Nick Griffin
Forum Replies Created
-
I agree with Andrew, but what I think he meant to say was:
[Andrew Kimery] “Given that technology keeps getting better and cheaper there’s NO need to do a ‘traditional’ offline/online workflow.”
The whole low rez / offline thing began when the largest hard drives you could get were in the 160 Megabyte range. Yes, for the kids in the audience let me repeat 160 MEGABYTES. And if your system was really slick you had a raid using four of them. And they cost a butt-load ‘o cash. And if you were really serious you had extra sets to swap in and out for different projects. This was how it was done on Media 100 as well as Avid. (Back when Dinosaurs roamed the Earth.)
Today I believe a 1.5 Terrabyte SATA drive can be had for about $125. I’m not too good with math (especially math based on 1024 as the multiplier, but I believe that 1.5 Terrabytes is something like 9,000 times the storage space of 160 Megabytes.
So, no, Derek. I wouldn’t worry about doing the low rez “offline” / high rez “online” thing. Just do try to throw away the stuff you didn’t use before archiving at the end of the project.
-
Client: “Well, you were right. I really can’t seem to make a decent video with a Flip camera and everything sounds so hollow and far away. And I have no idea how to use iMovie even though they made it out to be so simple at the Apple store.”
Me: “So perhaps now we can get back to the kind of stuff we did for you last year?”
Client: “Oh, no. Sorry. We already set the budget for the Flip camera, so I guess we’ll have to see if we can do a video next year.”
Me: (Deep sigh.)
-
[Aaron Cadieux] “The spot is actually for Tape/film to DVD transfer services”
Aaron –
I agree with Steve. It’s a buyer’s market out there and you should have little trouble getting a deal. That said… I’m not sure that broadcasting (even when it’s cable) will provide a cost effective return for what is, in essence, a specialized service.
Traditional media buying logic dictates that most spots require a frequency of at least 6 or 7 before they become effective. Translation: the average person has to see a spot 6-7 times before it registers and produces a buying response — from some small percentage of an audience. Therefore the last thing you need is to spread $2,500 worth of spots multiple cable channels. You will be much better served by concentrating on a single channel and a small number of programs. That’s the only way to build enough frequency to get results. (IMHO.)
In addition to frequency you need to target your most likely demographic (age) and psychographic (attitude/ pre-disposition). The transfers you are selling would be of little interest to most people under 50. I also believe that women will be more predisposed to want these than will men. So there’s your media buy. Go for the Senior channel(s) during daytime hours and sticking to just a couple or a few programs. But none of this guarantees that it will bring in more than it costs you to advertise it. Just a little more likely to actually work.
-
Umm… at the risk of being sarcastic, ever heard about CreativeCOW.net? I’ve never found an organization/association/web site/magazine/whatever with a fraction of a percent of the depth and community offered right here. But perhaps that’s just me. I’m biased.
-
One basic fact of a slate / countdown that I don’t see above is how it’s supposed to end. In my part of the world the countdown part goes from 10 to 2 with a few frames of tone at each change of the second. Then at two video is completely black and audio completely quiet — and this is key — for exactly 2 seconds. This certainly meant a lot more in the days when everything came into the stations on tape, but probably would still be a good practice to follow.
-
[Mike Cohen] “And you have stock updates top right and lots of logos around the edges, so the content only takes up 30% of the screen.”
Jon Stewart did a very funny lampooning of this a couple of years after 9/11. One has to wonder how many Exec Producers and News Directors saw his satire and slowly started to cut it back.
I agree with most of what’s been said about local news. It sucks and it can be painful to watch good looking people who were plainly “C” students (or less) struggle with pronouncing the names of foreign leaders or capital cities. I mean, REALLY? People who deliver the news never WATCH the news?
But my “favorite” has to be the Today Show and their oh-so-sincere interviews with those in the news through some recent tragedy. Matt Lauer has questions along the lines of, “When you found out your wife had been killed, how did that make you feel?” HOW DID THAT MAKE YOU FEEL???? I understand that they’re attempting to reach the broadest audience possible, and it certainly isn’t me. That’s what drove me to Imus and now Joe Scarborough for my fix of morning noise.
Speaking of which, I find MSNBC to be far less objectionable and have fewer complete jerks than Fox does. MSNBC obviously bends to the left, but I’ve never seen them to be making things up as Fox seems to do with some regularity while claiming with a straight face to be so “fair and balanced.” But don’t get me started because, as is the case with the Congress, I believe one of the best ways to start to fix the mess that “news” programming has become would be to throw out everyone running it now and start over.
-
C’mon, Bob. Now we want to see what the Unibomber has to say about self employment.
-
Well said, Walter. But I’m not diminishing the college experience. I guess my ire is more directed at the for-profit “institutes” which seem to know more about the ins and outs of helping kids obtain the loan needed for their tuition than they do about the realities of the jobs their dangling as the reward.
As to the college and university level courses, well the popular ones always do tend to fill up fast. Hopefully an education in Radio-TV will have some applicability for those who never work in either and, with the growth of the net, perhaps they’ll end up in a job where the skill set and knowledge can be used.
-
[Mads Nybo Jørgensen] “the media teaching profession, and as much as they IMHO are turning out students of which many will never get a job in the industry”
This has long been a pet peeve of mine, going back to many of the advertising schools which sprang up in the 1980’s. And not that the larger colleges and universities are, from a moral standard, much different.
Well sure if you’re 18 to 22 years old training to work in television or in a recording studio or in an ad agency sounds like a lot more fun than getting a “real” job. But how much sense does it make for institutions to churn out eight or nine or ten people for every one or two actual jobs which will be available? What possible justification is there for this? Hence my use of the word “moral.”
Yes, yes. Some people do get jobs and there are no doubt some quite successful individuals who took this path. It’s likely that some of them are here on the COW. But for every one who is working how many are there with an expensive degree or certificate in our glamorous profession who are working behind the counter at the corner convenience store?
-
Jeff-
You’ve gotten several pieces of good advice from this thread so here’s one that may also be helpful: DON’T BUY Premiere until you go to the Premiere forum and ask for specific advice on configuring a system to properly handle it.All NLEs, not just Premiere, put extreme demands on the computer and its storage. Not having a CPU that’s fast enough, not having enough RAM and utilizing disks which can’t transfer at the speeds needed for video, along with other factors, can make your system useless. Get this stuff straight because there’s a lot more to putting together a functional editing system than simply buying software.