Reading vs. Watching

[Wonky3]

I found "Freakonomics" on Netflix and watched it. 
I had read the book some time ago (Levitt and Dubner).
I enjoyed the documentary but it made me wonder about how we take in information.
I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.
I know I can do that with the controls on while watching it,but it's awkward and for me not the same.

Wonder what kind of experiences others here have with this?

[tvguy]

I found "Freakonomics" on Netflix and watched it. 
I had read the book some time ago (Levitt and Dubner).
I enjoyed the documentary but it made me wonder about how we take in information.
I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.
I know I can do that with the controls on while watching it,but it's awkward and for me not the same.

Wonder what kind of experiences others here have with this?

I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.

  I don't see it being awkward. I find it very useful. Sometimes when I'm in the shop with a friend and a TV show is on about street rods it's nice to be able to freeze the pic and or rewind and talk about what we see.
The same with fights or any sports.

As far as how we take in information I actually believe video is better. The best way to remember things is when you use all of your senses.
With Video you use your eyes and your ears. You did say "how we take in information".

If I want to learn how to do something and I use the internet. I will almost always watch a Youtube video instead of just reading print on a page.
I think it's also faster.
I can't imagine how reading about wildlife could be anywhere near as interesting as video. Especially with the amazing cameras they have today.

[Wonky3]

I found "Freakonomics" on Netflix and watched it. 
I had read the book some time ago (Levitt and Dubner).
I enjoyed the documentary but it made me wonder about how we take in information.
I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.
I know I can do that with the controls on while watching it,but it's awkward and for me not the same.

Wonder what kind of experiences others here have with this?

I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.

  I don't see it being awkward. I find it very useful. Sometimes when I'm in the shop with a friend and a TV show is on about street rods it's nice to be able to freeze the pic and or rewind and talk about what we see.
The same with fights or any sports.

As far as how we take in information I actually believe video is better. The best way to remember things is when you use all of your senses.
With Video you use your eyes and your ears. You did say "how we take in information".

If I want to learn how to do something and I use the internet. I will almost always watch a Youtube video instead of just reading print on a page.
I think it's also faster.
I can't imagine how reading about wildlife could be anywhere near as interesting as video. Especially with the amazing cameras they have today.

Absolutely agree about wildlife. 
As to all the other, I guess it's "to each his own". I like books. But, I agree with you about the value of film/video and it's true a picture is worth a thousand words.

[tvguy]

I found "Freakonomics" on Netflix and watched it. 
I had read the book some time ago (Levitt and Dubner).
I enjoyed the documentary but it made me wonder about how we take in information.
I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.
I know I can do that with the controls on while watching it,but it's awkward and for me not the same.

Wonder what kind of experiences others here have with this?

I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.

  I don't see it being awkward. I find it very useful. Sometimes when I'm in the shop with a friend and a TV show is on about street rods it's nice to be able to freeze the pic and or rewind and talk about what we see.
The same with fights or any sports.

As far as how we take in information I actually believe video is better. The best way to remember things is when you use all of your senses.
With Video you use your eyes and your ears. You did say "how we take in information".

If I want to learn how to do something and I use the internet. I will almost always watch a Youtube video instead of just reading print on a page.
I think it's also faster.
I can't imagine how reading about wildlife could be anywhere near as interesting as video. Especially with the amazing cameras they have today.

Absolutely agree about wildlife. 
As to all the other, I guess it's "to each his own". I like books. But, I agree with you about the value of film/video and it's true a picture is worth a thousand words.

It's definitely a to each to his own thing. I think our minds eye can do a better job seeing some kinds of things better than what you might see in special affects in a movie.
When I used to read I liked a lot of sci fi. Kurt Vonnegut Robert Heinlein  and the like. I don't think what I read could be replicated as well in a movie.

On the other hand I read the Old man and the sea and To kill a mockingbird as well as seeing both movies.
And when I think of either one I remember Spencer Tracey and Gregory Peck and lots of scenes from those movies.
More so than the books. But I may have enjoyed the books more at that time.

[Wonky3]

I found "Freakonomics" on Netflix and watched it. 
I had read the book some time ago (Levitt and Dubner).
I enjoyed the documentary but it made me wonder about how we take in information.
I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.
I know I can do that with the controls on while watching it,but it's awkward and for me not the same.

