Comments on: Screencasting for public speakers

By: Russell Unger

Russell Unger — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 02:46:23 +0000

Very nice.

I would think that, if you have co-workers in the room, you could easily take notes on the questions and then either voice-over the questions and answers or even re-purpose the screencasts later with the questions and answers over them–it almost becomes the demo that the client wants.

We’ve done these with Flash, but more as a play-and-watch demo, with little discussion and control around it. In fact, it’s mostly viewed later and without any ability to be in the room, so this could be another way to gain some of that control back.

Pretty cool use. I can see doing this in the future, as well.

–Russ

By: Steve Holden

Steve Holden — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:37:28 +0000

Jon … I like this idea … I am presenting an “Audacity 101″ session at the Podcast and New Media Expo in Sep07. Do you think it would work in a ‘training session’? It would seem like to me that it would be very efficient and give me more focus to talk about a topic’s specifics than to worry if I’ve got the audio example files loaded and in place, etc. – Steve

By: shetech

shetech — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:18:57 +0000

Thanks for a great idea! From now on, I’m doing screencasts for presentations to clients. Nothing that I do (at present) requires a live demonstration, and fumbling around during a presentation really detracts from the credibility of the presenter (and lordy, have I seen that happen!).

By: vojko

vojko — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:42:24 +0000

@Brian
I would not recommend a screencast when the audience expects live presentation. But, even in that case, benefits of making a screencasts are at least threefold. First, as mentioned, screencasts are excellent “fallback strategy”.
Second, after time invested in a screencast preparation, I know that I am very well prepared for a live presentation.
Third, concrete product as a bonus, I’ve recently created a blog for sharing my screencasts.

By: Jon Udell

Jon Udell — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 05:21:30 +0000

“So do you “hide” the fact that it’s a screencast”

Nope. The fact that it’s playing in QuickTime kinda gives that away.

To be clear about this, there are times when it’s critical to demo live. When keynoters like Scott Guthrie pull that off, it’s a high-wire act that I regard with awe.

But there are also a lot of times when it isn’t necessary. When you’re not trying to prove that some new piece of software really works, but simply trying to tell a story. There’s no deception involved here, just careful preparation and respect for the audience’s time and attention.

By: Brian Keller

Brian Keller — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 22:40:38 +0000

@Nic: LOL, I love the idea of plucking a volunteer out of the audience! That’s good schtick, I’ll have to try that one soon… :-) Thanks for the suggestions.

By: Dr Nic

Dr Nic — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 22:24:50 +0000

@Brian – I haven’t used them in the past, but I’d personally be transparent about it, or at least make it obvious so you don’t waste 30 seconds explaining what could be obvious.

Either that, or pretend to pluck someone out of the crowd and have them “operate the demonstration” but really they are just starting and pausing the screencast. That’d be fun.

By: Brian Keller

Brian Keller — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:01:16 +0000

So do you “hide” the fact that it’s a screencast from the audience or do you make it obvious that you’re showing screencasts? I can see pros and cons either way, curious what works for you.

By: Dr Nic

Dr Nic — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 13:01:49 +0000

And the bonus is that its easy to share it later and/or interlace it with any video/audio that was taken.

Live coding is definitely an adrenalin rush, but all your points are valid, and I plan to use screencasts in future. Perhaps with “deliberate” errors and pretending to type on the keyboard to keep up the illusion! :P