I'm not quite sure but is Dave joining the "digital magazine please", lobby? I hope not, because reading any magazine at one's leisure without having to perch in front of a computer, is a luxury. Speaking personally, I spend much of my time either editing on my big computer or dealing with correspondence on my laptop, that to get away from them and relax somewhere else is so pleasant.
As to content, surely it is up to us film makers and watchers to offer to Garth interesting pieces for him to publish. I've done so in the past and will try again in the future. One idea that occurs to me is that he should be allowed to publish comments that Judges have written (or spoken) on films that they have been judging. Would anyone object to that? It would be fun to compare their comments to ones that we all make when we view films at various festivals and public showings.
Dave mentions 'commercialisation' of the magazine. That would be great, I can't understand the reluctance of advertisers as regards this magazine. When Movie Maker ceased publication our magazine seemed the natural successor but it's never really approached Movie Maker's scope and appeal. Maybe even asking a publishing house's advice in this connection might be worthwhile? Is Alan Cleave (ex editor of Movie Maker, with Tony Rose) still in a position to be able to advise - I believe he's still a member of the IAC.
FVM April 2014
-
Lee Prescott
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2010 9:20 pm
Re: FVM April 2014
Wow Dave,Your Post contains the best - no - is the best of comments that I have read for a long time. (Certainly following your last piece in FVM).
It's a breath of fresh air - and - Guys and Gals, not only FVM but the entire IAC needs a breath of fresh air -
especially within that so called "National Council" - cheez what a title in this day and age! So hide bound by 82 years of
"Tradition" (?) and what is far worse - attitude!
Our (my) Younger members often have quite a titter at some of the material when they (sometimes) see a copy of FVM!
LEE.
-
Ken Wilson
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:17 pm
Re: FVM April 2014
So as this continual griping shows no signs of abating, I will add a few more observations. I do notice that there have been no further posts from Colin Lamb who shoved a big stick into the wasps nest and gave it a massive stir! But if the FVM needs a big shake up, lets debate it seriously!
Last night I was at the Bradford Camcorder Club judging their annual competition. They are a very active, though small group and don`t figure too large on the national "stage" as far as the bigger IAC picture is concerned. But from the films screened last night, they are busy and clearly love the process of making movies, which is what it should be all about.
I spotted several issues of the latest FVM on the table at the front of the room and asked if anyone reads it. Several members reacted with surprise and said "Of course we read it." Then added jokingly; "A chap called Ken Wilson writes in there." I said "No seriously, what do people think, because there has been some on-line criticism about the content." So they offered the view that the magazine was interesting, had good articles and they voiced opinions about the parts they liked and the parts they didn`t.
As film makers, they liked the "Making of..." articles and skipped the AV column. They said they always read my articles (Yes I was their judge so you wouldn`t expect otherwise, but they did seem to know what I write so I expect that this was true.)
So this is at the grass roots level of local clubs. Clearly film makers like and want to read different things. The magazine has to cater for all interests and as they say you can`t please all the people all of the time. Obviously, there are some people you can`t please ANY of the time. There are grumblers and there are film makers. In all walks of life there are the talkers and the do-ers so Colin Lamb and Lee Prescott should write for the magazine if they don`t like what is in it.
I used to "edit" the local North East IAC magazine the Nor` Easter but in practise I wrote a large portion of it myself as so few things were sent in for it. Even this small paper insert was desperately short of news and articles and had to be filled with bits and pieces from any source where I could find anything related to film, so I have some idea of what Garth`s problem is.
Like Tom, I spend quite some time planning and working on my articles to come up with varied subjects and even though I work full time, find the free time to write 2000 words each issue and check and re-check each one before it goes to print. As I have said, I am quite happy to stop at any time or to take a break and I have suggested this several times, but I have been told to continue as long as I want to for now and as long as I have things to write about. But if that position has changed, someone let me know please and I can easily fill the time with other things.
I am not sure if Garth has read these postings, so I have e-mailed him to draw his attention to it as he should be given the opportunity to comment.
I have previously said to Garth that I would give him advance notice if I run out of things to write about so that he is not left with 2 blank pages in the magazine, so that is still the case. If the consensus is that FVM needs a shake up and new material and new contributors, then it`s fine with me and I hope that someone will say so.
But I suspect that Colin and Lee are part of a minority group who like to complain but do nothing to contribute themselves.
Let`s try to be constructive and not destructive about FVM.
