The curse of the video camera - a rant!
- Thread starter John Fenna
- Start date
I have a very good French friend who sends me oodles of junk she's seen on You Tube. Sometimes it's amusing, but usually not. I can always tell what the weather has been like in France because the more she' stuck indoors, the more junk I get. I hate to hurt her feelings by not having a quick look and returning a comment- price of friendship i reckon.
John is right about the amateurism. I married into a family of documentary film makers. My father-in-law must be turning in his grave.
So let me get this right.
The people complaining the loudest are the ones that either don't have the skill or can't be bothered to produce quality videos yet are berating the others that could be bothered.
Call me a miserable old sod, but it just seems to scream a bit "those that can't, teach" or "do as i say, not as i do"
Besides even IF you find a channel that produces good quality vids, who's to say your going to like ALL the content?
I've got a lot of time for John woo films, he's made some absolute stinkers though.
So if a decent director with an enormous budget, decent script writers and a vast wealth of resources can make stinkers what chance has a few folks at home got?
Just seems a bit like moaning for the sake of moaning to me.
The people complaining the loudest are the ones that either don't have the skill or can't be bothered to produce quality videos yet are berating the others that could be bothered.
Call me a miserable old sod, but it just seems to scream a bit "those that can't, teach" or "do as i say, not as i do"
Besides even IF you find a channel that produces good quality vids, who's to say your going to like ALL the content?
I've got a lot of time for John woo films, he's made some absolute stinkers though.
So if a decent director with an enormous budget, decent script writers and a vast wealth of resources can make stinkers what chance has a few folks at home got?
Just seems a bit like moaning for the sake of moaning to me.
I would suggest that what you see is part of them learning how to do that. And also that where the older ones among us have the mentality of sharing it among our friends for feedback before putting it out there, the newer mentality would be that these are one and the same. i.e. putting on youtube is how you share it amoung your friends and get feedkback.
That's always going to be difficult but if you do not have a sense of what is safe and what is not, then the medium by which you are taught is not going to make much difference as your ability to tell when someone is talking rubbish and don't know they are.
That doesn't help with filtering out the rubbish I guess other than recommendations. I guess that's why I tend to stick to stuff that is recommended on here.
That's not consistent with my experience. I can pick up stuff very well from video, my dad and brother cannot and need a teacher in the room. I am not sure why. I can only assume I am somehow better at sticking to the instructions (what they did) and going through them in my head first (so I have already figured out where it is going before I put myself in any sort of danger). I can't follow written instructions that well and that is not consistent with this either (I'm not saying it's wrong it's just doesn't seem like the whole story).
I've seen a study mentioned on BBC new that suggest that when you watch someone doing something the same things are going on the brain (but to a lesser extent) as if you were doing it. But I can't find the link.
It really is too bad that the common people are allowed to post on YouTube, why they might even be the same people as dare to go outdoors without the benefit of the wisdom of those on this forum and we all know what a disaster that is.
This is as close as I can get
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100412162112.htm
ScienceDaily (Apr. 13, 2010) — Mirror neurons, many say, are what make us human. They are the cells in the brain that fire not only when we perform a particular action but also when we watch someone else perform that same action.
Neuroscientists believe this "mirroring" is the mechanism by which we can "read" the minds of others and empathize with them. It's how we "feel" someone's pain, how we discern a grimace from a grin, a smirk from a smile.
Problem was, there was no proof that mirror neurons existed -- only suspicion and indirect evidence. Now, reporting in the April edition of the journal Current Biology, Dr. Itzhak Fried, a UCLA professor of neurosurgery and of psychiatry and biobehavioral sciences, Roy Mukamel, a postdoctoral fellow in Fried's lab, and their colleagues have for the first time made a direct recording of mirror neurons in the human brain.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100412162112.htm
ScienceDaily (Apr. 13, 2010) — Mirror neurons, many say, are what make us human. They are the cells in the brain that fire not only when we perform a particular action but also when we watch someone else perform that same action.
Neuroscientists believe this "mirroring" is the mechanism by which we can "read" the minds of others and empathize with them. It's how we "feel" someone's pain, how we discern a grimace from a grin, a smirk from a smile.
Problem was, there was no proof that mirror neurons existed -- only suspicion and indirect evidence. Now, reporting in the April edition of the journal Current Biology, Dr. Itzhak Fried, a UCLA professor of neurosurgery and of psychiatry and biobehavioral sciences, Roy Mukamel, a postdoctoral fellow in Fried's lab, and their colleagues have for the first time made a direct recording of mirror neurons in the human brain.
robin wood
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Wood N (2006). Transmitting craft knowledge: designing interactive media to support tacit skills learning. PhD thesis, Sheffield Hallam University, November 2006 http://www.archive.org/download/Tra...eMediaToSupportTacit_590/2006_Wood_thesis.pdf
Very interesting!
