[Nick Griffin]

Thanx, Scott. Actually in my case it was more than the file names which I kept shortening and re-arranging trying to make the imports work. It’s the ENTIRE file name, in other words the whole path wherein I had the spaces in front of folders within folders within folders. Who knew? Now I do. Again, thanx for taking the time to post.

[Nick Griffin]

James & Michael –

Thank you! That’s it!!

As part of my file by month system I’ve been using spaces in front of month names to get them to sort properly when viewed in list view or open dialog boxes. This is the first application that’s ever had a problem with that hierarchy. But once I brought things to the root level the “Invalid file name” problem vanished.

As to import vs. AMA, guess I’ll have to do a little more study on when one is better than the other. My head is still stuck in the After Effects world where import is the only option. At least for now I can get things working. Again, Thanx!

[Nick Griffin]

Much improved!

[Nick Griffin]

Dan-
In regards to the tagline, as well as most aspects of the promo as a whole, remember this simple idea: Less is More. You’re trying to convey too many ideas rather than identifying and concentrating on the most important and meaningful sales points. Less is More.

[Nick Griffin]

Aw shucks, thanks, Emre.

Of course there’s also now #13: Proofread so you don’t have “loose” where you meant to say “lose.”

I think one of the better pieces of advice given in this forum over the years has been to invest in gear and software at the point where it’s really needed and not to think you have to be fully geared-up from day one. Rent, borrow, get by until your situation demands that the item is something you’ll be using on a very regular basis.

It seems that Tom may already be headed down this path and Jonathan has also made this point in his item 6, but let me add a concurrent thought. Gear, especially computers and software has to pay for itself very quickly. A matter of a few months to a year is ideal. You also have to regard frequent upgrades as a cost of doing business. Build this into your long term planning.

Be especially wary of taking on too much debt in the name of staying current. That’s one of the nearly universal factors in the demise of so many of the big production houses. Twenty years ago most of them felt that they had to be state-of-the-art in order to hold onto their clients, so the latest and greatest “box” had to be available in the “A” Suite. Quantel, Multi-channel ADO, etc. Then along came folks like most of us with our inexpensive desktop systems that could do the same work for a fraction of the cost. The big production houses still had to pay down the loans they’d taken for their latest and greatest boxes and they still had to pay the leases or mortgages on their expensive facilities and POOF… they started going out of business. A trend that continues to this day.

So stay smart, invest carefully and regularly keep a close eye on how much is going out and coming in.

And one other thought and an idea that’s not discussed here often: Going into business doesn’t necessarily have to be an all or nothing proposition. Many times it can be much safer to hold onto an existing job while starting your new venture on the side. As you develop new clients and a predictable flow of business you can make the change from part time/on the side to becoming a full time six or seven day a week business. It may not be practical for everyone in every situation, but for those who can make the gradual transition work, it’s a helluva of lot safer.

[Nick Griffin]

OK, Walt. I’ve been sitting back waiting for your reply to Linda’s question, but since no response yet, exactly how does “work for hire” protect you from being named in a lawsuit for copyright violation? As has been said a million times in this forum (mostly by me), I’m not a lawyer, but… I believe that’s it’s common practice in litigation to go after everyone involved and let each put up a defense or at the least a motion for dismissal.

I also doubt that responsibility for copyright violation can easily be assigned from one entity to another. (However the law degree that I don’t have precludes me from knowing for sure. Then again, in my experience it’s fairly rare for a lawyer to be willing to venture an opinion on nearly anything without being able to bill for a few to several hours of research.)

[Nick Griffin]

It’s very difficult to mind read clients, even when you’re sitting across from them. Even more so from 10,000 + miles away. But, if I had to guess, I’m thinking that the “visual treatment” was some form of informal storyboard which used still photographs to convey key scenes, especially of the product. This could be supplemented with suggested graphic treatments for titling, opens/closes, etc. Essential to showing this is also the ability to “sell it” by walking the client through the storyboard and enthusing over each step.

The other alternative, which we see here more for proposed commercial spots, is a “rip-o-matic.” Pieces from existing film and video materials are cut together, sometimes combined with pictures or illustrations of the characters, to crudely depict how the final product will work.

[Nick Griffin]

[Mark Suszko] “Somewhere between 150K and 200K for a seriously qualified applicant that won’t embarrass you, would be my guess.”

I agree with Mark on this. But… these days … who knows? You can never tell where the real expectation and reality will meet, and it seems to rarely be on the side of generosity. You also have to determine if the person or committee writing the job description knows what they’re asking or if this is just their overly-broad wish list.

Situations like this are where your sales ability comes in. You have to get the potential employer to reveal what they’re honestly expecting and offering before they watch you paint yourself into a corner with a lowball ask.

[Nick Griffin]

Um, Doug… you know the part about Google tracking your comments when you post here? Maybe now the COW should add a warning about posting specific job listings if you are interested in them for yourself.

[Nick Griffin]

Todd-
For what it’s worth I had something like this, albeit on a smaller scale because it was only a single piece of equipment.

I simply made it the responsibility of the buyer to supply a domestic address where I could ship to. From that point on it was his responsibility to move the item out of the country and to pay whatever duties his country required.

Perhaps, if nothing else, your buyer can get the commerce section of the Saudi embassy here to help with the process. But, I do wholeheartedly agree that you need to make sure that all of the intricacies are the buyer’s problem, NOT yours.