Results of Different Camera Angle Techniques in Video Programs Production on Learning of Farmers in San Sai District, Chiang Mai Province
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The objective of this research was to compare farmers’ levels of cognitive conception through video programs produced by using three different presentation techniques: (1) Objective camera angle (2) Subjective camera angle (3) Point view camera angle.
The randomized pretest-posttest control group design was used in this study. The model groups, resulted from a sample random sampling, was comprised of 120 farmers from Sansai district, Chiang Mai. The respondents were then divided into three groups of forty members. After collecting data by interviews and questionnaires, statistical analysis was conducted to determine ranges, mode, percentage, means, standard deviations, Chi square test, t-test, F-test and Lest Significant Difference (LSD) test.
The results of the study shown that 1) the cognitive learning outcome after watching the video program of the 3 groups of farmers was significantly different higher than before. The cognitive learning outcome after watching the video program of the 3 groups of farmers was significantly different. It was found that farmers who learned from video programs using Point view camera angles had the highest learning outcome followed by the video program using the Subjective camera angle, while the video program using the Objective camera angle had lowest learning outcome. When comparing means of each group, it was found that means of farmers learning outcome from Objective camera angle were not significantly different from those in Subjective camera angle (p<0.05). Means of farmers learning outcomes from Subjective camera angle were not significantly different. And means of farmers learning outcomes from Point view camera angle were significantly higher than those in Objective camera angle (p<0.05).
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Carroll, N. 1993. Toward a theory of point-of-view editing: communication, emotion, and the movies. Poetics Today 14(1): 123-141.
Cummins, R.G., J.R. Keene and B.H. Nutting. 2012. The impact of Subjective camera in sports on arousal and enjoyment. Mass Communication and Society 15(1): 74-97.
Intaratat, K. 2004. Communication Pattern and Strategy for Participatory Development among the Community, The Tambon Agricultural Service and Transfer Center, The Community Learning Center, and Relevant Agencies. Bangkok: Extension and Training Office Kasetsart University. [In Thai]
Khotchum, A. 2019. Development of Video Learning Materials for Occupations and Technology Course Garden Design and Decoration for Mattayomseuksa 2 Level. Journal of Project in Computer Science and Information Technology 5(2): 67-76. [In Thai]
John, R.S. 2013. Photographic Psychology: Image and Psyche. [Online]. Available: http://truecenterpublishing.com/photopsy/article_index.htm (October 22, 2020).
Jungbauer, L. 2018. The Effect of Motion Dynamics and POV shots on Film Viewers’ Narrative Engagement, Empathy and Arousal. (Bachelor thesis Communication and Information Science Specialization: Human Aspects of Information Technology Tilburg University, Tilburg. Netherlands.)
Panpeng, Y. 2016. Movie Creation with a Digital DSLR Camera. [Online]. Available: https://www.chonburi.spu.ac.th/comm/index.php?p=knowledge_detail&detail=774093531 (October 22, 2020). [In Thai]
Pungsri, A. 2018. The Development of Online Video Lesson Subject Photography Technology Tiile “Advance Flash Photography”. (Independent Study M.Ed. in Educational Technology and Communication, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok.) [In Thai]
Quintero, J.M., and A. Sangalang. 2017. Testing the explanatory power of two measures of narrative involvement: An investigation of the influence of transportation and narrative engagement on the process of narrative persuasion. Media Psychology 20(1): 144-173.
Sricharoen, P. 2016. Audience’s Viewing Behavior and Satisfaction of AT TEN DAY Television Program on Channel 3. (Independent Study M.A. in Mass Communication Administration Journalism and Mass Communication Thammasat University, Bangkok.) [In Thai]
Yamongkon, D. 1990. Effects of different camera angles with and without subtitles and main points in video production upon farmer’s skill learning. (Master of Agricultural (Agricultural Extension) Maejo Institute of Agricultural Technology. Chiang Mai.) [In Thai]
Yenjabok, P., S. Saengpetch and T. Sittirangsan. 2004. Agricultural development communication for the new theory of King Bhumipol Adulyadej. Bangkok: The Thailand Research Fund (TRF). [In Thai]
