Paper Example. Live Audience

Following my trip to Noah's ark, some of my friends requested me to describe to them the events of the journey. Due to my enjoyable experience in the trip, I could not wait to share with them some of the things I saw and lessons learned. I took the time to prepare a PowerPoint presentation to help with the visual presentation of the place and the art. I went ahead and chose a location for the performance and ensured that all I had all the equipment I needed for the day. I also took the time to learn about my presentation style and map out a strategy that would be effective for me and my audience. I then rehearsed my speech and made sure I had the appropriate attire to wear on the day.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Differences between Web Camera and Live Communications

During my presentation, I noticed that there are many differences between live communication and presentation via a web camera. For my face-to-face communication, their several considerations I took into place to ensure that I passed across the information in the right way. For one, I had to use a strong, confident speaking voice. Because I was presenting to a few people, I had to be sure that my voice was strong. This way, everyone could easily hear me. I also had to be confident when speaking for my ideas to be clear and easy for friends to understand. For a web camera, the settings of the camera can be adjusted to project the presenter's voice clearly and audibly. Therefore, the presenter does not have to project their voice while speaking (McDougall and Helen 173). The other differentiating aspect in my presentation is the use of active listening. As I presented my speech, I had to listen intently and hear others as they offered their feedback or asked questions. Web Camera presentations do not have such an advantage because the presenter does not receive any feedback from their audience as they communicate.

Due to the small number of people I was speaking to, my visibility was not a challenge. My friends could all see and hear me. This factor made the presentation an easy one. In web camera presentations, however, visibility can be a challenge (Marlow, Jason and Daniel 34). The presenter has to ensure that his or her viewers are in a position to see who they are talking to. Much the same as taking envisioned with a still camera, there ought to be a light source in front like natural light through a window. This light source ensures that the presenter's face is lit. If there is an abundance of light originating from behind the moderator than before them, their face will be in shadow. The audience will not have the option to make out the communicator's face. This perspective makes the introduction of exhausting and amateurish, as well as somewhat creepy.

When presenting, I enjoyed the privilege of moving around the room. The excitement I felt when talking about my experience in Noah's ark could not allow me to sit still. This movement allowed me to be close to my friends as I spoke, listened, and satisfied their curiosity as I answered their questions. A web camera, however, does not allow for much movement. Most module cameras are not intended for high goals. Overabundance development and how hard the PC is functioning at the time will make the image obscure or even absent. This problem fathoms itself typically when the moderator finds a good pace position; however, it causes a few seconds of pointless video.

Live communication offers one freedom to choose their clothing based on the type of audience they have. Because I was presenting to my friends, who were going to be dressed casually in shorts and jeans, I had to wear nice casual clothing. For me, this was a pair of pressed slacks and a collared shirt. For web camera presentations, the clothing an individual wears can disturb the camera. Garments can destroy a webcam's presentation. Unadulterated white garments can "flare" and appear splendid on camera, which can clean out one's face. Likewise, checked examples do not read well on camera and can look foggy. Most webcams show the moderator from mid-chest up. Subsequently, the shirt ought to be a strong shading and ideally not brilliant white.

Maintenance of eye contact is the other feature that I implemented in my live presentation. Eye contact is a sign of trustworthiness, competence, and confidence (Paul, Jesse, and Song 681). In the video presentation, the issue is that the audience is not with the presenter in the room. Thus it is frequently challenging to recollect where to look. Numerous moderators end up taking a gander at either their image on the screen. The issue is that on the camera, it would appear that the moderator is looking down or to the side, which isn't what they are attempting to do. Most webcams have a little dab of light that tells a person where the camera is. A communicator should regard that as their crowd's eyes and talk there. Live presentations are easy to make because one the audience is settled; no other external factors can disrupt the discussion. In Web camera presentations, however, one should be prepared for catastrophe. At times, a web camera will freeze up and quit working. Nobody will have the option to clarify why, and technical support freely shrugs and states they do not know either. Most presentation stages permit a person to post a despite everything image of themselves that will fill in as a placeholder for where the webcam video would be.

