I’m flattered by this, but also a tad dubious, so I told the creators of this video—the brothers Treat Metcalf and Matthew Metcalf, who run the Youtube Channel, MassComprehension—that I’d put it on the website and see what people think. The video came with a note:
I have read through Why Evolution is True several times, and recommend it often to friends and family. It is a book that yields greater understanding of Evolution for readers of all levels of exposure to the subject, making it a rare class of book that keeps on giving far after the first reading.
My favorite way to experience the work is through audiobook, as I let my mind imagine all the various species, environments, and concepts described so eloquently in your book. However, when listening to the book, I cannot help but realize that what I am imagining is very likely either distorted, or completely inaccurate! This line of thinking gave birth to the video below. It is an excerpt of your book (first few pages of Chapter 1) with your writing put to images and video that demonstrate what you are describing.
The feedback from my friends and family (many of whom have minimal exposure to Evolution) has been immensely positive. Most found it to be the most engaging video on Evolution they had ever seen, and were very interested in your book as a result! I began this project for my own pleasure, but as I continued, I realized that I may have hit upon a way to bring your book even to those uninterested or uninitiated in Biology through this visual format(no soul can resist Biology in HD!). But before I continue any further, I wanted to get your feedback. Do you think this idea has potential? What advice would you give me? Or should I just cease and desist, and try this concept with another audiobook?
Now I do like it, and appreciate the effort of making it (I think it turned out well), but in toto the thing would be 16 hours long! Audiobooks can be listened to in the car, but would anyone watch a 16-hour video of an evolution book? Also, there’s the matter of permissions, which is in my agent’s hands.
When I brought up the length problems, Treat replied:
My plan was to release it in short, ~15 minute increments, perhaps every 2 weeks. These digestible segments would be short enough to keep the light reader interested, while allowing the deep reader to continue through the playlist of videos. We will have to wait until further feedback to be sure, but due to the engaging nature of your writing(even further enhanced by visuals), the length of the work is a great advantage, rather than a problem! There are plenty of multi-hour productions on Youtube, and they are just split up into segments in this way.
So. . . . reader feedback is most welcome.
I like the concept of bringing WEIT to video and I like the video and appreciate the work put into it, but I conceive of it differently. The images used reflect the exact words rather than the concepts the words are describing. For instance, in describing the adaptations of hummingbirds, octopuses, etc. instead of showing those things, it would be better to show those things in context of the concept of adaptation.
I know I sound abstract but in seeing those images with the words, I found the concepts harder to comprehend. This could just be me because I am not a visual learner.
An example of videos done well to bring to life ideas and animals was in Neil Shubin’s Your Inner Fish. I liked how drawings of extinct animals would spring to life from the fossils so we understood what that fossil really once was.
I don’t know if that helps – I feel like a stick in the mud.
Sounds about right to me. I like the idea as well. Perhaps the explanations seem incomplete because it is the introduction. Later chapters might very well intend to elaborate in the way you suggest.
I totally agree with you.
IF this “videobook notion” would become one more tool to get the uninitiated into the mindset that Evolution and Natural Selection are not straight-line tickets to Hell but, in fact, the reality of our Universe as we presently understand it, then it would be a good idea. I liked it…!
I think you should proceed -it looks terrific.
I agree, proceed on.
It has my vote.
Should WEIT be a videobook?
If the rest of it is done with the same quality as this first installment, then absolutely yes.
A video like this could bring understanding of the basics of evolution and the history of life to many people who would otherwise never pick up your book.
There might be a lot of details to work out, and Metcalf might need to work hard to find video material, but the prospects seem good to me. I’d give it a thumbs up.
– KGB
“If the rest of it is done with the same quality as this first installment, then absolutely yes.”
I agree that the sample is nicely done, using good quality, mostly appropriate video or still clips; however, I wonder what the cost of licensing those video and stock photo clips for video is? Having produced video, I know that licensing rights for quality stock video footage of nature, and even stills, can be very expensive, with quality footage charged based on the nature of the finished product(s), number of copies to be sold, number of years the license will be active, clip length * number of uses, etc. (Clips sold on a “royalty-free” (paid up front, not based on number of units sold) clips may not be available for all the shots needed, and Creative Commons licensed clips would likely add to many restrictions on the finished product for practical commercial sales).
