by Hannah Wasserfaller -

Output Analysis and Reflection

This last post is dedicated to reflect on this semester’s project – and give some insight into what became of it!

Now, since I produced a reel-type short video on the topic of map projections and Greenland as my creative part of this semester’s task, I also wanted to publish this video to gather some insight into if this is something a public audience would find interesting. 

For that purpose, I developed a little design framework for myself and transformed two of my existing social media accounts on YouTube and Instagram accordingly.

Because my focus in creating this content was to make interesting, appealing visuals paired with science-related information, I ultimately decided on renaming my accounts to „cinematic.science“. 

I changed the bio and profile pictures before finally posting the reel to both platforms. In order to better understand the performance of each, I should mention that the Instagram account had around 226 followers and I had previously used it for sharing my artworks, however, it hadn’t been in use for multiple years. I figured it would be a good opportunity to use this account as it already had an existing audience and hoped that they would accept the change in direction.

The YouTube Account, while also being existent, is one that I had not used previously and sat at 0 followers and 0 videos, so I knew that I would start from scratch there. 

Before posting, I did do some research on what social network algorithms like in terms of posting times, captions and hashtags – however, I am not entirely sure that my implementation of these suggestions helped with the performance of the content. Still, I tried to incorporate supposed effective posting times and caption suggestions (shorter, key-word focused) into my publishing process and ended up posting the first video in the beginning of July.

Overall, the results after publishing the video on both accounts varied, however that was to be expected due to the difference in followers.

I would say that the „success“ was mediocre, the YouTube video garnered 283 views as of today, 1 follower and 2 likes. 

The Instagram reel performance was a little better, with gathering 950 views, 32 likes, 4 comments and 17 new followers (opposed to 3 lost followers), which is considerably better but I would also attribute this to the fact that I shared the video on my personal account that has a lot more followers and probably had the effect that people that know me personally interacted with it. 

I think it leaves room for improvement, but I also believe that building a community based on publishing content of this sort takes time, as there needs to be a baseline trust and reliability in the authenticity of the shared information, so I will definitely try to continue to publish content and see where that journey takes me.

I actually did publish another post, this time it was less informative and more trend-based but tailored to my topics, as I did a „your birth-month – your xy“ post based on map projections. This was a carousel (multi-slide) static posting on Instagram only, which did not receive as many interaction and was also seen by less people(575), accumulating a total of 12 likes and no comments, suggesting that this might be too niche or not appealing enough to my audience. I suppose that further testing will reveal which formats prove to be effective. 

The posts and profiles were set up can be found here:

https://www.instagram.com/cinematic.science

https://www.youtube.com/@cinematicsciences

Overall, my conclusion is that getting into this entire research – recording – editing – publishing process is A LOT. There is much more to consider than „just“ filming a video, playing around with edits and putting it out there. I suppose that I underestimated the amount of resources it would take to some extent because the researching and breaking it down into digestible pieces part takes some effort, since I also only wanted to publish something I knew was well researched and reliable. Still, I had a lot of fun diving into all of these little topics and testing out what I could achieve with my setup and my ideas, and it definitely motivated me to keep going and do more even though the results purely based on social media metrics aren’t yet overwhelmingly positive. I did receive some personal feedback from friends and colleagues that was very positive, so I plan on continuing on my way, gather more experience and collect further feedback that can continuously be integrated into new content.

Cinematic Science on YouTube
Cinematic Science on Instagram
Screenshot of Map Projection Reel on Instagram
Screenshot of Your Birth Month = Your Map Projection Posting on Instagram

by Hannah Wasserfaller -

Dissemination practices

As teased in one of my previous blog posts, I wanted to give more detailed insights into dissemination practices. I do believe that this will help me understand the scientists side of things more, as I was previously more focused on developing content for the general public. And while that goal remains the same, I believe that it is crucial to understand how scientists try to communicate their topics and to find a way that bridges the gap between the scientific and non-scientific community.

A 2020 article by Tony Ross-Hellauer et. al. published ten simple rules for innovative dissemination of research, which will now briefly be explained. These ten recommendations were compiled via multidimensional research activities and have the goal to provide primarily researchers with an entry point to more innovative dissemination practices, allowing them to choose methods and tools according to their audience, requirements and skills. 

