Lessons

So I went down to Video Post and Transfer today to pick up my film. While Glenn wasn't there to receive me, I talked to an editor named Peggy. Real nice woman, cussed a lot, sharp as a tact. Anyway, she gave me a digital beta tape, but then added:

"Listen, we think there is a problem with the shutter. The images are really soft and there's a streak of light on the right side of the frame. This generally happens with most used camera equipment. We can give you a list of people to talk to about fixing it."

I asked about the costs, but she claimed to not have much of a clue about that sort of thing.

Well, with this class slowly coming to a close, the knowledge of film and video, while still minimal compared with that of a specialist in this technical field, has allowed me to realize the complexities and outright mindscrews that you have to live with on a daily basis. The question of which one is better than the other...well, I still don't know the answer to that one.

More next week.

Continued Update

While posts have been few and far between, the action continues. Since the last post, I have acquired six 100' rolls to be used in practice for mastering this sweet-looking film camera of mine. Glenn Shenk, the savior, has assisted me in whatever way he can, ranging from offering me a glass of ice water after traveling 100 miles in an unconditioned car to showing the simplicities of loading film into a camera. Suffice to say, it's been an experience.

I have shot an assortment of images on the Bolex ranging from very bright to very dark. I know that very bright images won't necessarily look good and vice versa. But I'll know how it will look, which is a lesson in and of itself. I am following the method of knowing the extremes in order to form a moderate, rational final result.

The next portion of this project will capture a particular image onto both film and video at the same time, which will then be observed by both Brett and myself. Hopefully, from this experiment, we can spot specific similarities and differences between the two mediums and also conclude which one looks "better" (although I don't particularly like this word, simply because it warrants a certain human bias). I have another appointment with Glenn early this week, where I will take my film over to the lab where it will be processed for free. He'll show me how it works, what can go wrong, etc. Pretty sweet.



Branching from this project and moving to broader concepts of this course, I found this article
that discusses an old concept applied to a new technology. Everyone knows of the 3-D movement of the 1950s in cinema theaters. Enticknap talks briefly about 3-D technology in film, stating, "...two cameras [in a cinema theater] are mounted with their lenses roughly the same distance apart as human eyes, in order to expose a 'left eye' and 'right eye' image. The resulting films are then projected simultaneously through polarising filters while viewers wear spectacles which enable the human brain to perceive the two images as originating separately through the left and right eyes, thus reproducing the illusion of a three-dimensional image" (58).

Yes yes, a very long and overly detailed description. I am sure that most of us reading this knew how 3-D works, but it never hurts to just throw it out there. So, anyway between the years of 1953-1954, 3-D was used in several films from major companies (Warner Bros. and MGM). The projects Enticknap mentions are Kiss Me Kate and Dial 'M' For Murder. But the new technology didn't work out for mostly technical difficulties (i.e. if one film projector broke, the entire film had to stop until repairs could be made). Well, now the technology is applied to digital technology. The articles says:

"Post-production remains the only part of the 3D movie chain that hasn’t improved...Quantel's beta software may help change that. The Quantel Pablo, a digital-intermediate platform, was designed with dual output so customers could want to output an HD and SD version of the same DI. The idea that that dual-output could also be used to handle the left eye and right eye of a 3D image got its start during conversations between Quantel senior product specialist Milton Adamou and Marty Sadoff, VP of 3D digital at Digital Jungle Post Production in Hollywood."

Anyone ready to put the 3-D glasses back on? They always hurt my nose.

New Menial Tasks!

Being an intern is a lowly, menial type of work, and this is commonly accepted pretty much anywhere you look. The very word "intern" suggests a sort of timeliness, and its primary definition on dictionary.com is "to restrict to or confine within prescribed limits, as prisoners of war, enemy aliens, or combat troops ... in a neutral country..."

So I guess it makes sense that my first 6 weeks as an intern in Los Angeles were spent running errands and doing tasks solely to make other peoples' lives a little bit easier. At first this fact was pretty depressing; I mean, how often do you hope to God that somebody will send you to buy them a pack of Parliament lights? But over time I guess I've just adjusted...and it seems like most of the other interns have too.

After 6 weeks of working my ass off doing all the worst jobs in "The Biz," I have essentially earned the respect of my superiors to be given, yet again, another set of (what I hate to say are) menial tasks.

This week I've been given the dreaded tasks of covering phones, documenting receipts, and updating contact lists. Now, I say that these are dreaded, because these are the big, important things on the proverbial "production assistants' list of things to do..."

COVERING PHONES
When an executive assistant needs to take a break or calls in sick, an intern is the one who has to "cover" the assistant's desk. Though this may seem like an easy thing to do, it isn't...at all.

First off, the phone system is a confusing, illogical system that takes months of practice to be comfortable with.
Secondly, when working the phones, you're commonly dealing with important people. And when I say important, I mean that these are names which you have definitely heard, at least if you're conscious of the movie industry.

On my first go of covering phones, I was told that the "WORST CASE SCENARIO" would be for Harvey or Bob (Weinstein) to call. My boss, Derek, explained all the ins and outs of the phones--which I pretty much immediately forgot--then left for lunch. Within 2 minutes the phone rang and the caller ID read "HARVEY." After calming myself I answered the phone and was asked where Derek was. Harvey's assistant then began berating me in order to get in touch with Derek. I told the assistant that I'd call Derek. After Derek told me to tell Harvey that he was at lunch, the phone rang again, and this time it was Harvey and his assistant, demanding to know where Derek was. I calmly explained that he was out to lunch, and before too long I was off the phones and recovering...

DOCUMENTING RECEIPTS:
When an exec. takes a client out to lunch, this is technically something that the company compensates you for. So the executives give their assistants all of their corporate receipts, and the assistants give them to the interns to deal with.

The first task is organizing the receipts chronologically. Though this is extremely easy to do, it takes an hour to organize just one month of receipts. After organizing 4 months of receipts, the second task was to log the receipts into a computer, then finally to scan the receipts into the database.

UPDATING CONTACT LISTS:
The Weinstein Company and its executives have literally thousands of names in their "roladex." And each adds over 60 names to that list per year. At Cannes this year, the executives got over 100 business cards--all of which I had to log into the system.

The philosophical implications of the fact that we have to work and adjust to please others are dense, and I dont really want to go into them here. But what I will say is that there's alot to be said for menial tasks, in a training kind of way. These tasks are an easy way to gauge a person's reliability, and let the assistants know how hard one is able or willing to work.

We have yet to hear back about the Sopranos articles...but I guess that'll be in the next post...

