When did you last enjoy an instructional video? To answer this question you may have to fudge a bit, like me, and consider a Ken Burns film to be instructional rather than entertainment.
A required “Fundamentals of Progressive Corrective Action” video comes in a distant second. I can’t quite recall, but I must have watched it because I signed the obligatory post-course litigation management documentation, now on file at Human Resources. Why does a medium with so much potential so often produce such underwhelming results?
Video is truly ubiquitous, loved, and voraciously consumed. The technology continues to improve, while bandwidth and memory become the cheapest of commodities. What could be more “rapid” than a video that goes through production, editing, and posting to the Web in minutes, using consumer equipment, and a standard computer? Video image quality and visual effects today are superior to those available to professional filmmakers just a decade ago. Why aren’t we inundated with stunning instructional videos?
In this article, I share with you my experience with the issues in video design. I also provide you with a short course on the vocabulary and syntax of video design. This will help you make better use of your tools to plan, shoot, and edit video for e-Learning.
Design matters more than technology
Video production has the same shortcoming as other development tools; the fundamental truth is that design matters. Producers often use instructional video because they must produce content quickly. Video is the original rapid development tool. By organizing and automating processes with macros, software and machines can produce results more quickly than manual production by an actual human. Therefore, the more rapidly a producer makes something, the more the producer must rely on automated processes. The need for speed often results in a greater reliance on technological processes than design principles. Unfortunately, the relationship between production time and the complexity of design often means that quickly-made media products as not practically compelling. All too often, the video producer hopes to compensate by providing improved technical quality or editing effects. We are encouraged by the many large, smart companies that continue to produce better cameras, lenses, and software. However, in the end, ease of use, and lush, beautiful images cannot replace content and design.
A way to mediate the need for time-consuming design is to use the video technology for documentation. It is very effective to document a learner activity for review by a subject matter expert, who then provides feedback on camera. A video of a law student's moot court argument, with a law professor or judge then providing analysis, is instructionally useful, but requires little investment in time. The product is incredibly compelling video … to the student. This student will have a performance-altering lesson, just as an athlete, sales person, or line-manager could. However, this is more an example of technology-aided mentoring than it is of instructional video. The advantage is that the production method has design elements embedded in it.
Occasionally design matters very little. Sometimes, seeing a video clip of a short procedure is all a learner needs to “get it.” Take this example of instructional video that is quick, easy, and effective: A ten-second shot of a human hand manipulating a mechanical device in a very precise way. This could be exactly what a learner needs; after viewing, a learner could replicate the procedure. In this case, the important design element is a clear readable camera angle that documents the entire procedure.
A demonstration clip is the video version of the “see it” animation often used in task-based software training (e-Learning). This ten-second shot is a learning moment that could be an element of a blended learning program, delivered in a classroom or part of an e-Learning course or event. It teaches a task that otherwise would be awkwardly described by text, narration, or a series of illustrations. It’s probable that that video clip would be a fast and cheap alternative to 3-D animation. Video benefits by having a lower learning curve threshold than 3-D animation. Fundamentally, all you need to make a single-shot video clip is the ability to find a red button, point, and shoot.
Mentoring and demonstrations are not typical examples of instructional videos. Most instructional videos attempt to teach through narrative stories or examples, or simply convey information with an expert speaking to the camera. New hire orientation, soft-skills, and subject matter expert videos are the norm.
Being common is not the same thing as being effective. Many instructional videos are ineffective, simply because of the inescapable truth that design matters. The power of video increases exponentially with improved design techniques. This is exactly why Ken Burns can entertain millions of people with grainy black and white archival footage, and a voice. Technical quality is important. The production and broadcast standards of a Ken Burns film are impeccable, but his films start as scraps of mismatched odds and ends. The design, narrative, and continuity are the things that make these films compelling, not the final pixel count per inch. This is why I believe that video is capable of much more than is evident in the average instructional video. We can’t all be Ken Burns, but we don’t have to be, either. We just need to understand that small improvements in design provide great returns for our viewers.