The sales of a long form “video book” would be far fewer than of the original, and I think the cost of pre-production, motion graphics, video editing, syncing open captioning, QA review and rounds fixes, clip and still licensing would far-exceed any likely income. The book was written as a book – long form – not as a video.
As a producer, one of the things one has to consider is whether the format is appropriate for the content. Video is absolutely appropriate for educational material about evolution, but, I think, not unabridged text meant for a book.
I’d love some quality YouTube clips I could show friends to help them understand evolution better, but those should be short, not 16 hours long, and probably would be better if written or edited for the purpose rather than just copied verbatim from the book. I would not buy an unabridged video book even though I love Jerry’s writing and am looking forward to when I can buy the albatross.
My concerns echo those of Jerry’s. I’d also add that with an audio book (or Text to Speech of the ebook) you can listen to it sped up 1.5 to 2x rather than plodding through it as read by a slow and careful narrator.
I have some “video books(actually videos of long lectures). I generally just make them into mp3s and listen to them as audiobooks. Unless the video really adds something visually explanatory it doesn’t add anything, and a study of power point showed that PowerPoint slides can *reduce* retention rather than increase because the slides divide the attention and created separate narratives rather than combine for a single, stronger narrative. So unless the video is really well done, it will make the book less effective, not more.
This was similar to my concern.
Although this video was much better than a certain other vid Dawkins was criticizing for being very poorly done, I’m wary of a “privy seal” effect. http://cuvideoedit.com/editing-aesthetics.php
Sometimes too many images, in rapid succession, frequently following nouns every step of the way, serve to chop up the flow. I didn’t see anything too egregious here, but stuff that felt like it was just beginning to border on being cut up too much.
That joke (Lord Privy Seal) was first done, IIRC, on The Frost Report.
(Yes, I was alive then…)
And sho ’nuff, it’s on Youtube and Google found it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVlfvdH7qwY
_everything_ is on Youtube these days…
I was going to bring that up if nobody else did first.
I liked the video. I think it looks very vivid and brings more fun to reading the book. Although not suited for listening in a car or train, the video(s), if done really well, can be used, for example, as k-12 class material. Also I like the idea of making a series of segments instead of a long 16-hour whole, each segment capturing the essential part of one chapter or so.
Thank you for the feedback 🙂 I would love to see this type of video used in classrooms, and think it would be perfect for it as well!
A complete reading of the book I think it is too long for this medium. I would opt for an abridged version designed for the medium, of no more than 2 hours in length. This would require a good editor who could comprehend and express the content more succinctly. I suspect it might drive many to decide to explore the book version for more detail.
Give it a shot, I say. You’d have to vet each video, buy if Metcalf is just doing fifteen minute installments, it shouldn’t be to difficult. Better to try and fail. You’ve got nothing to lose but time.
I’m not a scientist. I loved it and I would watch it with enjoyment. I think they’ve done an excellent job and I hope this project is able to move forward. If I didn’t already have it, it would make me buy the book too.
There are lots of longer things cut into shorter segments, and people, I think, like watching them that way. It’s really like the new way of watching TV On Demand. Some watch the episodes as they come out, others in marathon blocks. With TV series I really like, I’ve always bought the DVDs because when a series has a complicated plot that runs throughout, it’s easier to appreciate it over a few days rather than months.
Thank you, I’m glad you enjoyed it. I agree that the short, 10-15 minute mark is where online video consumption is going. And, as you said, the alternative still exists to watch in marathon.
I like this attempt a lot. I also like the idea of releasing a bit of it (hour long segments) over periods of time. Like the Cosmos series people will be able to review it anytime. I also feel that this could eventually be put up on YouTube for anyone who is interested.
Why not do it as a TV series, just like Cosmos and the revenue comes from advertisement instead of individual readers?
I’m with you,NewEnglandBob. I watched Sagan’s “Cosmos” on YouTube and I bought Tyson’s as a DVD set.I preferred Sagan’s, but I accepted that Tyson was aiming his at a different younger market – all those sexy younger graphics. My vote – go for it Dr.Coyne – it really SHOULD be more than a book.