Finally I am back (whew)

Well finally there is some stability back in my life. Like Casey, I had a family emergency from two weeks ago until...well...just about now. So, after a hiatus in Arlington, I am back. And I am packing some serious heat


There is my new (or should I say old) equipment from the far away land of Athens, Greece. Thanks a lot, Greek dude with lots of film equipment!

Also in the midst of chaos last week, I managed to catch an interview with Glen Shenk of Video Post and Transfer. After talking with him for roughly an hour and a half, he allowed me access into their facilities, which chemically treat and process film for projects (both corporate and student) in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. On the side, he says, they sell film stock. But this was their pride and joy.

Walking into the treatment lab, I felt like I was walking into one of those rooms that housed a 1943 IBM machine. You know, one of those computers that took an entire room? Yeah, you do. Thousands of feet of footage lined each row of the assembly line, each frame dipped in various chemicals stored on the floor below. All of this is delicate process, considering that each reel is the original. You make one screw up and...well...it's gone forever.

Mr. Shenk's opinion on the future of film was positive, complying with Enticknap's theory that the number of manuals and individuals who've mastered filmmaking as an industrial and mechanical skill is much higher than that of digital video. Glen noted that, particularly with HD technology, the number of skilled workers with these devices is still relatively small compared with film, and therefore the price of their skills increases dramatically.

Anyway, he is preparing five 100' rolls of usable footage that I will pick up next week. Also at our second meeting, he'll go through the mechanics of my camera with me and provide insider hints and pointers as well. Basically, as Brett pointed out to me a number of weeks ago, I owe you big on this one, Prof.

More later on this week

O' the Week Of Hell... and Rejoice!

Hey,
I had the week from hell. First, my grandfather went into the hospital, so I had to spend some time at home at the beginning of the week. Then, the power inverter for my laptop went out... I think. This led to some bad problems, like not having the internet ... having to use the school's computers, and not being able to play WoW. I also became busy and frustrated at my current computer situation and forgot to post. Anyway, I have been reading ALOT.

Here is what I read in the past week:

First, I want to explain where I am in my research. I found that the game of WoW is such a complex environment, that anyone can make their own form of competition. When different types of competition happen simultaneously, and with the user’s same avatar, then a complete immersion of who the player wants to be and what the player wants to be doing is fulfilled. The player now does not need an end point because of my so called ‘spiral affect’ where the player does not feel like he is going in a circle, but in a spiral progressing outwards with no end point. I guess what I found an end point to be is when one can not play WoW, like I have not been about to do in a long while. Just kidding.

Never the less, from what I have seen and from where I think my research is going, is there is not much difference between competition in the virtual environment of WoW, and outside in the real world. There are only subtle differences in the means through which we compete. Basically, World of Warcraft produces a tangible environment for all to create their “Other”, so to speak, which they were not able to create before in the real world. This means that research into how players use computer mediated communication and competition is parallel to real life, and playing these games is more than just a game, it is standing on the brink of becoming a society.

Second, I wanted to just put some notes for myself, and anyone else who is interested about Lacan from the book An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis by Dylan Evans.

The little other is the other who is not really other, but a reflection and projection of the Ego. He is both the counterpart or the other people in whom the subject perceives a visual likeness (semblable), and the specular image or the reflection of one's body in the mirror. In this way the little other is entirely inscribed in the Imaginary order. See Objet Petit a.

The big Other designates a radical alterity, an otherness transcending the illusory otherness of the Imaginary because it cannot be assimilated through identification. Lacan equates this radical alterity with language and the law: the big Other is inscribed in The Symbolic order, being in fact the Symbolic insofar as it is particularized for each subject. The Other is then another subject and also the Symbolic order which mediates the relationship with that other subject.

Yet, the meaning of "the Other as another subject" is secondary to the meaning of "the Other as Symbolic order". 'The Other must first of all be considered a locus, the locus in which speech is constituted' (Seminar III: The Psychoses). We can speak of the Other as a subject in a secondary sense, only when a subject may occupy this position and thereby embody the Other for another subject (Seminar VIII: Le transfert).

ALSO, I read:

• Yee's The Demographics, Motivations and Derived Experiences of Users of Massively-Multiuser Online Graphical Environments

This mostly scientific paper revealed, through massive surveys and interviews, a five factor model of user motivations:

1. Achievement: This factor measures the desire to become powerful in the context of the virtual environment through the achievement of goals and accumulation of items that confer power. There is also a sub motivation that goes along with achievement, which is the "Lead" factor. This factor is players drive and desire to become the leader of the pack, so to speak.
2. Relationship: This factor measures the desire of users to interact with other users, and their willingness to form meaningful relationships that are supportive in nature, and which include a certain degree of disclosure of real-life problems and issues.
3. Immersion: This factor is about existing in a fantasy world as well as being “someone else”. Those who fancy the immersion factor enjoy the story-telling aspect of these worlds and enjoy creating avatars with histories that extend and tie in with the stories and lore of the world
4. Escapism: The “Escapism” factor measures how much a user is using the virtual world to temporarily avoid, forget about and escape from real-life stress and problems.
5. Manipulation: This factor measures how inclined a user is to objectify other users and manipulate them for his personal gains and satisfaction. Users who score high on the “Manipulation” factor enjoy deceiving, scamming, taunting and dominating other users.

The paper also discusses how meaningful and emotional relationships are formed within WoW and how real life skills form in these virtual environments. I believe the interface of WoW is not just a glorified chat room, where people simply communicate and share meaning with numbers and aesthetics; but knowing that real world skills and strong character building is possible through interacting with, about and through the game, makes research into this game genre even more important.

• Yee's Motivations of Play in Online Games

This paper shows an empirical model of player motivations to provide an understanding of how players differ from one another and how motivations of play relate to age, gender, usage patterns and in-game behaviors. These components are kind of similar to his larger paper (the one I just talked about) but in a different set up and format (please note the chart of page 5 of Motivations of Play in Online Games). This paper showed me that every player has completely different emotional value within the game. They all have different levels of drives, want different things, desire different strengths and powers. Yet, they all exist in the same world, and can compete with each other or fight side by side, but with ultimately different drives.

The paper also talks about archetypes and stereotypes within the gamers’ society. This idea that the gamer generation is for late youth who did not get out much was taken out by the wide range of demographics surveyed for this paper. Many ages, from all economic and social background play together.

• Chen and Duh's Understanding Social Interaction in World of Warcraft

This article is a bit smaller and also used Yee for a few reference points, but generally what Chen and Duh talk about is how people interact within WoW. First, they are look at the game as socially engaging or as individually driven because of resent research that has shown that most people play WoW predominately alone. They also talk about how relationships built online were just as solid, if not more so than in real life. They ask these questions next:

What are the factors that affect social interaction in WoW? What are different forms of social interaction in WoW?

