A letter from a major motion picture studio.

Dear Mr. Miller,

After having received correspondence from your aunt, my staff has diligently dug out your submissions for consideration in potential movie plots. Please understand that we deal with 100’s of submissions a day, often complete scripts with potential names attached. I did take some time out of my schedule to read and re-read your work in order to give you some constructive, if not obvious, criticism.

My Mother, your aunt, was very clear about not being too harsh in my statements. In order to be clear, if I seem dismissive or perhaps sarcastic, it is not you or your well-intentioned idea, it is the several hundred other Bruckheimer-wet-dreams I have to read every week which are just like it.

I am organizing your submissions by date and will refer to them by number for criticism. I have listed eight of the nine submissions, with the last one being dealt with in the general comments.

#1. This is a topic covered in several movies, with death and destruction of the Earth being rather trite. I do like the use of Bud, of Air Bud fame, for the lead. However, without articulated thumbs, I think that flying even a modified space shuttle is out of the question. To allay your concern, the budget for a bone-shaped asteroid wouldn’t be that high, but the afterthought “Cat Ninjas,” may present more of a challenge.

#2. You are right, no one has really thought about Zombies in the context of the north pole march. The intersection of these two genres could be lucrative, with global warming being a, pardon the pun, hot topic and some celebrity groans it might have legs. My assistant tells me that Penguins come from the South pole, so we may need a change of location, which means landfall in the south. Nothing movie worthy down there. Can penguin zombies surf?

#3. We are in contract litigation with both of those actors at the current moment, and as much as I would like for them to “bump uglies” on the big screen, this is not a plot idea. Unless you’re Zalman King.

#4. Once again, sex should not be the only thing that you are making a movie around. Also, the adult film industry covered this as soon as Brokeback came out. Yes Salma Hayek is hot, but I don’t think Frida will be the beginning of any type of carpet-anything career, even with “that hottie from Enterprise.”

#5. There is already a new Die Hard movie in the works and Indiana Jones lived in the early 20th century, they could not just happen to be in the same bar unless it is at a geriatric care center. Also, the budget would be untenable, even with the “coolness of coincidence.”(the inspiration of that expression should remain a secret until they legalize it.)

#6. Dr. House is not a real doctor.

#7. The Japanese have this covered, they make more “buddy cop” movies than we do. Also “jujitsu and shit” is not a martial art, so there would be no cage matches in it. Maybe with some research you could come up with a REAL martial art that has “ring hotties” and encourages people to bet with human/animal hybrid slaves.

#8. Franco-Prussian melodrama is a no-no, and a girl you just met at the bar may not have the acting ability to play anything except a skank. Do you have a head shot of her?

General Notes. “and shit” is not descriptive, research what you want to say. Originality is a good thing, perhaps you should expand your cultural digging ground beyond pirated movies and Maxim magazine. Your #9 submission was to short to consider even a movie idea; “A horse movie…” is more of a genre than a film and “with dwarves” is neither politically correct nor original.

I am very busy this time of year with contract negotiations and complete scripts to read, so please let your aunt know that responded to your submissions. From now on, please pass them on to her to read and critique first and she can pass them on to me. Despite her protestations that I have completely forgotten about her, the 11 messages on my voice mail per day constantly remind me she’s there. I will pick them up from her after a few rounds of edits this thanksgiving.

Yours Sincerely,

John William Caravace,
Duckhammer Films

Thinking of ways to raise your game? Maybe even a new camera or computer? There are better ways to get great digital photography. Sometimes even a little step in the right direction will yield amazing improvement. I have spent a lot of time learning equipment and reading books to realize there are simple ways . Here are 10 simple steps to kick-ass digital imaging.

1. Calibrate your monitor. You will get tired of hearing it after a while if you read a few color correcting books, and I am not saying that you need to use a total color management workflow(but it helps). There are several ways to calibrate and profile, so we will start small and work up. Online epaper press Software Mac operating system monitor calibration: Native on OSX, decent calibration, has some shortcomings on LCDs that aren’t Apple made. - Adobe Gamma: Comes with Photoshop and is good at baseline calibration. Pantone companion software: Pantone has made several pieces of software to accompany… Hardware from Pantone: Has produced many pieces of monitor reading apparatus. I personally own the Spyder 2 Pro (originally from Color Vision) that I picked up on eBay. One of the bonuses of a hardware solution is the ability to profile your monitor, which aids greatly in color management. - GretagMacBeth: Makes hardware for total color management from input profiling to output. They have a bit more upscale equipment with clients such as commercial presses.