Wonder what kind of experiences others here have with this?

I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.

  I don't see it being awkward. I find it very useful. Sometimes when I'm in the shop with a friend and a TV show is on about street rods it's nice to be able to freeze the pic and or rewind and talk about what we see.
The same with fights or any sports.

As far as how we take in information I actually believe video is better. The best way to remember things is when you use all of your senses.
With Video you use your eyes and your ears. You did say "how we take in information".

If I want to learn how to do something and I use the internet. I will almost always watch a Youtube video instead of just reading print on a page.
I think it's also faster.
I can't imagine how reading about wildlife could be anywhere near as interesting as video. Especially with the amazing cameras they have today.

Absolutely agree about wildlife. 
As to all the other, I guess it's "to each his own". I like books. But, I agree with you about the value of film/video and it's true a picture is worth a thousand words.

It's definitely a to each to his own thing. I think our minds eye can do a better job seeing some kinds of things better than what you might see in special affects in a movie.
When I used to read I liked a lot of sci fi. Kurt Vonnegut Robert Heinlein  and the like. I don't think what I read could be replicated as well in a movie.

On the other hand I read the Old man and the sea and To kill a mockingbird as well as seeing both movies.
And when I think of either one I remember Spencer Tracey and Gregory Peck and lots  of scenes from those movies.
More so than the books. But I may have enjoyed the books more at that time.

Thinking of a book I read last year about the Donner Party: That, IMHO has to be seen with the "minds eye" because it would be almost impossible to film anything near what happened there. (By the way, a part of that story I was unfamiliar with from prior readings were the heroics attempted by men who came from the west (Sacramento area) trying to assist those stuck in the snow around Truckee. And for the life of me, can't remember how the guys from the west knew about them...damn: Hell to get old and watch the mind slip right before my eyes. Oh well...give me something to reread in the darkness of winter days.

[tvguy]

I found "Freakonomics" on Netflix and watched it. 
I had read the book some time ago (Levitt and Dubner).
I enjoyed the documentary but it made me wonder about how we take in information.
I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.
I know I can do that with the controls on while watching it,but it's awkward and for me not the same.

Wonder what kind of experiences others here have with this?

I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.

  I don't see it being awkward. I find it very useful. Sometimes when I'm in the shop with a friend and a TV show is on about street rods it's nice to be able to freeze the pic and or rewind and talk about what we see.
The same with fights or any sports.

As far as how we take in information I actually believe video is better. The best way to remember things is when you use all of your senses.
With Video you use your eyes and your ears. You did say "how we take in information".

If I want to learn how to do something and I use the internet. I will almost always watch a Youtube video instead of just reading print on a page.
I think it's also faster.
I can't imagine how reading about wildlife could be anywhere near as interesting as video. Especially with the amazing cameras they have today.

Absolutely agree about wildlife. 
As to all the other, I guess it's "to each his own". I like books. But, I agree with you about the value of film/video and it's true a picture is worth a thousand words.

It's definitely a to each to his own thing. I think our minds eye can do a better job seeing some kinds of things better than what you might see in special affects in a movie.
When I used to read I liked a lot of sci fi. Kurt Vonnegut Robert Heinlein  and the like. I don't think what I read could be replicated as well in a movie.

On the other hand I read the Old man and the sea and To kill a mockingbird as well as seeing both movies.
And when I think of either one I remember Spencer Tracey and Gregory Peck and lots  of scenes from those movies.
More so than the books. But I may have enjoyed the books more at that time.

Thinking of a book I read last year about the Donner Party: That, IMHO has to be seen with the "minds eye" because it would be almost impossible to film anything near what happened there. (By the way, a part of that story I was unfamiliar with from prior readings were the heroics attempted by men who came from the west (Sacramento area) trying to assist those stuck in the snow around Truckee. And for the life of me, can't remember how the guys from the west knew about them...damn: Hell to get old and watch the mind slip right before my eyes. Oh well...give me something to reread in the darkness of winter days.

the Donner Party: That, IMHO has to be seen with the "minds eye" because it would be almost impossible to film anything near what happened there.

There was a Donner party movie and there was also a movie about a plane that went down that was full of Soccer players ( I think) who practiced cannibalism.
But yes a book probably would be better but I doubt I would ever read or buy the book. But if the movie was on TV I might give it a look.