Excellent idea!
I was going to suggest the same thing. But getting it to tv is logistically challenging, I am sure. Someone would have to do it, get commitments from a nature channel, and so on. It would be quite an ordeal, but worth it.
In order to be on tv, it might have to be edited down, leaving out various ‘extra’ examples of points being made. That would be painful, but necessary.
“In order to be on tv, it might have to be edited down…”
That could be an advantage to a series on WEIT, the book itself is always there underlying what the viewer experiences on film. This could lead to a significant number of people reading the book, gaining knowledge of this wonderful science, and likely spreading the word to friends, children, etc.
Someone mentioned Netflix. That would be cool.
A broken-up videobook is a great idea. However, why not also do something new based on the book? It could be a ten-hour series for TV or Internet called “Evolution.” Here’s the hook: I want this to be the “Cosmos” of evolution.
Maybe this is the fault of the underlying audiobook, but it seemed to me that there were places where the reader didn’t quite grasp the meaning of the sentences he was reading. Also the phony English accent on the Paley quote was kind of annoying.
Nitpicks aside, I guess a video book of this sort could be of some value, although at 15 minutes every two weeks it will take 15 months to complete the project. It might be better to release it in larger chunks, or maybe do as Netflix does and release the whole series all at once when it’s finished, so enthusiasts can binge without frustration.
Yes, holding it back and then releasing it all Netflix style might be the best way to go.
I agree, the accent mars an otherwise effective narration… perhaps for the quotes they could enlist several actual british, french, etc.. speakers to give a little aural flourish.
The visual aesthetic is real nice. The color palette and illustration choices give a good sense of the eras being discussed.
I would like to see the whole series…
“Here’s the hook: I want this to be the “Cosmos” of evolution.” – great idea
I agree with those who think it would be good as a TV series. However, I can’t imagine the latter chapters of WEIT being done in the same manner. The first chapter is an introduction and is well suited for video with voice over, but I’m not sure the latter chapters would work as well.
I like the idea of a video presented in small segments, since it would be a good way to make the science more accessible to people who wouldn’t read the book, could easily be used in classrooms or homework assignments, and would appeal to young people for whom a colorful screen presentation is the most appealing and familiar way to learn.
This attempt is nicely done, though I do have a few problems with the style of presentation, mostly having to do with accessibility:
The video displays the text on the page, which is helpful to viewers who are hearing-impaired or who just prefer not to listen to a narration. However, the text is sometimes difficult to read against the background. Putting the white text in a black box at the bottom of the image, and using a larger, clearer font, would be a great improvement.
A simple presentation is the clearest. Video gimmicks are distracting and will eventually make the video look cheap and dated. They also make viewing difficult for those whose vision is less than perfect. Examples include “breathing” text/images that constantly change size, or rapid-fire “strobe” images, such as the hummingbird sequence, where so many pictures were used that it was impossible to focus on any of them.
Overall I think it’s an interesting start.
I thought the video was nicely timed to the reading – perhaps a bit slow. For comparisons check out TV commercials or MTV for what the current generation of viewers expect.
The most common “gimmick” was the Ken Burns effect which is very common and well liked.
No, please NOT the Ken Burns effect. We still haven’t finished watching The Roosevelts because the sloooooowwww narration keeps putting us to sleep, despite the interesting photos and interviews.
I wasn’t implying it should be used; it is the effect that the Metcalfs have used. And yes it make things seem slow, however, the pacing of WEIT video is set by the reading of the audio book not a new audio track for the video.
I too enjoyed the video. I think the Metcalf brothers have done a good job and understand filmmaking.
A couple of concerns would be first that 16 hours is a lot of film for two people to produce. Second copyright issues for the images selected. On this issue the readers of this site could help. We have a great number of excellent photographs we could contribute.
Thank you. I would definitely appreciate any video/image suggestions.
I think it is a worthy idea. I don’t listen to audio books but I do watch educational videos from time to time. In the case of WEIT, I’d rather read the book, but I’m sure there are lots of folk out there who would watch it.
YES! Viewing it also made me want to go back and re-read the book. I think its very well done and I hope it gets the go-ahead.