They discuss a symbolic interactionism theory. This looks into how individuals create symbolic meaning through their interactions with other people. “An individual’s self-conception is therefore reconstructed by each interaction with an Other. Individuals invest symbolic meanings into these interactions to make them socially real. Then they discuss Contextual factors (Historical Context, Interactional Arena, Level of Social Aggregation) and In-game Factors (Instrumental Joint Acts, Rules of Conduct) and how they influence social interaction in WoW.

The paper concludes with how the social interaction can be understood by self-other dynamic. In a RPG, everyone can experiment forms of self-representation. Staging oneself, the spatial gaze that exists in the environment of WoW, and superiority all play into how one views him-or herself within the game. For example, superiority can be used as a competitive factor with the drive to boost ones ego. There is also the view of the Other; which is the view of the Individual other and the view of the collective Other.

• Brignall and Valey's An Online Community as a New Tribalism: The World of Warcraft

I enjoyed this article because it showed me that there is a movement towards New Tribalism, and a part of playing the game is leading a more eventful ‘life’. The article starts out by defining how tribalism fits into WoW. Most guilds are formed with the sharing of a common interests or identity. Within Wow, players are able to substitute their real life need for a ‘brotherhood’ with the guild they play in. This is simply a shift in meaning for the player. Also, they point the important fact that 24 of 30 ‘hardcore’ players prefer to socialize online, than off. This means that the devotion some players will give to their guild will be higher than a social group IRL. This paper also discusses the tribalistic behavior found in WoW, including the negative aspects.

• Rehak's Playing at Being (Chapter 5 in Wolf & Perron's The Video Game Theory Reader)

This is the second time I have read this article, so I am just going to point out the important things I feel are valuable to my research.

Rehak notes on the image of self perspective in videogames: “… the crucial relationship in many games, both contemporary standards and their ancestors, is not about avatar and environment or even between protagonist and antagonist, but between the human player and the image of him- or herself encountered onscreen.” Rehak continues to explain Lacan’s theory of the Mirror Self. Babies, between 6 and 18 months begin to respond and treat their own reflections as a part of themselves and the baby responds to the “attraction of unity, wholeness, and power promised by the reflective form.”

Also, “The videogame avatar would seem to meet the criteria of Lacan’s Objet Petit a. Appearing on screen in place of the player, the avatar does double duty as self and other, symbol and index. … They are supernatural ambassadors of agency.” Ego-confirmation creates a vicious cycle here with no negative affects of death. But also, the long history of videogames has taught of that there is no perfectively reflective avatar. This allows “an alterity enabling players both to embrace the avatar as an ideal and to reject it as an inferior other.”

“The avatar is not simply a means of access to desired outcomes, but an end itself.”

I have also been looking at how competition works within the mindset of humans. This a very general assumption, but what I have determined is that there is Amoral and Moral behaviors that affect competition.

Amoral is the humans beings drive to survive. In WoW, most players, for the first time, are in constant danger of dying. Never before, does one have to fight for ones own survival. The is all granted with the idea that surviving in WoW is to level up, which is the ultimate drive for most users. In order to level up, one must risk his or her own neck to gain experience. The more dangerous a situation is, the more rewarding the booty. Amoral competition does not center around the forced downfall of someone (or something) else. Instead, the main drive is to maintain ones own existence. This can be seen in many regulated and non regulated forms of competition: such as being social and knowing a lot of people, needing items in order to survive in certain areas, being a good team member to allow your teams greatest chance at survival, etc. This type of competition can be brief, like getting away from an large group of aggro’ed monsters, or learning a new spell to help you kill or escape with ease from a dangerous situation.

The next form of competition is dealing with moral behavior. This type of competition encompasses This is where competition is a mutually voluntary activity in which success is based upon the forced failure of someone else. Life and death do not necessarily play into the desired outcome, but superiority does. This also encompasses the good versus evil scenario, where some people feel it is their moral duty for fight for their side, etc. And finally, this also seen in being a Good Samaritan, because one could be striving to be the most noble and kindest player.

The Final Episode of The Sopranos

Sorry for the bulk-posting, but I was asked to write an opinion piece on the final episode of The Sopranos. I was asked to analyze the most infamous aspects of the final episode, which I basically assumed was the enigmatic ending. So here it is, hope you enjoy.

Tony Carmella and AJ die
and it's not looking good for Meadow...

In the final episode of David Chase's far-too-long-running series the Sopranos (I assume you've seen it...but in case you haven't i'll give the basics) Tony, Carmella and AJ sit at a diner we've never seen before eating onion rings. Meanwhile, Meadow struggles outside with parallel parking, and she enters the restaurant just as Tony looks up from the table--then the screen goes black. All the while conspirators seem to be looming around the Sopranos as they eat. The most telling of these characters is the man in the "member's only" jacket walking into the bathroom, which stands out distinctly as a mafia-movie reference. We all remember the scene from The Godfather in which Michael Corleone enters a bathroom, then exits soon thereafter to kill his father's enemies. The fact that "members only" (the "member" is a somewhat phallic reference to the secretive nature of the mafia) walks into the restroom as the oblivious Sopranos dine on fried food is perhaps the biggest clue to the audience that yes, indeed, the Sopranos were taken out mafia-style. The overly enigmatic end to the episode however, which was essentially a fade to black just before anything really happened, left the viewers feeling abandoned and confused--and in some cases checking their cable boxes. The ending provided no distinctive end to a television series (Seinfeld anyone?) which classically aggravates television audiences to no end.
So what were David Chase's intentions in creating such a critically panned finale? I like to think that the ending was slightly tainted by a case of I'm-David-Chase-and-I'm-a-genius disease. David Chase is infamous for creating over-metaphorical webs of storylines and BS that have confused Sopranos fans throughout the series. The most glaring of these was a 45-minute dream sequence where nothing really happened, but every image used was shocking and awe-inspiring. So to me, it makes sense that a guy like David Chase would end his most famous series with the artsiest, edgiest cut-to-black ending that he could come up with--complete confusion.
But all David Chase-ism aside, the ending as it stands leaves some very interesting material for thought for us, once it has been analyzed for what it really is. The Sopranos have been doomed from the very beginning. All of Tony's immediate family are irreconcilable in their flaws, a fact which never goes unresolved in mafia films. Infamously, the best deaths in mafia films are of those characters who deserve their death, who have it calling for them. Tony, AJ, Carmella and Meadow have, time and time again, been presented with situations in which they could completely redeem whatever transgression that had committed. Yet systematically, every last one of them chose to continue on the path of immorality and wrong-doing, as long as they didn't have to suffer the consequences. Though yes, this is an awfully moralistic way of looking at things, we are talking about a mafia-based television series. The mafia itself is an organization that is centered on religion and family, two of the most morality-reverent forces in life. So for the Sopranos, it seems that vengeance is only seconds away, when suddenly the screen cuts to black. This ending practically guarantees the death of the Soprano family, while at the same time doesn't incriminate anybody.