2. Image Editing Basics. One of the most important ways to improve your images is to learn your software. Whether it’s Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, The Gimp, Photoshop Elements or some other solution, use the internet, DVDs, book and whatever else you can get your hands on to learn the basics. Skip the lens flare and beveled edge, here are the things that you absolutely should know and use:

• Selections: The heart of image editing. learn several different ways of making selections, with lassos, channels, feathering, color selection and masks.
• White Point/Black Point & Neutral Gray: Learn how to determine where the limits of your image are and how to reset them to optimize your contrast. In Photoshop: Beginner-Variations, Intermediate-Levels, Advanced-Curves.
• RAW processing: Learn how to process RAW files from your camera. Seriously, I know there are lots of people on either side of this argument and it sometimes gets heated. So let me say this; the jackasses today who oppose RAW so vehemently are the same jackasses who said digital wouldn’t last.

3. Don’t cave to marketing when buying a better camera. If this is the step you want to take, here are some simple rules:

• Don’t go for huge Megapixels. I usually get bristly when I read about the Megapixel Myth from photographers who blow up 3Mp images to 24″ x 36″ posters, but there is something to be said for bigger pixels rather than more. Check reviews on possible cameras and remember: Canon just stepped back to 10Mp (from 16!) on their flagship camera, the EOS-1D.

• Buy into a D-SLR system. They will provide real expansion potential like lenses, filters, and special flash units tied to the metering system. You can get into a system with a kit lens in the $600-$800 range. If you are fortunate to be able to afford a bigger entry, you may want to get the less expensive model and get an extra lens, a good flash, an extra battery or another memory card; all of which will help you more than a few select pro level features or 2 more Megapixels.

• Don’t buy an old digital. As much as I love finding wonderful older film cameras on eBay, I would recommend not purchasing an older digital camera. The technology changes to fast and the potential to get something crappy is just too high. There are some venerable older cameras, like the Sony F717 or the Original Nikon d70 which is fairly recent that should still be great investments. Just be sure you are looking at the reviews with their age in mind.

• Learn the camera controls inside and out. If there is something you don’t understand on the camera, read the manual or check online and try to understand what it would be used for. This applies to the 2 most important controls on the camera as well: Shutter speed and Aperture Camera controls.

4. Buy a Tablet. This is one of the biggest leaps from amateur to Pro. In addition to fine, intuitive control of your image editor, you get increased hand-eye coordination. It will take some getting used to, but is so worth it. I use a Wacom Graphire 4×5 ($89) and a Wacom Intuos 6×8 ($260) that I purchased so long ago it uses a serial interface.

5. Learn some color theory. The art world uses RGY, Printers use CMYK and your monitor displays RGB. What does this have to do with color correcting or even colorizing photos? Everything.

6. Work through actual photographic tutorials. Look up tutorials in something other than beveled buttons and Web 2.0 logos. Work through them digitally. Ansel Adams was a great photographer, but he worked his magic in the darkroom, and he would be using photoshop if he were alive today.

7. Join a group. Feedback is important, but learn to ignore non-constructive criticism. There are several ways to meet peers, and depending on your area, you may find like-minded folk right around the corner.

• Flickr Groups
• Deviant Art
• PBase
• Local photography club. In the real world…I know, scary right?

8. Expand your subject matter. If you shoot close, try far away. Think in different proportions, even using scale creatively. If most of your images are people, shoot landscapes for a week intentionally cropping out people. Alternate, mix it up. Change your perspective. And use you Exposure Variation(EV) to make things darker or lighter, as your camera is kindof smart…but sometimes not.

9. Take your camera EVERYWHERE (that you can). Even a little P&S with a decent flash and a big viewfinder is a good way to learn composition and dynamic range issues with displaying and printing. Personally I pop a 50mm prime on my DSLR (they are usually small). This roughly approximates human vision which is about 72mm on a 35mm format, so it is a good general purpose lens.

10. Shoot film sometimes, even if it is just for yourself. Learn about some kinds of film, as there is a century of technological development in types, speeds, and sizes. I like to check out the internet for specific characteristics starting with flickr. Try shooting slides, using a low-ISO high-saturation film like fuji Velvia ISO50 and get those Lomo style images that are just RICH and surreal. If you get comfy enough, try processing your own B&W film, and then printing on photo paper. This will give you an AMAZING insight into image making, and a new appreciation for digital.

I lurk. I have never been much of a joiner, but I troll. A large part of my time is currently being spent trying to diagnose a problem with my new camera. OK, not really a problem, a “feature” that I may go into later. There are so many photo forums for shooters, editors, snappers, and curmudgeons who incessantly argue about something or other. It is very amusing. At some point the cranks and the noobs will go around about: Survey says… DIGITAL VS. FILM and to a lesser degree Canon vs. Nikon, or even Fuji vs. Kodak.