And finally, an electronic FVM would not reach everyone as even today, many still have no computer or access to the internet...yes that`s true! So some members would have no contact at all. Like Michael, and others I spend so much time on a computer that I do not want the magazine that way.
The magazine can be improved by more people sending in their material which would remove the "fillers" so don`t moan about it, do something about it!
Last night I was at the Bradford Camcorder Club judging their annual competition. They are a very active, though small group and don`t figure too large on the national "stage" as far as the bigger IAC picture is concerned. But from the films screened last night, they are busy and clearly love the process of making movies, which is what it should be all about.
I spotted several issues of the latest FVM on the table at the front of the room and asked if anyone reads it. Several members reacted with surprise and said "Of course we read it." Then added jokingly; "A chap called Ken Wilson writes in there." I said "No seriously, what do people think, because there has been some on-line criticism about the content." So they offered the view that the magazine was interesting, had good articles and they voiced opinions about the parts they liked and the parts they didn`t.
As film makers, they liked the "Making of..." articles and skipped the AV column. They said they always read my articles (Yes I was their judge so you wouldn`t expect otherwise, but they did seem to know what I write so I expect that this was true.)
So this is at the grass roots level of local clubs. Clearly film makers like and want to read different things. The magazine has to cater for all interests and as they say you can`t please all the people all of the time. Obviously, there are some people you can`t please ANY of the time. There are grumblers and there are film makers. In all walks of life there are the talkers and the do-ers so Colin Lamb and Lee Prescott should write for the magazine if they don`t like what is in it.
I used to "edit" the local North East IAC magazine the Nor` Easter but in practise I wrote a large portion of it myself as so few things were sent in for it. Even this small paper insert was desperately short of news and articles and had to be filled with bits and pieces from any source where I could find anything related to film, so I have some idea of what Garth`s problem is.
Like Tom, I spend quite some time planning and working on my articles to come up with varied subjects and even though I work full time, find the free time to write 2000 words each issue and check and re-check each one before it goes to print. As I have said, I am quite happy to stop at any time or to take a break and I have suggested this several times, but I have been told to continue as long as I want to for now and as long as I have things to write about. But if that position has changed, someone let me know please and I can easily fill the time with other things.
I am not sure if Garth has read these postings, so I have e-mailed him to draw his attention to it as he should be given the opportunity to comment.
I have previously said to Garth that I would give him advance notice if I run out of things to write about so that he is not left with 2 blank pages in the magazine, so that is still the case. If the consensus is that FVM needs a shake up and new material and new contributors, then it`s fine with me and I hope that someone will say so.
But I suspect that Colin and Lee are part of a minority group who like to complain but do nothing to contribute themselves.
Let`s try to be constructive and not destructive about FVM.
And finally, an electronic FVM would not reach everyone as even today, many still have no computer or access to the internet...yes that`s true! So some members would have no contact at all. Like Michael, and others I spend so much time on a computer that I do not want the magazine that way.
The magazine can be improved by more people sending in their material which would remove the "fillers" so don`t moan about it, do something about it!
-
Lee Prescott
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2010 9:20 pm
Re: FVM April 2014
Dear Mr. Wilson, ....and ALL,
Obviously, there are some people you can`t please ANY of the time. There are grumblers and there are film makers. In all walks of life there are the talkers and the do-ers so Colin Lamb and Lee Prescott should write for the magazine if they don`t like what is in it.
But I suspect that Colin and Lee are part of a minority group who like to complain but do nothing to contribute themselves.
Here's MY TRUE information Mr. Wilson:-
1. I DO NOT criticise the IAC and would not do so because - that's the Members. What I do criticise and not without good reason is the Hierarchy so get that straight - they ARE NOT THE IAC although they like to think they are!.
2. No I am NOT a talker, I am a video (film) maker and have been for 60 years just over and I hold 36 individual international awards, (even if I have to state it myself). Neither am I a YES MAN!
3. I write for every issue of our regional SOCO NEWS - the reason I do not contribute anything anymore for FVM is that I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT ANYTHING I WRITE HAS TO BE SEEN, (CENSORED), BY THE, OR SOMEONE ON THE HIERARCHY and this last happened when I wrote a piece in response to Dave Watterson's article in FVM about "Change"!!! That's quite recent too.
4. I have never been "forgiven" for writing and originating the matter of "FILMING IN PUBLIC PLACES" earlier which resulted in the Hierarchy having to write to the ACPO!
5. "Minority Group" (?) I doubt it Mr. Wilson, if that's the case then there's a large majority of the IAC's approximately 1700 or so members who are floating in the same boat! - (Why and what's happened to the 900 membership loss over the past 11 years or so - think about that)?