And for the life of me, can't remember how the guys from the west knew about them

 I guess because a whole lot of people never arrived at their destination and I'm sure there were people there anxiously waiting.

[Wonky3]

I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.

  I don't see it being awkward. I find it very useful. Sometimes when I'm in the shop with a friend and a TV show is on about street rods it's nice to be able to freeze the pic and or rewind and talk about what we see.
The same with fights or any sports.

As far as how we take in information I actually believe video is better. The best way to remember things is when you use all of your senses.
With Video you use your eyes and your ears. You did say "how we take in information".

If I want to learn how to do something and I use the internet. I will almost always watch a Youtube video instead of just reading print on a page.
I think it's also faster.
I can't imagine how reading about wildlife could be anywhere near as interesting as video. Especially with the amazing cameras they have today.

Absolutely agree about wildlife. 
As to all the other, I guess it's "to each his own". I like books. But, I agree with you about the value of film/video and it's true a picture is worth a thousand words.

It's definitely a to each to his own thing. I think our minds eye can do a better job seeing some kinds of things better than what you might see in special affects in a movie.
When I used to read I liked a lot of sci fi. Kurt Vonnegut Robert Heinlein  and the like. I don't think what I read could be replicated as well in a movie.

On the other hand I read the Old man and the sea and To kill a mockingbird as well as seeing both movies.
And when I think of either one I remember Spencer Tracey and Gregory Peck and lots  of scenes from those movies.
More so than the books. But I may have enjoyed the books more at that time.

Thinking of a book I read last year about the Donner Party: That, IMHO has to be seen with the "minds eye" because it would be almost impossible to film anything near what happened there. (By the way, a part of that story I was unfamiliar with from prior readings were the heroics attempted by men who came from the west (Sacramento area) trying to assist those stuck in the snow around Truckee. And for the life of me, can't remember how the guys from the west knew about them...damn: Hell to get old and watch the mind slip right before my eyes. Oh well...give me something to reread in the darkness of winter days.

the Donner Party: That, IMHO has to be seen with the "minds eye" because it would be almost impossible to film anything near what happened there.

There was a Donner party movie and there was also a movie about a plane that went down that was full of Soccer players ( I think) who practiced cannibalism.
But yes a book probably would be better but I doubt I would ever read or buy the book. But if the movie was on TV I might give it a look.

And for the life of me, can't remember how the guys from the west knew about them

 I guess because a whole lot of people never arrived at their destination and I'm sure there were people there anxiously waiting.

I saw at least one (I think there were a couple) of movies about the Donner Party and I've heard neither were very good. It's a very difficult story to tell with film, without making it a six hour movie. I've read three books (I think) and I thought The Indifferent Starts Above was the best of the ones I've read. (There must have been 15 books about this). But I'm not a historian and don't really know which book is the most accurate story. 

About how the folks on the west side of the mountains knew of their plight: I'm not sure anyone was expecting them to be near Truckee. They had made a fateful decision to take a cut-off (forgotten the name) and had hoped to shorten the time a bit because they were aware they were late in the season for crossing the Sierra Nevada's. But, perhaps someone who did NOT choose to use the cut-off informed the folks on the western side about where they might be. Whatever, the story of the men who attempted (and failed, and most died) to rescue them is almost as stirring as the Donner story. 

Tragic, in any event.

[bbqboy]

I'm gone for a couple of hours and now we're on cannibalism in the books vs tv category. Good job.

[Valuesize]

I'm gone for a couple of hours and now we're on cannibalism in the books vs tv category. Good job.

 No shit huh.

[Wonky3]

I'm gone for a couple of hours and now we're on cannibalism in the books vs tv category. Good job.

 No shit huh.

History my man, history.

[tvguy]

I'm gone for a couple of hours and now we're on cannibalism in the books vs tv category. Good job.

LOL no shit. Movies on that subject suck and I would think a book would suck even more.

[Wonky3]

I'm gone for a couple of hours and now we're on cannibalism in the books vs tv category. Good job.

LOL no shit. Movies on that subject suck and I would think a book would suck even more.

You think the events of the Donner Party were about cannibalism? 
Yeah, you might want to do some reading.

[bbqboy]

Zing!

