 01:39:09.180 --> 01:39:10.910 and how that's legitimately connecting 01:39:10.910 --> 01:39:12.070 to the rest of their body. 01:39:12.070 --> 01:39:12.986 AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. 01:39:17.307 --> 01:39:19.890 ELIZABETH CHOE: Could you even just use pictures of the brain, 01:39:19.890 --> 01:39:21.181 and then, like, the human body? 01:39:24.040 --> 01:39:26.340 Again, this is a really hard thing to visualize, 01:39:26.340 --> 01:39:30.530 and I know you're not working with a ton of resources, 01:39:30.530 --> 01:39:32.060 but I think that's an opportunity 01:39:32.060 --> 01:39:35.020 to maybe try voiceover with the technique 01:39:35.020 --> 01:39:37.880 that Jamie was talking about, because it's such a crucial bit 01:39:37.880 --> 01:39:39.070 to the video, actually. 01:39:39.070 --> 01:39:41.680 That's where you're actually tying the science 01:39:41.680 --> 01:39:45.126 into something that seems a little pseudo science. 01:39:45.126 --> 01:39:49.070 AUDIENCE: Keeping that in mind, as you watch your video-- 01:39:49.070 --> 01:39:52.028 and whoever's talking over with you, 01:39:52.028 --> 01:39:54.164 really connecting it and grounding it 01:39:54.164 --> 01:39:55.479 in the real science too. 01:39:55.479 --> 01:39:57.451 Because I liked your furnace metaphor, 01:39:57.451 --> 01:40:00.902 but then I was distracted by the burning exploding boxes, 01:40:00.902 --> 01:40:04.353 and if I've never heard of mitochondria before, 01:40:04.353 --> 01:40:07.804 or cellular respiration type things, 01:40:07.804 --> 01:40:09.810 that wouldn't be very distanced. 01:40:09.810 --> 01:40:12.305 I would think explosions rather than this is grounded 01:40:12.305 --> 01:40:15.299 in my biology type things. 01:40:15.299 --> 01:40:16.962 And so maybe think of places, where 01:40:16.962 --> 01:40:19.790 you can include images like the circulatory system, things 01:40:19.790 --> 01:40:21.287 like that. 01:40:21.287 --> 01:40:23.283 Just, like, keep grounding it. 01:40:27.774 --> 01:40:32.265 AUDIENCE: When you cut from the guy doing meditation 01:40:32.265 --> 01:40:35.758 to you sitting cross-legged, was that purposeful? 01:40:35.758 --> 01:40:36.756 AUDIENCE: Yes. 01:40:36.756 --> 01:40:37.754 I'm supposed to be doing meditation. 01:40:37.754 --> 01:40:38.253 AUDIENCE: OK. 01:40:38.253 --> 01:40:39.169 That's what I thought. 01:40:39.169 --> 01:40:43.540 Because I was like, not 100% sure, but I was pretty sure 01:40:43.540 --> 01:40:46.325 that was a choice that you made. 01:40:46.325 --> 01:40:47.810 There's no comment. 01:40:47.810 --> 01:40:48.800 I just had a question. 01:40:52.866 --> 01:40:54.740 ELIZABETH CHOE: Any other thoughts for David? 01:41:02.660 --> 01:41:05.810 So you guys want to do Google Docs versus just talking one 01:41:05.810 --> 01:41:07.420 on one with people? 01:41:07.420 --> 01:41:10.180 Is that the consensus? 01:41:10.180 --> 01:41:11.860 AUDIENCE: Could we do both? 01:41:11.860 --> 01:41:12.180 ELIZABETH CHOE: Yeah. 01:41:12.180 --> 01:41:13.570 You can totally do both. 01:41:13.570 --> 01:41:17.600 So the rest of class time is for feedback for each other, 01:41:17.600 --> 01:41:20.677 and this is a super, super crucial, critical part 01:41:20.677 --> 01:41:21.760 of the production process. 01:41:24.510 --> 01:41:26.770 During the break, I will post a link 01:41:26.770 --> 01:41:39.080 onto the Tumblr that has all the Google Docs that I will 01:41:39.080 --> 01:41:40.270 finish making for everyone. 01:41:40.270 --> 01:41:44.530 So for example, Yuliya, your two commenters are Joshua and PJ. 01:41:44.530 --> 01:41:47.850 So Josh and PJ, just go into your corresponding page, 01:41:47.850 --> 01:41:49.870 and on the time code, just leave your comments. 01:41:49.870 --> 01:41:52.062 I will comment on everyone's rough cuts as well. 01:41:52.062 --> 01:41:54.520 And again, don't worry if you're repeating the same remarks 01:41:54.520 --> 01:41:56.890 as other people are doing. 01:41:56.890 --> 01:42:00.580 How about we spend-- after the break-- doing the Google Docs 01:42:00.580 --> 01:42:04.110 stuff, and then whenever you guys finish, 01:42:04.110 --> 01:42:06.230 I guess, in the order of people finishing, 01:42:06.230 --> 01:42:09.280 group up, and give one on one feedback as well. 01:42:09.280 --> 01:42:11.302 And we can help facilitate that too. 01:42:11.302 --> 01:42:14.920 Does that sound good to everyone? 01:42:14.920 --> 01:42:16.440 The hardest part is over. 01:42:16.440 --> 01:42:19.370 The hardest part is just getting the first cut. 01:42:19.370 --> 01:42:22.320 It's getting the first script out there. 01:42:22.320 --> 01:42:26.640 And hopefully, moving forward, going to Thursday, 01:42:26.640 --> 01:42:28.470 it'll be easier.