@tedvid: On the trip back to Waco! Excited to see Robert Griffin back in action tonight! #riseup

Archive for January, 2010

Twitter Exchange

Friday, January 22nd, 2010

This is one of the best Twitter exchanges that I have ever seen, despite the misspellings. I am proud to have been a part of it.

Comments (0)

Writing makes for better Improvisation

Sunday, January 10th, 2010

Writing makes for better Improvisation.

It’s plain. It’s simple. Writing makes for better ad-lib on set.

Often when aspiring filmmakers set out to create a short film or video they start shooting with limited knowledge: only having about a quarter of the audible script in mind and not even necessarily on paper. Sure, they’ve got it in their head what most of the video is going to look like, but they think that because of shows like “The Office” and especially the once popular “Who’s Line Is It Anyway?” that improv-style comedy/acting is an effective way to fill your story. What they forget is that 1) “Who’s Line Is It Anyway?” has a buzzer to stop the actors when they stop being funny and 2) “The Office” has an incredible set of writers that make improvisation better (the point of this post), and there is actually not as much ad-libbing as people assume.

So what makes this claim true, Ted?

Well let me see…. I’ve been creating video for six and a half years, and I’m the classic example of, “hey, let’s go make a video and see how it turns out” only to have the video turn out to be interesting/funny to… well, no one.

Alright, so then why does it make it better?

Think of it this way: when you go out for a jog (if you are into that kind of thing), do you just go running along any which way? No. Instead, you go on a predetermined course, and then if you are still feeling good you “go the extra mile.” If you just went wherever your feet lead you, you would end up 5 miles away from where you started and wondering how you are going to get your exhausted (and probably dehydrated) self back to your place of origin.

This same concept can be applied to video making. When you set out to shoot your footage, you set your predetermined parameters, and then if you are still feeling good after you have gotten all of your shots, then you can expand and play with the actor becoming the character that was once only on paper.

People often say, “the book was better than the movie” and while I wholly despise this statement, there is some truth to the idea that text appeals to people because it allows their imaginations to be free. When an actor (or typically in my case someone I have conned into being an actor) has some guidelines and some text to associate with his/her character it provokes their imagination and helps shape the image they have of their new on-camera persona.

When all else fails, write. (you can quote me on that)

- Ted

Comments (1)

“The book was better than the movie”

Sunday, January 10th, 2010

“The book was better than the movie.”

How many times have you said or heard someone else say this? Personally, I have heard this so many times that it makes me sick. Before you go novel-elitist on me, let me explain.

Books are not better than movies. Books are different than movies.

When reading/viewing:

Books are more engrossing. The take more time, they take more energy, and they take more imagination.

Movies are less engrossing. They take less time, they take less energy, and they take less imagination.

Now some of you are saying, “exactly, books are better than movies” and are missing the point: you can’t compare them. You have to compare movies with other movies and books with other books (there is a well known cliché that I could easily throw in here, but I prefer bananas and pineapples). You cannot be upset when your favorite 400 page book does not fit perfectly in a two hour movie, and then be upset when Peter Jackson’s latest adaptation is “too long.” There are so many ironies in that previous sentence that it might make your head explode.

Look, I love books, and like most of the world I wish I read more. However, I also love movies, and I love movies adapted from my favorite books. I just recognize that they are different mediums of entertainment, not to be confused as the same. I judge the movie on its own merit, and the book the same way.

When you say that the book is better than the movie, you are saying that your own idea of something is better than someone else’s. Now, there is a shock.

Next time, when you go to ramble about the movie not living up to the book, please, think again.

Categories : Advice, movie
Comments (0)

Video Checklist

Tuesday, January 5th, 2010

I recently went to get the last bit of footage necessary to complete a short video I’m working on, however while using new equipment (and not thinking properly), made a very newbie mistake: I did not record any audio. When I returned to capture my footage and finish up my own personal project, I got to sit in front of my computer in disbelief and anger. So, as they say happens, I have learned from my mistakes and have put together a checklist that I am willing to share to the Internet (that’d be you). Part of the reason I blog, is so that I can express my learning process, which then allows me to look back on my progress (that rhymed and everything!).

Here is the list that I will walk through from now on when I go to shoot footage:

1) Is the tape in the camera?
2) Have you properly hooked up the audio inputs and tested their functionality?
3) Have you compensated for lighting changes?
4) Have you applied the proper filters?
5) Have you properly focused the shot?
6) Have you focused the shot?
7) Did you actually record something?
8) Do you have everything?

It’s not a very detailed list, however it does help me out with some basic things that anyone can overlook (even me, a guy who has been doing video for much longer than I’d like to admit after making the mistake I did).

Ted

Categories : Uncategorized
Comments (0)

As Twitter Evolves

Monday, January 4th, 2010

Lately I’ve noticed a huge trend in my Twitter followers: real people giving a “fake” follow.

As people turn to bots and other services to accrue massive number of Twitter followers at a steep price, I’ve noticed a huge number of people following me only to dump me a day or two later when I haven’t “returned the favor.” Interestingly enough, most of the twitter usernames that I see come and go on my follower list have  high numbers of people following them and vice-versa. While at first I was wondering how I was so quickly offending some of these people, I realized that what I had was a fake follow and not a legitimate follow to begin with and that I did not really care in the slightest what those who fell in the fake category really thought. There is a pretty significant chance that these people will never see what I have micro-blogged on the social networking sphere to begin with anyway, so why should I care?

So as Twitter itself evolves and begins to become a more permanent thing in 2010 rather than the trending thing it was in 2009, I’ve started classifying what the different levels of Twitter users and the difference between a worthless follower and a significant follower. Here are four examples of worthless followers and four examples of significant followers:

Worthless Followers

1) Anytime you get “followed back” by a super-popular twitter user who simply follows everyone back (whether it’s a news-outlet, band, celebrity, company, etc.). Now this doesn’t mean they’re worthless to follow yourself, you can get great information/links/etc. from these sources, but as a follower on your list, they will never actually see what you have to say.

2) The guy/girl who follows 800 plus people. While it is possible that they are very organized with the lists feature that Twitter offers, it is highly unlikely and you will easily be “just another face in the crowd” (oh cliches..)

3) Anyone who follows you and then dumps you within 72 hours.

4) People who tweet incessantly. This is probably the least worthless of this group, but people who are constantly tweeting are either A) too busy tweeting to read your tweets or B) conversing with a short list of people/directing their tweets at the same short list.

Significant Followers

1) Your friends, family, and coworkers. As lame as that may sound, they are probably (especially to begin with) the most likely to read your tweets and also click on the links you place in your tweets.

2) Someone who follows less than 800 people. I use the number 800 (here and earlier) because it is where I believe the line begins to become more distinct between one who follows for the sake of following and one who follows for the information you are updating your feed with.

3) Someone you yourself consider to have good quality twitter updates. If you believe someone has quality stuff and they return the favor, a lot of times it means they believe the same about your content. Always a good thing.

4) Probably the most significant are those who are below the 800 mark but have 3000 or more people who follow them. This means they are probably seeing what you have to say, with the possibility of re-tweeting it and/or sharing it in some capacity. Plus, these people have built a certain clout around them that impresses people which means those 3000+ people who follow them are going to look to see who they consider to hold worthwhile information by checking out who they follow.

I hope you found something useful here. Feel free to comment with your agreements, disagreements, etc.

- Ted

Categories : Social Media, Web, twitter
Comments (0)

Stay Updated

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner