Who wants to get their own video made?

[LK]

Dave Sammons, Xil, 11fifty.

No, creative vision isn't what makes a quality project. It's all about technical execution -- a pragmatism rooted in knowing how to fool an audience by manipulating what you see on screen to produce an effect.

[vincent_richter]

Poor choice of words on my part, as I rather meant it in reference to "creativity in direction" than "creativity in inspiration."

Still trying to clarify though - are you saying he's used to churning out subpar product, and maybe should stick to acquisitions over attempting to inject his direction into a project he's not personally financing?

I'm looking for a silver lining here; I hardly think the man's incompetent, but everyone is better at some things than others.

[LK]

Yes, I'm saying he's used to churning out a subpar product. No quality control. Effects mistakes IN THE FINAL CUT! He's relying on his audience to be horny and hungry enough to look past things no person with pride in their own work would release.

Here's who I'd give money to: someone has a plan for a project. THEIR plan. They aren't whoring themselves out to the public looking for ANY idea (each idea having its own technical challenges, requiring different props and funding to accomplish). They have a track record of quality releases -- you can see what they've done and have a reasonable expectation of what they'll produce based. I wouldn't pay to enable someone to get better tools unless they've already proven they can do some amazing stuff with the tools they have. Even then, the profit they make from their releases should have some amount set aside for gradual tool upgrades.

There was this guy on here, RedParrot, produced some *amazing* test footage, had a real good eye and concept. Blew everything of Dave's out of the water. No single-shot, unmoving camera film-making. No terrible editing and cutting. NO MORPHS! He got creative with what he had.

He's had the opportunity for a decade now to create, and all of his releases have had some issue with editing, sound, effects, composition, directing. They just look *bad* even by fetish clip standards.

The problem is not his tools or studio. The problem is Dave. Pay your money to an artist to realize your vision, or go with one of the established outfits who'll be more than happy to do your custom with far more enthusiasm and energy.

This pitch promises the WORLD! Only $15,000 to make it happen!

Look, some of what I write is speculative, but my bottom line is: This is all highly suspicious. Buyer Beware.

[LK]

First post back and I'm already writing like an asshole. Guess my internet forum personality hasn't changed that much.

Oh man, that's funny. I'm doing exactly what the trolls have been doing to me over the years. The internet makes you a sociopath -- I can't see the harm my words are doing. But at the same time, it was important to say something. My plan was to lurk. I wouldn't speak up unless I felt it was important.

[Rachel Bronwyn]

I'm all for informing the general public of potential harm but hijacking qzar's thread and commanding people in as many words not to contribute is basically taking a giant shit on qzar. Don't do dat. By all means, raise awareness if you think there's monkey business going on but not here and, as a general rule I think valuable, maybe don't give other grownups commands? Give them the information (elsewhere) and I'm sure they can use their own judgment to make a decision that's right for them.

I'm going to take an exam I'm nowhere near prepared for now. I don't know why because I'm taking the course again to hammer the material into my head. This should be a gas.

In the meantime, can we be kind to one another?

[qzar9999]

Originally Posted by LK

You're right, I forgot how it is a statement's author that is most important to its merit, not its content. Anything worth being listened to requires an identity people respect, with its attached reputation and history. Similarly, someone's reputation and history are important factors to consider when deciding whether to trust someone or not with an investment opportunity like this.

I don't fully believe Dave Sammons knows how to do better. To be clear, I'm not saying anything about you, qzar.

Don't get me wrong, my intent isn't negativity and disparaging your project. I view this as informing the uninformed audience that there is a large risk / Buyer Beware situation inherit in your pitch. The fact that it goes against your interests is the side effect, so I understand your reaction.

I've thrown my money around at anything that has even the faintest whiff of fetish material and taken hits on things others would be hard pressed to -- such was my desire and susceptibility to the hype of a hint of process material. I've also sold plenty of material and seen the business strategy for getting fetish folks to part with their money. I know how eager our audience is. I've hobnobbed with clip producers, seen how the internet warps a person, and been exposed to the liars, the cheats, and the fakes. That's who I am.

