Presentations (was: First impressions)

[Dick Dunn]

I seem to have hit a nerve with both Steve Bellovin and Dan Klein--both of
whom have presented (good) papers at recent USENIXes and both of whom were
on the program committee for Baltimore.

They may be pretty sensitive about quality of presentations, and I probably
didn't convey quite what I meant.  I was not trying to say that "overheads"
are superior to slides--but only that each format has some advantages over
the other.  I'd like to see good equipment which can accommodate either
format.

In article <3624 at ap.sei.cmu.edu>, dvk at sei.cmu.edu (Daniel Klein) writes:

> >	- The overhead format is more convenient and familiar to many
> >	  folk.
> 
> Yeah, we've always done it that way, and we don't want to change, even if
> it's better another way.

I think this is a cheap shot.  I don't agree that slides are better in all
respects, and I think that if you're standing in front of a thousand people
trying to do a smooth presentation, there's a distinct advantage to working
with a familiar format.  People *do* fumble with slide projectors!  They
shouldn't--in theory a slide projector is trivial to operate--but theory
doesn't matter unless practice obliges.

The main objection seems to be to my suggestion that overheads are much
easier to fix at the last minute, either by running off a new one just
before you leave for the conference, or by manual correction with a
marker.

> This is one of the biggest problems at USENIX conferences - the last-minute
> mentality.  If you are going to be making a presentation to over a thousand
> people, you simply cannot make your slides at the last minute...

I agree...but that's not anything like what I was suggesting.  I was
suggesting that you might find a mistake at the very last minute and want
to correct it.

Do better proofreading, you say?  Fine, that will reduce the chance for
error.  With the small number of slides you need for a 20-minute talk, the
errors should be down to almost zero.  Yeah, almost.  If you don't think
you can prepare a talk with incredible care, go over it repeatedly,
study every detail, and still miss an error, either you haven't given
enough talks or you lead a charmed, Murphy-free existence.  Chances are you
won't have anything you need to correct if you're even reasonably careful--
except that (Murphy) the harder it is to make a correction, the more likely
you are to find one at the last minute!

Even if you don't have any errors, there's always the chance that you'll
get that last minute call or email that says, "Hey Billybob, y'know that
test you wanted me to run on the Frobozz/2?  I finally ran it, and you
won't believe the numbers!"  Of course, you can ignore the last-minute
info, but unless it's really too late to incorporate it, that's a cop-out.
(USENIX is supposed to be timely, remember?)  If you have to put up a
slide you couldn't correct, and point out the change, it will break your
stride in the talk, waste some of your valuable time, and confuse the
people whose attention was drifting just then.

It's THESE things that you can avoid by being able to make a last-minute
minor correction.  You'd better have your talk all ready to go well in
advance, as both Klein and Bellovin said.  In no way do I advocate doing
the preparation at the last minute, but I might like the option of being
enough of a perfectionist to make a small correction at the last minute,
without the constraints of the visual medium being in my way.

> A 20 minute talk should have between 10 and 15 slides, maximum.  Flipping
> back through 15 slides won't hurt anyone...

...IF the speaker knows how to use the projector in reverse!  (Again, that
*shouldn't* be hard, but it seems to be.)  It is disruptive to have to
watch the flash/flash/flash, but I guess it's rare enough that it's not too
bad.

> ...Calling for the overhead is just as time consuming,
> because more often than not, the overhead turner does not know the talk, and
> is only there to flip pages...

Why is that?  By earlier arguments, if you're presenting a talk to this
many people, you'd better have rehearsed it.  I hope it's in front of
people who can understand and critique it!  So rehearse it in front of the
person who's going to turn the overheads for you.  non-problem.

Again, I'm not trying to assert superiority of overheads; I'm just trying
to put them at parity with slides.  I've seen enough overheads done right
that I know they can work - and work well enough that other factors in the
talk are more important.  They have advantages as well as the disadvantages
that others have mentioned.

There are even problems with both media--such as trying to anticipate the
readability in a room of > 10^3 people.  There were some poor slides at
Baltimore--one set in particular was just too dark to read.
-- 
Dick Dunn     rcd at ico.isc.com    uucp: {ncar,nbires}!ico!rcd     (303)449-2870
   ...Simpler is better.