Potential benefits from using videotaped testimony are many. They include greater efficiency, convenience, better use of juror time, deletion of inadmissible evidence, greater flexibility for the judge and counsel, and a complete record of trial proceedings that can be used in appeals. Jurists are wary of videotaping in the legal system because of the effect of various production techniques on the opinions of the jurors. Prior research suggests that different camera shots exert an impact on viewer perceptions of a speaker's attractiveness and appeal. For this study, 162 undergraduate students role-played as jurors, viewing a total of 6 conditions: weak witness/closeup shot, weak witness/medium shot, weak witness/long shot, strong witness/closeup, strong witness/medium shot, and strong witness/long shot. A variety of measurement scales guaged perceptions of composure, credibility, authority, and character, as well as juror information retention and interest. Jurors exposed to the strong witness perceived him to be significantly more composed, qualified, and dynamic than the weak witness, and they retained significantly more information and expressed greater interest than jurors exposed to the weak witness. The type of camera shot had a significant effect upon jurors' perceptions of the strong witness's authority and the weak witness's composure, and upon the amount of information retained by jurors exposed to the weak witness. However, camera shot alone had no significant effect upon the types of jurors' perceptions examined. Footnotes and 45 references are included.