The Role of Non-Verbal Communication in my Presentation

During my presentation, I every so often grinned inadvertently at whatever point that I heard a pleasant idea or piece of information. This kind of communication was beneficial because it helped me to comprehend my companions' considerations and sentiments. At one minute, I understood that when looking at having more confidence in God and remaining on his guarantees, one of my companions was showing closed non-verbal communication. He had crossed arms and slumped shoulders. This companion had recently lost his wife to cancer, and I understood that he might be feeling on edge, angry, or anxious. Before the day of my presentation, he had consistently been asking me how a just God would permit such a disaster to transpire. Knowing the premise of his responses helped me address his implicit worries in a well-disposed and adoring manner. Other friends were displaying open non-verbal communication like having their arms close to the table, and feet placed firmly on the floor. These non-verbal signs educated me that they had positive attitudes and were likely open to information.

Throughout the presentation, I experienced a range of positive emotions. I was quite energized and happy. Developing mindfulness around how my feelings influenced my body gave me more prominent dominance over my outside presentation (Hill, Lynn, and Kaitlin 219). As a result, my face was lit with a smile and the joy that radiated from my heart as I spoke about the fantastic ark. I also made an effort to mimic nonverbal communications I found compelling. Whenever I saw anyone of my friends nod their head, their activity effectively conveyed endorsement and positive feedback. Displaying the exhibits of the ark in my presentation led to the display of many non-verbal signs that were a reflection of my friends' intrigue. I saw most of them with mouths open and eyes full. Some of them were shifting their bodies forward to get a glimpse of the pictures. I used these drawings and works of art to aid my verbal communication. The experience was like no other because my audience connected with me as I gave them information about the journey.

My Preference for Live Presentations over Video Presentations

Firstly, this type of correspondence shows body language. At the point when I see the way that the individual I am conversing with reacts, I am better able to understand their feelings. Face-to-face communication is advantageous in that it allows for live criticism interpreted through outward appearances and non-verbal communication. Diverse types of communication channels like videos can never let one such opportunity (Trinh et al. 17). It is also more straightforward to decipher the emotions of a person I am speaking to because I can hear his or her voice's tone. Secondly, I am ready to show my responses and feelings. Using videos would not offer me the opportunity to make a connection with my audience. Eye to eye correspondences is an extraordinary sort of impact and responsibility.

Thirdly, live introductions offer me the opportunity to observe the other individual. This way, I can show them through my auras that I am listening to them and care about what they are expressing. Along these lines, the individual I am speaking with will realize that I esteem them. Along these lines, I will cause them to know that their conversation is significant and has been heard. In such settings, I will likewise have the option to ensure that they are tuning in to me as well. Videos do not offer me the chance to listen to my audience. Fourthly, face-to-face correspondence upgrades trust and validity since I can unquestionably explain and answer questions with decency as opposed to in video presentations.

Conclusion

Various types of correspondence are utilized each day in every environment, including the workplace. Whether or not one gives a slight head motion in understanding or presenting information to a broader audience, correspondence is imperative when building associations, sharing considerations, selecting commitments, and managing a gathering. While it requires some venture and practice, correspondence and social aptitudes are undeniably prepared to be both extended and refined. My presentation that day was a success because of my proper use of both verbal and non-verbal communication techniques.

Works Cited

Hill, N. Sharon, Lynn R. Offermann, and Kaitlin Thomas. "Mitigating the detrimental impact of maximum negative affect on team cohesion and performance through face-to-face communication." Group & Organization Management 44.1 (2019): 211-238. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601118776835

Marlow, Jennifer, Jason Wiese, and Daniel Avrahami. "Exploring the Effects of Audience Visibility on Presenters and Attendees in Online Educational Presentations." Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communities and Technologies. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1145/3083671.3083672

McDougall, Jenny, and Helen Holden. "The silence about oral presentation skills in distance and online education: new perspectives from an Australian university preparatory programme." Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning 32.2 (2017): 163-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2017.1316187

Paul, Rachel, Jesse Sharrard, and Song Xiong. "The importance of face-to-face communication in the digital world." Journal of nutrition education and behavior 48.10 (2016): 681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2016.09.014

Trinh, Ha, et al. "Robocop: A robotic coach for oral presentations." Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 1.2 (2017): 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1145/3090092