6. You are also fully aware of the late lamented CIFVF, since you once came - but that's quite another story with regard to the IAC! So, Mr. Wilson when you go to bed, think and consider about these things.
LEE.
Obviously, there are some people you can`t please ANY of the time. There are grumblers and there are film makers. In all walks of life there are the talkers and the do-ers so Colin Lamb and Lee Prescott should write for the magazine if they don`t like what is in it.
But I suspect that Colin and Lee are part of a minority group who like to complain but do nothing to contribute themselves.
Here's MY TRUE information Mr. Wilson:-
1. I DO NOT criticise the IAC and would not do so because - that's the Members. What I do criticise and not without good reason is the Hierarchy so get that straight - they ARE NOT THE IAC although they like to think they are!.
2. No I am NOT a talker, I am a video (film) maker and have been for 60 years just over and I hold 36 individual international awards, (even if I have to state it myself). Neither am I a YES MAN!
3. I write for every issue of our regional SOCO NEWS - the reason I do not contribute anything anymore for FVM is that I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT ANYTHING I WRITE HAS TO BE SEEN, (CENSORED), BY THE, OR SOMEONE ON THE HIERARCHY and this last happened when I wrote a piece in response to Dave Watterson's article in FVM about "Change"!!! That's quite recent too.
4. I have never been "forgiven" for writing and originating the matter of "FILMING IN PUBLIC PLACES" earlier which resulted in the Hierarchy having to write to the ACPO!
5. "Minority Group" (?) I doubt it Mr. Wilson, if that's the case then there's a large majority of the IAC's approximately 1700 or so members who are floating in the same boat! - (Why and what's happened to the 900 membership loss over the past 11 years or so - think about that)?
6. You are also fully aware of the late lamented CIFVF, since you once came - but that's quite another story with regard to the IAC! So, Mr. Wilson when you go to bed, think and consider about these things.
LEE.
-
John Roberts
- Posts: 320
- Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 8:42 am
- Contact:
Re: FVM April 2014
Ouch...
Sheffield often find themselves competing against Bradford, with similar results by and large. However, the two clubs are quite different in their approaches to film-making (and their results) with Sheffield being more of a collection of individual film-makers. There are other differences too - apart from the 3 IAC members within Sheffield, the IAC and it's offerings (including FVM) are without exception ignored. The complimentary copy of FVM sent to the club gathers dust on a table at the front of the screening room without even a single fingerprint from someone taking a peek beyond the front cover. This is not intended in any way as being denigrating to any member or the magazine, it's just simply how it is. The magazine could be absolutely perfect in every way, but it would still remain fingerprint-less at club meetings.
Personally I read almost all of FVM over a period of time. But the interesting thing is this - if I received it as a PDF file, I wouldn't read as much of its content. Computer = work or research, magazine = pleasure. The leisurely way a magazine is thumbed through means articles catch your eye that otherwise wouldn't, and if the opening lines are well crafted then they draw you in, even if it's a subject you didn't think you were interested in. I don't know why this doesn't happen as a PDF, maybe it's just the immediacy of opening a double page spread and having one's eyes assaulted in the way on-screen information doesn't.
A number of (admittedly large) companies give their users a choice of bills - receive via post or online, sometimes with a discount for the latter. Perhaps it might be possible to offer FVM as a printed copy or PDF download, the option selected at renewal. Possibly offer a discount for the download only option, or maybe after some time if printing costs are reduced as more people choose electronic formats the annual subscription could be reduced or not rise as much as it would otherwise. Just a thought. Start with a straight electronic copy of the printed magazine and if the format proves successful over time then add 'extras' such as linked videos or tutorials as appropriate.
Anyway - I'm not just 'talk'. I've emailed Garth and offered an article, and he has graciously replied with all the details I need. I might not have a lot of experience or a lot to say, but if I can at least try and help or interest other people, then there's no reason why other more experienced and enlightened film-makers can't do the same. Get on with it!
John
Sheffield often find themselves competing against Bradford, with similar results by and large. However, the two clubs are quite different in their approaches to film-making (and their results) with Sheffield being more of a collection of individual film-makers. There are other differences too - apart from the 3 IAC members within Sheffield, the IAC and it's offerings (including FVM) are without exception ignored. The complimentary copy of FVM sent to the club gathers dust on a table at the front of the screening room without even a single fingerprint from someone taking a peek beyond the front cover. This is not intended in any way as being denigrating to any member or the magazine, it's just simply how it is. The magazine could be absolutely perfect in every way, but it would still remain fingerprint-less at club meetings.