Video is a powerful medium, capable of communicating complex information, knowledge, and relationships to viewers simultaneously in intellectual and emotional ways. As audience members, we know very well, because of our training, how to read and understand the visual language of moving images. In many ways, video is the perfect medium for a great many complex instructional challenges. There is just that one small issue: Design matters. Producing technically correct video is child’s play, but doing so in a way that communicates effectively requires a bit of skill and knowledge.
The intellectual property of a sneeze
On January 9, 1894, Thomas Edison copyrighted the moving images replicating a man sneezing. Why was Edison the author? His body did not produce the sneeze. He did not author the sneeze , in the sense that he intentionally edited it; it was simply documentation of another’s actions. In fact, Edison did not edit the sequence of images. The sneeze was simply a series of still images, with action seemingly taking place over time. The purpose of the copyright was to protect Editions’ financial interest in a product that anyone with the correct equipment could replicate. In 1894, people paid to see replications of meaningless human actions, in much the same way someone might tolerate advertisements in order to see meaningless personal video clips on YouTube.com today. It’s an entertaining optical illusion, to which a viewer will unconsciously attribute a story.
The optical illusion of moving images fundamentally compels the human eye to watch, in much the same way that a cat will chase the dot of light from a laser pointer. It is simply a deception of biological responses. People and cats are both effective hunters, because their minds attribute simple narratives and probable outcomes to unexpected motion. Seeing the illusion of motion on a two-dimensional screen is biologically unexpected. It’s a nice parlor trick, but hardly inherently embedded with instructional value. Our minds attribute stories to motion, but controlling the narrative is the real trick. The ability to create the sensation of time and a narrative line is a human biological response manipulated by technology. Structuring these responses in meaningful, informative, or educational ways is a byproduct of design. Ineffective instructional video is that which relies on the viewer’s ability to perceive the correct meaning in an optical illusion without proper guidance by the author. Anyone who can find the red button can copyright his or her video.
Basically, one camera angle and one shot documenting a man sneezing is a still image with a timeline added. An illustration depicting a sneeze would communicate the same information. In this case, the illusion of time does not add information but simply emotional response. Thomas Edison was using his new technology in an old way. The illusion of the fourth dimension, time, is the most obvious element of the new technology. Edison was playing with this element in a meaningless way. This sneeze really was the 1890’s version of YouTube.com clips, more amusement than meaning.
Authors using new technologies often struggle to find effective design methods. The cliché is that authors using new technologies usually depend on old design methods that don’t fully leverage the benefits of the new technology. There is truth in this cliché.
Let's consider the adoption curve of e-mail. When first introduced, e-mail memos were written out by hand, and then typed into the software application. A staff member called a “secretary” often did the typing. In the next leap in the design process, authors typed, and even edited their messages, directly into the e-mail interface. The new element of immediacy that e-mail provides was unanticipated. The old design process of Dictaphone dictation, and review of typed draft, provided plenty of opportunity for careful consideration of content and tone. E-mail is immediate, as the network connection inherently shortened the production and delivery time for messages. That author, typing and editing a message into an e-mail application for the first time, often discounted the new intimacy and immediacy the technology provided. Unfortunately, authors also wrote and sent a few slightly-too-honest e-mails without taking time for prudent consideration of the tone and contents. With the passing of time, and gain of experience, this is no longer a problem, for the most part.
The technology improved the process of producing messages, but unexpectedly changed the design rules. Early adopters learned the hard way, through trial and error. Through their efforts, people implemented new design processes; later e-mail users had the benefit of learning from the early adopters' mistakes. This is equally true for producers of instructional video. The hard-won lessons of early video technology adopters have created a great deal of design knowledge. Unfortunately, many producers of video are not familiar with this design methodology.
Most technologies have an overall learning curve. Early adopters force the new technology to mimic the technology it replaces. Early e-mail was simply a new way of producing Interoffice Memoranda. Basically, early films were still images with a timeline. The horseless carriage refers to that which it is not, rather than to the actual invention itself. Apparently, people are better at inventing things than they are at knowing what they invented.