Rule 1: Get the basics right

In order to be able to communicate effectively, it is necessary to have clarity in some aspects: one needs to define objectives, define the potential target group(s), messages and methods of engagement and communication. Also, a dissemination plan should be created to strategically outline the project goals.

With defining objectives, the authors essentially mean the purpose and goal of the dissemination – what is a researchers motivation, what should be achieved with it? This step is essential for planning further activities.

This step goes hand in hand with defining the target audience and who to reach with ones research – having clarity in who the stakeholders are will also determine what they need in order to receive the information. The same goes for developing the key messages, as these need to be planned accordingly in order to be communicated to a specific group.

Rule 2: Keep the right profile

The authors suggest establishing a unique identity, both online and offline, for a research project or individual researchers – be it through the usage of websites, personal social media accounts, academic social networks or other, as this will help in increasing visibility. Creating a brand and having a visual identity not only can have an impact in the public’s perception and accumulating esteem within the scientific community.

Rule 3: Encourage participation

Inviting research audiences to engage and collaborate in order to create a collaborative, collective endeavor is suggested. Participatory approaches can be anything from games through including the public in the research process.

Also, frequent and early dissemination, i.e. by updating followers on social media, publishing progress blogs or tell the public about early findings can in turn mean early feedback. So, to sum up, including not only researchers but also citizens and other audiences outside of the academic circle can increase a project’s societal impact.

Rule 4: Open science for impact

Open science is definitely as knowledge that is share and developed via collaborative networks in a transparent and accessible way and is rooted in the principles of transparency and equitable participation. Practices include, for example, open access to publications, open source software, open research data, citizen science, or open educational sources.  Open Access publications can have a larger impact as they are widely available and can be reused and explored further. Therefore, dissemination can be considered a core element of the open science approach.

Rule 5: Remix traditional outputs

Research articles or books can be consider traditional research outputs. The authors suggest that innovative dissemination practices should complement these traditional tools in order to boost impact. Publishing press releases, blog posts or nonspecialist summaries alongside the traditional outlets can be a great way of reaching more people with one’s research and which also might get picked up by media outlets who are often interested in science-related stories. 

Rule 6: Go live

There are multiple ways of translating dissemination into in-person activities outside of specialized conferences. Science slams, TED talks science shops or science festivals offer different ways of interacting with various audiences. Reaching out to key stakeholders is also encouraged, as policy-makers or thought leaders have the power of making change happen and personal conversation might be a powerful tool to support collected evidence on a topic. 

Rule 7: Think visual

Currently, dissemination is still largely done via writing or spoken word. Including visual elements can be a strong tool in helping the audience understand and interpret research. The most logical approach is, of course data visualization, a practice that has been used for a long time. However, the means of visualizing data have changed throughout time and offer some new possibilities such as smart graphs and infographics. Science comics, video abstractor even artistic interpretations are ways of depicting science in a way that might just be memorable – and therefore stronger in impact.

Rule 8: Respect diversity

Diversity within the academic discourse has always included discussions about cultural backgrounds, gender, ethnicities, ideologies, digital literacy and economic diversity. It is important to not only raise awareness about diversity issues but to also grant higher visibility to underrepresented minorities in research. And in terms of communication, there should always be the consideration of how to appropriately and respectfully reach the right audience – because research should be reaching everyone that it might affect. Helpful tools to achieve this is defining a code of conduct or contributing guidelines. 

Rule 9: Find the right tools

Contrary to traditional dissemination methods, innovative dissemination often requires a different skillset and other resources. A Hub created by OpenUP offers a catalogue of innovative dissemination services researchers can use and list resources that range from data visualization, outreach and publishing to event organization, archives, and crowdsourcing opportunities. 

There are other initiatives like this in order to support researchers in their dissemination and widen public scientific engagement.

Rule 10: Evaluate, evaluate, evaluate.

Dissemination activities should constantly be monitored and evaluated in regards to their effectiveness and impact. Analyzing why or why not certain tactics do or do not work is crucial in order to identify effective practices and allow researchers to be strategic in using them. 

Evaluation should be based on a combination of qualitative and quantitative indicators and could include interviews, questionnaires, or observations for measuring impact.