Personally I read almost all of FVM over a period of time. But the interesting thing is this - if I received it as a PDF file, I wouldn't read as much of its content. Computer = work or research, magazine = pleasure. The leisurely way a magazine is thumbed through means articles catch your eye that otherwise wouldn't, and if the opening lines are well crafted then they draw you in, even if it's a subject you didn't think you were interested in. I don't know why this doesn't happen as a PDF, maybe it's just the immediacy of opening a double page spread and having one's eyes assaulted in the way on-screen information doesn't.
A number of (admittedly large) companies give their users a choice of bills - receive via post or online, sometimes with a discount for the latter. Perhaps it might be possible to offer FVM as a printed copy or PDF download, the option selected at renewal. Possibly offer a discount for the download only option, or maybe after some time if printing costs are reduced as more people choose electronic formats the annual subscription could be reduced or not rise as much as it would otherwise. Just a thought. Start with a straight electronic copy of the printed magazine and if the format proves successful over time then add 'extras' such as linked videos or tutorials as appropriate.
Anyway - I'm not just 'talk'. I've emailed Garth and offered an article, and he has graciously replied with all the details I need. I might not have a lot of experience or a lot to say, but if I can at least try and help or interest other people, then there's no reason why other more experienced and enlightened film-makers can't do the same. Get on with it!
John
-
Lee Prescott
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2010 9:20 pm
Re: FVM April 2014
Hi John: and all, "Good On Yer" as my OZ friends say!
Good Posting John R....It has good ideas......as I said, it all needs a "breath of fresh air"!
Good luck with your efforts for FVM....May I offer Lesson Number 1? Don't "rock the boat"
"they" don't like it at all, at all!!!
I'll find it interesting to read your material and will look out for it....... although from what you've posted,
doubtful if anyone will pick up FVM and blow the dust off the copies in your neck o' the woods!
Regards to Sheffield - I worked there for a period!
LEE.
-
Dave Watterson
- Posts: 1876
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
- Location: Bath, England
- Contact:
Re: FVM April 2014
Let's not get into personal strife ... Lee and Ken have different views about the magazine. That's all.
We all appreciated the days when there were three international festivals in Britain for our kind of film: BIAFF, Cotswold and Guernsey. Now just BIAFF is left.
To me that says that a festival backed by an organisation rather than by remarkable individuals has a better chance of continuing to serve us.
As for "the hierarchy" ... IAC National Council includes;
Alan Atkinson - a very active and award-winning film maker
Ron Prosser - a long-time film maker and BIAFF 2010 Diamond winner and UNICA bronze medal winner with Letters from the Front
Michael Gough - very successful film maker, regular lecturer at clubs up and down the country and FACI(M) = master moviemaker
Terence Patrick - leader of the extremely successful and active Circle Eight Film Makers
John Owen - active film maker and BIAFF 3 & 4 star winner
Gerald Mee - long-time active film maker and leader of Stoke on Trent club
Eric & Brenda Granshaw - both active film makers and leading lights of North Thames Region
David Newman - mountaineer, film maker and IAC Competition Officer
John Gibbs - active member of Nuneaton Moviemakers and often actor in their productions
Rob Day - leader of Lichfield club
Phillip Collins - active film archivist
and among the additional advisers
Marion Waine and John Rowell - very active AV makers and contest organisers
David Jackson - film maker and NLE expert
Gordon Bullock - famed as film maker and actor
Richard Curry - award winning film maker
Val Ellis - film maker / archivist / animator / active in Humphrey Park club
They don't seem that remote from most IAC members.
Yes, sometimes their decisions irritate me too, but that does not make me disparage them as people. They tend to play it safe, precisely so that IAC can continue. They clearly do understand that change is necessary if the organisation is not to wither away. Hence the Chairman's appeal for ideas - on this forum and in the magazine. And remember that most of them in addition to making films, help run their clubs and help run their regions as well as the national organisation.
Fair is fair.
We all appreciated the days when there were three international festivals in Britain for our kind of film: BIAFF, Cotswold and Guernsey. Now just BIAFF is left.
To me that says that a festival backed by an organisation rather than by remarkable individuals has a better chance of continuing to serve us.