It’s interesting but wouldn’t it be better to adapt the book to a script and then produce a video rather than just using the audio book with pictures and video in the back ground.
Final thought is, it needs more cowbell!
This would be a biology teacher’s best friend.
Many (if not most) 15-year-olds prefer audio/visual learning. Only the brighter half would do as well with the printed book. 15-minute segments would be perfect for classroom use.
The production values of this sample are splendid. Were they to keep this up, I believe it would be successful.
I wouldn’t call them the “brighter half”. They may just do better with written materials than visual one. I am an audio learner (a freak) so I have a hard time explaining things visually (which sucks when you have to do presentations) & I tend to be distracted easily with visuals unless they are tightly integrated into the story. I know, I’m a real fun one. I also don’t like roller coasters.
What if you removed the visual aspect and rode a roller coaster blindfold? 🙂
Then my inner ear would say, “I’m confused; I think I’ll upset the stomach.”
Alton Towers, “Black Hole” – awesome!
/@
Anything that gets WEIT to a broader audience is admirable. The filmmakers have done a good job in visualising the initial bits of the book, but I would like to know more about how they are going to push it out there: I don’t know much about Masscomprehension or who uses it.
There is now a requirement in the UK to include evolution at all levels in the national curriculum, and some good teaching resources are being developed to meet this need. This initiative could be a very helpful tool for those using such resources; and 15-minute segments would seem about right for a single classroom lesson.
The thing about an adherence to 15 minute segments will mean certain edits and compromises. A segment must be about a particular subject or two, and it must finish the subject by the end. So these segments are a good idea, but there will be some changes in content to make it fit the time slots.
Thank you for the feedback. I also think that this could be a great way for young people to learn about evolution.
A 16-hour series of videos may be a valuable educational resource at the high school level and below, where kids tend to resist reading but enjoy watching videos in class.
I personally would never watch a video book or listen to an audio book when I could read the book. Video and audio is far less convenient. I have to go at the pace of the speaker, flipping back to a previous page becomes difficult, I can’t simply watch on the bus or in restaurants (although that’s not such a problem with audio books), battery life is insufficient for a mobile device to play a 16-hour video, so you’d have to stop and recharge several times, and unlike audio books a video book isn’t a convenience for car drivers.
But of course they’re not mutually exclusive!
I think it’s a fabulous idea!! And since you have a second book out it would help to promote that as well. GO FOR IT! I’m pretty well up on evolution, and I’ve read WEIT (the book), but I’d watch it anyway.
🐾
This is a powerful idea. The visuals add a valuable layer of instruction. Go for it.
Steve Brooks
Many interesting points!
My perspective is coming from an entirely different angle than the ones already discussed. Since G+ comments on a shared YouTube video automatically show up also at the YouTube site, the quality of comments in general at YouTube has somewhat improved in the last couple of years.
I would definitely shared certain segments of this series with my G+ viewers (about 15,000, some who would then share with their readers, on and on), hence, optimistically, the often rabid discussion connected with such videos would be somewhat dampened.
Professor CCs brilliant writing and the Metcalf brothers visual aids should be able to get some good discussion going, which is such an important part in interactive learning.
Ripples meet pond. 🙂
Thank you, and please feel free to share this video with your audience!
If the rest of it is of that high standard, I’d watch them all as they come out.
I do think information overload is a potential trap, and also found my mind struggling a bit at the humming bird sequence. However I thought the Paley sequence was excellent.
I think they need to avoid the trap that some audiobook narrators fall into — emphasizing every single point as if each is of equal importance. The structure of the presentation can get buried under that.
Images and footage could at times be used less literally and more to set the mood and and allow the viewer to relax and let their mind wander over the “territory”. (Punctuated equilibrium is better than slow incremental growth for the presentation of ideas!)
The summing up of the 6 aspects of evolution worked really well, I thought.
Those are just my idle thoughts. It looks like they’d do an excellent job in any case.
Phenomenal feedback. There are a few segments where I agree with your “information overload” assessment, and could reduce the number of images used.
Emphasizing overarching concepts is important, and I attempted to do so with the 6 Components of Evolution and the Darwin/Paley icons. Plenty of room for improvement however.
