Interface and structure

Film is understood in retrospect, so scenes must be presented before the viewer is asked to make a choice. Knowing this, it is easy to see why the wedding film was perceived as so much better.

The main problem with the travel film interface, is that it is difficult for the user to understand the choices before it is too late. Users can alter the length of the film at any point by clicking a pyramid marker, and they will be taken to a corresponding point in the longer edit of the film. Let's say sequence "A" is over, which the viewer realizes as a different sequence "B" begins. It is only now that the viewer can know that he or she actually would liked to view a longer version of sequence A. But if she or he changes now, it is the longer version of sequence B that will appear.

more...

The footnote approach of the wedding film is easy to understand, as it presents a taste of a sequence before it gives the user the choice of what to see. Its interface is also more convenient, giving the user time to react, by showing a placeholder (or, rather, timeholder) image or sequence when the link is available.

more...

Thus, it is not just the visual interface or the thematic material that made users prefer the wedding film format, but also the editing style. Editing for stretchfilm requires a very straightforward style, where similar shots are grouped together in scenes or catalogs. The reason for this is that it must be possible to represent all parts in the shorter film. This is more effectively done by metonymy, that is, that a tight edit or a short shot represents a larger heap of similar shots.

The two experiments used a special kind of material: amateur video. However, the principles of stretchfilm can be usefully applied to other professional genres, such as broadcast news and fiction film.

Next chapter: Other Genres