As for "the hierarchy" ... IAC National Council includes;
Alan Atkinson - a very active and award-winning film maker
Ron Prosser - a long-time film maker and BIAFF 2010 Diamond winner and UNICA bronze medal winner with Letters from the Front
Michael Gough - very successful film maker, regular lecturer at clubs up and down the country and FACI(M) = master moviemaker
Terence Patrick - leader of the extremely successful and active Circle Eight Film Makers
John Owen - active film maker and BIAFF 3 & 4 star winner
Gerald Mee - long-time active film maker and leader of Stoke on Trent club
Eric & Brenda Granshaw - both active film makers and leading lights of North Thames Region
David Newman - mountaineer, film maker and IAC Competition Officer
John Gibbs - active member of Nuneaton Moviemakers and often actor in their productions
Rob Day - leader of Lichfield club
Phillip Collins - active film archivist
and among the additional advisers
Marion Waine and John Rowell - very active AV makers and contest organisers
David Jackson - film maker and NLE expert
Gordon Bullock - famed as film maker and actor
Richard Curry - award winning film maker
Val Ellis - film maker / archivist / animator / active in Humphrey Park club
They don't seem that remote from most IAC members.
Yes, sometimes their decisions irritate me too, but that does not make me disparage them as people. They tend to play it safe, precisely so that IAC can continue. They clearly do understand that change is necessary if the organisation is not to wither away. Hence the Chairman's appeal for ideas - on this forum and in the magazine. And remember that most of them in addition to making films, help run their clubs and help run their regions as well as the national organisation.
Fair is fair.
-
Dave Watterson
- Posts: 1876
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
- Location: Bath, England
- Contact:
Re: FVM April 2014
Um ... I seem to have shut people up!
That was not my intention. I just think it important to remember that non-commercial film makers and their organisations are all people. It is tempting to slip into an "us and them" pattern of thinking.
So what would you like to see in FVM - whether on paper or as an e-magazine? For the moment do not worry about who would write it or how it could be achieved. Let's dream a bit ...
That was not my intention. I just think it important to remember that non-commercial film makers and their organisations are all people. It is tempting to slip into an "us and them" pattern of thinking.
So what would you like to see in FVM - whether on paper or as an e-magazine? For the moment do not worry about who would write it or how it could be achieved. Let's dream a bit ...
Re: FVM April 2014
Hi folks.
Light the blue touch paper and stand back for a while.
Debate, I have certainly started precisely what I intended, if your feathers got ruffled then you are too sensitive.
Sometimes kicking the hornets nest is the only way of getting people moved out of complacency.
Like Lee, I was an avid supporter of Garth when the Management took it upon themselves to be heavy handed about the Mag, Management was and still is the secret service. My gripe about the current management is that they are not open in their discussions and the results of their activities not readily available as far as I know. In the main they are certainly absent here on this forum, so shame on you folks.
FVM should be available either in paper form or in electronic form and members given the choice, I for one would prefer reading it on my iPad.
There also has to be ways of reducing its cost and hence making funds readily available to support the development of The IAC and its members. I for one would like to know just how cost effective the Mag is.
Yes, I should contribute more to the Mag but how many more tech articles do readers want?
Look at it another way, the Mag is a great resource and the contributors do a great job but one thing I keep harping on about is the e-mail help group article. It is old hat, outdated and totally not necessary other than to fill space. I have no gripe with those who are members of the group it is the e-mail distribution system that they use that sucks. Missing e-mails, answers to questions arriving long before (and it can be days) the question does, if the question arrives at all. I go so fed up with it I dumped membership. The forum is the place to post, not a selective closed group. Also what is the point of including in the current issue an answer to an e-mail post I sent out 11 months ago, answer none.
So continue the debate, it is the what, where, how, when and who etc scenario.
If we do not change we stagnate.
Light the blue touch paper and stand back for a while.
Debate, I have certainly started precisely what I intended, if your feathers got ruffled then you are too sensitive.
Sometimes kicking the hornets nest is the only way of getting people moved out of complacency.
Like Lee, I was an avid supporter of Garth when the Management took it upon themselves to be heavy handed about the Mag, Management was and still is the secret service. My gripe about the current management is that they are not open in their discussions and the results of their activities not readily available as far as I know. In the main they are certainly absent here on this forum, so shame on you folks.
FVM should be available either in paper form or in electronic form and members given the choice, I for one would prefer reading it on my iPad.
There also has to be ways of reducing its cost and hence making funds readily available to support the development of The IAC and its members. I for one would like to know just how cost effective the Mag is.
Yes, I should contribute more to the Mag but how many more tech articles do readers want?