I gave Dave about $2000 years ago, thinking about starting up a studio, investing in his potential, and was sorely disappointed with what I got in return. Since that time, I've seen little improvement in his standards and execution. He's always been several steps behind in models, technology, and in his execution. Now he wants $15,000! That's a very, very large amount of money in these circles.

He's consistently outclassed by more talented and more attractive producers in a highly competitive arena.

I do not have faith that investing in Dave Sammons will bring you what you expect for your money, but our audience has bankrolled worse.

Take this as one man's opinion who has pretty high standards, though -- nothing to get angry about. See it for what it is.

OK, something about you qzar: post count's a pretty shitty way to measure someone's worth.

You know, I would agree that post count isn't the most important thing in measuring someone's worth, you're right there. However, when someone seems to have an agenda (i.e. "Don't give money to this project!") and their post count is in the single digits, it does merit consideration. Similarly, an extremely low post count means they don't say much--that is, they don't contribute, and they don't praise other people's contributions--so that also is worth thinking about when they suddenly decide to talk shit about something that a longtime contributor is doing. Ordinarily I wouldn't judge based on post count but you have to admit I have a point.

Originally Posted by Kong

Great.... then the steps are pay the $100 donation in the link you brought us and write the script in "comments" box, right? Or is it better to send you an email?

Much, much better to send an email, please.

Originally Posted by LK

Yes, I'm saying he's used to churning out a subpar product. No quality control. Effects mistakes IN THE FINAL CUT! He's relying on his audience to be horny and hungry enough to look past things no person with pride in their own work would release.

Here's who I'd give money to: someone has a plan for a project. THEIR plan. They aren't whoring themselves out to the public looking for ANY idea (each idea having its own technical challenges, requiring different props and funding to accomplish). They have a track record of quality releases -- you can see what they've done and have a reasonable expectation of what they'll produce based. I wouldn't pay to enable someone to get better tools unless they've already proven they can do some amazing stuff with the tools they have. Even then, the profit they make from their releases should have some amount set aside for gradual tool upgrades.

There was this guy on here, RedParrot, produced some *amazing* test footage, had a real good eye and concept. Blew everything of Dave's out of the water. No single-shot, unmoving camera film-making. No terrible editing and cutting. NO MORPHS! He got creative with what he had.

He's had the opportunity for a decade now to create, and all of his releases have had some issue with editing, sound, effects, composition, directing. They just look *bad* even by fetish clip standards.

The problem is not his tools or studio. The problem is Dave. Pay your money to an artist to realize your vision, or go with one of the established outfits who'll be more than happy to do your custom with far more enthusiasm and energy.

This pitch promises the WORLD! Only $15,000 to make it happen!

Look, some of what I write is speculative, but my bottom line is: This is all highly suspicious. Buyer Beware.

The more recent stuff has a lot fewer technical problems, don't know if you've noticed. He's really cleaned up the green screen errors and effects mistakes. There is still the odd issue here and there, but it's nowhere near as bad as it was (because, you're right, there were some bad ones).

For the record, Dave and I both actually make money at the current level of production. We don't NEED this upgrade, we're not seeking it out of greed. Both of us genuinely want to make something better, and he's tired of not being able to shoot like he wants to.

I understand that you had a bad experience with Dave before, and thus would be suspicious of any further attempts to raise money involving him. However, *I* invested about $1500 last year with him and I've already made my money back and then some, so I'd say it could go either way.

I'd like to point out that we aren't asking for handouts, here. We're basically accepting clip commissions, and using the money from them to upgrade. Someone donates their money, they WILL receive what we offer for it, so it's not like there's some kind of con going on.

Originally Posted by Rachel Bronwyn

I'm all for informing the general public of potential harm but hijacking qzar's thread and commanding people in as many words not to contribute is basically taking a giant shit on qzar. Don't do dat. By all means, raise awareness if you think there's monkey business going on but not here and, as a general rule I think valuable, maybe don't give other grownups commands? Give them the information (elsewhere) and I'm sure they can use their own judgment to make a decision that's right for them.