I must have a look at that soon
When I was training as a coach we were taught that there are several learning styles such as "academic" read it and learn, "experiencial" - do it and learn, "immitative" - watch and learn, etc
But we were also taught "practice makes permanent" if you learn and repeat bad technique then it is hard to unlearn!
If skills vids are wrong and dangerous then folk are still going to learn and practice poor technique and probably have trouble un-learning it!
I must have a look at that soon
When I was training as a coach we were taught that there are several learning styles such as "academic" read it and learn, "experiencial" - do it and learn, "immitative" - watch and learn, etc
But we were also taught "practice makes permanent" if you learn and repeat bad technique then it is hard to unlearn!
If skills vids are wrong and dangerous then folk are still going to learn and practice poor technique and probably have trouble un-learning it!
Very interesting!
I must have a look at that soon
When I was training as a coach we were taught that there are several learning styles such as "academic" read it and learn, "experiencial" - do it and learn, "immitative" - watch and learn, etc
But we were also taught "practice makes permanent" if you learn and repeat bad technique then it is hard to unlearn!
If skills vids are wrong and dangerous then folk are still going to learn and practice poor technique and probably have trouble un-learning it!
Still not had any links to dangerous videos, dangerous that is in more than the technique displayed being different or even more naive than that of the critic's.
Picking up on a point in the 'Grumpy' thread.....
the Concise Oxford Dictionary has several definitions of 'Rant' and one is:
"Speak vehemently or wildly"
If this definition applies to the original post (and it sometimes does to my rants) then comprehensive evidence to support the 'rant' isn't likely to be forthcoming.
For example, I could have a rant about how much stuff there is about Islam in the media and so very little about other religions, but I would be hard pressed to produce hard evidence to support my 'rant' because I don't keep a record of every time Islam is discussed/mentioned compared with all other religions and I don't then compare that ratio with the mix of religions in the world.
Doesn't mean I'm wrong though.
the Concise Oxford Dictionary has several definitions of 'Rant' and one is:
"Speak vehemently or wildly"
If this definition applies to the original post (and it sometimes does to my rants) then comprehensive evidence to support the 'rant' isn't likely to be forthcoming.
For example, I could have a rant about how much stuff there is about Islam in the media and so very little about other religions, but I would be hard pressed to produce hard evidence to support my 'rant' because I don't keep a record of every time Islam is discussed/mentioned compared with all other religions and I don't then compare that ratio with the mix of religions in the world.
Doesn't mean I'm wrong though.
Oh - does that mean someone is asking for evidence?
I guess it is Boatman - I have not seen his posts as he is on my "ignore list"...
I could go back in and waste yet more time and effort searching for vids that I have opened once and found not to be worth the time and effort effort ... I could ... but will not as I am not going to waste my time and effort going into you choob to satisfy the wishes of someone whos posts I have already decided are not worth the time or effort of opening...(one of a very small list I should add - I do not list folk willy nilly)
If you have the skills to evaluate what is safe and sensible you will find loads of dangerously wrong vids on you choob!
But you might also find the odd vid worth opening too - Bushcraft a-z stands out as pretty good
If you want a laugh have a look at the BG parody!I will sit back now and let the discerning you choob surfers post links to GOOD you choob vids ... it should take less time and effort all round
robin wood
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
That is the so called "Learning styles" theory which was based on work published by educational theorist David Kolb in the 70's. It was popularised and lots of money made from folk teaching teachers about learning styles. Kolb himself has distanced himself from it all and significant academic research shows that you don't learn any better as a result of someone identifying your preferred learning style and teaching that way. Wikipedia is surprisingly good on this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles
I remember being told this stuff abouit 'learning styles' - interesting to know it has been assessed and found wanting
Couple of nice ones for you John, save you surfing, apologies if linked to before.
[video=youtube;Iq0rZn8HFmQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq0rZn8HFmQ[/video]
[video=youtube;yZe4SmIH_U4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZe4SmIH_U4[/video]
[video=youtube;Iq0rZn8HFmQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq0rZn8HFmQ[/video]
[video=youtube;yZe4SmIH_U4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZe4SmIH_U4[/video]
A good link!
That was a very interesting read ... which basically says that much of what I was taught about how to teach was rubbish ... how long before the latest ideas are rubbished by new research though.
One thing you can count on is that the "latest sientific truth" will soon be an "old and discreditted theory".
Scientific proof is absolute - until it is proved wrong by the latest scientific proof
Ooooh what a cynic I am