Glad you liked it, and thanks again for the feedback.
Just do it for cryin’ out loud!! I LOVED the book, would love to see it in video!
I think it’s great.
I’m more a reader than a viewer, but I thought the Metcalfs did an excellent job with that short intro; and if they could keep up the quality, this would be a good adaptation of the text for the visually-oriented. ProfCC’s agent can advise him on the copyright issues; since he’s essentially the author of the proposed screenplay as well as the author of the boo.
…jum!
/@
It was great. Much better than one would imagine it would be. I suspect the narration has a lot to do with it as well. He is very good.
I think you don’t want to overdue the graphics as you follow along or it might cause some to loose concentration with the reading.
Other than the not-insurmountable potential problems highlighted, I can’t think of any reason why it wouldn’t be a good move.
It would certainly be one in the eye for the likes of Ray Comfort.
Just as long as Tom Hanks doesn’t get to play the lead. 🙂
Agreed on Tom Hanks
Choosing between reading the book or watching the videos, I’d prefer to read the book.
I found the narration dry, and the visuals didn’t add to the experience for me. Maybe some appropriate music would’ve helped.
A few more thoughts:
Why not a more dynamic approach? I mean, something beyond a static video that engages the user and augments the content of the book rather than simply reiterating it?
For example, a virtual lab that allows the user to conduct experiments illustrating key points of the book. Making the user more of a participant, rather than just a viewer.
A fascinating idea! However, not the objective of this project. But, thanks for the feedback 🙂
I will agree with the music idea, but I would not want it to be intrusive. More like little touches in the less information dense areas, and at the beginning and end of an installment.
Lots of documentaries over-do the music, with a music theme for every sequence, and flourishes for every animal movement. These are annoyingly aimed at squeeeeezing emotions from the audience. I am sure you know what I mean.
No, no music please! It is always obtrusive and beside the point. It makes it difficult to parse the words. It makes it difficult to hear the words. Some people can’t listen to two things at the same time (music and speech). Speech is in itself musical. I especially hate music telling us what we should be feeling about the images.
A musical ident might be a nice idea. Maybe from some favourite jazz classic of Jerry’s that’s public domain.
/@
Part of the appeal of Cosmos and series like it is the host: a likeable and convincing person presenting the ideas and evidence. Would this WEIT series be improved with an on-screen host? That host could help with subtle issues like pointing out that some ideas or evidence may be more important than others (@26 above). Tyson was great as a host in part because he can be funny too, but it seems harder to convey humour by voice-over. Or maybe the host in this case would be a distraction from the ideas and the evidence (and the organisms).
This then would become a “based on the book” production costing several million dollars. For example, your “host could help with subtle issues” means a rewrite from the book. Adding a host would require a new sound tract as would adding humor.
Check out the credits at the end of Cosmos. Certainly to make this happen will take more than two brothers. As the scope of the project increases so does the cost, labor, and time to completion.
I don’t see a downside.
I can think of a couple.
At bare minimum, it’s a 16-hour commitment of Jerry’s time to watch all the episodes and give them the thumbs-up. Probably much more if there are any issues that need correcting.
There’s also the question of rights. I presume Jerry owns the copyright on the text, but have video rights already been licensed to someone else? If not, could this project preclude the future sale of such rights?
Yes! I had no intention of watching all of it – no time right now, but it caught me. It reinforces the book and 16 one hour increments might be too much, unless on “Nature”, but the 15 minute segments would be perfect. And, there is no reason it couldn’t be presented on Youtube, on Nature, in classrooms, in 15 minute segments and hour long shows. The more choices the better and the better to teach!
DO IT! PLEASE!! It would be unique — a virtual video COURSE on evolution (historical fact and valid scientific theory) for John Q & Mary J Public and their chilluns who well may take the time (over time) to watch WEIT as videos rather than reading it. GREAT idea, it sure seems to me!
Two thumbs up. And the more exposure to WEIT the better. Let us know what your agent says.
Like.
If you go for it, keep in mind that a videobook Albatross will be sure to follow.