[tvguy]

I'm gone for a couple of hours and now we're on cannibalism in the books vs tv category. Good job.

LOL no shit. Movies on that subject suck and I would think a book would suck even more.

You think the events of the Donner Party were about cannibalism? 
Yeah, you might want to do some reading.

 If you think what happened would be as interesting and the story told as often without the cannibalism you might want to try using some logic.

Guaranteed the first thing ANYONE thinks about when the Donner party is mentioned IS cannibalism. And the movies about it DID suck.

[Wonky3]

I'm gone for a couple of hours and now we're on cannibalism in the books vs tv category. Good job.

LOL no shit. Movies on that subject suck and I would think a book would suck even more.

You think the events of the Donner Party were about cannibalism? 
Yeah, you might want to do some reading.

 If you think what happened would be as interesting and the story told as often  without the cannibalism you might want to try using some logic.

Guaranteed the first thing ANYONE thinks about when the Donner party is mentioned IS cannibalism. And the movies about it DID suck.

I doubt you would understand logic if it was having lunch with you.

[tvguy]

I'm gone for a couple of hours and now we're on cannibalism in the books vs tv category. Good job.

LOL no shit. Movies on that subject suck and I would think a book would suck even more.

You think the events of the Donner Party were about cannibalism? 
Yeah, you might want to do some reading.

 If you think what happened would be as interesting and the story told as often  without the cannibalism you might want to try using some logic.

Guaranteed the first thing ANYONE thinks about when the Donner party is mentioned IS cannibalism. And the movies about it DID suck.

I doubt you would understand logic if it was having lunch with you.

 Right first you say I might want to do some reading and now I don't understand logic.

And you act pissed and surprised when someone says FUCK YOU? Whatever, show me where I tried to demean you?

[Wonky3]

LOL no shit. Movies on that subject suck and I would think a book would suck even more.

You think the events of the Donner Party were about cannibalism? 
Yeah, you might want to do some reading.

 If you think what happened would be as interesting and the story told as often  without the cannibalism you might want to try using some logic.

Guaranteed the first thing ANYONE thinks about when the Donner party is mentioned IS cannibalism. And the movies about it DID suck.

I doubt you would understand logic if it was having lunch with you.

 Right first you say I might want to do some reading and now I don't understand logic.

And you act pissed and surprised when someone says FUCK YOU? Whatever, show me where I tried to demean you?

Suggesting that your understanding of that event (from film) is logical while my understanding means "I might want to try using logic"....
Yeah: A bit demeaning.

[Juniper]

I found "Freakonomics" on Netflix and watched it. 
I had read the book some time ago (Levitt and Dubner).
I enjoyed the documentary but it made me wonder about how we take in information.
I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.
I know I can do that with the controls on while watching it,but it's awkward and for me not the same.

Wonder what kind of experiences others here have with this?

I think I find books more useful. I can stop, maybe go back, ponder things a bit and continue on.

  I don't see it being awkward. I find it very useful. Sometimes when I'm in the shop with a friend and a TV show is on about street rods it's nice to be able to freeze the pic and or rewind and talk about what we see.
The same with fights or any sports.

As far as how we take in information I actually believe video is better. The best way to remember things is when you use all of your senses.
With Video you use your eyes and your ears. You did say "how we take in information".

If I want to learn how to do something and I use the internet. I will almost always watch a Youtube video instead of just reading print on a page.
I think it's also faster.
I can't imagine how reading about wildlife could be anywhere near as interesting as video. Especially with the amazing cameras they have today.

I like to watch things. But the truth is, when it's about information, reading is denser. More information packed in than watching. Sometimes watching can make more of an impression, but it always edits some info out. That may or may not matter. I think it depends on what you are watching and what and how much information you are looking to take in.

[Juniper]

I'm gone for a couple of hours and now we're on cannibalism in the books vs tv category. Good job.

LOL no shit. Movies on that subject suck and I would think a book would suck even more.

I read a book about the Donner party. And it was what I read that made the most impact on me. And it wasn't about the cannibalism; it was about one of the survivors and the effect the event had on the rest of her life. It was pretty interesting and nothing I'd ever gotten from watching anything. And I remember it still 15 years after reading the book, whatever the heck it was.

[chuck white]

I find that it's easier to read a book while watching TV, then it is watching TV while reading a book. Maybe it just me.