Good writers are storytellers who organize information in order to communicate a message. A big part of “good writing” is editing, distilling the message and clearing away the extraneous clutter. The “good communicator” also has the ability to experience the work through the target audiences’ point-of-view.

In video editing, I’ve noticed those with good writing skills are the better editors. More attention is paid to the organization of material, the flow of the story and the technological details.

-- Eileen Foster weighing in on why you should 'always hire the better writer' over at Signal vs. Noise.

[... and I do realise that I can get sloppy, writing wise, when jamming out a blog entry... but I also think its all fairly readable]

A person named Brad also weighs in on the discussion, with something else I agree with:

This is good advice in general, although there are exceptions: I know a few people who are brilliant speakers and thinkers, and yet their writing is fuzzy or wooden. Some people seem susceptible to a sort of “stage fright” when it comes to putting words on paper. Clear writing is a good indication of clear thinking, but clear thinkers are not always clear writers.

A fellow called Switchcraft responded to an earlier message about 'indie feature workflows'. Rather than responding in the comments, I've decided to turn it into a post.

Switchcraft doth quoth:
it looks like you and me too, from what i've seen, are steering towards the Panasonic AG-HVX200 announced at NAB


Absolutely. I've worked with the Varicam before and this camera basically comes across as a cut down version of the Varicam tech - even to the point where it records variable frame rates. I assume, rather unfortunately, that it uses the exact frame 'frame tagging' method as the varicam to do it... which means my dream of it producing -cleaner- HD images is quashed. I had hoped it would only record 24/25/30P at 720P and thus spread the 100megabits over 24/25/30 pictures, rather than recording at 60P and spreading the 100megabits over 60 pictures (thus compressing the image at twice the amount).

Either way, having double the data rate and double the colour sampling of HDV is -very- significant for image quality.

Sure, it might require you to spend like $2K on P2 memory cards.. but its still overall cheaper than buying/renting a Varicam. Looks like the 'loader' on a P2 shoot is going to load a hard drive storage system (raided for redundancy of course) with image from the P2 system rather than load mags. So it isn't *ideal* [at all] for a one person shoot, but that's pretty much only matters to the documentary and pseudo documentary crowd.

As an aside, the rumours on CML indicate that the new IMX-HD cameras from Sony may only be 50megabits. WTF is this? Lets just take bigger images and compress em even more so we can fit em into the bandwidth requirements of SD.

It is shite. But it really won't be that long before we start seeing 150/200megabit 'prosumer' HD cameras.

VFX Post

Looks like I'm going to be joining the world of high-end VFX post on big summer blockbusters. Neat. Scary. But neat.

What does this mean for this blog and its readers (all 2 of you :)). Well, I probably won't be able to update as frequently as I used to - but I'll be learning ALOT related to the 'mission' of this blog. Namely, how new filmmaking technology can be leveraged to allow the Australian film industry to become sustainable. Rather than speculating what its like to work with cameras like the Panavision Genesis, or with 4K scans, or post workflows for teams of 50+ people, I'll be actually speaking from hardened experience.

It does mean my directing career is going to be put on hiatus for a while - but that's OK. This gives me a whole different range of opportunities to learn skills essential to being a good director, like actually having the strength to run the marathon of a feature production, and being able to keep people motivated and creative throughout.

I won't be starting for a while, but I thought I'd let you all know.

Thanks to everyone who helped make this happen, I owe you much.

Pure Gold

Because of our work on the CK project, my flatmate and I were given a bottle of Johnny Walker Gold Label. Its a beautiful blended whisky - not quite Blue Label, but it is very nice. The problem I find with Black and Red Label, particularly the latter, is that it has lots of attack but almost no flavour. Gold Label, while still resembling a light Highland malt, has some of the woodier complexities of the Islays. Its also quite sweet. Apparently, the serving suggestion for Gold Label is to freeze it for 24 hours and serve it frozen with some dark chocolate on the side. I look forward to trying it.

I also had some 18yo the Glenlivet last night. BEAUTIFUL. Still a light Highland, but a little peatier (not by much) with some honey notes.

The problem with loving single-malt whisky is that not only is the stuff expensive, but its bloody hard to find - especially the rarer belnds. For example, I'd like to try a range of 15yo single-malts: the Macallan, Laphroaig, Laphvaulin, Talisker... but I haven't seen them anywhere. Guess I'll have to order them in and pay a bit of a premium. I've thought about opening an online single-malt whisky store in Australia but I've been told the licensing fees would be horrendous. Crap.

Re-post from a post on CML-HDTV

Brian writes:

In theory, this is true. But as many on these lists have pointed out, HD has a considerable way to go before it becomes a viable and cost effective production system from set to theater screen, especially where lower budgets are concerned

You're not wrong there.... but I think it has a lot of potential for most national cinemas (ie those that aren't hollywood or bollywood).

Australian movies have budgets of between $1 and $5 million; 40% of which is usually contributed by the AFC or FFC (two national bodies for film funding). Average budget is around $2million IIRC [happy to be corrected on this]. Most Australian movies bleed money everywhere and leave massive losses of like, um, $1.5 million :) Consequently, private investment - at least with AFC funded films - has been drying up. We've gone from a peak in the mid 90s of 24 films being made a year to around 13. [Remember also, that we're a country of only 20million people.So the potential pool of funding due to the economics of scale tends to be far less per capita than in the US]

There are many reasons why our films are failing (hint: they suck) - but if we can reduce costs by shooting on tape and projecting digitally, even by $100,000 then that is actually a large percentage of a project's overall budget. You can spend the money on marketing to actually get bums in seats, on script development, on actors OR by making the project cheaper and therefore proportionally less of a risk for government and private investors.

In particular, the AFC launched a new scheme called Indivision back in February. Unlike their other schemes, this is NOT a co-production scheme but a fully funded fundpool (of a whopping $1.9 million initially). They want to fund features that cost no more than $1 million each and, given that tiny pool of dollars, much prefer cheaper features. Given the lack of private investment, Indivision and similar schemes are becoming the only real options for our new wave of filmmakers. Saving money by shooting tape and projecting digitally is becoming the only way we can actually tell our stories. That's why I care. Apathy is suicide.

You're right, HD isn't about revolution.... but it might become about survival for non-American cinematic cultures. Frankly, I don't want to live in a cinematic monoculture - and if that means I have to sacrifice perfect image quality then I will... every time.

But I am interested in alternatives like S16mm acquisition and using digital intermediates to finish either to HD or to 35mm. Or shooting on DV. Or shooting on pixel vision. Or whatever I and the DoP and the Production Designer etc. etc. can make work. Obviously, I'm not even in the realm of making my own features yet or helping others to make theirs but one day I hope to do both and as far as I'm concerned I gotta start learning and thinking now. [A short feature, on the other hand, far more likely in the near future]

For instance, who's going to buy the digital projectors.

In the UK, the push for digital projectors is coming from their national cinema bodies. A similar call is being echoed in Australia - that part of the AFC's grand plan should be to push digital projection into their their network of art-cinema's and/or lease them to the major chains in exchange for projecting Australian movies. This is a VERY different system from the US where it seems digital projection will be used to lock out non-mainstream content.

All that said, I understand where DPs come from. You're not just the authors of the cinematic image, you're the guardians of the image. I wouldn't trust anyone who didn't fight to get what they need to do the best work they can. But there are limits to what actually can be done.

Stu.