~arrivederci

Finance vs. Art: Why Are We Making Movies?

So the Indiana Jones transcript has turned out to be a bigger bit of reading than I originally thought it would, so I'll be writing about that a little later.
Now, I wanted to deal with a question that was originally brought up by Brett in one of his comments:

What drives people to make movies...money or art?

To answer this I talked with my boss, Dan, about his intentions with regard to movie-making.
His answer was quite simply, "a combination of the two."

For better or worse, the movie industry is just that--an industry.
Movie projects are primarily seen as potential investments
once the investment is seen as potentially successful (public-worthy)
then, and only then, can the artistic integrity of that investment be judged.

Unfortunately, things are extremely near-sighted in this business.
Projects for studio execs are by no means long-thought masterpieces
made by directors like Coppola and Kubrik, rather they are seen as subjects to the public eye,
potential successes or potential dvd-releases.

But in some cases, execs have the chance to consider art before finance.
unfortunately, those movies usually end up failing in some form or another.
So as a result, mediocre and somewhat redundent pictures get put out by studios
(hey, there's a reason why there are so many f'ing trilogies out there.)

SO, in sum, Unless you are a director, you rarely get the chance to be artistic.
But if you aren't a director and somehow get lucky...well then good luck, buddy.

CMC and Culture

The next chapter I read in The Handbook was Chapter 11: Cultural Context and Computers. Through much use of the internet, going on a decade or so, I have come to the conclusion that there are three distinct reasons why people use the internet: Informaton gathering, social interaction and commerse. The internet is unique because it blends multiple types of media, all through one outlet. I want to see how all of this playing into the ultimately humanistic concept of competition. I decided to study one specific type of medium, World of Warcraft solely and see how the videogame media in combination with the massive connectivity of the internet.

How I am going to look at the internet's connectivity (and ultimately WoW) is through 3 types of interactivity. All forms of media must contain some interactivity or else there would be no meaning being shared (given or taken).

Interactivity 1:

Agency – Media

Agency can also be substituted with ‘player’.

The medium: The game of WoW itself, sans every other human players.

This includes interaction with interactive fiction, customization from the user, and the media’s and producer’s control over the parameters. This interaction is when the design of the game takes a great affect on the actions of the user.

Interactivity 2:

Media – Structure

Media: The Game

Structure: The outside social structure

The brings up the classic question of how SMSs alter political and economic infrastructure of social life. Ex. “Are our rights taken away with the implementation of the patriot act and how they can monitor the internet?” “No, ‘cause this is ‘Merica.”

Non of that nonsense here, but the other norms CMC influences is how the game of WoW allows certain types of contact between players i.e. the display of profiles, the spatial and abstract forms of chat, the ability to earn and display feats and levels, to be altruistic and to be competitive or to be co operative; all of this is possible with the interaction of the media and the social structure.

All in all, this type of interaction determines guidelines, abilities and limitations of how the users of CMC can interact with each other.

This leads into the next:

Interactivity 3:

Agency - Structure

The chapter references how, in a Utopian society mind you, this is the ultimate way for users to participate in a completely democratic society. Basically saying, CMC is almost necessary for democracy (some may or may not agree, but I do not care about politics). Never the less, This fits in with my studies of competition and WoW, because without the interaction between Agency and Structure is more so the game than the game itself. Nick Yee claimed this on a CNN interview. This type of interaction and communication creates new social formations.

I meant to post this a couple of days ago, but I guess i did not hit the publish button. Sorry.

I wish I was this hardcore.

I have a lot of questions for my survey, just not on this computer. I will post them tomorrow when I get to the file.

I want to end with a quote about from the 'hardcore' guy.
"In 2 years of the game being live. I have written extensively before about who I am and why I enjoy what I do. I am a bit disappointed at the "Southpark/Overweight/etc" comments and I hope that is a result of shortsightedness, misunderstanding or simple jealousy rather than genuine beliefs. I encourage you all to face each day with an open mind - and not one filled with stereotypes or preconceived notions. In 20 years, when your children are learning about the world in a virtual one - I hope some of you remember that not everybody who uses computers to communicate or for enjoyment is a social leper who deserves nothing else but to be beaten up. The geeks shall inherit the earth." (Read this hardcore)

PEACE for now!!!

Film Camera Purchased

I have published my film camera (as of Thursday morning at 12:00).



Having purchased this camera and acquiring a video recorder (yeah, I just used an old-school term like that), I am going to capture images on both and see how hard it will be to get from beginning to end. Some of it will be blatanly obvious. Some of it won't. I can't wait.

Sorry for the lack of updates, though. Sister in the hospital with pneumonia. No good

And just in case you guys were wondering:

Redux and Qualitative

First,
I feel my post about the quantitative was a bit loose in its structure and meaning. So, I want to clear some things up.

• When dealing with gratification, the wide variety of media out in the world all leads to different types of gratification. The viewer essentially chooses their own accord to follow, thus they want to receive the gratification they want. One hypothesis I am working on is:
  That the players want to want (yes, want to want) the next level. Basically, the way a character is leveled is more of a spiral moving outwards, than any cyclical development. Achieving the next level means the player has to work even harder to achieve the next, but by gaining this level, the player almost proves to him/her self that they are capable. This capability is their drive and ambition to be able to accomplish the next, more difficult and strenuous task. This drive is also something I am going to dive into later with research into Lacan.
• Now for exposure. I need to jump into my hypothesis to explain, which is almost begging the question, but hey, this is a blog not a formal paper:
  I want to redraw my connection to sports players and WoW. Now, lets take soccer for example, the players who play professional soccer, and I am talking about the big pros like Beckham, Zidane, Ronaldinho, and of course the classic Pele. These players eat, drink and play soccer. Yes, they have other passions for life and what not, but they constantly think about soccer, and if they did not, then they probably would not be the professionals they are and do not deserve the millions they get each year. And the only way, in my opinion, for a player to be so devoted to their game is to have that drive (back to Lacan). What I am getting at here is that these professional players DO NOT play within a media. Yes, the news media is surrounding these players and the game, but soccer itself is not a media. With WoW players, they do the exact same thing, but exist and compete within a controlled (by Blizzard) media. This is where the difference is between those who could be claimed as professional WoW players to professional soccer players. Soccer was not created like WoW was; WoW is as Jenson says the "primary product of media organizations is not its content, buts its audience." Thus, this media’s product is competing players, and Blizzard created (and patches frequently) WoW to keep this game from doing what it is designed to do. The level of exposure is directly correlated to how much a person wants to compete, and the higher level of exposure is what any media wants. (I feel like going on, but I think you all get the picture. I will continue this thought with another post).
• Next was my weird parallel with the news. What I meant from this is:
  People play WoW for gratification in competing, when the game is designed to achieve levels; where people watch the news without retention, where the news is designed to give the facts. Both medias have subtly changed to fit in how the viewers ‘view’(I think this thought may be applicable, but I do not want to give it much more brain juice right now).