All these dissemination guidelines made me realize that I, myself, might need to re-evaluate my research approach. I need to decide where I want to put my focus in my further research – to support the scientists in their science communication skills and develop formats that might be applicable for them or to independently find ways of communicating science to the non-scientific community outside of dissemination goals.

This blogpost is majorly based on this PLOS article: 

Ross-Hellauer, Tony, Jonathan P. Tennant, Viltė Banelytė, Edit Gorogh, Daniela Luzi, Peter Kraker, Lucio Pisacane, Roberta Ruggieri, Electra Sifacaki, and Michela Vignoli. “Ten Simple Rules for Innovative Dissemination of Research.” PLOS Computational Biology 16, no. 4 (2020): e1007704. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007704.

by Hannah Wasserfaller -

A little research discourse: Interviews

I wanted to take the opportunity and use this blogpost to talk about the topic of interviews for my research.

In class, we conducted interviews with each other – originally aimed at practicing how to handle an interview situation, which pointers to have in mind, how to interact with the interview partner and how to document the talk. I have to admit, however, that for me it turned out to be not just valuable as a practice opportunity but actually helped me in figuring out some key questions that I want/need to ask in my research. Furthermore, the talk with my interview partner already offered some interesting insights and new approaches I had not yet fully considered.

The interview I conducted was all about the topic of science communication with the following questions being at the center of the conversation:

  • Of course, it is a very large field, but are you generally interested in science and research?
  • Are there areas that are of special interest to you?
  • Which sources do you use for getting information about (scientific) topics?
  • Which formats do you find interesting?
  • How do you like content that is, for instance, being presented via social media, in podcasts or posters?
  • Can you think of any platforms/accounts/creators that are focused on scientific content?
  • Do you follow science platforms / accounts / creators?
  • If you get in touch with a scientific topic, for instance through a fun fact, are you interested in exploring the topic further?

Essentially, I wanted to find out about my interview partner’s personal experiences and opinions about the general topic of science communication formats. I was particularly interested if, and if yes which, science communication channels are interesting for the other person.

Although I tried to be neutral when I asked my questions, I was hoping for answers that support my general opinion on the potential of science communication formats and I was pleased to see that, at least in this case, I was under the impression that I am on the right track with my topic. 

To give a short recap and analysis of the interview: the interview partner, while not having a specific interest in science topics, showed general curiosity and openness to them. He stated the platform YouTube, in particular, as the main source of engaging with science content. Even though he is  not specifically searching for that kind of content, he has come across it through, for example, the suggested videos page and by now does follow some accounts and creators that he has learned to value for their appealing treatments of scientific topics. The way these creators present their topics and the trust in their reliability that accumulated over time are pivotal in the interview partner’s willingness to consume such specific content, the topics themselves not even mattering as much as the knowledge that a certain channel or person will present them in an appealing way.

Overall, the interview was extremely helpful for shifting my attention to YouTube as an important platform for educational content and gave me some ideas as to what matters when getting people to watch/consume scientific content. It leads me to believe that the „how“ is more important than the „what“. While the „what“ is something I believe is crucial when deciding which topics could be worth knowing about, the „how“ probably is an extremely important subject, especially in the beginning, where building trust with the public community might be more important than instantly teaching about complex issues. Furthermore, the way a topic is being presented can make or break the viewer’s interest. Essentially, it does not matter what one is talking about, it could be the most theoretical, boring information but if it is presented with enthusiasm, made to be entertaining, interesting and/or impressive, people can get inspired by it. Of course, the same is valid the other way around – viewers could lose interest in the most interesting topic if the presentation lacks all the attributes mentioned above. 

I will definitely conduct further interviews to see which touch points are natural for people and what platforms and formats currently matter to them. 

For that purpose, I put together a questionnaire that I just published as part of this blog posts topic. (If you are reading this, feel free to complete the survey, I would appreciate anyone taking the time to do so!)

It picks up on the questions I asked in my test interview with a bit more It is currently open for answers in the hopes of getting more insights that will help me create better science focused content. 

