[Nick Griffin]

I recently had the original video card in my 2008 Octocore Mac tower die. Micro Center still had in stock an ATI Radeon HD 5770 for a very reasonable price. About $200 I believe. Hope this helps.

[Nick Griffin]

Amazon says December 6th. I’d be more inclined to trust them even though I still buy a lot from B&H.

[Nick Griffin]

I’d be happy if a project came in from one my daughters. Instead I have a sister who, although having worked in network television as on-camera talent, remains clueless on any detail whatsoever of what goes on behind the cameras. Instead she brings me DVDs and tapes shot by “the best guy in town” (a town of 1,400), with the only light and mic in said town.

“Can you pull this together right away because we really need it to put on our web page so the foreign buyers will be impressed?” Really. THIS is what you think will impress them? Whatever happened to flying me and real gear out to shoot something decent? “Oh we didn’t have time for that, so we figured we’d do it ourselves to save you the trouble.”

I believe that I have worked using these kind of materials for the last time. (Until the next time she shows up with puppy dog eyes and a story of desperation.)

[Nick Griffin]

This is certainly the best of the two scenarios possible. I figured you working your butt off today was the better of the outcomes and glad to hear that’s what it was.

“Entertainers” like Rush tend to be getting a lot of things wrong in the past few years. An appreciation of humanity is obviously one of them. Let’s just hope that the people of Illinois and the rest of the midwest aren’t left to fight for post-storm help the way New York and New Jersey were this time last year.

[Nick Griffin]

I agree with all that’s been said here… BUT if you can delay getting into After Effects until you’ve had adequate time to learn Media Composer it will benefit your learning curve for both.

What’s not often discussed is that there is a fundamentally different approach to the way many things are handled in Avid FX/Boris and After Effects. Perhaps it was the fact that I started with After Effects, I found that there was a lot to un-learn and re-program the way my brain reacted when attempting the move to the Boris environment.

[Nick Griffin]

I fully concur with Todd on all of his points. The only time to buy something is when you have the business lined up to keep it busy and therefore paying for itself in short order. The “Build it and they will come” philosophy will not turn out well the majority of the time.

If you are NOT an experienced shooter, the camera isn’t the only thing you should be renting. While in the learning stage hire camera people with their own gear. You can learn a great deal from working around those who already know a lot of tips, tricks and short cuts. You especially don’t want to appear to still be learning your craft when clients are on a shoot. As an experienced editor you probably already have a good idea of proper coverage, but you may not know the best and quickest ways to get it.

In summary, deciding to go for it does not mean making a huge capital investment. Get the business, get it coming in with some consistency, THEN buy the gear that can pay for itself in a fraction of its useful life.

[Nick Griffin]

[Bob Cole] “You might produce two versions of the spot, one with the phone number, one without. Run the two spots on alternating weeks; track the sales.”

I seldom disagree with Bob, but have to point out a flaw in this idea. Spots don’t exist individually in a vacuum. In fact one of the most basic premises of media planning is calculating ‘frequency” — the number of times the theoretically average viewer sees the spot. (I’m a couple of decades removed from buying TV time, but the theory used to be that you needed a frequency of at least 6 or 7 to break through and get noticed — at all.)

Therefore if the spot runs with a phone number the first week and not the second, comparing week to week sales would not take into account the fact that in week 2 the viewer might be seeing the spot for the nth time and subsequent weeks would just add to the frequency with which the spot had been seen. A valid test would be if you could advertise versions with and without the phone number in different, yet statistically similar markets. That might have some validity as a test.

Clients, especially locally advertising clients almost always want to cram as much contact info into a spot as possible. Like the earlier post about someone wanting their zip code as well as their address, this is ridiculous and makes for bad, ineffective advertising.

But the exception, and what hasn’t been mentioned oddly enough is “Direct Response” advertising. In the world of Direct the spot IS the salesman in addition to the promotional vehicle. The phone number and/or website is the call to action because there is no other way to obtain what is being advertised. Hence memorable phone numbers repeated ad nauseum and web addresses being displayed throughout the entire spot. And as always the kicker, “But wait! If you act now, we’ll DOUBLE the offer.” (Just pay double the already inflated shipping and handling, which probably costs more than the item being sold.)

For regular, non-direct response local retail advertising. Location names and or maps can be an effective way of providing a response mechanism that actually works, again IMHO.

[Nick Griffin]

Congrats, Ned! Yes, even snail mail works… when the timing is right. And how do we get the timing right? Almost always through random luck that we hit someone at just the right time for THEM. That requires throwing a lot against the wall so some of it will stick. And painful as it can be for all of us, cold calling works too if you do it often enough with a plan and with some regularity.

But what works best? Always has been and probably always will be referrals. Nothing beats having a happy customer saying good things about you.

[Nick Griffin]

My ditto to the sentiments offered here. In my experience the ONLY people who tell you how honest they are, are the ones who are NOT.

[Nick Griffin]

If you’re stuck in an all too familiar environment, try looking at it from very different points of view. For example, put a camera, maybe even a tiny GoPro behind the law book that’s being removed from the shelf. That will cut nicely with the medium front view.

Another thing is to approach the cliches using extreme close-ups: note taking, fingering skimming a brief or a law book, eyes darting back, and forth, tapping a pencil, dialing a phone. All of these can produce a very cinematic look when cut with establishing shots.

Try high camera shots with cross-over activities in the foreground. Try POV camera shots where you enter the firm through their impressive glass doors and go through their elegant lobby.

Anyway, just a few additional ideas. I shoot factories and I’m always looking for ways to enhance the work and avoid completely falling into the cliches.