Ron Lindeboom
2
COW Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
Hello Mickey,
If you used our events section here at the COW (which is FREE btw), you would automatically get your announcement fed onto our front page (which sees over 40,000 people a day entering that way), and into our weekly newsletters that go out to 300,000+ people.
If you missed the memo, it’s up there in the orange buttoned navigation bar in the link for Events.
Best regards,
Ron Lindeboom
creativecow.net -
[Bob Cole] “People from the music industry love themselves too much to settle for getting married to someone else.”
Too funny, Bob — funny, but mostly true.
:o)
Ron Lindeboom
-
[Bob Cole] “Maybe the music industry doesn’t want to fight true love. Or, maybe they’re just too smart. Think of the negative publicity: greedy international conglomerate sues to deny newlyweds “their song.””
You are kidding, right, Bob?
When the RIAA has sued kids and their parents (the legally responsible party), do you honestly think that they care one twit about romance or that the couple considers this “their song”?
I know lots of famous musicians and nearly all but the A-List ones are broke, cheated, been screwed out of royalties and publishing rights, and would tell you that the industry has no such conscience as that which you have ascribed here.
Before the Net, I think it was harder to “catch and corral” those who were breaking the law. Today, I suspect that as event vidographers grow and become more and more public, the RIAA will come down on some people to set examples.
It is one of the reasons that I always turned down wedding video work when I was asked. I did one and spent more time explaining why I wouldn’t do what the bride wanted that it was something I never wanted to do again. Besides, she wouldn’t even write me a letter of referral, imagine that. ;o)
Ron Lindeboom
-
There are some wonderful responses in this thread, and then there will be mine. ;o)
As many here in this thread, I love mentoring people who really want to learn. But as Chris, Mike and others point out, it’s really frustrating trying to teach anything to a person that isn’t listening, has the drive and ambition of a ground slug and won’t do anything, could care less about achieving anything, and just showed up because it’s some kind of class that they have to take. In those situations, I keep the good students and throw back the others.
We had a situation like that just yesterday, with a great student coming over and spending the day with us. I had many important things that I could have been doing but instead, I spent the entire day going over things with this person. Why? Because it’s clear they are listening and the guy is married and has kids. He wants to succeed and anything I teach him will be burned into this guy’s brain and I guarantee that he’ll use it. So my time isn’t wasted, it is invested and I am happy to do it.
But in my life when I get the ones that are clearly just taking up molecular space and are using up my local air space without contributing a thing, I respectfully tell them that they don’t need to come back. I have let teachers and others know that I am not interested in the ones that don’t care and so they won’t find me a willing mentor to those kinds of people. I will send them back. But for those that do care and are trying to get ahead in life — those kinds of people are the ones of whom I am their greatest fan.
Best regards,
Ron Lindeboom
-
One thing that I noticed right off the bat in your video is that it needs some music to dramatize and punctuate the presentation in places — it’s especially needed at the end when you say “So if you were thinking that you can’t afford custom virtual sets … think again.”
Without music the presentation is laying flatter than it would be with music added.
Just a thought,
Ron Lindeboom
-
[Mike Piontek] “So you’re saying that any derivative of “quicksets” is not safe to use?”
No, that is not what I am saying. I am saying that the “my” variant in particular is very unsafe and it would be sad to see you use so much time, money and effort to build your brand only to have the guy that owns the quicksets.com domain come along and say that you have cut into his trademark that he owns. You might win but you could just as easily lose.
Videoquicksets.com is far more likely to be a safe name and is more indicative of what you are doing anyway. That is where I’d go. And seeing as how we are discussing it here today, you better grab it today or it will be gone.
I wouldn’t build around quicksets.net as the name is too generic and the .net variant is far less advantageous to your business for reasons that Todd Terry already laid out.
A good marketing name to have is one which spells out what you do quickly in the mind of the market. Quicksets.com is okay, but videoquicksets.com is far better. You “see” it when the name is said and so any effort you put into the name builds its value far quicker.
Did I mention that you better grab it NOW?
:o)
Best regards,
Ron Lindeboom
creativecow.net
(who grabbed it because turbosquid.com was already taken) -
[Franklin McMahon] “Hopefully the Star Wars pics will be kept to a minimum.”
Maybe it is time to make a policy statement that Star Wars pictures are verboten unless you are a production person that actually worked on the movies in some capacity. ;o)
Boomer
-
Well, one thing I’d be leery of is using a website name that is “my” something-or-other (in your case, myquicksets.com).
Why?
We have been in a couple of legal matches recently and have won them both. (We are set for a third one soon as the second company lost their trademark case against us but refuses to take their site down and so we are going after them in a civil action.)
The first case involved a company that was using “mycreativecow.com” and it took about all of 20 minutes to win that case against them. You see, if you can’t get the name that proves without a doubt that there is trademark confusion and you are the usurper 9-times-out-of-10 when you don’t hold the “core” name. The derivative version, in your case the “my” variant, is almost a guaranteed loser.
That’s my feedback.
Ron Lindeboom
creativecow.net -
You are likely working with the default 72dpi setting in Photoshop. For printing cards, etc., most print shops want 300dpi.
To explain the whole process to you would require a long post and so I have gone online and found a print shop that has a good explanation of the process at:
It explains the procedure pretty well. If you get stuck, please ask and I am sure the forum here can get you through the rough spots.
Best regards,
Ron Lindeboom
-
Rent it. It will save your money and also will give you a chance to learn the ins and outs of various equipment and what are the strengths and weaknesses of each.
Ron Lindeboom