Next is my bizarre idea around the 4 types of research that focuses out long term significance. (Which I can only assume would bring out the reason why my research is important). Here are the key points for each of the 4.

· Natural Experiments. The view of the natural availability of the media and the change in the audience with increased exposure time.

· Public Events. Shows how public events become more of a spectacle, or media event. I want to look into how competition within WoW is becoming a spectacle more so than a mere event.

· Institutional Practices. I am slowly thinking that this is not applicable to my research. The only way I can see it is (relating back to the soccer vs Wow) how WoW designs a form of competition for players to compete more so than the players creating it. But this could run into a chicken egg conundrum.

· Cultural Formations. This is applicable because of how the players treat other players in the game. Does WoW affect cultural practices within the game and outside?

Now, I feel better about my quantitative research understanding. Now for QUALITATIVE!!!

Moving on to chapter 10 in A Handbook of Media and Communication Research: This chapter, in my opinion, shows how there is much difference between Quantitative and Qualitative. But, both are equally necessary for my research.

I came up with several questions for my project, and I would rather list them than go into details about what I think about the key concepts of Qualitative research.

• First, How does being in public places affect playing a game like WoW? Is there much difference in playing in a lan center than interacting with these people in ones own home?
• How is WoW intregrated into the lives of the players? This related back to how constant playing increases their drive to play and submission of other things (media or not) within their life.
• Do demographics change the way people play, compete and interact with each other? Does age become a non-issue? I.E. Kids playing on equal ground with adults. Does this change the way people compete?
• Does the game change how players conduct themselves? Change their beliefs or empirical thoughts about the IRL world?
• Is wow a means of representing competition or a resource for competition?
• Comparison to romance novels. Fans of romance novels look at the books as a resource on how to live and be romantic (according to Jensen). Do people use WoW as a resource in how to function in the world? I read some quotes on the Daedalus project that said this player felt more comfortable dealing with people and managing large groups because of the skills she ‘learned’ from playing WoW. What does all this mean when competition is the soul reason the game exists?
• Is the game creating a ‘Fandom’ where it is a resource for cultural practices?

Moving away from questions, I want to look at what this chapter has taught me about how I should approach my project:

• Discursive elements. The way people comprehend information and media is important in discovering how it affects their social life and ideals.
• Genres. This is important because I need to see if the information I find about WoW could be applied universally to other games of the similar genre. “Another reason for focusing on genres is that their mod of address, in addition to their form and content, anticipates particular uses of media in social content” (Jensen 168).
• Hypertexts. This is particularly important in my research because it changed the way media is presented, from a singular narrative to a more open ended use of the media. (I will get more into this when I write a post about chapter 11)
• Media environments. Studies have gone towards defining issues and relevant approaches. At the same time, the bluring of divisions between ‘text’ and ‘context’ in virtual environments is adding to the complexity and challenge.

From here, I wish to dive into Chapter 11, which focuses on Computer Mediated Communication (OMG!).

My next post will be my condensation of a thesis and questions I feel are important towards my research, and finally questions I wish to present in surveys and interviews.

A Pretty Solid Week (again...oops)

Before I get started,
I got to meet Larry David at the LA premier of Sicko last night...
I worked as an usher (as part of the internship) and Larry David had forgotten his ticket to the movie.
This was my first real case of being star struck, and thankfully Larry was a nice, funny guy.

So I just realized that last week's last post was rather lacking.
it seems I didn't copy and paste from the daily journal...
Anyway, last week can be summed up with one word: COVERAGE

From Wednesday on I've been covering at least one script a day.
Unfortunately though, none of them were good.

They were entertaining though, to say the least.
The best one was about the Seraph class of angels--only they were evil angels.
So these evil angels would steal magical babies away from their safe homes on the countryside
and then throw the magical babies into volcanoes, eating their souls as they float up.
I tore it apart in my coverage.

NOW FOR THE DEEPER STUFF:

I wanted to take some time this week to talk about the work environment at TWC,
as it is almost completely different from any other work environment I've been in.

At my other jobs (working at a church, working at a supplies and logistics company, working at a bank),
people were generally tense, quiet, and pretty much serious all the time.
This made work unenjoyable and tense...I always felt like I was in trouble for something.
At the Weinstein Company, the environment is similar to what you would find in a friendly study group.
In our down time we joke with one another, tell stories, watch funny videos on youtube, etc...
but tension in the office only comes about when there's a rush to get things done,
and even then it's not as miserable as at the supply company or at the bank.

When I started thinking about all this, it was pretty easy to come up with a reason as to why the environments differ so drastically...
The Weinstein Company, despite its wide reach into film and television, is a company that makes entertainment.
Though TWC has hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue, the projects it funds are still made for people's enjoyment.
When it comes down to it there are no lives at stake, nor major contributions to society being made from day-to-day at TWC.
But that's not to say that's a bad thing...just different.
Where a company like On-Target Supplies and Logistics makes money by organizing the distribution of office supplies,
TWC--and all other production companies, for that matter--makes money by distributing entertainment.
Therein lies the biggest difference.
Though we (film students) may see it otherwise, entertainment is far from a daily necessity...at least, not in the same way that pens, paperclips and printer toner are daily necessities.

Unfortunately my conclusions on this are pretty lacking at this point, as I've only recently started thinking about this stuff.
What I have concluded however is that companies are controlled by their driving purposes:

A supplies and logistics company is controlled by other companies' needs: paper, pens, toner...
so the pressure is brought from the companies placing these orders.

A production company is controlled by its own desires (or maybe Harvey and Bob Weinstein's): new, entertaining movies and TV shows.

So I'm glad to be in an environment where it's OK to watch mildly inappropriate youtube exerpts...
I find that it not only makes for an enjoyable workday, but it also makes the friendships within the office stronger.

My next post is going to be an overview of an awesome little bit of history that I've found while working here.
I was given a copy of a transcript for the meeting between George Lucas, Steven Spielberg and Larry Kasdan when they came up with the storyline and plot for Raiders of the Lost Ark.
REALLY cool stuff...
but you'll just have to wait for it.