I really like this concept and as others have suggested, this would be a great as a Cosmos type production. There is so much here to introduce people to that might not otherwise get put out there. It would be great to see it on Netflix, PBS, etc., where it’s accessible to most people. You’re writing is so easy to comprehend and if the rest of the video series is as well produced, it would be great.
Yes, by all means, give the project all the support that you can. It’s a great idea.
I like it, Jerry. Anything well produced will offer an intriguing format for a broader readership. And viewers, some of them, will become readers, and readers will become enlightened human beings. You can’t go wrong.
I am a big fan of audiobooks and have only “read” WEIT in audio book form. I understand that this video is meant to be an illustrated version of the audio book. As such, I think it should be abridged where appropriate, or scripted to match the video.
While I appreciated the crocoduck’s appearance, I think it’s a bit of an inside joke for general audiences.
Sub
At the risk of being a boor, it isn’t anything like Cosmos. I would say try harder. It needs some Jerry Coyne or Tom Cruse or somethin. 😀 Effort appreciated though. Try harder to entertain.
Why not to try ? It looks very attractive. And the slicing into 15 or 30 minutes segments would make it quite digestible. Some things to avoid, however
1) Music. It is already difficult to follow text and image together, music will mostly add distraction. And what music to choose?
2) Repetition of images. Numerous TV science documentaries repeat the same sequences ‘ad nauseam’ just to fill the time needed by the speaker and that can be really boring.
3) Approximate illustration. An example in this preview: the text speaks about squids and the movie shows an octopus. Many people don’t care or are very forgiving, but it’s really bad teaching.
4) long introduction and closing sequences repeated for each episode. The preview is perfect for that. Title, authors, coryright and directly to the main course.
Fantastic feedback. Thank you.
1) Great advice. We had initially considered music, then arrived at the same line of thinking.
2) Couldn’t agree more. We attempted to only include repeated images when intentionally emphasizing a previously referenced point.
3) We tried hard to keep our illustrations accurate. Thank you for pointing out our error. Was thinking of replacing it with this video of a true color-shifting squid(Loliginidae):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OauXCp8l3QI
4) Once again agree. Get right to the point in the video. Bibliography, copyright, and additional info can sit in the YouTube Description.
Fear not. We have the same standards of video content, you and I 😉
Very well-done! I was sorry it was over when it ended. : )
Wow, what a wee show-off that squid is. Do you think it’s trying to tell us something?
Pretty engaging and pretty good narrator, aside from the cheesy Paley English accent. He could speak a tiny bit faster, and agree with Diana ( was it?) that Shubin-like animations coukd be added. Liked Larson’s Larry had turned into a snake:-). Larson seems to have lots of Larrys and
Go for it!
I’d watch it!
Go for it!
I thought their method of presentations was excellent.
NO MUSIC!
NO RAPID SEQUENCE OF IMAGES.
It’s not entertainment for the masses. It’s for people who enjoy learning new ideas.
I would much prefer YouTube to TV. TV has lots of viewers who would never watch it. YouTube makes it accessible to people who are interested and when convenient for them. I missed several episodes of Cosmos because I just overlooked the time. YouTube can be tailored to different length videos so a subject can be completed. YouTube can be paused to study diagrams and textual visuals. YouTube is rather permanent; TV is ephemeral. You think they’ll buy the DVD? Very few. I don’t know how the financials of YouTube work but I notice than many now have embedded advertising.
I’m also glad they don’t have that hand drawing the stuff quickly which seems to be all the rage now. Even the Met Opera has a sort of ad doing that. Agree with David that YouTube ( or Netflix) is a good idea.
I actually like that whiteboard style if IT is done well.
I’ve kind of ODed on it, and it also kind of makes me seasick.
I liked it although watching my way through hours of it may dim the initial enthusiasm. Chopping it into pieces seems reasonable if each piece makes sense on its own and/or leaves you wanting to know more (reminding me of the ads in the movie “Starship Troopers”). I found myself wanting to check my copy of WEIT to try to imagine it being read aloud at length, so it’s too bad I already loaned it to a friend who wanted a recommendation re a good book on evolution. For comparison purposes with a few other comments, I was disappointed in Shubin’s tv version of “Your Inner Fish” but I don’t remember the details so I can’t be more precise other than to say that the animation was not the problem. I didn’t mind the Paley accent, but perhaps that’s because it seemed minor compared to a couple audiobooks I have of H. G. Wells’ classics that are read entirely in horribly accented English.
