[Bob Cole]

I love those title bull sessions. But you haven’t told us enough. Is it a tv show that competes for eyeballs through listings? Is the show targeted to disease junkies or to people who might have a specific ailment?

I can’t beat some of Michael’s creative titles, but:

Bone Tired to Bone Happy
Younger Bones
Getting Out the Aches
Moving Free: bla bla bla (boring PBS title)

and in the spirit of Michael I was about to add another but I realized that Ron L monitors this forum for decorum…..

— Bob C

[Bob Cole]

Not background — I meant “menu”

[Bob Cole]

I appreciate the real-world reality check on this. It’s a very alluring idea but the caution is well heeded.

It brings to mind one motion menu that seemed to be outstandingly cool: on the DVD for a feature documentary about a family accused of child abuse, which was based largely on home movies, there was an image of an 8mm projector, with a flickering, grainy home movie playing in the background. The clunkiness of the home movie and the relative clunkiness of the way DVD shows motion menus sort of went well together.

— Bob C

[Bob Cole]

I work out of my own office, so this is purely conjectural on my part.

What’s to stop you from using one of your own plug-ins, then (quite properly) removing it from the client’s computer when your work is done?

[Bob Cole]

Thanks CG for the explanation. I tried resetting the sample size. I’m even making a comp from the first comp, and stabilizing that one. The results are still poor.

Perhaps the reason I’m not happy is that this is table-top work on a “sweep” of gray paper, with a gradual fall-off of light away from the subject. The change in luminance values results in the gray-to-white “ramp” moving to and from the center of the image. I don’t think the fluctuations on the subject itself are noticeable. So I’m doing a lot of masking.

When I try the third option, Levels, with three locations for black/midpoint/white, the result becomes crazily erratic, with Color Stabilizer actually destabilizing the values dramatically.

Thanks again.

— Bob C

[Bob Cole]

For me the big problem with taking a green screen on location is all the extra stuff: stands, clips, lights, lightstands. And using cloth brings up the whole issue of wrinkles, and requires stretching the cloth with clips to get rid of at least the biggest folds. I understand that some of the flexfill style screens have a textured surface which doesn’t show wrinkles, so I’d really like to know whether the 6×8 size is workable.

[Bob Cole]

Sorry -incomplete answer. If it isn’t on the toolbar, go to Window and checkmark Tools.

[Bob Cole]

Are you talking about the rectangular mask? It’s on the toolbar.

[Bob Cole]

Sometimes a frank question generates a frank answer. I was asked to come in for a meeting that required travel, so I told them it was a busy time for me, and asked how they got my name, why they had thought of me, and whether they had other people in mind. I was told that they needed three bids and they really liked XYZ Company. I said, “Thanks for thinking of me,” and declined to help them by being one of the bidders they had no intention of hiring. I guess if I had said, “I charge for meetings,” that would have ended it right there too.

[Bob Cole]

I’ve gone the home office route. You can’t beat the commute.

For a few years, I rented space in an old high school that was being turned into an arts center. You had to agree to do some teaching, etc. in exchange for low rent. It was a neat atmosphere, and I was able to collaborate on some film projects with artists “down the hall.” But long hours in the editing room persuaded me to go back to the home studio.

Do you need the additional space? Will the benefits of a studio generate enough profit to offset the added cost of rent, utilities, insurance, commuting? If you took two years’ rent money and applied it to your home office (or a better kit, etc.), could you make that space good enough to compete with the outside office?