Look at it another way, the Mag is a great resource and the contributors do a great job but one thing I keep harping on about is the e-mail help group article. It is old hat, outdated and totally not necessary other than to fill space. I have no gripe with those who are members of the group it is the e-mail distribution system that they use that sucks. Missing e-mails, answers to questions arriving long before (and it can be days) the question does, if the question arrives at all. I go so fed up with it I dumped membership. The forum is the place to post, not a selective closed group. Also what is the point of including in the current issue an answer to an e-mail post I sent out 11 months ago, answer none.
So continue the debate, it is the what, where, how, when and who etc scenario.
If we do not change we stagnate.
Col Lamb
Preston, Lancashire.
FCPX, Edius6.02, and Premiere CS 5.5 user.
Find me on Facebook, Colin Lamb
Preston, Lancashire.
FCPX, Edius6.02, and Premiere CS 5.5 user.
Find me on Facebook, Colin Lamb
-
Dave Watterson
- Posts: 1876
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
- Location: Bath, England
- Contact:
Re: FVM April 2014
I agree that it is sometimes necessary to kick the hornets' nest.
I agree that IAC Council (the management) does operate too privately. There have been attempts at reporting what they have been doing from time to time in the magazine, but they have faded away. In UNICA, the world body, the President writes three of four times a year to members outlining discussions and debates on their governing body. This seems to me a good model. There are still times when not everything can be reported publicly, but members have a better understanding of what UNICA's committee is doing.
Some of the Council members do read this forum, but there seems to have been an informal agreement not to engage in debate here. One can see why. There is always the risk of a slanging match, which wastes time and tempers and might reflect poorly on the Institute.
As to value-for-money ... by what criteria? Roughly half our subs pay for the magazine so allow £18.75 for six issues, which is just over £3 an issue. Digital Film Maker costs £50 for 12 issues, which is over £4 an issue.
But let's add the question at the heart of Col's post to my last one:
a) WHAT SHOULD BE IN FVM - if anything were possible?
b) WHAT SHOULD IAC DO WITH ITS MONEY - if anything were possible and not, for the moment, worrying about who would do it?
I agree that IAC Council (the management) does operate too privately. There have been attempts at reporting what they have been doing from time to time in the magazine, but they have faded away. In UNICA, the world body, the President writes three of four times a year to members outlining discussions and debates on their governing body. This seems to me a good model. There are still times when not everything can be reported publicly, but members have a better understanding of what UNICA's committee is doing.
Some of the Council members do read this forum, but there seems to have been an informal agreement not to engage in debate here. One can see why. There is always the risk of a slanging match, which wastes time and tempers and might reflect poorly on the Institute.
As to value-for-money ... by what criteria? Roughly half our subs pay for the magazine so allow £18.75 for six issues, which is just over £3 an issue. Digital Film Maker costs £50 for 12 issues, which is over £4 an issue.
But let's add the question at the heart of Col's post to my last one:
a) WHAT SHOULD BE IN FVM - if anything were possible?
b) WHAT SHOULD IAC DO WITH ITS MONEY - if anything were possible and not, for the moment, worrying about who would do it?
Re: FVM April 2014
By cost effective what I was actually after was does the Mag actually make money?
If your figures are accurate and there are 1800 members then collectively the Mag cost £33750 to produce and distribute.
At that cost it should be scrapped and an online version produced. Perhaps something like http://www.dvuser.co.uk
Yes, you confirmed my Secret Service analogy of the Management, where are the minutes of the meetings, records of discussions and financial records?
It is time to change
[Dave - commenting here to keep answers close to the questions
- No, FVM has never to my knowledge made money. It is one of the main benefits people get for the membership fee. The others are access to the music copyright scheme and for clubs access to reduced price insurance.
- As mentioned elsewhere however it is distributed, a magazine still costs money to produce.
- Every IAC National AGM is given the statement of accounts and you can download the latest one at http://www.theiac.org.uk/iac/downloads/ ... apr-13.pdf
- Minutes of National Council and its sub-committees are kept at the IAC Registered Office.]
If your figures are accurate and there are 1800 members then collectively the Mag cost £33750 to produce and distribute.
At that cost it should be scrapped and an online version produced. Perhaps something like http://www.dvuser.co.uk
Yes, you confirmed my Secret Service analogy of the Management, where are the minutes of the meetings, records of discussions and financial records?
It is time to change
[Dave - commenting here to keep answers close to the questions
- No, FVM has never to my knowledge made money. It is one of the main benefits people get for the membership fee. The others are access to the music copyright scheme and for clubs access to reduced price insurance.
