[Mike Smith]

It seems to me that your client is spot on – the whole point of data projectors is that they project the screen display from the computer, so if the computer can play it. Computers frequently and normally use varying refresh rates, with problems from underlying cycle frequency in the mains power.

On the multi-format player side – your client would just need a projector that accepts appropriate ntsc inputs … like

https://www.rentit.biz/specs/projector.htm

But why leave it to chance? Can’t you make a 30-second test file and have the people out there test it ..?

[Mike Smith]

Correction – https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/doc/basic/trade_defin.htm

[Mike Smith]

The idea of tradmarking a building – rather than a specific image of a building used as a device, with or without verbal accompaniment, to identify specific goods or services as coming from a particular supplier – is moderately comical, and no doubt would raise a chuckle from legal practitioners in the area. This is from the US Patent and Trademark Office at https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/doc/basic/trade_defin.htm

What is a trademark or service mark?

* A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others.

Some individuals and organisations may seek to claim such rights, though however fanciful their basis in law. The trustees of the The Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund made their own, failed, attempt to create a new class of “image rights”, preventing anyone else from using any image of Diana – an expensive lesson for them. For a time, a region of Italy flirted with the idea. And in London, a port of authority has made grand claims for its ability to prevent people from taking or using images of the River Thames – with success to date only in fleecing the unrepresented.

[Mike Smith]

Hi Frank.

As an outside guy, I think your description is pretty well spot on, for some buyers. I think there are people who get seduced by what they see as the glamor / status and the perks that can come from a lavish production. And hey, if you have the budget and can commission a top-of-the-line outfit, then why not do that – surely they’ll do a great job. And if tney don’t, no-one will be asking just why you commissioned them – fun, quality, protection – why would any client do otherwise? The reason why not, of course, would be budget – we can’t afford it. So of course, as a buyer, when you go to a cheaper outfit, your expectations are lower all around.

Worse, if you don’t have the savvy to see and judge what’s on the screen on its merits, quite likely you’ll see it as better if – no, because – it cost more … a self-fulfilling spiral. We learn what’s good by what we pay a lot for – do we escape that trap ourselves, from the production end?

Early days as a freelance writer and director, I worked for a whole lot of different producers, with very different approaches, different markets. But it was only when I lost a pitch (on a great idea) to what the buyer told me later was a poor idea and twice the budget, but included client trips into the Caribbean for a shoot, did I start to wise up just a little.

So if I’m hearing you right, do the great work because you want to, you can and you know the difference, but don’t expect the buyers to understand it unless 1> you tell them, loud and clear, or 2> they are those rare kind, expert buyers who know the market and understand your work.

In the meantime, let’s all keep on plugging away with the well-known brand names – “my animation is great because I did it on Maya / wrote myt script in Final Draft / did my finishing edit on a DS Nitris …” – and enjoy the merry-go-round.

All best!

[Mike Smith]

Hi Markus

At a guess, the camera side might be tricky for you. If I were a prospective client, I’d want to see a great reel. Mark has offered great “getting started” advice – pick a niche you love, really master it at “subject” level, made a great piece of video – that could both launch you into that market and open the door to you for wider work.

But we all find it hard to listen to advice which “goes against instinct” …. good luck with it.

If you can come up with a good answer to the inevitable client question “why would I work with this person?” – and back that up with solid evidence – then you have a shot.

Mike.

[Mike Smith]

You might want to cost similar footage to yours from a commercial library, for use in a commercial. Over here in the UK, “standard” footage is often in the

[Mike Smith]

1. Most ideas are pretty much like other ideas … is it really different?

2. As the man said, you can’t copyright ideas.

3. What you can do is work up your idea in as much detail as you can – specific detail which might work to make your show special (unique seems unlikley!) – and put it into written form.

Then you perhaps need to research producers / prod cos in your area of interest, and approach them with a minimal “teaser” and try to get a meeting – that’s a hard stage. Why would they see you …?

Then see a lawyer and get a confidentiality agreement / non disclosure agreement for your chosen producer(s) to sign before you go into detail with them on the show. Hard sell …

[Mike Smith]

You do need the lighting, camera position, lens any camera movement etc to match.

As long as you have decent separation between foreground and background you should be good to go – light background separately.

With a woman lying down, how are you going to separate her from the backing? My guess is that she will be lying on a large transparent screen of some kind, or supported on a thinner-than-she-is central beam, or on a thin plank hung from wires, so that you can drop the bluescreen well away from her ..

[Mike Smith]

Matrox DV .. aah. PAL is normally upper field first – all formats except the DV family, which for whatever reason is lower field first for PAL (as well as NTSC – a compatibility choice?)

BUT Matrox (correctly) decided that this changed field order for DV (DVCAM, DVCPRo) footage in PAL could create problems.

So Matrox opted with the RTX 100 for their own variant of DV, with upper field first – a decision which introduces its own problems.

You need to choose and keep to a single variant of DV within your projects – if you use the RTX 100 you will want Matrox DV codec, which is upper field first for PAL ….

But it won’t place nice on standard firewire or other DV projects without the Matrox hardware ….

[Mike Smith]

You might add Motion Picture Company, Molinare, Oasis TV (oasistv.co.uk) …