The survey can be found here: 

https://forms.gle/1JAfiZ1cRcrFZUqQ7

by Hannah Wasserfaller -

Science Communication and Dissemination

While I am busy with creating further visual content that is related to science and have been starting to put out some of my creations, I still wanted to continue my research about the world of science communication. From an exercise in the design and research class, I came up with a number of relevant key words for my research which I wanted to explore further. And one term in particular has crossed my path in both the research process and in “real life”, which is why I would like to dedicate this blogpost to the topic of dissemination. In the world of science, dissemination is a term that one will frequently come across – and one that I would define as closely related to the field of science communication.

Dissemination in the context of science essentially means transferring knowledge to a targeted audience because that audience will either use it, be impacted by it or influence the use of the evidence. In short: dissemination is all about getting information to the right people so that they can make use of that knowledge. To name one example – knowledge that concerns health care could be communicated to policy makers, patients or healthcare practitioners. It is a core component in translating knowledge strategically in order to adopt and implement new practices.

There are various frameworks and translation models that include elements of dissemination, however, dissemination is often regarded as a single step at some point towards the end of a research project rather than spanning over its entire running time which in turn contributes to a translational gap between what is evidence is being generated and what actually impacts policies and practices. This furthermore has also the potential to represent poor return on investment to research funders.

Dissemination is a complex topic that demands strategic use and while many models exist, researchers struggle to select the fitting resources for their dissemination strategy and lack guidance in terms of which activities to implement at the subsequent steps of the dissemination process. 

So, to sum up: while there are strategies and models, implementing them effectively poses a big challenge, which is why it would be important to develop a framework that is accessible and clear to everyone. 

While my previous posts and my general approach was more on the non-scientific community as a target group for my topic and also the little projects I have been working on, it was quite interesting to see that proper science communication is a struggle that is not only related to (public) education but maybe even more relevant for the scientific community,  incredibly important in order to translate scientific findings for decision makers or audiences that concretely benefit from certain knowledge. 

While communication to the public and offering ways of easily accessible information that are intended to raise the overall knowledge within the population is a large part of what caught my interest in the matter and is also something I want to pursue further, the importance of that other side of science communication was not as evident to me before.

Therefore, I think it could be interesting to also follow the topic from this other side. To look at the ways  scientists currently frame and communicate their work to respective target groups and then find the issues and new (design supported) approaches to make for better knowledge transfer.

The way of communication research has been changing, especially due to digital possibilities.

And while traditional formats such as scholarly journals and books can be found online, their functions and formats have remained similar throughout that time of change. 

Therefore, online media such as blogs and social media platforms offer new possibilities for scientists to use. Blogs and wikis have risen to popularity with something called „open notebook science“, professional academic networks like ResearchGate or Academia.edu have millions of users, and for interaction with the wider public, online formats such as TED talks that are being streamed via YouTube have become very popular. 

Digital technologies allow scientists to not only communicate with their primary dissemination targets (such as other scholars, policy makers or similar) but to actively involve people that otherwise would not have had access to this information.

The potential of adopting new methods is promising, as new cross-disciplinary collaborations could emerge which in turn could support publications, funding and new research opportunities.

Overall, there has been a noticeable push towards making science and research known to the greater public since the 1980s and the inclusion of non-scientific audiences which in turn has caused new forms of dissemination to emerge. Examples for this would be sciences shows or magazines and in more recent years, new event types such as science slams or open lab days. New participatory spaces such as science cafés or hackerspaces emerged which influence both research production and dissemination  processes, and powerful trends that strive for the globalization of research, responsible research, and inclusion of previously excluded audiences are reshaping the scope and purposes of dissemination. 

The issue here is, that while these new emerging approaches are viewed as fundamental constituents of open science, researchers tend to still focus on traditional outputs such as journal articles, speaking at conferences or publishing books. 

Innovative dissemination would, in turn, mean dissemination that exceeds traditional academic publishing and meeting practices and aims to spread the research findings to a more widespread audience.

I feel like this is the part I would like to find out more about in the future because that is also where the power of (media) design can play a vital role. 

For the next blogpost, I plan on diving a little bit deeper into (innovative) dissemination practices in order to find out more about the possibilities and challenges in that regard.