I'm going to take an exam I'm nowhere near prepared for now. I don't know why because I'm taking the course again to hammer the material into my head. This should be a gas.

In the meantime, can we be kind to one another?

Thank you, Rachel, for nailing down exactly how this was feeling to me. If someone has an issue with Dave or doesn't think this is worth contributing to, that's their opinion and they're welcome to it, but don't try to tell others what they should or shouldn't do, and don't use your personal bias to try to sabotage this project.

[Animas]

"but don't try to tell others what they should or shouldn't do, and don't use your personal bias to try to sabotage this project."

Do you see the hypocrisy contained in a single statement?

Rachael, I don't agree with every point of your post. I can't envision a more effective means of providing a counter-point of information and personal experience than at the source, and the habits of internet users aren't to go look far for contradictory information -- what's in front of them is all they want to work with, especially in an area of impulse buys. It's unfortunate that qzar's feelings are going to get hurt, which is an unfortunate side effect of investing yourself personally in a venture and not treating it as a business, but I'm thinking about the feelings of other people who might invest money and experience buyer's remorse. I'm the consumer advocate, though I could be more professional myself with how I go about it.

If someone still chooses to invest, at least they are better informed of potential risks. I can't prioritize both his business and his potential consumers if my opinion is that it is a bad idea to give money to him. I've made a number of poor, blind investments myself out of enthusiasm, both financially and emotionally. The internet's all marketing. People are all marketing. We have negative reviews for this reason -- handled properly, it isn't an insult directed at the creator, but a warning about the work to inform others about a bad purchasing experience / potentially unsafe action.

Qzar, I also do not agree. I understand why you'd post the way you did, but such hostility! You've drawn your own assumptions about what certain things mean, and to prove otherwise, I had to change-up accounts.

What you see as commands, I saw as putting options for a better use of their money. "Please do not give any money. Direct it elsewhere if you want to have something created with a good degree of quality." Was this the statement you took issue with and blew up over? Who commands with 'please'?

Bottom line: you're arguing for investment, I'm arguing against it. Buyer beware. We can argue semantics and how we're both writing until we're blue in the face, but the internet doesn't work the same way as the real world. There's so much room for misinterpretation and reactionism.

[Rachel Bronwyn]

You're not arguing buyer beware. You're instructing people not to invest.

Can we just refrain from being dickwads to each other until the new year? Don't you know what this does to the baby jesus?

[darththeo]

just to make sure the video we pay for we get right for 100

[queenofprussia2006]

I'd suggest a rworking of the prospectus

$2 - 3k for the fancy new bells and whistles

$ 2 -$ 3k to option non-fetish scripts/storyboards ( in case the fetish market crashes and burns )

$ 2- 3k to hire a contract writer to add that extra zip to the submitted fanboi dregs

etc till the whole $15,000 is balanced out with a proper
business plan

[LK]

Originally Posted by Rachel Bronwyn

You're not arguing buyer beware. You're instructing people not to invest.

Can we just refrain from being dickwads to each other until the new year? Don't you know what this does to the baby jesus?

Sure. I'm done.

[qzar9999]

Originally Posted by Animas

"but don't try to tell others what they should or shouldn't do, and don't use your personal bias to try to sabotage this project."

Do you see the hypocrisy contained in a single statement?

Rachael, I don't agree with every point of your post. I can't envision a more effective means of providing a counter-point of information and personal experience than at the source, and the habits of internet users aren't to go look far for contradictory information -- what's in front of them is all they want to work with, especially in an area of impulse buys. It's unfortunate that qzar's feelings are going to get hurt, which is an unfortunate side effect of investing yourself personally in a venture and not treating it as a business, but I'm thinking about the feelings of other people who might invest money and experience buyer's remorse. I'm the consumer advocate, though I could be more professional myself with how I go about it.

If someone still chooses to invest, at least they are better informed of potential risks. I can't prioritize both his business and his potential consumers if my opinion is that it is a bad idea to give money to him. I've made a number of poor, blind investments myself out of enthusiasm, both financially and emotionally. The internet's all marketing. People are all marketing. We have negative reviews for this reason -- handled properly, it isn't an insult directed at the creator, but a warning about the work to inform others about a bad purchasing experience / potentially unsafe action.

