Mike James
Forum Replies Created
-
Legal (and moral issues) are:
1. You Paid for After Effects (((or Adobe gave you NFR copies used for educational purposes only and not to be used for commercial useage.)))
2. You Paid for the Screen Capture Software
3. You Paid for any other software used in the workflow of creating the training videos
That’s about it as far as I know.
-
Actionscript is pretty darn close to javascript.. they’re like cousins.
AE7 isn’t being converted to flash in any way. They were just showing ONE export option (to FLV). You still get everything AE is today PLUS the new stuff. Adobe and Macromedia won’t be co-mingling any development stuff until the merger closes.
Which means the Video Collection has been and was developed without any Macromedia influence.
-
I’ve got Particular. It’s awesome. Well worth the dough for the effects.
-
From Macromedia’s site…
“””Steve Kilisky of Adobe gave a sneak peek of what
-
Were 3000+ NDAs signed at Max yd? Someone saw that demo… SPEAK UP!!!
I don’t know how Adobe picks beta testers… I’ve submitted for years, but never been used. Although I’ve beta tested half a dozen non-corporate controlled softwares. And I don’t speak of them or features because of NDAs. But Max is a public event so I’m not sure where this falls in the legal realm.
I don’t work for a studio, but I do create training for Adobe’s apps and still get treated like a red headed step child! I had always thought they were pretty open minded, but phone calls and emails got me nowhere. So I’m left to frothing at the mouth like any other outsider with sneak peaks like the one at Max 2005.
-
Elin,
Have you used or do you use Combustion? Because I prefer that interface a million times over AE 6.5 But I have plugins tied to AE that keep me dialed into AE. -
Ron is correct. Adobe can’t abandon the Mac. No matter how upset Adobe might get with apple, as long as it makes financial sense to sell software to mac users…. they will. Adobe is shareholder friendly to a fault.
Look at LiveMotion 2 as a case and point as to how ROI ‘centric they are… As soon as they didn’t see the ROI numbers they require they bailed on it. Personally I think they hurt themselves on that one because they were looking at LiveMotion 2 as an island, but when they went to the CS format, I saw many designers and kids coming out of school opting for Studio MX and MX 2004 because it included Flash. When Adobe killed LiveMotion they made it so their own Creative Suite had no flash option. Had they just put in minor bug fixes and stuck it into CS it would have taken away the arguement of whether to buy CS or MX.
Even if Apple releases a pro photo editing app it will barely dent Adobe. Photoshop is the industry standard. It is no premiere. Others have used Premiere’s example (adobe dropping premiere on the mac) as an example of what might happen to other adobe apps, but that is just silly. Just look at what the number of units shipped of Photoshop on the mac vs. Premiere on the mac were. Premiere was a blip on the radar screen for Adobe as a company. It made a business decision.
And the business decision for Adobe for the time to come will be to continue to release Mac apps.
Just go to all the major job sites and do design, IT or creative type job searches. You will see Photoshop and Illustrator as requirements on over 90% of the job requirements. That would take years and years to change and Adobe knows it.
-
I never read Cramer’s book but I’m pretty sure he did well as a hedge fund manager. Cramer seems like he is just over the top and wished he was some famous rock star. The reality is if he didn’t feel the need to create so much drama and “act out” (like some poor kid that didn’t get enough attention) he’d be really popular because of his out of the box thinking.
But he offends many with his style. Me… I just laugh when he comes on and I turn off the TV. I’d watch him if he wasn’t crying out for attention so badly. That weak ego stuff is just too tough to watch.
-
Graeme, I call all of them “harmonic” numbers. But I should just call them all “Money” numbers. ‘Cause when patterns end at them … it is “money” baby. LOL! BTW, I heard your interview with Paul Figgiani (another ex-wall street guy and cyberfriend of mine).
———————-Chris,
All this graphics stuff is new to me and I’ve enjoyed the learning curve thusfar. I’ve found I really enjoy creating things from scratch (Idea to end result). My “day job” is as an investor/trader. I ran a daily stock picking service from Dec 2000 to May 2003 before I got burnt out of the day to day updates. Even though I outperformed the S&P by several thousand basis points, I couldn’t keep running the site alone from day to day. It was a burnden. Then my subscribers asked how I did what I did so I created a CD-Rom teaching the core of my strategy.
It was while I had to learn how to create that teaching CD-Rom that I got into this geek graphics stuff with Macromedia / Apple / Adobe, etc…
My site is: https://www.longorshort.com
There is a free PDF there that explains breifly some of the characteristics of some of the patterns I trade. FYI, the product there (CD and Manual) is for traders, not casual investors.
-
1.414? Oh that is creepy. That is a fibonnaci harmonic number I use for trading extenstions (commodities and stocks). I guess harmonics exist everywhere.
It was just creepy to see that ratio appear for pixels, when I watch it weekly for trading reversal patterns. Creepy.
https://www.flashvodcast.com (coming late sept)