- As mentioned elsewhere however it is distributed, a magazine still costs money to produce.
- Every IAC National AGM is given the statement of accounts and you can download the latest one at http://www.theiac.org.uk/iac/downloads/ ... apr-13.pdf
- Minutes of National Council and its sub-committees are kept at the IAC Registered Office.]
Col Lamb
Preston, Lancashire.
FCPX, Edius6.02, and Premiere CS 5.5 user.
Find me on Facebook, Colin Lamb
Preston, Lancashire.
FCPX, Edius6.02, and Premiere CS 5.5 user.
Find me on Facebook, Colin Lamb
-
Lee Prescott
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2010 9:20 pm
Re: FVM April 2014
No Dave, I for one, haven't been "shut up". Just dozed off!
Well, well, Swell, Almost everything that Col Posts I totally agree with and virtually all of Dave's too.
I've been "banging on" for ages about all the things "THEY" state. Col's comment about a "secret service" et al. exactly sums it up! My term previously was "Kremlinesque" but a Russian acquaintance told me the spelling was wrong!!! Or as I said in my previous posting above - with the bigger letters - the Hierarchy think they're the IAC - they're not- we are!
So to the real thread of this discussion et al. FVM - With regard to myself, I could write for the 'zine but I am NOT allowed to!
"THEY" have said so! I write for SOCO News instead - and more preferably.
Of course currently that isn't "smooooth" 'cos Mr. R. Prosser has conjured up, literally, "Vitriol" (I quote) and thrown it in my face, because I DARED write a reasonable piece in the previous issue about how his little team had handled the SoCo Comp. judging! So it is also quite obvious that members, (I almost wrote Our Servants), of the Hierarchy just cannot stand or cope with any Members opinions and not only mine in this case, or any form of criticism what-so-ever! Their attitude cannot help Garth and FVM, maybe it's better then to let it gather dust as John Roberts posting says it does in Sheffield.
So Col is quite correct -the Hierarchy it is a "Secret Society" and it's long past time it was sorted out! It is time to change - attitudes anyway. (where are the minutes of the meetings, records of discussions and financial records)
[Dave once again keeping responses near questions:
There is no question of you not being allowed to write in FVM. The publishers are simply exercising their right, as the people ultimately responsible for the magazine, to approve or disapprove what you write before publication.
You have had so many negative responses to some of your letters and articles over the years, you must be aware that what seems to you to be robust criticism, is seen by others as over-the-top ranting and yes, vitriol, at times. It does not help your case when you so often snap back in similar strong terms after being criticised.
The argument between you and Ron Prosser can be seen by those interested in the two latest issues of the SoCo magazine downloadable here: http://www.theiac.org.uk/iac/regions/soco/soco.htm
As I tried earlier to indicate there is no THEY and no US ... we are all volunteers in the hobby together. Someone has to make decisions and run things ... the Council members are the people who came forward, or had their arms twisted to come forward and do the work. They do not get paid. It costs them time and money to attend meetings and take the follow-up action required. They would welcome other candidates for election to Council.
See the previous posting for the answer to where the records are kept.]
-
Huey Walker
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:59 pm
Re: FVM April 2014
With all repect Lee,
You do write a load of crap most of the time.
I'm not surprised that FVM won't publish your articles. After all, what was all that crap you wrote about 'Toilets On Space Stations' in the last issue of The SoCo magazine.
It had nothing whatsoever to do with Film Making.
So please explain that one to us all.
[Dave again - Huey we try not to get into personal arguments if we can ... and do not usually accept the term "crap" ... though here it is such a clever link to the joke that I could not help smiling.]
You do write a load of crap most of the time.
I'm not surprised that FVM won't publish your articles. After all, what was all that crap you wrote about 'Toilets On Space Stations' in the last issue of The SoCo magazine.
It had nothing whatsoever to do with Film Making.
So please explain that one to us all.
[Dave again - Huey we try not to get into personal arguments if we can ... and do not usually accept the term "crap" ... though here it is such a clever link to the joke that I could not help smiling.]
-
Bob Lorrimer
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 4:15 pm
Re: FVM April 2014
A most spectacular rant...well done all!
I can remember in my early 20's the febrile excitement I experienced as I hurried to W.H.Smith's on the Earls Court Road in London to seek out my monthly copy of MOVIE MAKER. The Magazine was usually found on the top shelf adjacent to TIT BITS ....removing the MOVIE MAKER from the top shelf was therefore the high point of my rather lack lustre social life!