Next come the true innovators. These people figure out how to change the world with that which was just invented. John MacAfee made antivirus software. Basically, it cost nothing to make, so consumers didn’t see the value in purchasing it. As a result, John came up with a design principal, in this case a business system, which gave the invention legs. He gave the software away, and charged for the updates. Early Russian filmmakers, Sergei Eisenstein and Lev Kuleshov, developed Synchronization Of Senses and discovered the Kuleshov Effect. Eisenstein and Kuleshov figured out systems for creating continuity and emotional response, based on the framing, juxtaposition, and transition of moving images.
The third stage in the grand arc of technology adoption is you and I. We are the folks who want to use the technology, know what it looks like when it's done well, and just have no idea who Eisenstein or Kuleshov were, what they did, or why it matters. Unfortunately, not knowing does not make it matter less. If you want to make an instructional video, even a small one, even a little tiny video, or pieces of a larger e-Learning course, it's good to remember one thing: It’s very hard to learn from something that’s unwatchable.
Ineffective visual design of instructional video is not a byproduct of the technology. It is the result of the inaccessibility of design methodology. There are three technological revolutions involving moving images. First was the invention of technologies allowing for creation of the illusion of motion (Edison’s Kinescope). The second is the digital revolution, allowing for vastly improved production tools (Digital camcorder and editing software.) Thirdly, cheap storage and bandwidth provides easy access for an audience (the Internet.) The advantage of video is that the design processes have been highly developed over the last one-hundred years. The disadvantage is the tools and the audiences are more available than the design methods. The new authors of video are unlikely to hold applied arts degrees in filmmaking or television production. Their production skills are based on the use of home video cameras, Webcams, and mobile phones.
If one were to use e-mail for the first time, never having seen such a thing as a computer, it is likely that one's personal learning curve would recreate the iterations of design processes experienced by early adopters. One would write out the message and then type it into the software application, just as an experienced amateur videographer might point and shoot at a sneezing man. Producing instructional video based on previous use of consumer electronics, regardless of technical proficiency, is unlikely to result in a compelling product. The quality, accessibility, and ease of use do not change the fundamental truth that design matters. Good design is nothing to sneeze at.
The vocabulary of images and transitions
The audience knows how to predictably read and interpret video images. As consumers of video, they understand implicit technical and emotional information from the framing, context, transitions, and sequence of images. It is the author's responsibility to use the vocabulary, syntax, and language of sequenced images in a way that conforms to, and leverages, audience expectations. Images that do not conform to expectations are distractions that inhibit effective communication.
All images have a double meaning, intellectual and emotional. It is simpler to produce an instructional video that does not effectively control both the intellectual and emotional content of images; unfortunately, the product is inevitability tedious and immensely forgettable. The natural inclination when making an instructional video is to accept that it's not entertainment. The lack of time and money are often the reasons used to justify sloppy image making. While there is truth in this argument, and there is a line of diminishing returns, this is a false argument. If you area going to shoot an image, it takes little additional effort to frame it carefully. If you are going to edit a sequence of shots, why not edit in the most effective way?
Video is a useful element of e-Learning. However, e-Learning as a context does not reduce the viewers' expectations. Taking advantage of the audience's ability to read and understand the visual language is essential to the effectiveness of instructional video. Understanding the basics of framing, transitions, and sequences will dramatically improve the viewers' ability to follow, remember, and learn from what they see.
Framing the human body
In this section, I will list and describe the standard frames videographers use for representing people. There are more options and variations than I've listed here, but this list provides the basics. Using these framing standards will dramatically improve the effectiveness of your instructional videos.
First, there are some questions to ask as you consider the framing of an image:
- How will you use this image? Ideally, you have the benefit of working from a well-planned script and storyboard. Regardless, it is useful to take a moment and think about how the image you are about to create will fit into the finished and edited segment. Does the framing support the narrative flow? Imagine you are viewing the image you are about to make, as if you have the advantage of objectivity. In the context of a sequence, is this image supportive or neutral to the sequence, or is it distracting?