Sources used in this blogpost:

First part: Scott, Sion, Bethany Atkins, Thomas D’Costa, Claire Rendle, Katherine Murphy, David Taylor, Caroline Smith, Ian Kellar, Andrew Briggs, Alys Griffiths, Rebekah Hornak, Anne Spinewine, Wade Thompson, Ross Tsuyuki, and Debi Bhattacharya. “Development of the Guide to Disseminating Research (GuiDiR): A Consolidated Framework.” Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy 20, no. 11 (2024): 1047–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2024.07.007.

Second part: Ross-Hellauer, Tony, Jonathan P. Tennant, Viltė Banelytė, Edit Gorogh, Daniela Luzi, Peter Kraker, Lucio Pisacane, Roberta Ruggieri, Electra Sifacaki, and Michela Vignoli. “Ten Simple Rules for Innovative Dissemination of Research.” PLOS Computational Biology 16, no. 4 (2020): e1007704. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007704.

by Hannah Wasserfaller -

The journey to a result

Okay, so this was the moment I wanted to share the video I edited for my little design and research project with you – a short reel where I try to communicate a somewhat scientific topic / share some facts – in the case of this video, it’s about the topic of map projections and why Greenland looks so big on maps while it is actually way smaller.

And then, this happened:

A big learning from that, I guess, is: ALWAYS SAVE YOUR DATA WITH AN EXTRA BACKUP. Or you might experience the same feeling of dread I had as you check every single one of your SD cards, desperately hoping that one of them might still hold your files, the hope dwindling with every empty folder you encounter. 

However, I had at least one thing – since I exported a work in progress file, I had some footage left to work with.

Ultimately, I ended up editing the preview and managed to create this video piece:

In the upcoming blogpost I will talk about learnings in the editing process and possible improvements for further content creation. Also, I still want to record a voice over because feedback suggested that it would be helpful / possibly improve the quality of the watching experience because following the content might be easier.

by Hannah Wasserfaller -

Visual Hooks

As I was researching and looking for video edit ideas, I stumbled upon a big topic that is especially relevant for social media content: (visual) hooks. Hooks, in general, are a way of capturing an audiences attention at the very beginning of a piece of content.

Especially on social media and in the world of short form video content, it is vital to get people’s attention within an incredibly short amount of time, as content needs to stand out in order for people to stick with it and finish watching. 

Usually, a hook happens within the first five seconds of a video or can be found in the first line of text in the caption or posting. Its purpose is to interrupt – for example – mindless scrolling and create enough curiosity for a viewer to consume the entire piece of content.  On social media platforms it is crucial to keep people interested in one’s content as the algorithms reward longer playback times or replays with an increased distribution rate which in turn increased viewership numbers and public attention.

Various types of hooks can be used to garner attention, such as making a surprising statement, asking compelling questions or promising valuable information. Visual hooks (= something you show) can. be especially effective because our brains process images around 60.000 times faster than text. 

The psychology behind hooks 

Certain psychological triggers naturally cause human responses. One of the most important drivers here is curiosity and what happens within the human brain when what is called a curiosity gap occurs.  It is an incredibly powerful tool when it comes to capturing peoples attention. Raising a question people want to know the answer to will keep viewers watching because the brain essentially registers incomplete information as a problem that needs to be solved. Sparking curiosity basically hijacks a person’s neural pathway because once a question has been asked, a sense of tension arises through with the brain’s desire of wanting closure. 

Emotional Connection Factors

Emotions are human behavioral drivers – so hooks that manage to evoke emotions such as surprise, joy, the aforementioned curiosity or even fear are especially effective. Connecting with the audience emotionally can have a special appeal and compel the audience into watching or interacting with content. 

The following paragraphs will look at some visual hooks and explain how they work.

Curiosity Gap or Open Loop Technique

As mentioned before, sparking curiosity is a very effective way of generating attention. When teased with potentially valuable information or asked a question one wants to know the answer to, the curiosity gap is in full effect.

A simple example would be something like:

“I discovered a weird productivity hack that tripled my output. You won’t believe what it involves…” 

Or

“Most people use their phone charger wrong. Here’s why.” 

Both these hooks cause an instinctive reaction from the viewer, who now is faced with  unresolved questions: are they using their chargers wrong? What hack could there be that makes you so successful?