(I endeavoured to improve the convivial side of my time in London by joining the CHELSEA CINE CLUB on the KINGS's ROAD. The KING's ROAD being the hub of a sexual and fashion revolution at the time. The CHELSEA CINE CLUB however did not lead me to the "SUMMER of LOVE," which somehow passed me by when I was reloading my double loading 8mm Cine Camera!). As with all CLUBS the CHELSEA CINE CLUB had one, token, single and good looking young lady who was the Sister to Raymond Napthine.....She was obliged to suffer all manner of indignities to satisfy the craving of our probing cameras - willing talent being in short supply then as it is today.)
However, I still feel a flutter of excitement.....as the FVM magazine drops through my letter-box and floats to the carpet.
Col Lamb has a point....Vintage Equipment and techniques are all but irrelevant today ... and there, in itself, lies the conundrum. The Magazine can hardly address a technical issue which is only relevant to half a dozen readers who have the same kit...'back in the day' we had a reel of processed film and a splicer - OH! Happy day! A CUT really was a CUT. We were all in the same boat, with similar Gear. Today, the myriads of technical applications and computer software programs now make many articles almost entirely pointless unless, like me, you happen to have FCP 6.6, Magic Bullet Looks and an ageing IMAC 24 !
I am one who enjoys the Paper Format too....it is a pleasure to read something in my 'sunroom' instead of at my desk. I do have an Ipad which might make my reading more mobile...but 30 seconds into an article I will clumsily 'trip' the device into somewhere where I do not want to be and an ill tempered outburst immediately follows.
It cannot be an easy task to edit the FVM on a regular basis ... if it is suffering, it is because the readership are not helping it to prosper.
I can remember in my early 20's the febrile excitement I experienced as I hurried to W.H.Smith's on the Earls Court Road in London to seek out my monthly copy of MOVIE MAKER. The Magazine was usually found on the top shelf adjacent to TIT BITS ....removing the MOVIE MAKER from the top shelf was therefore the high point of my rather lack lustre social life!
(I endeavoured to improve the convivial side of my time in London by joining the CHELSEA CINE CLUB on the KINGS's ROAD. The KING's ROAD being the hub of a sexual and fashion revolution at the time. The CHELSEA CINE CLUB however did not lead me to the "SUMMER of LOVE," which somehow passed me by when I was reloading my double loading 8mm Cine Camera!). As with all CLUBS the CHELSEA CINE CLUB had one, token, single and good looking young lady who was the Sister to Raymond Napthine.....She was obliged to suffer all manner of indignities to satisfy the craving of our probing cameras - willing talent being in short supply then as it is today.)
However, I still feel a flutter of excitement.....as the FVM magazine drops through my letter-box and floats to the carpet.
Col Lamb has a point....Vintage Equipment and techniques are all but irrelevant today ... and there, in itself, lies the conundrum. The Magazine can hardly address a technical issue which is only relevant to half a dozen readers who have the same kit...'back in the day' we had a reel of processed film and a splicer - OH! Happy day! A CUT really was a CUT. We were all in the same boat, with similar Gear. Today, the myriads of technical applications and computer software programs now make many articles almost entirely pointless unless, like me, you happen to have FCP 6.6, Magic Bullet Looks and an ageing IMAC 24 !
I am one who enjoys the Paper Format too....it is a pleasure to read something in my 'sunroom' instead of at my desk. I do have an Ipad which might make my reading more mobile...but 30 seconds into an article I will clumsily 'trip' the device into somewhere where I do not want to be and an ill tempered outburst immediately follows.
It cannot be an easy task to edit the FVM on a regular basis ... if it is suffering, it is because the readership are not helping it to prosper.
-
TimStannard
- Posts: 1226
- Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:20 pm
- Location: Surrey
Re: FVM April 2014
Or 'trip' the device into the modern day equivalent of Chelsea Cine Club in the Kings Road and become distracted by more worldly items? Happens all too easily to meBob Lorrimer wrote:I do have an Ipad which might make my reading more mobile...but 30 seconds into an article I will clumsily 'trip' the device into somewhere where I do not want to be and an ill tempered outburst immediately follows.
Whilst it is always good to have discussions and I know certain people have tried to steer the discussions in a more positive way (step forward, Watterson), some of the sniping comments cannot do much to promote this forum or the IAC to anyone passing - and anyone lookig at a film making forum is a potential member in my view.
Tim
Proud to be an amateur film maker - I do it for the love of it
Proud to be an amateur film maker - I do it for the love of it