Talk:Storyboard: Difference between revisions

The main article on storyboards mentions 'corollary notation'. What does that mean in this context? How can I use it in teaching elementry student.

They were fancy words instead of just "additional text"... --Janke | Talk 05:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC) Reply

I changed the oversimplified references from digital media to interactive media. Not all interactive media is digital, or even electronic for that matter. Film (the motion picture category) and animation could also be digital media, which adds to the confusion if the term is used to distinguish from film and animation. Oicumayberight 19:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC) Reply

I reverted your final change because the article ended up by saying "or interactive media sequence, including websites and interactive media" which doesn't make much sense. I also reinstated information that was removed because it duplicated the opening (lead) section, because that's how good articles are supposed to be written, though few enough are, see Wikipedia:Lead section. Notinasnaid 20:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC) Reply

A complete revert of all the changes was not necessary. I made the one sentence clearer by adding the word "other" to show that websites are included in the description of digital media.

Simply reverting didn't address the oversimplified use of digital media where interactive media should have been used.

I don't understand your point about the opening section. The information wasn't removed, but instead moved to the sections which it was discussed. There is no need for a "description" section, because the opening section is a description. Oicumayberight 20:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC) Reply

By opening section, you mean the lead section, the bit before the first section? If so, it is correct, and preferred, to repeat (or expand) what the lead section says later in the article. Removing the lead section should not remove any information from the article. Notinasnaid 20:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC) Reply

I have removed the external links section. All the were either commercial, or in a format not recommended (rtf) in the wiki guidelines. Please do not reinstate commercial links, thank you! Wikipedia is not for advertising services. --Janke | Talk 16:45, 25 January 2009 (UTC) Reply

besides the artists who use the storyboard technique to script comics, the manga Bakuman describes using "names" so writers can better present their story to their artists. Check it out and consider ading this info. Alphapeta (talk) 08:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC) Reply

While Disney holds a claim to be the first to adapt the technique to film. But this is nothing more than an extension of the traditional artistic process using sketches to pre-vision finished work. Sculptors are probably closest to film in that historically they have sketched around potential pieces, built tiny models to work out spirit and physical details, and all-in-all extensively plan their finished piece. And, similar to film, the primary visionary has also developed his or her sketches and models to the point that they could be turned over to assistants for creating the final and full sized piece.

At the same time, I seriously doubt that Disney was the first --- but have no way to know. Since pre-sketching is entirely ubiquitous in the art world, it is much more likely that various levels of pre-sketching were in use in many other places. However, it would make sense that Disney was the first to begin rigourously applying boards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.11.112.161 (talk) 18:16, 10 December 2009 (UTC) Reply

I totally agree - if the Walt Disney Company contributed anything it would only be for the invention of the word "storyboard" to label and claim as it's own that which artists had already being doing for centuries. It is absolute bollocks that someone like Disney be given the credit for such a process. I mean check this out - from the 1920s: http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/megacollectors-felix-cat-part-1-of-2.html - Felix the cat was not a Disney cartoon - and preceeded Mickey Mouse. So even if by "storyboarding" we mean what Disney was doing to prepare a cartoon, then even in that narrow definition Disney doesn't own it. Only the word can be credited to Disney. But if it is that easy to own something - by giving something your own name - well we could all own anything, couldn't we?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.6.86.1 (talk) 05:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC) Reply

Does it seem to anyone else that a lot of this history seems uncited and original research? --ScientificBuccaneer (talk) 23:02, 30 October 2011 (UTC) Reply

Apple has a software development file type named literally ".storyboard", which specifies the on screen layout and formatting of various data fields. An article entirely on that format would presumably contain technical information similar to articles about other computer file formats. This topic is also listed on the disambiguation page for the word "Storyboard".

But for some unknown reason, someone has merged that topic into this mostly unrelated article about storyboards in creative media such as movies and theater, leaving it only as a tiny paragraph with none of the information of info-boxes for file formats in computing articles. It would be really nice if it was unmerged again and properly fleshed out with the usual information found in other file format articles, including the usual info-box specifying file type, Apple data type, MIME type etc.

Jbohmdk (talk) 23:42, 4 September 2023 (UTC) Reply