Every meaningful decision is taken in the absence of better knowledge. That’s not an excuse in advance, it’s the best reason to stop hesitating and get it over with so you can move on.
(Side note: In my latest read Fredmund Malik recommends writing down all motivations that influenced the decision so when it is reviewed someday, one can better understand what the thinking at the time was. Sounds easier than it is, but certainly worth the effort.)
Over the last few years I came to realize how different what you do for for a living can feel in different scenarios even though what you’re doing on a micro level is the same. And at the moment, my conclusion is that it all depends on the level of mutuality. Not mainly in terms of friendship, though having a good buddy at work is a big advantage, but rather in terms of people doing the same stuff as you, each and every day, who have an innate understanding of your coping with whatever it is.
This doesn’t require to work at a big company, it can also be a small one like a … garage. While I’m at it, I want to share some insight concerning how small and non-small (how big is big?) companies differ, and it just my point of view. Let’s define big companies as businesses with more than 100 employees. That’s not a lot, but it’s enough to make sure you don’t have a close relationship with everyone who’s working there, though you may know all of their names.
In big companies you have a good chance of finding a buddy, someone working in the same position as you, having a similar background or worldview, someone you can genuinely like. And even if not, you’re rarely alone, because in most cases the only exclusive position is the CEO. She’s the only one who has no friends, because that’s the price of power (ha!). Also, whenever there’s a tense atmosphere, you can go somewhere else and lighten up.
When you’re in a small company where almost everyone is working towards the same goal with similar tasks, chances are you’re on a subcontractor. Which means this is no real enterprise because the jobs keep coming in from the same source, and that has a serious impact on the atmosphere, which is a good one. Because? The absence of the pressure of finding the next client or customer is an enormous benefit. The only downside of this scenario might be that all of you colleagues are so different from you that it’s not easy to get along, but there’s a good chance you’ll respect and value each other’s work.
And again, the situation is very different when you’re working at a small company where everyone is practically having a different job though you’re working towards the same goal. One is working conceptually, one does most of the administrative work, the third is the techie, because you need one to keep all the gear running somehow. This is a difficult scenario in which the atmosphere hugely depends how you get along as characters, because on the operational level it’s very often 2 vs. 1. Everyone has individual needs and wants appreciation and respect for their work, but the other two don’t know what’s going on at the micro-level. This again leads to a focus on results, which can be devastating at times, because of different (unspoken) expectations and so forth.
And no matter where you are now or where you want to be going, it’s always important to remember that you cannot expect people to fully appreciate the effort you’re putting into your work. And the more you put your heart into it, the more vulnerable and sensitive you are when someone comes to judge the result or work in progress. On the other hand, it’s important to constantly treat people the way you want to be treated, and still mutual appreciation and respect will go a long way. There’s an upward spiral, and a downward one. The choice is yours.
Not having posted for a long time, I thought a share some tips as a comeback teaser.
In various forums, people have reported problems with camera stabilization inside Final Cut Pro 7 using the plugin SmoothCam (which orginally comes from Shake, no pun intended), but not in Final Cut Pro 6. For comparison I ran some tests on both systems and came to the conclusion that FCP7′s SmoothCam does not work properly with interlaced footage no matter which codec you use. FCP6′s SmoothCam does the job with whatever kind of video.
Two more tips for Apple Color:
Always de-interlace when using Color, especially when working with Color FX. There are two ways to do this, one via the Clip Settings Tab and the other in the Color FX Tab. I haven’t compared whether they give different results but my guess is it’s not going to be that dramatic (we’re talking video ‘ere).
Last one: When migrating a Color project from Version 1.x (Final Cut Studio 2) to 1.5.x (Final Cut Studio 3) and you want to keep a copy of the old version, be careful to keep them in different folders. Thing is, when you rename the .colorproj bundle (it’s not a file, but a file package), Color will crash when opening the project (because he filenames inside the package don’t match). So you can either re-name the backup, open the current version, update & save-as the project and then re-rename the backup file, or just use different folders.
Here’s a proposal for something I can’t turn into reality myself:
There are a number of music collaboration platforms on the web already, but most of them don’t seem to be very productive, because all projects are open-end, there’s no deadline, no need to ship. Hence engagement soon drops after the initial euphoria. I think making music is more fun when it happens quickly and spontaneously, as well as under a time constraint, something you can see in the many remix contests that only allow participants to work on their remix for a few days or even a few hours.