Debunking Quantitative Research

Before I get into my post topic, I want to briefly discuss where my project is heading.
I decided to fully go with competition and its impact upon social and individual play experience in World of Warcraft. In order to build a foundation for my research, I decided to look at quantitative research taken in WoW AND compare the findings to quantitative research methodologies.
I used a book Brett gave me called, A Handbook of Media and Communication Research, by Klaus Bruhn Jensen. (F'in Google Roxorz). Chapter 5 in the book runs the gamut of information concerning quantitative research. I found it extremely helpful in analyzing this:
Alone Together
All of this information is the basics of my research. This research is making it possible to compare and contrast basic information and help interpret more the more complex and Qualitative research (which I will be diving into next post).
Some examples I have found through my own analysis:
• There is a need for gratification. Gratification is a primary reason why people take in media. The research in Alone Together shows that the higher the level, the more time people spend in aspiration for the next. (Reference the two figures on page 3). Or another main goal is to become level 40 to gain a mount. These are just two of many goals people have in the game. But this data does not explain why there is a constant drive to continue to play the game and that the quantitative study of gratification has not proven itself useful in predictions. We just now understand the cycle of the player. Now, I want to look into the relationship between the amounts of exposure in game to the desire of competition (and winning or gratification).
• This dives into my next point, exposure. Jenson says the "primary product of media organizations is not its content, buts its audience." Basically, the idea is for the product/ media to make an apparently attractive role of 'being an audience'. Exposure is crucial for a certain mediums survival. Jenson continues on about how the creators and maintainers of certain media 'view the viewers' in determining what they want, in order to make their media the best, most enjoyable and audience building. WoW, as seen in Alone Together, gives the unique ability to dive into a media with extreme ease and uniqueness unlike any other. Allowing guilds to be built, competing amongst factions and each other, and the pure social environment all create WoW to be an audience captor and enchanter. Blizzard is definitely becoming good at gaining high levels in audience amusement. From here, I want to look at how this media is become something more than just a secondary means of exposure, into the main means of entertainment and social value. This, in my wild guessing, is going to be tied to competition because of the way people strive to gain levels, being that each level is harder and harder to achieve, to be better than the next person. I feel a parallel to professional sports where the players damn near only play their sport, and everything else is secondary to them.
• Next, I drew out a weird parallel between the news and WoW. Now, bear with me. What Jensen was saying about the news is that some people watch the news and are unable to retain much if any information from it. They just had the gratification of watching the news and knowing that there really is nothing of great importance. The people, who liked to watch the news, did so because of the pure enjoyment factor, almost an opposite of the desire to receive factual information. What I am hypothesizing is that people are playing the game, not to be immersed into the game, but because they feel the need to compete. But the difference between WoW and the typical evening newscast is that WoW is slightly adapted to the audience that desires to compete, because the media is creating an audience that wants to want to compete. Then again, none of this I can prove without diving into the qualitative research (Next post, I promise).

I took several more notes, but these were the more note worthy ones. I am going to end this post with how the WoW is applicable to Jensen's 4 types of research that focuses on long term significance.

1) Natural Experiments. This concerns peoples' play and conversation (and other uses of) time before and after exposure to a new medium. WoW tends to slowly suck more and more hours away from players, as their characters become more powerful. Again, I am drawing an element of competition here.
2) Public Events. The news coverage of sporting events are becoming more of a grand display then just the mere competition. The competitions between the higher-level characters are becoming somewhat interesting to the other players. Also, the company running WoW is able to set up certain events (such as a new patch, raid, or a competition) to create a public event worthy of everyone responding to and watching (or participating). This is how the media of WoW is able to shape participation within the community.
3) Institutional practices. This is involved in forming a balanced world, not the balanced world of WoW, but the idea that this media is becoming a balance between other institutions. This concept is still a bit fuzzy in my head, but I plan on working in out soon.
4) Cultural Formations. What I have determined this to be is the cultural norms the media is putting forth, and that we are adhering to. What in the game is universally taken out and put forth in real life? I am sure the 8 million people who play the game have taken something the game has taught them and applied it to some aspect of their real life. One ideal could be that sitting in front of a computer for 8 hours a day is not a bad thing after all.
That about does it for this post. I think I am going to read over this one more time tomorrow to see if I put everything I wanted to say in, and to see if any of this actually made sense.

Keep it Up

So far, you are all doing a fine job of providing in-depth updates on the progress of your work. Each of you is doing something quite a bit different from the others, but there are intriguing connections among all of your projects. I encourage you comment on one another's posts as well, especially as you see them relating to (or not) your own work. Keep peeling back more layers and see what you uncover.

A Pretty Solid Week

So, why did Widescreen ever come into being?

So for my class, Professor Boessen and I purchased Leo Enticknap's book "Moving Image Technology: from Zoetrope to Digital" in hopes of gaining further insight into the history of filmmaking. It turns out, there's a couple things that I never thought of (blame my 22 year-old ego that tries to convince himself of his own self-worth constantly)

I blame my generation

Anyway, we are aware that the coming of widescreen productions occurred near the beginning of the 1950s as ammunition to fight the new mediums that more people were getting a hold of (e.g. home film cameras and TELEVISION). However, Enticknap points out another valid event that might bear (or not) more significance towards this specific evolution:

Did you know Hollywood had developed primitive widescreen technology in the 1920s alongside sound? I know I didn't. Films like Wings, released in 1928 and the first recepient of the Academy Award for Best Picture, Happy Days (not to be confused with the television show of the latter-1970s) and The Big Trail, a go-getum Western along the Oregon Trail. But, it dies off until the 50s...why?

Enticknap says that the depression had a lot to do with it. Coincidentally, so did sound. The movie industries had poured so much energy, time and money into sound that little more could be set aside for another bold risk such as widescreen films. From Enticknap's chapter:

"In this context sound just got in under the wire. By the autumn of 1929 Hollywood had committed to producing 'talkies', a large proportion of cinemas throughout the Western world had already installed the reproduction equipment and the rest were compelled to doing so whether they wanted to or not. Too much money had been spent and too many boats had been burnt for the industry to back out. Widescreen, however, was still in the research and development stage with the early experimental shows in first-run city centre cinemas taking place during the autumn and winter of 1929 at the moment of, or just after the crash. Sound had already passed the point of no return" (55).

Not that television wasn't a cause for the widescreen phenomenon (and let us not forget smell-o-vision, either). Rather, it was not the only cause and the full truth, like so many other examples, goes much deeper down the rabbit hole.