Yes, most definitely. It was youtube videos that fed my growing curiosity back along – AronRa, Potholer54, ThunderF00t, and others. But having something well-done, straight-forward, that’s not snarky and belittling of creationists would be great. It would be something that the average nice person who was never exposed to a decent education about evolution could benefit from.
Agreed. Thank you for the feedback.
Really great video. If someone wants to put that amount of work into this; that is an accomplishment to be remembered. Also a great course, in and of itself…like sophomore or higher level in high school. Forget the textbook…just use these videos.
I like the idea, just need to resolve any legal issues.
I feel the book should not be over shadowed but should be complimented by this fine effort.
To this end for instance, the program should start with a short intro of the book and proceed to extract the main points of WEIT from its chapters. Stick to the man himself, the theory, the evidence and closing from the book. Forget peripherals like mentions of Paley leave that for the book. This way the editing needs to be sharp and keep it flowing otherwise it’s an image bashing, the pace should keep us interested.
Bare with me, perhaps your good self should be live to camera at the closing. If not, no matter but it should close with reiterating Darwin’s contribution to science and our understanding of how life began and diversified and don’t mention the g word if it can be helped. It’s not to accommodate I say this reluctantly but Evolution is the star here. (Maybe a little stick)
My concerns were the length and that it might run aground and lose direction.
I agree. I’d summarize the book down to 2 hours or so. That’s enough for many. For some this would stimulate curiosity for the book.
I haven’t had a chance to go through the comments yet so I apologize if I’m not being original here. I think WEIT would make a great TV series along the lines of “Your Inner Fish” or “Cosmos”. Seth Andrews could narrate with that great voice of his with Dr. Coyne providing numerous commentary throughout.
Jerry, It looks very good. It would reach ‘fence sitters’, non readers, tee vee watchers and internet browsers.
Yes yes yes!
Something to look forward to every week now that cosmos and inner fish are over.
Hopefully, some sort of profitable arrangement for everyone involved can be reached.
Anything to get more evolution on TV (in whatever form) is a good idea. Cosmos reached a huge audience in the US and 181 countries around the world (Skeptical Inquirer, Vol 38 No 5, Sept/Oct 2014 “From The Editor”). That series had several good segments on evolution in its 13 hours. There is an audience for this out there. Maybe a series of video books might catch the attention of a network like PBS and be turned into a series for general TV viewing. Jerry, you need something to keep you busy when you retire someday.
I think this is a fantastic idea!
Getting my kids to read the book is a hell of a task, but letting them watch a few segments like this at a time, would make it so much easier for my TL/DR kids… (Too Long Didnt Read).
I say go for it….
Given what was shown and the volunteering of the brothers, NOT producing this would be nearly a criminal act. My personal preference would be for 30 minute to 1 hour segments.
If half hour segments are too long (are attention spans really that short now?) shorter segments would need to be essentially stand alone and complete.
Note that 16 hours broken down into half hour segments is 32, and that would be 64 if further divided into 15 minute segments. It is also the case that having more smaller segments makes it more difficult to convey complex information since there would have to be some overlap between the segments, and that just accumulates into an even greater amount of total run time.
What percentage of the target audience would really watch 32, 64, or even more segments?
Nice job Metcalf brothers. I have 3DS Max and a quite powerful workstation at home so I could offer 3D computer graphics rendered at any resolution, if that would assist you.
How many others beside Prof. CC would be willing to assist the Metcalf brothers on this? It is obviously going to require more than just the two of them to produce this.
I’m growing to like this. If I were doing it, I’d probably make different choices (e.g., a sans serif typeface, not text shading, and right-aligned text — all of which I find aid readability; stylistic unity of the graphical elements; positioning and cropping of images; &c.). But I’m not sure the Metcalfs’ (Metcalves’?) choices are wrong.
Clearly, apart from copyright of the text, they have got copyright of the audiobook commentary to worry about.