The „Wait for it“- Visual Hook

Visuals are extremely powerful and can serve as hooks by themselves. When a video is started with a dramatic or unusual visual instance, it suggests that something greater is about to happen which in turn, again, keeps the audience watching.

Examples for that would be a visual that suggests a massive object that is about to be dropped or something complex being activated – or even someone preparing for an extreme challenge. This works because humans respond intensely to visual tension and if something appears to be in progress or incomplete, we wait to see the outcome. 

Bold Claims

A strong or controversial claim can be another effective strategy because they challenge assumptions. They signal to the viewer that they might learn something that could question or even change their existing views and that the content could cause their perspective to shift. 

An example for this would be “This is the biggest mistake new creators make.” 

Such as with curiosity, bold claims cause tension because a viewer – whether or not they agree with the statement – will stick around to either see if the argument that is being posed holds up or be validated in their views.

Story hooks

As humans, we are naturally made for stories. Therefore, when a piece of content introduces narrative tension, viewers instinctively will want to know how it unfolds.

Narrative structures create emotional responses or relatable scenarios, which is why this approach is so effective.

An example would be: 

“I almost quit my job last year. Then something unexpected happened..“


Stories evoke empathy and curiosity at the same time. People want to follow through with a narrative once it has started, which is why story-based hooks are particularly useful for content or creators that want to build a strong personal connection with their audience.

Rapid-fire value hook

Leading with valuable insights or sharing a quick list right away can be an effective hook as well because it promises the audience immediate payoff without having to wait for slowly teased information. 

This style works due to it signaling efficiency and valuing the audience’s time in terms of not making them wait long for promised information.

Examples for this kind of hooks:

„Three things every new filmmaker should know“

or

“Five apps that will make your life easier.”

Bandwagon Effect

Humans are naturally social beings, which is also why we tend to follow trends. When delivering statements that suggest many people are doing a certain thing, this can make for an effective hook. Showcasing popularity or social proof have the potential of making viewers think that they should do something because everyone else is doing it. 

For example: “Join 10000+ savvy marketers who’ve boosted their ROI with this one simple trick!” 

There are numerous types of hooks that have the potential of catching viewer’s attention and especially in the fast-paced environment of social media, I feel like it is almost impossible to not be aware of these strategies if one tries to build up a platform and wants their content to be seen. 

In further video projects, I would like to try out some of these techniques just to see for myself what works and what gets people engaged in science-related content. 

Sources used in this blog entry: 

https://playplay.com/blog/video-hooks

https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2026-89350-001.html

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237086938_Visual_Images_as_Hooks_for_Problem-Based_Learning

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327111538_Set_Your_Hook_A_collaborative_video_hook_approach_to_advancing_scientific_engagement

https://research.universityofgalway.ie/ws/portalfiles/portal/25982663/An_Observational_Narrative_of_Student_Reaction_to_Video_Hooks_Final_Draft_pre_Publication.pdf

https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.3786

https://thebettercontentclub.com/the-science-of-hooks-creating-content-that-stops-the-scroll

by Hannah Wasserfaller -

Videos Part 2: Greenland & Map Projections – Production

After completing my research about the topic of map projections/ how they relate to Greenland and finished writing the text, I was eager to get started on trying out different video edits.

I gathered a lot of inspiration on social media and used multiple reels as somewhat of a tutorial/template for my own videos.

I will admit, I was probably too quick in jumping on to the production train, as my shotlist was not fully worked out and I had not yet determined the timing/duration of each shot. Still, I tried out a setup at home, because this is also something I aim to achieve – have setups that don’t require a well-equipped studio setting. I do own a Sony A7 IV, which I also used for recording, my light setup is much more rudimentary, as I am using a ring light, a budget LED-floodlight for lighting up the room as well as a budget LED-colored light for establishing moods and create a look.

By now, I have recorded multiple clips and am in the process of editing them using different tools/effects but they still have to undergo massive timing adjustments in order to produce a good result.

Techniques I tried out were for example using background remover tools for layering videos and putting in text, or achieving a kind of stop-motion look for a text animation.

Screenshots from my current progress can be found below.

by Hannah Wasserfaller -

Videos Part 1: Greenland & Map Projections

I am currently busy with trying out ways to record and edit content about science-related arctic topics, focusing on coming up with content and editing ideas I then can apply.