Altruism

As I play more and more… and more and more, I finally understand why so many different people play this game. It’s addictive.
But, that is not what I want to talk about today. One component I have seen in the game is higher level characters helping lower level characters with quests, instances, and grinding. There are even the people who randomly buff (positively enchant) players they pass, and do not even talk to them. Buy why? Why is there this general sense of generosity that exists all throughout the game?
A player on The Daedalus Project said, “From my 4 or 5 years MMOG experience Id say that simply helping others is the most memorable thing you can do.” The site continues on with a comparison between the virtual MMO worlds and the real worlds. It claims,
“The other category revolves around being helped by a stranger in a time of great need. Typically, a lot of time investment, risk or trust is needed during these events. In real life, many friendships are solidified through a series of favors or repaid debts because they signify a sharing of trust and understanding. The difference is that crises are far and few between in our everyday lives, so it takes months if not years for those kinds of relationships to solidify, whereas MMORPGs are designed to be dangerous worlds where crises occur frequently.”
Basically saying that the game world is (at least partially) designed to allow higher level users to help the lower level users with ease.
The Daedalus Project continues its comparison between helping people IRL and helping people in the virtual world. The site claims that "Most MMORPGs on the other hand are designed to contain many everyday inconveniences. You need a travel ability to travel long distances. You need someone to rez you. More importantly, MMORPGs empower users to help each other. You can heal someone who is about to die. You can craft a component another player needs. You can root a mob long enough for the player to escape. Thus, MMORPGs empower players to help each other in a way that is often difficult in real life." This is a very interesting concept; the game designs certain fun things that only prohibit players to help each other. MMORPGs remove much of the ambiguity and danger of altruism. A kind of social engineering occurs in MMORPG by restructuring the rules and expectations of how and when people can help each other.
The altruistic nature is indeed important to how MMO games function, but there are always the players who are greedy, unappreciative and ask for more help. Basically asking for an inch and taking a mile. There are also the players who refuse to help, (or perhaps help for monentary gain). But, this is human nature, and one would not have the good helpers without having a definition of a bad helper (or helper).

An interesting side note to HD cameras

I went to the HD website, where they had various articles about which of their products were used on which projects both in Hollywood and in the independent arena. While this would seem like a point we would all come to the conclusion to, I found:

"HD Studios' F900 cameras were rented for principal photography of a HD feature starring Forrest Whittaker and Virginia Madsen. HDCAM tapes were downconverted to DVCAM on set using our Miranda DVC 800 onboard downconverters. This allowed downconversion to DVCAM tape as each take is simultaneously recorded to HDCAM tape."

That's pretty neat, if you ask me. Not only did this HD camera "downconvert" as they call it to record on DV, but also allowed an HD recording at the same time. At this point, however, why would you wish to downgrade?

Full article here

Uh oh...my power cord won't go in?

Well,

Computer troubles are rough. Especially when writing coverages of screenplays (on your computer) is your job...
On thursday I had to take my trusty iBook to the mac store...and didn't get her back until this evening.

So here's an update of last week's affairs:

Life was frantic at the Weinstein Co. this last week, mainly because of a certain movie that [TWC] is trying to make.
Though I am not allowed to tell you what the name of this project is (because of a certain contract), I can tell you what the interns were doing...
Mainly it was a rat-race, yet again. On Monday we were again made to "go get coffe/cigarettes/that-naked-fruit-juice-with-the-berries-that-i-like" for our superiors, and it didn't look like anyone would be getting a screenplay to cover.
luckily though, on tuesday, I was offered a coverage (I was the first to get a coverage) of a pretty bad script:
even though it was yet another movie based on a Stephen King novel...
I was happy to get the script anyways, and used the opportunity to attack the cliched style of "the Stephen King movie"

Coverages at the Weinstein Co. are supposed to be 4 pages a piece, with:
1) a log-line

In which I describe the plot in one sentence: "General Jack Ripper takes control of American nukes, and wages war against the Russians, for stealing our 'precious bodily fluids.'"

2) two pages of summary (what happens throughout)

3) two pages of commentary (how much I disliked it)

Luckily, the humor in the criticisms was well-received, and on Wednesday I was given another script to cover. This one was about a major historical figure, and was written extremely well. Even though the script was 150 pages (most scripts are around 100) I found myself turning the pages quite easily. I praised the script in my coverage, and had it done by the end of the day.

On thursday morning my power cord's "nipple" (as it was described at the mac store...)
had come off inside of the mac and "tore the whole place up"

I didn't get to cover any more scripts after that.


So this week is the big premier of Sicko
which is michael moore's latest venture...
so everyone should go out and see it!
that is, when it comes out in theaters.

Today I went to get coffee and lunch because I didn't have my computer.
But in my down time I actually read 2 pretty decent scripts--one about peter pan as a vampire--and a bad one about a world of alien babies with aquaman-like powers.
but again, I can't say much more than that...

hopefully I'll get some coverages tomorrow!
i'll keep you guys updated.

-Sam

My First Post

Since this is my first post, I thought I would summarize what I have been doing since the beginning.

“Since game play is based at least partially on users interacting with other users, does human nature change this medium of social networks into a community?”

Since this is such a broad question, I felt I had to narrow the search down to specific questions of topics and trends facing the largest mmorpg World of Warcraft. Along with the research, I have created characters in the game to immerse myself into this virtual world. I plan on developing these characters in order to associate myself with the higher level players. I would like to discuss with numerous players to discuss why they play WoW. Such questions would be: Do you play to be competitive? Do you prefer to be competitive with people, or work with them and why? I also would like to find one group of players who are in an association (aka a guild) to ask why they play with these certain people, do they know them personally? Also, I would like to ask them if they form friendships with the people they persistently associate themselves with in WoW.

My first character, Andregurd, a Human Paladan, I enjoyed playing him, and probably will get into later on, but I started a Blood Elf Hunter, Undergrad, (yay! name!) which I really enjoy. I wished only I picked a more populated server because I want to come into contact with more people. I think I am going to try and change servers with my character.

I have found it a little annoying with the limited people I have seen, even less of them are responsive. I think it may be attributed to my low character level. I need to work on that.

But what I found that will help me meet people is this:

Rapture

Which was built by the guy who founded Napster. It is kind of a facebook for WoW characters and players. It even pulls information from the Armory, which is the realtime “Wikipedia” for Wow, featuring information on characters, weapons, places in the world, and much more.

The site has only a hand full of people currently using it, so I hope it catches on soon.

Currently, I am noticing the major (and almost obvious trend) of people mainly in the mode to advance their character. Provided the occasional person will come help you if you need it, but in the end, people just want to reach that great number 70. This, I am pondering, is probably affecting the interactions between characters within the game. Without the competition, it basically becomes something like secondlife.