Qzar, I also do not agree. I understand why you'd post the way you did, but such hostility! You've drawn your own assumptions about what certain things mean, and to prove otherwise, I had to change-up accounts.

What you see as commands, I saw as putting options for a better use of their money. "Please do not give any money. Direct it elsewhere if you want to have something created with a good degree of quality." Was this the statement you took issue with and blew up over? Who commands with 'please'?

Bottom line: you're arguing for investment, I'm arguing against it. Buyer beware. We can argue semantics and how we're both writing until we're blue in the face, but the internet doesn't work the same way as the real world. There's so much room for misinterpretation and reactionism.

In the interest of, as Rachel said, "not being a dickwad," I'll keep this reply completely courteous and professional; I just want to clarify a couple of things.

"Hypocrisy"? Really? You've always struck me as a pretty clever guy and I think you know exactly what I meant by that sentence, but I'll admit I could have phrased it better--so I will. "You have neither the right, nor the authority, to tell other people what they should or shouldn't do with their money; they're adults and should be allowed to exercise their own judgment without you saying 'Don't do it! You'll regret it!' Furthermore, I would very much appreciate if you could keep your personal bias to yourself, rather than use it to undermine what I'm trying to do. You invested money with Dave and weren't happy with the results. I invested a similar amount and have been satisfied with the outcome. Your experience is no more or less valid than mine and serves as no better of an indicator what will or won't happen this time around." It was just shorter to say it the other way.

This is not about me "getting my feelings hurt." This is about me wanting to try to improve what both Dave and I are producing, and you coming in here to damage our project with what happened between you and him years ago. If the roles were reversed, I expect you'd be angry with me for doing the exact same thing.

I'd also like to once again point out that this isn't so much an investment as it is commissioning clips. It's more of a service being offered. If you think it's a bad idea to give Dave money, then don't give Dave money--but let others decide for themselves, won't you? There's a difference between saying "It went badly for me" and saying "Please do not support this." Other people have seen the clips we're producing, and if they want to commission a clip from us it's not really any of your business.

Where was I hostile, other than pointing out the low post count and asking what "Animas" had ever done for the community? You've created content before--you know as well as I do that there are plenty of people who won't lift a finger to do anything themselves but have no problem tearing down others' efforts. If someone whom I'd never heard of and who had never written anything went into my Wolf Lake thread and said "Your story sucks!" I wouldn't be nearly as upset as if someone like ZZZ, merrittstone, or pseudoclever did it. If you felt this issue was important enough to speak out about, you should've done it as LK in the first place. It's the difference between Barack Obama stating something vs. some looney that Fox News is interviewing.

I didn't say you "commanded" anyone to do anything. You're right, "Please" isn't technically a command. I could point out that "Please keep off the grass," "Please don't feed the animals," "No smoking, please," etc. etc. aren't really "commands" but there's the implication of one...but you said you didn't want to argue semantics, so. Anyway the point isn't whether you "commanded," it's that you're actively trying to dissuade people from investing. You didn't just present other options, you specifically said "Please do not support this." That was an awful thing to do and it goes far beyond simply saying "You could also spend money on this other thing!" Clearly I'm not the only one who read it as such--see Rachel's post, for instance.

Originally Posted by darththeo

just to make sure the video we pay for we get right for 100

You pay $100, we'll make your video and give you a free copy, then it goes up for sale in our store. Simple.

Originally Posted by queenofprussia2006

I'd suggest a rworking of the prospectus

$2 - 3k for the fancy new bells and whistles

$ 2 -$ 3k to option non-fetish scripts/storyboards ( in case the fetish market crashes and burns )

$ 2- 3k to hire a contract writer to add that extra zip to the submitted fanboi dregs

etc till the whole $15,000 is balanced out with a proper
business plan

I appreciate the advice, I'll see if we can post a proper breakdown of the expenses. I don't think we'll need a writer, though--that's one of the reasons I'm here. ^_^ (And I'm so humble, too...)