• October 30, 2014
October 30, 2014, 2:24:21 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with your Chronicle username and password
News: Talk about how to cope with chronic illness, disability, and other health issues in the academic workplace.
 
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: #*$&ING PowerPoint (2007 version)  (Read 13760 times)
terpsichore
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 2,198


« Reply #15 on: March 25, 2010, 10:15:10 PM »

I may be late to the party, but this morning I thought, "Ooh, I'll take this nifty Word handout, cut and paste it into a Ppt, and then they'll not only have the handout to look at, but a nice, big, projected Ppt to follow along with in class!  They'll participate!  They'll find it easier to ask questions!"  Cool--until I went back to my slides and tried to highlight a few points on each slide (the content was teaching MLA documentation, so I wanted the attributions to be highlighted in yellow, in-text citations in blue, etc.).

But NOOOOOO!  You can't highlight in the MS Office 2007 version of PowerPoint!  Well, at least, you can't do it easily like you used to (i.e., you can't just select the text, then bop up to the toolbar and click the little picture of a highlighter--there IS no little picture to click).  I went to the Help section of Ppt and found this: 


You could also just project the Word document directly. No need to use Powerpoint. Just plug your computer into the projector while the Word document is open. If you want, you can use "View > Full Page" to eliminate some of the MS Word clutter.
Logged
bread_pirate_naan
Preposterous
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 5,233

softwears


« Reply #16 on: March 25, 2010, 11:45:47 PM »


Switch to a black background with white text and[....]

OUCH!! My eyes hurt just imagining this!

Seriously?  It's like you've never watched the credits of a film.

Yes, seriously. I don't bother with painful text.

I'm glad it's something you can feel good about.

I have no idea what that means.

Boundaries. (you don't bother) 

FTR, when I said "seriously," I meant in the sense of imagination pre-empting something so ubiquitous.  I wasn't questioning your subjectivity.

Naan, I'm not wanting to be snarky here, but I don't understand your last two posts. I don't bother what? I don't bother to have boundaries? I don't have boundaries about feeling good about not looking at white type on black?

Maybe someone else can try to make sense of your posts for me?

I assumed you meant "seriously?" in the sense of "really?" But now that you have "explained" it, it seems that I have no idea what you meant by that, either.

Non-snarky, non-ironic, plain speaking help wanted. Really. Seriously.

To be honest, it often bothers me that I simply can't figure out what your posts actually mean, since I often get the sense that, if I could, I might actually agree with them or even learn something from them. I like agreeing and I like learning, but as it stands mostly I just shrug and don't bother, and that seems a shame. 

If you know what you're talking about on this thread, hopefully it will all work out.  I am going to jump around a bit, and revisit comments out of chronological order.

Boundaries. (you don't bother)
  (this came not that long after you said this:)
Yes, seriously. I don't bother with painful text.

Not bothering to read things because of the way they are designed is a boundary. (A freely chosen limitation.) You exclude those texts.

***

I'm having a pretty straightforward interaction with you, but you do put out this sharp vibe that makes me cautious. That is where you get something like this: "I'm glad it's something you can feel good about."  You are very clear with your boundaries, white on black is a bad thing.  No point in defending it, because you have articulated quite plainly, it causes you pain.  I have no intention changing, ... awkward. Backing away slowly, but not fleeing without responding.

***
I'm glad it's something you can feel good about.

Quote
I have no idea what that means.

It means "You project yourself in a manner I find self-assured, forceful, authoritative, and intimidating; and I have nothing relevant to say.  I don't see an opening for further discussion. C-ya!"

***

Quote
I assumed you meant "seriously?" in the sense of "really?" But now that you have "explained" it, it seems that I have no idea what you meant by that, either.

Seriously?
As in: 
"I find your articulation of imagined pain, in lieu of reference to pervasive real world examples, thought provoking."

or

OMG/WTF/Huh? Verbena is closer to some of these issues than most people, yet sets this painful circumstance up in terms of imagination rather than direct, physical experience.  An experience that she is probably having regularly.  I wonder why that is.  Is it because she never noticed that about cinema? Or doesn't want to acknowledge the commonality of the white-on-black experience renders the perceived design flaw moot? Or she is all about what is going on in her head?  Probably something else.  Anyway, what is up with the Dean heading that way too?  Seizures?  WTF? This manner of presentation is all over the place. These are visually literate people, yet this format leads them both say weird things about a style that is almost as standardized in common forms of projected mass media, as black ink on the white page. Seriously? Bizarro thread! More research needed.

***

I wasn't questioning your subjectivity.

Restated:
I am in not even remotely skeptical that you experience pain related to black-on-white projection.