I found this article a good start. This article discusses the popularity and fascination with the game. Some interesting examples are high ranking business men who gather other high ranking professionals to form guilds with top level characters. “…like the one formed by noted Japanese venture capitalist Joi Ito (Level 60, Gnome Mage), are mini-societies with their own Web sites, online forums and private lore.” The article also observes the fact that higher level characters have tendencies “rarely seen in the real world; higher-level players go out of their way to tutor newbies and accompany them on quests”.

The game has become such a huge success, the VP of creative development for Blizzard Software, Chris Metzen, said, "I call it the Technicolor, Americanized version of 'Lord of the Rings'.” Though this article is only mere observation, they claim “Though WOW is a fantasy world, the interaction between guilds and individuals relies on human choices and morals”. The article also alludes to line between real worlds and virtual worlds are becoming fuzzier and fuzzier. This all is quite interesting news.

What would Porn look better in: HD or Blu-Ray?

Apparently, this is the question that the adult industry has been tackling for a few years now. While a politically incorrect subject, I found this article online which does directly examine the question of next-gen technology and what should be done with. It's just through the eyes of the adult movie market

In this article, it talks about the discussions mentioned concerning the pro's and cons of HD and blu-ray. Essentially, many of these companies have decided on HD because of its availability and lack of any proposed legal problems.

While this doesn't directly address the question of film and video, this does bring up an interesting point dealing with next-gen technology. While a highly sensitive field of interest, the adult film industry were pioneers in adapting new technology and the distribution of their materials (this article mentions that they were one of the first big arenas to adopt and implement the heavy usage of VHS back in the 1980s). Anyway, have fun

HD in practice

So I was cruising the net this morning, looking for some insights towards the continued usage and evolution of HD in movies. Sure enough, the new Nicolas Cage film "Next" is claimed by its producers as the first to be shot in HD using a specific codec:

Avid's DNxHD codec

Now, what does this mean to us? Codec is a codec, right? Well, according to the article:

"Avid's codec delivers high-quality compressed HD images in the bandwidth of uncompressed SD, which enabled Next-generation innovation like putting a 1080p video projector in the cutting room so Christian Wagner could see how his edits played out on a big screen without packing up and heading for the screening room."

That's pretty damned impressive to me. It's definitely shows the acceptance Hollywood has placed on HD and the slow (or perhaps not so slow anymore?)acclimation into mainstream motion pictures.

We do have to remember, however, that Robert Rodriguez was the first to incorporate to film an entire project in DV (Once Upon a Time in Mexico), not HD. I, at first, confused the two together.

Here's the entire article , including interviews about the editing process

Differences in Film and Video Cameras

So, while Sam is off in the foothills of Los Angeles, I am here in Sherman, doing some research into the specific differences that lie within the film and video cameras of today. While some of it is obvious, there are a few small, yet practical technicalities which provide certain benefits and problems with each instrument. So, here we go!

Film Camera:



1. After production is complete, it is required that you process your film
2. Film shooting can be done with a video assist (video tap) which sends out a video image of what the camera is shooting (however, it does NOT represent what the film stock is actually capturing)
3. Most film cameras require a separate audio recorder to capture sound.
4. Editing involves the purchase of the film editing machine, which usually includes (but not necessarily) a cutting board and a small viewer screen.
5. In order to properly load film into the camera, you will need an area with absolutely no light or else the film will be ruined before you even begin
6. Shutter speed on the film camera has easier accessibilty for manual control, unlike many video camera, which uses a digital output, rather than analog.
7. There are two forms of viewfinders, reflex and nonreflex. Reflex viewfinders are used in most modern film cameras, diverting light coming through the lens to a viewfinder where the image is projected on a viewing screen. Nonreflex viewfinders give a less accurate representation of what is being filmed. Also note, that some cameras don't have viewfinders at all and rely on finders attached to the lens or require a prism that is placed inside the film gate.
8. The most common film cameras include 35mm (most motion pictures use this type), 16mm and Super 8 (both used mostly for home use and for independent films that cannot afford 35mm)

Video Camera:




1. Unlike film, the image you are capturing can be directly viewed on a monitor.
2. Tape can be checked right away, with no need for processing
3. As noted above, no processing is required. You simply pull the tape out and capture it onto a editing program
4. Unlike film cameras, there is an option to use the in-camera audio recording device rather than use an outside microphone. However, sound quality may not be as clear or crisp with the in-camera audio device
5. Instead of focusing an image on a strip of film, video cameras focus the picture on a light-sensitive computer chip called a CCD (charge-coupled device). The picture is focused onto the flat surface of the CCD, which is divided into a very fine grid of spots or sites called pixels. Basically, think of pixels as tiny light meters that measure the brightness of light in a specific location on the frame.
6. In component video systems, the red, green and blue signals are kept separate from one another or, in anoher version, the luminance is kept separate from two "color-difference" signals. In composite video systems, the color signals are merged with the luminance into ne signal that can travel on a single path. Think of composite video as a form of "video soup" that mixes all the color and brightness into one electronic signal
7. Video formats include VHS, Super VHS, 8mm, Hi8, Betacam, DV, DVCAM, DVCPRO and HDTV.

So, that's a lot of information. And trust me, I am still trying to process a lot of it myself. But basically, you all get the gist as to why video formats and instruments have become popular. I am not, however, going to assume or infer that film is on its way out just yet. In my next post, I'll be sure and give a more detailed explanation into the advantages and disadvantages of film itself. This was simply a brief overview of the information I have obtained in the last couple of days

Sam, you better not be buying those guys Pall Mall's!

Monday and Tuesday...

I started work at The Weinstein Company on monday morning, bright and early at nine am...
On monday I got introduced to the people I'd be working with in the production department (2 other interns and producers' assistants), and was walked through my basic duties by a fellow intern.

As an unpaid intern my jobs thus far are:
-getting coffee/breakfast/lunch/cigarettes/snacks
-making copies of scripts and magazine articles
-sending mail and delivering it
-answering phones while assistants are busy

The fact of the matter is, that in order to get the good jobs (i.e. first-hand script readings, coverages, calls to execs, etc...) I have to prove how well I can work--even if it is the grunt work.

On the upside, I've been able to read ten scripts in the past two days during the down time

I'm hoping to do some coverages tomorrow, so the entry will be a little more interesting

- Sam

Let's Get This Party Started...Right?!

Hey guys--

If you are reading this, you should be able to post to this. I'm not sure how it will evolve, but it seems to me that we will all benefit from a central place to which we can post ongoing thoughts, ideas, and developments this summer.

Let's start doing bi-weekly posts (twice a week) for each of you. If it turns out that seems a bit much (i.e., you're not writing much new each time), then we can adjust as we go forward. Fair enough?

OK--let's get to it!