I have made a list of suitable topics and am currently working on the first reel which is all about the size of Greenland and the related topic of map projections.

My learnings so far are quite extensive and mostly related to my workflow and my personal approach, because I realized that a lot of time has probably been lost because I was (or am still) partially unclear about which edits I want to use on which sequence and how to actually produce my visual assets. I will finish this current edit now with how I already started but am aiming to have a clearer plan set up for the next videos. That includes a much more detailed shotlist and thought-out transitions as well as having exact timing frames (as especially for social media, timing is extremely important) 

In more detail – the first approach to creating my video was rather messy, as I was mostly drawing on edits/videos I had previously researched and saved, matching those visual ideas loosely to the text/explanations I developed.

I tried to create somewhat of a shotlist to accommodate each sentence/explanation but while doing so I realized that the amount of information and text might just be way too extensive for the intended purpose of the video.

Ultimately, I ended up recording a couple of sequences so I could try out some of the editing styles I found interesting and am currently in the process of editing those clips, matching them with text and hopefully generating a cohesive final result.

I am also still figuring out which kind of text/voiceover would be most suitable for my videos and I might possibly just end up with two versions – one with voicelines that rhyme and have a more rhythmic, fun approach and one with a more „natural“ voiceover / text animation, to test out how they are perceived by viewers and which has the better overall information factor.

Current (faulty) Pre-production process for Video 1

  • Choosing topic – Greenland and map projections
  • Researching information about map projections and the special case of Greenland in that context
  • Researching video edits I would like to try out.
  • Coming up with the text / voiceover (which, as we now know, is probably way too long/would require many shots)
  • Creating (somewhat of) a shotlist

This would be the lyric draft I created and used to base my shots on:

For the shotlist, I used a Notion template and essentially based my shots on the respective matching text. I have to admit, however, while writing this list, as mentioned above, I felt that I didn’t have enough clarity as to how I would actually do/produce/set up each shot and how long each sequence would have to be. So, coming back from this first attempt, I aim to make this list more of a priority in order to have a much clearer plan for the recording and editing process.

by Hannah Wasserfaller -

Science Communication and Creative Editing

Finding creative ways to communicate scientific topics to the non-scientific community

Introduction

This blogpost shall give an overview over the planned skill to be acquired throughout this semester and list the resources that should be used in order to acquired said skill.

As I plan on building my master’s thesis around the topic of science communication and on how to build bridges between design and science communication in order to better communicate scientific topics to a non-scientific audience, I want to take this semester to focus on creating short-form video content that tackles scientific topics. My goal is to make these videos more than „classic“ explainer videos and have them stand out by learning more about creative editing and VFX for that purpose. The final product should be a series of videos that have both, educational content and visually appealing creative edits.

I have been researching accounts and creators who focus on producing creatively edited videos and selected some editing styles I would like to try out. These styles I would then like to match with scientific topics, which I am also in the process of selecting. I figured –at least for the start – I will be focusing on choosing topics that have some sort of „visual potential“ (meaning that they concern subjects that can also be adapted visually) and can be broken down into short form content relatively easily. Even though that may restrict the exploration of more complex topics, it will help me to get started in this field and to get to know more about how much information is needed in short form content to still convey knowledge without losing too much critical information. 

First Content Ideas

Since I was part of last year’s JOANNEUM Arctic Expedition Team and have worked in the science communication and media division of the team, I would like to generally focus on Arctic topics. There are many fascinating topics surrounding the Arctic and Arctic research is more relevant than ever, since it is not only heavily affected by climate change, but the happenings in the Arctic also have a massive impact on, for example, Europe’s climate. 

To get started, I put together a list of possible areas to be explored and explained on the video projects. This list, of course, is subject to change and extension and will be updated accordingly.