I hope that helps.  Apologies for the opaque language, you have an absurd signature line.
Logged

In unrelated news, I'd like a slice of cake.  --corny  /  It will go great. --jackalope
bread_pirate_naan
Preposterous
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 5,233

softwears


« Reply #17 on: March 26, 2010, 12:00:10 AM »

Correction, when I wrote black on white(x2), I intended white-on-black. 
Logged

In unrelated news, I'd like a slice of cake.  --corny  /  It will go great. --jackalope
verbena
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 3,167


« Reply #18 on: March 26, 2010, 12:19:26 AM »

Naan, that does indeed help. Thanks. (And sorry, folks, for the continued hijack.)

I'm sorry if I'm intimidating and I'm also sorry if you're intimidated. Since white-on-black print hurts my eyes, since I don't feel good about the fact that it hurts, and since I can't imagine you're actually glad my eyes hurt, "I'm glad it's something you can feel good about" sounded to me like a hostile attempt at a nasty put-down that came out of left field.
 
Quote
"I find your articulation of imagined pain, in lieu of reference to pervasive real world examples, thought provoking."

But it's not imagined pain. It's eye strain, like what I get from having to read something in 8 pt Arial. So why would I bother trying to read those credits or that ppt? (I generally do stay to the end of the credits after movies end, but if it hurts to read them I don't bother.)

Quote
Seizures?  WTF? This manner of presentation is all over the place.

Bad design is all over the place, too, like poor grammar and lousy spelling. Still not acceptable.

Quote
Apologies for the opaque language, you have an absurd signature line.

And you neglect the semicolon! But the sig line, yes: La Fiona once wrote it and I thought it was just beautiful. But I was young and foolish and didn't know how to use the quote function....
Logged

"My kind of paper, into lots of fiber."
verbena
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 3,167


« Reply #19 on: March 26, 2010, 12:32:17 AM »

Now that I've hijacked the thread, and apologized, and continued the hijack, I think I'll double post -- but only because I am SO pleased to have found this:

The Fiona, would you mind terribly if I used "My kind of paper, into lots of fiber" as my forasignature for a little while? I've never had a tag line, and I think that one might do the trick for me. (And despite my previous attempt to plagiarize your words here, I promise I would give you credit.)

Be my guest. All great writers plagiarize, so don't let anyone know you got it from me.

The Fiona

(Sorry, Fiona, the; I couldn't resist. I'll stop now. I promise.)
Logged

"My kind of paper, into lots of fiber."
bread_pirate_naan
Preposterous
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 5,233

softwears


« Reply #20 on: March 26, 2010, 12:56:43 AM »

Naan, that does indeed help. Thanks. (And sorry, folks, for the continued hijack.)

I'm sorry if I'm intimidating and I'm also sorry if you're intimidated. Since white-on-black print hurts my eyes, since I don't feel good about the fact that it hurts, and since I can't imagine you're actually glad my eyes hurt, "I'm glad it's something you can feel good about" sounded to me like a hostile attempt at a nasty put-down that came out of left field.

Yes, well, in my world, telling someone you won't engage with their work, or bother to understand their posts because of your formal concerns is pretty rude/controlling.  Even if your interest is in comprehending content.  It leaves only one two options, change to please you, or accept the label of unacceptable. I'm for you, or against you, and my interests seem secondary or irrelevant.

Quote
Quote
"I find your articulation of imagined pain, in lieu of reference to pervasive real world examples, thought provoking."

But it's not imagined pain. It's eye strain, like what I get from having to read something in 8 pt Arial. So why would I bother trying to read those credits or that ppt? (I generally do stay to the end of the credits after movies end, but if it hurts to read them I don't bother.)

Which is my point, if something causes you real pain, articulating it in terms of imagination is the most impersonal way of saying it.  Distancing yourself from reality that way makes you and your experience seem remote.

Quote
Quote
Seizures?  WTF? This manner of presentation is all over the place.

Bad design is all over the place, too, like poor grammar and lousy spelling. Still not acceptable.

You do realize I have the sloppiest editing on the fora, therefore this is a very direct insult?

And, I have to do more research, if I care to, into whether or not optics support your claim, because for me ergonomics trump what is acceptable to you, where pain is concerned. 

Quote
Quote
Apologies for the opaque language, you have an absurd signature line.

And you neglect the semicolon!

Ah yes, there's the swipe at the unacceptable grammar.  How restrained and not at all nasty or put-downish the context of your sentence immediately preceding it.  That's some mighty deep shade you are throwing.  I hope it's conscious.

Quote
But the sig line, yes: La Fiona once wrote it and I thought it was just beautiful. But I was young and foolish and didn't know how to use the quote function....

I remember.  I wrote the one it replaced.