- What level and type of authority does this image have in the context of the sequence? A full face shot in Medium Close Up refers to stable authority, such as a TV newsreader or a political news conference. It is a choice that implicitly communicates respect. An Extreme Close Up can suggest a lack of stability, or it can suggest deep thought. Consider the level of authority when choosing shots. Think of a similar video image in a similar context. Is the authority attributed to the subject in the image you are about to make supportive or neutral to the content of the video, or does it distract?
- Consider the physical relationship of the camera to the subject as if video were not mediating the experience. A full figure shot from a distance at a high angle may suggest voyeurism. An Extreme Close Up may suggest intimacy. How the audience understands it, depends on the context of the sequence. An Extreme Close Up may illustrate the point of view of a child looking to a parent for protection, or it may illustrate the protagonist's deep thought as she considers a difficult choice. When choosing the framing, it is useful to think about what that choice would mean if you were physically viewing this action in “real life.” Visualize yourself standing and looking at another person at the same distance and angle as that of the image you are making. Would you think and feel about this person the way you want the viewer to do in the context of the video?
Here is the vocabulary of frames that professional videographers use. (See Figure 1.)
Medium Full Shot (MFS)
A MFS provides a view of the majority of the body. The bottom of the frame is just above the knees of the subject. This view is often the videographer's choice, when introducing a new character into a narrative or beginning a new sequence. It provides visual information about context, including clothing choices, posture, and the character's engagement with the surroundings.
Medium Close Shot (MCS)
A MCS provides a view of the torso. The bottom of the frame is just above the belt-line, lectern, or news desk. This view identifies the character as important, and a source of information. It is a formal composition that mimics the relationship one might have in a formal conversation with someone of authority.
Close Shot (CS)
A CS provides a view of the upper torso. The bottom of the frame is between the nipples and armpits of the character. Close Shots provide a slightly higher level of intimacy than the MCS. It could provide variances in formal communication. For example, the President of the United States giving an address to the nation while seated at his desk in the Oval Office would begin with a MCS as he starts speaking. The framing moves in to a CS when he hits a particularly important topic. The framing is instructing viewers where they may find the important content. If correctly allied with the script, the shot supports the meaning of the content.
Full Close-Up (FCU)
A FCU provides a view of the head and neck. Center the bottom of the frame on the triangle formed from the top of the shoulders to the base of the neck of the character. In general, the intent of this shot is to be a little too close for comfort. It signifies a moderate level of intimacy and friendship, or possibly an unusual moment. Colleagues, who would not normally stand as close as this frame suggests, 12 to 14 inches, might be this close when whispering gossip about a recent personnel change in their department. In this case, the intimacy they share is all about the importance of their work environment, and its impact on their lives.
Medium Close-up (MCU)
A MCU provides a view of the head. The bottom of the frame is just below the chin of the character. This is usually too close, when used in a sequence with more than one character. The exception is situations involving close friends and family. MCU is a great framing when illustrating a parent caring for a sick child, or a villain sneaking up on someone. In an instructional video context, MCU is useful when illustrating an individual contemplating new information, or their reaction to a situation.
Framing the location and action
Fundamentally, it is the responsibility of the video maker to bring the audience into the action. This is not as important in instructional video as it is in entertainment. You need to invite the audience into the video. Likewise, they should be shown the door when it's time to go. Establishing shots move visual narrative along, much as peristalsis moves food through the body, rhythmically and unconsciously, not calling attention to itself. These shots create boundaries for visual continuity. (See Figure 2.)
Human Resources Narrative Storyboard
Extreme Long Shot (ELS)
ELSs are distant landscape images that set the boundaries of the narrative environment. How many times have you seen a film that started with a helicopter shot moving toward a city, as if the audience is flying into the action? In an instructional new-hire video, the ELS might be an image of the corporate campus, or branded high-rise office building.
Long Shot (LS)
LS are similar to ELS but not as distant. That film that started with an ELS helicopter shot moving toward a city, might then have a LS of the apartment building where the action will take place. In the new hire video, the ELS of the corporate campus might be followed by a LS of the building containing the Human Resources office. Once the action in Human Resources ends, the video moves the audience to a new location with a new long shot.