I would like to weigh in, and this is just my personal experience and doesn’t really reflect what others may think. I don’t think that I would be the photographer that I am without having a digital camera. There is a big difference between what we see and what a camera sees. I didn’t progress with film until college, when I had a class from a brilliant teacher. Even then, progress was slow and the film was black and white.

Oh yeah, B&W Vs. Color.

Shooting 400 iso 35mm in WV, where cloud cover is epidemic, is not a good way to see progress. My first digital changed things. In addition to immediate feedback, I could make leaps forward with teaching photography, which is what I did. If anyone doesn’t believe the best way to learn something is to teach it, try it. Methodology was Memorize/Terrorize. It was very effective. For me.

Feeling confident in trying film again, I skipped 35mm and purchased a Pentacon 6, a medium format slr that is cheap and build like a soviet era tank. Which means that sometimes it doesn’t work, and I am ok with that. It was only about $120 american and I learned how to make a bank transfer to the Czech Republic.

I like shooting with the medium, but I have to admit, it is inconvenient. I shot a few pics at a wedding and didn’t know that a few (most) didn’t turn out, due to a small problem with the B setting. That made me a bit sad, as I really like long exposure, especially night photos. Anyway, that got me to this point. Had I known, I could have reloaded and shot again. I should have used the digital.

As I am not a pro, not used the medium all day, everyday so I am not an expert on the sublties, but for education and convenience, digital is the way to go.

I like YouTube. I really like it. I think it might change or have already changed the world. As I think this, I feel a slight tug behind my navel and I realize why YouTube will fail, or be crushed. It will never be bought, and the reason is liability. The ammount of copyrighted material is so volumous that it may NEVER all be cataloged. Not because it can’t be tracked today, but because of the rate of growth. With the DMCA in place, everyone, EVERYONE who has something on YouTube that is copyrighted must defend it. Imagine a world where if you have an idea, song, logo, or other such intellectual property, you must spend every waking hour firing off cease and desist orders all over the internet. YouTube isn’t alone as a multimedia behemoth.

Google, Yahoo, Aol, MySpace, etc. all have video repositories. All with copyrighted content. This begs a bigger question: will this create another mercury effect? When Napster was shut down, before its rebirth, 15+ other peer-to-peer clients emerged. They all tried to fill the void and capitalize on the audience with ads built into the client. I was so taken with the trend that at first I imaged cockroaches that scurried from object to object as you lifted them. But it is more like mercury flowing to the lowest spot. I can put video on no less that 25 sites in the next hour. If it violates copyright, that is 25 C&D’s that have to be fired off PRONTO.

I think when I get my movie cut together, I am just going to sit on it.

UPDATE: Google buys YouTube; I guess I was wrong, I didn’t take into account that the best way to deal with lawsuits is to consolidate mega-video sites and make yourself a bigger target. However, according to the damned DMCA, the uploaders bear a substancial liability and if YouTube had be slapped by say Time-Warner, they wouldn’t have the warchest and army of litigators that Google does. If a precedent was set with YT going it alone, Google would be next, and with an uphill battle. Perhaps it was defensive but also offensive to prevent say News Corp. or Microsoft from getting ahead of the game with one purchase.

I still feel that this leaves independant content creators out in the cold. Without exclusive deals from YT or Google like Warner Bros. will get, there is no way to protect yourself from the YT version of ebauming. Everyone will steal your work and not even have to worry about hosting fees, just put it up and claim it. If I were to author the next Numa Numa, and 40,000 people uploaded it to YT, how the hell would I defend it? It would become a class action copyright suit, and without actually making any money on it myself, why would I go to the trouble?

Why is the RIAA scared?

Because the recording industry has been shoving pasteurized, homogenized, shitty music down our throats for at least 50 years. Bands are “made” and music is created to be catchy and annoying, simultaneously. Radio stations have been taking some form of “payola” for that long as well, to play the big record companies musical acts. Look at the career of Britney Spears: First on the Mickey Mouse show (with Justin, Christina, and Keri) and then “prepared” to launch a pop career. All over the airwaves, and she can’t sing. It is a self propogating system, with very few cracks to let new, upcoming, talented artists in. I understand it’s showbiz, but there are some legitimate, talented folk who would blow away america if they ever got real radio play.

That’s why they are scared, because with the internet, they can’t control the delivery anymore. With the recent hit by Gnarls Barkley, “Crazy” we are seeing a shift, not in what people listen too, but how they find new music. Instead of listening to the radio, they D/L music from the internet. Did you notice that big stations picked up on in? Yeah, it was their idea all along. Right