Topic 1: Greenland

1.1 | The Map of Greenland 
Greenland: The Island That Looks Like a Continent / Why all maps are wrong

Sources for info material:

1.2 | The country itself 
Population, languages etc., the name „Greenland“

Topic 2: The Arctic 

2.1 | Arctic vs. Antarctica  
-> Arctic vs. Antarctica (location on the planet, polar bears vs. penguins) 

2.2 | The Arctic 
-> the name origin
-> which areas/countries are part of the Arctic 

2.3 | Arctic Phenomena
-> Weather phenomena such as the Aurora Borealis and the Midnight sun

Topic 3: Glaciers

3.1 | What’s a glacier?
-> What makes a glacier a glacier?
-> how glaciers work

3.2 | Climate change and glaciers 
-> Melting glaciers
-> Ice shield, Glacier tongue

Next Steps

In the following days, I would like to further explore the potential of the listed topics and come up with ways to (visually) communicate and them. To get started, I have selected the topic around explaining the different map projections of Greenland, because it is not only a topic that can be well-explained in a short amount of time – it is also fun to play around with visually.

Background: Since it’s not possible to convert a 3D-sphere (such as the earth) into a flat plane, all maps are subject to distortion. Greenland is a pretty fun example of how map distortion completely changes a countries’ proportions – since northern and southern points of the globe are most affected by the falsification.

The next task is to come up with a storyline and subsequently a storyboard for this topic. Simultaneously, I intend to look into the creators more in-depth and look for explainer videos and tutorials to learn more about their approach to creative editing. The next blogpost will therefore be dedicated more to the editors and frameworks needed for creating short form (VFX-heavy) content and what topics surrounding the editing process itself I will need to look into.

by Hannah Wasserfaller -

Recording for Social Media

One part of my process this semester is selecting relevant topics for the videos I intend to shoot, while the other part is defining editing styles and effects I would like to use / base my videos on.

For this purpose, I took a deep-dive on social media and watched a LOT of videos, successfully training my algorithm to show me more and more creatively edited videos. 😉 Furthermore, I tried to find accounts that focus on science topics to gain inspiration on how to break down knowledge for short form video content.

The biggest challenge will likely be combining these editing styles into a concept that not only looks good but is useful for conveying information. A lot of the videos on social media with styles I found appealing don’t necessarily have the aspiration of actually teaching the viewer something, so I will happily accept the challenge of merging educational content with FX-heavy videos.

Since I plan on producing videos that are mostly intended for social media, there are a few aspects that should be considered for recording and editing the footage.

Resolution and Framerate

Probably most important for getting started with the video recording process is defining the frame rate and resolution.

While videos on social media usually play back at 30 FPS with a resolution of 1080 x 1920 px, the ideal recording specs for creating content that is mostly meant for social media platforms would be recording the footage in 4K UHD (which means a resolution of 3.840 x 2.160 px) and 60 FPS (60 Frames means generating 60 4K images every second). The reason for this is having more flexibility in the editing process. The bigger resolution will help with fixing framing mistakes in post production while the 60 FPS can be stretched for time remapping purposes such as creating slow motion effects.

I will most likely be using my Sony A7IV for my recordings, however, it would also be possible to just use a phone for recording, since many phones are capable of recording in 4K and 60FPS, so for our use case, a big professional camera setup would theoretically not even be necessary.

I would really like to find out how I can create a home setup and maybe even a mobile setup that allows me to effectively record and edit videos of the planned scope flexibly and thus also be suited for i.e. a setup on expeditions or field trips.

Further topics to be researched / discussed for video recording and editing

  • Lighting Setup
  • Camera Setup
  • Editing Setup

Topics surrounding the editing process

  • Masking / Rotoscoping / Keying
  • 2D/3D-Tracking
  • Time Remapping
  • Texturing (Texturelab)
  • Text animation
  • Greenscreen

Inspiration and Moods

I have collected inspiration and resources (inlcuding tutorials) and spent some time just watching videos and analyzing their styles. Out of alle those videos, I put together some moods and visual styles that I might want to try out. Especially the first three creators I listed have been relevant to me for quite some time, as I have been following them have been very impressed with the look and feel of their videos. Hopefully, I will be able to adapt some of their ideas to fit my own.

Style / Edits:

  • Sankalp Pandey (The Two Faced_)
  • Jesse Chrisss (jessechrisss)
  • Steven Womack (stevenwommack)
  • Sam Kolder (samkolder) (filmmaking)
  • Jordi Koalitic (jordi.koalitic) (creative photography)
  • Benn Tkalcevic (benn_tk) (filmmaking)
  • Corridor Crew (corridordigital)

Moods