On preview:  Yes. I know.  Moving on.
Logged

In unrelated news, I'd like a slice of cake.  --corny  /  It will go great. --jackalope
frogfactory
Totally Metal
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 10,600


« Reply #21 on: March 26, 2010, 11:17:15 AM »

Yellow on dark royal blue or cream on dark red, every time.
Logged


At the end of the day, sometimes you just have to masturbate in the bathroom.
bread_pirate_naan
Preposterous
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 5,233

softwears


« Reply #22 on: March 26, 2010, 2:04:46 PM »

Thanks for keeping the interesting part of this thread going, FF.  Do you know how many citations there are in pubmed about projection and ergopthamology?  Zero.  No wonder those seizure references weren't forthcoming.  The biggest factor in visual fatigue/eye strain with projected media is an improper relationship between screen size and the distance of the viewer from that screen.*

Yellow on dark royal blue or cream on dark red, every time.

Yes, I have seen these quite a bit in the sciences. Color is mainly about attention and interest -- less stark.  I could use deep red, which is actually a good way to reproduce the historic viewing conditions of Salon painting.  The idea that color theory is a stable system of empirical order/thought, beyond the spectrum, is just to keep from scaring people and making them feel ignorant.  So terrifyingly complex -- physics and perception.  I show slides in a dark room with low note taking light, where black reproduces ideal viewing conditions for projection.  Minimal distraction, and no skewing of color in images due to juxtaposition.  Of course, most theatres are also based on this very effective model (house lights down). 

Frighteningly, public outcry over the epidemic of cinema-related seizures and blindness has been hushed up, and all of the ne'er-do-wells perpetrating this 'bad' design conspiracy in a hyper-judgy art-design-visual communication medium fail to produce any criticism or innovate independently.  Who will save us? But seriously, folks:  I got glasses, with a very weak prescription, in the past year -- after a number of decades of 20/15 vision.  I only need them to see projection screens and to drive.  It sucks to be old and tired, but I accept my experience of aging is a personal design flaw.

*The Wachowski Bros Speed Racer (2008), which is full of rapidly shifting multicolored flashing lights, was labeled an obvious seizure risk for epileptics upon release of the trailer.  Much discussed (hyperbolically), no reported incidents. 
Logged

In unrelated news, I'd like a slice of cake.  --corny  /  It will go great. --jackalope
madhatter
We proudly present the fora's Least
Member-Moderator
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 8,094

Just killing time


« Reply #23 on: March 26, 2010, 2:33:27 PM »

*The Wachowski Bros Speed Racer (2008), which is full of rapidly shifting multicolored flashing lights, was labeled an obvious seizure risk for epileptics upon release of the trailer.  Much discussed (hyperbolically), no reported incidents. 

Definitely a headache risk! I'm glad I waited to see that one on the (very) small screen -- my 13" laptop.
Logged

"I may be an evil scientist, but it doesn't take a degree purchased from the Internet with your ex-wife's money to know how special and important you are to me." -- Dr. Doofenschmirtz
verbena
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 3,167


« Reply #24 on: March 26, 2010, 7:13:56 PM »

[...]in my world, telling someone you won't engage with their work, or bother to understand their posts because of your formal concerns[....]

I wrote that white-on-black writing hurts my eyes. I have no idea what your work is or what field you're in, and I never told you I won't engage with your work.

I also spent an hour asking you please to clarify your posts so that I could understand them. Please stop imagining personal insults.   

You do realize I have the sloppiest editing on the fora, therefore this is a very direct insult?

That's disturbingly far from the truth.
Logged

"My kind of paper, into lots of fiber."
pigou
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 1,473


« Reply #25 on: March 27, 2010, 8:18:54 PM »

If you go to the Design ribbon, I usually pick the "Apex" style and Background Style #12. It's not just a uniform color, which I find much nicer on the eyes - and it's gray, which is nicer on my eyes than both black and white. Style #8 would probably work fine, too. As for colors: just play around... but "Flow" usually works well enough. (Note that this is for Office 2010, but I think 2007 has the same styles.

As for highlighting: thank god that is gone. One of the worst elements of power point presentations, aside from the overuse of animations. Thankfully, Office 2010 introduced decent, discrete animations - one of the major reasons why I use it. The easy fix is to change the font color of the particular text. If I use a light blue, I might use a blue-green to highlight.

Might look something like this: http://yfrog.com/0xtestuuhp
Logged
egilson
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 3,660


« Reply #26 on: March 28, 2010, 7:31:11 AM »

I use black Calibri on a slightly off-white background (F8F8EA), with 36 for headings, 24 for text, and 18 for (rare) captions. Quoted text is italicized, and keywords are italicized and bolded. While the results are very unimaginative, they show up well under just about any circumstances, including in rooms where the shades are faulty, the screen hasn't been replaced since 1973, and the projected image can barely be be seen over the room lights, which can be either all off or all on.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.9 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
  • 1255 Twenty-Third St., N.W.
  • Washington, D.C. 20037
subscribe today

Get the insight you need for success in academe.