Master Shot (MS)
In an instructional video, there will be a MS in each sequence. A master shot is a shot that is wide enough to show all the characters in relationship to each other in the location. It is the fundamental reference point, allowing the viewer to understand the physical reality of the space and people.
Continuity of Transitions
Transitions either support or diminish the continuity of a video. Either is fine, as long as the choice supports the content. Using the appropriate transition at the right time is the trick. (See Figure 2 again, to note how transitions appear in the storyboard.)
Fades
Fades include fade-up, fade-down and cross-fade. (See Figure 3 for two examples.) There are additional variations, but the fade is essentially fading or blurring images into each other as a way of transitioning. Fades tend to produce an inherent sense that time is passing, and therefore are most effective when transitioning between segments. In the new-hire video, there might be three sequences in the Human Resources building. The transition between each is likely to use a fade to separate the sequences.
Cut
The cut refers the actual cutting and splicing of film. In film school, I was taught to cut the actual film with a razor blade, clean it, and glue or tape it to a different piece of film. The experience of the viewer is exactly what it sounds like. One sees an image and then 1/24th of a second later one sees an entirely different image. (Again, see Figure 2 for an example.) Sequences often use only cut transitions.
The syntax of images
You can flesh out the illusion of time and narrative by tricks of sequencing. Establishing shots provide a framework for understanding context and location, bracketing sets of meaningful action. Fade transitions separate sets into small, easily consumable segments by suggesting the passing of time. There are, in addition, building blocks of sequences that provide the fundamental narrative structure. (See Figure 4.)
Shot-Reverse-Shot
The Shot-Reverse-Shot is the most basic and valuable building block set of images. (See Figure 5.) It is three shots. The first and last are essentially the same. The middle shot is the “object” shot. The Shot-Reverse-Shot simply illustrates what the character is looking at, or thinking about. A shot of a man, a shot of a baby, a shot of a man is a representation of a man thinking about a baby. A shot of a woman, a shot of a notebook, a shot of a woman is a representation of a woman thinking about a notebook. A shot of a man, a shot of a woman, a shot of a man is a representation of a man and a woman interacting or speaking to each other. You can see in Figure 2 how the storyboard specifies the order of these building block elements; I have called out the Shot-Reverse-Shot sequences within the larger Human Resources video outline.
Doing the right thing at the right time
Video and computers are truly ubiquitous. There is a general societal acceptance of, and comfort with, using these technologies. My nephew, Kevin, has always had a computer, myspace.com account, text pager/mobile phone/PDA. Yet he may, on the first day of his first professional job, sit down in his lovely new work area and write his first business e-mail to his boss. It might read “Dude, TNX awesome cube, BTW killer Adidas kicks ... you rock.” If he does write this e-mail, it won't be because he’s not comfortable with e-mail technology. It will be because he is more comfortable with the tools than with the design rules.
This is the problem with most instructional video. Many video producers are far more comfortable with the technology than the design rules. Video production, and post-production tools and software will continue to improve. We should embrace these improvements, but never forget that it is design that matters.
Color, image clarity, sound synchronization, movement, and action are all things we tend to think of as important when we think about film and video. What would the latest action movie be without the cutting-edge special effects? The question is backward. What would the latest technology be without structure? Possibly, just a good-looking sneeze. Ken Burns meticulously authors narratives from archival or found footage using the fundamental techniques listed in this article. Burns creates compelling entertainment, despite the lack of consistent image quality, color, clarity, sound synchronization, movement and action, and other things often confused as important. Mastering the simple techniques of framing, transitions, and sequencing is really all that is required to competently create effective instructional video.
Video is rapid, familiar, and easily consumed. It’s just part of the e-Learning tool kit, so use it. You don’t have to know who Thomas Edison, Ken Burns, Sergei Eisenstein, and Lev Kuleshov are, or what they contributed. When you make even a modest attempt at applying the fundamental rules of the medium, your results will dramatically improve the visual design, and ultimately the quality of your instructional video. Better framing choices, thoughtful transitions, and carefully built sequences are the fundamentals of the medium.