So here’s the beef:
A collaborative music platform where there’s just a limited amount of time to finish a song. Not measured in real-word time, but in project-time. Huh? Very simple. A song has to be finished in, say, 12 hours. For instance, a guitarist starts a new project by uploading a riff. Someone downloads the music file and adds a bass part. The timespan until the new file is uploaded again will be added to this project, so when the bass player needs 90 minutes to contribute her part, there’s 10 hours 30 minutes left to finish the song. To spice it up even further, the whole thing does not happen in linear fashion, there can be multiple forks or branches per project. Again, huh? Well, say there are two bass players and each has a different idea (likely to happen), there will be two branches on each of which the project can be continued, each with its own timeline. Combine that with 3 different lyrics, 5 vocalists, one drummer, you might end up with 30 results based on the original part.
I’d be extremely happy to see someone turn this into reality. Got questions? Just drop me a line.
Suppose the currently circulated news about Apple’s soon-to-come iCloud service that artists will get paid whenever someone adds their music to his iCloud account no matter how he obtained this music, there is no reason not to give away your music for free now (as long as it’s available on iTunes, that is). Even if it’s just a fraction of a penny per song, it adds up, and even more so when it’s easy to spread. Musicians now have more power over their destiny (in terms of income) than ever.
Once an idea makes it to the TV screen, it’s approved. Otherwise TV wouldn’t spread it, we assume, so we can spread it avoiding the risk of going out on a limb.
But that’s not what we need. To make it really clear: We need to spread ideas that have not been approved yet. Not only is this when innovation happens, it’s also where the money is made.
Yes, the Peter Jackson. How so? Well, first off you might be equally talented but never had the guts to try it. Not necessarily in film, something you care about. But that’s not what I’m talking about today, so should you want to elaborate on this aspect a little more, you might want to read this
The idea to this post came to me when I read some of the comments on Peter Jackson’s Facebook Page after his last update (before they exceeded 100). There was quite a number of people half-heartedly applying as actors for the Hobbit shoot, like “Check out my page and contact my agent.” and I felt like is this how you say “Look me up, I’m on this new thing, it’s called Internet! Can you believe it?!?!” in 2011? Like any other person, or I dare say more than any other person on this planet, he won’t have the time. None of us has.
So please… even if you (secretly) are Peter Jackson, don’t ask anyone to “come and get it” unless they know (and most people don’t, so there’s a paradox at work here) that you’re the best (if not only) person in the world to deliver this kind of thing. Until then, you’ll have to keep sending your colleterals, applications in whatever form, whatever. Thank you.
The other day it occured to me in (almost) any market segment there are two kinds of products with entirely different ways of buying:
The difference between the two is like buying a shoe in a shoe store or from a shoe maker. The first is a finished, tangible, testable, take-it-or-leave-it product. The second is not really a product because it doesn’t exist yet, it’s a service.
The problem is we as consumers buy 99.9% off-the-shelf stuff, and thanks to the Internet this side of the market has become very transparent. Whatever we want, we type it into the search field and within seconds we know about price and availability. And because we do it all the time we have come to believe that this holds true for any product. Which is not the case, of course. How do you compare products that have no been made yet? Obviously you can’t, and the only thing you can do is make guesses by talking to the manufacturers to see how you like them, or talk to people who have bought something there.
So when people are hesitant when it comes to buying products that are not comparable, one of the better things to do when you’re the one making these products is facilitating the exchange of user experience, creating a community of fans and curious people, a go-to place. Do not leave them lost. Help them make a decision they are happy with, whether it’s in your favour or not.
Two weeks ago, I started looking for new tyres, so I went to the place where I got my last set about 3 or 4 years ago. They gave me the quote, and that was it. Take it or leave it. Not too hard a choice, thanks.
The next dealer I went to was entirely different. Besides talking a breakneck speed, he was really competent without selling anything, and at one point he said: “Y’know, everyone can go out and compare prices these days via the Web, it’s completely transparent, you know in a few seconds what I pay for tyres myself when I order them for you. It’s completely transparent, so there’s no sense in trying to make something up, all I can do is recommend and share my experience so you can make a good decision.”
You wouldn’t expect to find this insight in a courtyard garage, but it’s all what being a merchant is about today: Making your customers happy by helping them make a decision they’re feeling good about.
If every morning you woke up you had no clothes at all but had to wear them you like you do now, how much would you spend? How much would it be worth to you to enjoy the good and comforting feeling of this additional shell, per day? 20 bucks, 30, maybe 50? Or even 100, when you’re working in a suit position?
Maybe you already figured where this is going: How much do you actually spend on clothes? Per month, per year, doesn’t matter. The math is easy, you won’t need any directions, but I reckon everyone spends far less than they would in the above scenario. To me it’s worth a few minutes to think about.
Thing is, unless you’re buying in a fair trade store, buying expensive clothes helps everyone but those who really make them. I trust you to be smart enough to figure the rest out yourself. And I trust you to be brave and responsible enough to really commit to it.