Regarding which, I think that this can be speeded up. I was comfortable listening to the audio alone at 1.25× (more so than at 1×!). (1.5× was a bit silly, but might have been fine if the pitch had been adjusted to compensate.) I think that 1.25× would work for most people when supported by the text and images.
As a native British English speaker, I’m puzzled by the comments about the English accent for the Paley quotations. I didn’t really discern much difference in accent from the narrator’s normal voice; it was just a bit more “mannered”. It certainly didn’t strike a false note with me or detract from the video.
/@
I agree with your points, particularly the speed of narration. I generally record documentaries for later viewing, and have got into the habit of watching at 1.3X normal speed (available on my Panasonic PVR with normal-sounding pitch), to avoid a tendency to fall asleep.
Personally I would prefer the text to be optional, as I find it distracting.
These are minor points – the whole concept is excellent and well produced. Go for it!
Audio at 1.25x would be perfect.
An excellent and worthy effort making JAC’s book ACCESSIBLE to a far wider audience than at present. Very well done. At this high quality could be marvellous leverage for undermining false irrational beliefs in young minds. Perhaps, by abridging the book’s comprehensive treatment, serving more as an introduction to the originating book.
I agree that the captions should be white on black, -if possible optional for viewers who find them distracting?
Actually, there are more readable choices than white text on a black background.
/@
I agree with almost everyone above (except for music, animation, humor and host suggestions). Less is more. Better YouTube than tv, YouTube is available worldwide 24/7 without any of those stupid commercial licensing barriers (mostly).
If it is technically and legally doable I am all for it. There is no harm and only good things can come out of it. Maybe not for the masses but I for one would love to show the series of videos to the kids in my family and everyone interested. I enjoyed WEIT very much, it is a fantastic book and adding another resource is a great idea. Plus the “pilot” looks excellent.
Diversity of media seems to be a boon, not a problem.
I would encourage the effort.
Ditto!
I had read WEIT several times (as I had used it for a few years in a class). It had been a while, but I was very much struck by how well it comes across as a narration in a documentary. I wish I could write that well!
That introductory video was very well done. I think the project should go forward. People are more apt to watch a video than read a book. This seems a great way to disseminate the fact of evolution, something that I think most of agree needs doing.
I think this would be a wonderful idea…even at 16 hours long.
But please, consider re-recording the audio yourself. The inflections and emphases of the author really improve the audiobook experience.
Cheers
That seems a bit mean on Victor Bevine and the folks at Audible Studios!
I think the inflexions were good; everything was very clearly enunciated. (As I said elsewhere, I found it easier to listen to at 1.25×, and the enunciation was still clear.) But I’d agree it could have been more dynamic.
Get Brian Blessed to do it! “Darwin’s alive!”
/@
Yes — please proceed. I found the segment posted fascinating and extremely well-done. I’ve often urged family members to read your book to no avail. However, if they could consume the thing in this format, I imagine that they would be much more amenable to doing so.
I loved it!!!!!
In my view if done well, why not? (Assuming that it doesn’t take much of Jerry’s time, anyway.)
But – Jerry – who owns the rights to WEIT? The publisher might have a problem with this sort of thing, alas.
I have subscribed to the site, on YouTube, and I have asked him to prevail on you to allow it to keep going. Both because of my strokes and because it would take me so long to read the book and sit down and think about it… It was done so faithfully… It is amazing that people are out there that can do this.
Excellent idea, and some good suggestions.
Since the main aim is to increase ‘accessibility’ it should have versions in different languages such as Spanish, Chinese and (dare I say it?) Arabic.
I agree — I think you should do it! I really liked the first bit there.
It would have to be professionally done, & as you point out (& with my librarian head on) copyright permission becomes an issue…
Given settlement of the copyright issue, permission of the publisher and the continuous oversight and approval of Professor Coyne, I say, “Go for it! As Diana points out,we don’t all learn using the same senses. Some are visual. Some are auditory. Some use multiple senses at the same time. Variance in attention spans and language skills could play an important part as well. The more diverse forms this information can be presented in, the more people will have an opportunity to learn about evolution.
A latecomer to the discussion: I give my vote to those who gave the sample a thumbs up.