I like in older movies where they just show the whole letter on screen and pause for whatever they think is a reasonable amount of time for the average person to read it.
I mean I like it because it's funny, but it's bad UX. Anything but that, really.
@stufromoz noting there should *always* be text for accessibility reasons, I'm a fan of the conceit where the piece starts in the writer's voice and from their perspective and then fades across to the perspective and voice of the reader.
Not in every case, but where it works, it's effective. I've seen it again recently, but can't remember what I was watching.
it must be shown on screen (by some device) for people who are readers, and it should also be read aloud for people who are listeners. whether it is read by the sender or receiver (or both) depends on the dramatic purpose of the scene. so, “all of the above”
@purplepadma Remember a comedy scene. In Victorian times, two people were writing a letter to be rescued from a kidnapper. It used both on screen and voice over. There was an increasing argument over who had the pen and if the voiceover would match up. The villains hand and voice occasionally pop in with writing and V.O. Of “Mwahaha”. Goes on for ages. Eventually a new hand appears on screen and says/writes “No need for this letter. I’m already here to rescue you”.
Show the text. Start reading in recipient's voice. Overlap with sender's voice (they're talking over each other, *slightly* out of sync). Finish up with recipient again.
I feel like there.iant one right answer for how this should always be done. I think the presentation is telling the audience the perspective the film's writer director intended. Are we supposed to be relating the author or the reader? Or neither? Or both?
There is no should - no one way to present that information. There is only options, and it is entirely subjective. It depends on what the director is trying to achieve and the subtext of the material. I've seen (and used) every one (even combinations) of the listed methods. Some have been done effectively, others poorly.
I don't have a preference as a director, writer, producer, or consumer.
Steve Atkins
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •James M.
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Stu
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •whence and wherefore
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •I like in older movies where they just show the whole letter on screen and pause for whatever they think is a reasonable amount of time for the average person to read it.
I mean I like it because it's funny, but it's bad UX. Anything but that, really.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to whence and wherefore • • •skribe 🇺🇦 :verified_mustard:
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to skribe 🇺🇦 :verified_mustard: • • •Chris Jolly Holcomb
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Stephen Collins
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •@stufromoz noting there should *always* be text for accessibility reasons, I'm a fan of the conceit where the piece starts in the writer's voice and from their perspective and then fades across to the perspective and voice of the reader.
Not in every case, but where it works, it's effective. I've seen it again recently, but can't remember what I was watching.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to Stephen Collins • • •Maude Nificent
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •@caity
it must be shown on screen (by some device) for people who are readers, and it should also be read aloud for people who are listeners. whether it is read by the sender or receiver (or both) depends on the dramatic purpose of the scene. so, “all of the above”
ʙᴇɴ ᴄᴏᴛᴛᴇяɪʟʟ
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Goes on for ages. Eventually a new hand appears on screen and says/writes “No need for this letter. I’m already here to rescue you”.
bufalo1973
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •voice over but not at the speed of writing but normal speed.
#EvanPoll #poll
Sara Joy :happy_pepper:
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Dietmar
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Spoofer3
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Spoofer3 • • •Space Catitude 🚀
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •WORST CASE:
Show the text.
Start reading in recipient's voice.
Overlap with sender's voice (they're talking over each other, *slightly* out of sync).
Finish up with recipient again.
"Persuasion" (1995)
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114117/
(Wow, there are SO many productions of this story!)
Persuasion (TV Movie 1995) ⭐ 7.6 | Drama, Romance
IMDbStefan
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Baron Von J
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •My least favourite mode is exposition by dialogue, where the recipient explains the letter to a third party.
"Whatchya got there?"
"A letter! From Jim!"
"Jim, you say? Why, we haven't seen him around here for ages."
"Well, prepare yourself, because he's coming here next Thursday."
"Thursday? On the express train?"
"The very same."
"Well, I'll be."
Aulia Masna
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •skribe 🇺🇦 :verified_mustard:
Unknown parent • • •so you want me to dance for you?
*dance, monkey. DANCE!*
There is no should - no one way to present that information. There is only options, and it is entirely subjective. It depends on what the director is trying to achieve and the subtext of the material. I've seen (and used) every one (even combinations) of the listed methods. Some have been done effectively, others poorly.
I don't have a preference as a director, writer, producer, or consumer.
So, it depends...