Blosxom is Released

Congratulations are in order for Rael Dornfest who has officially released version 1 (and then 1.1) of Blosxom, which efficiently has been powering this ‘blog since I started it. One of the neat features is static rendering which makes for a more logical and efficient archive for me. So now categories and dates will let you go to entries with a logical hierarchy. i.e. http://www.bitdepth.org/archives/2002/ for all entries from 2002 (with http://www.bitdepth.org/archives/2002/12/ for just December of 2002) http://www.bitdepth.org/archives/film/ for all of the entries in the “film” category. Keep up the great work Rael! I’ve updated the site with it and it took only a few minutes. Then I set up the static archive along with a little cron job to generate it automatically…a bit geeky, but it’s nice to have a simple system that works well that is easy to understand and use.

January 25, 2003 , ,

24 Hour Party People

It seems somewhat appropriate that I saw Michael Winterbottom’s film “24 Hour Party People” around the same time that I saw “Adaptation”. Both films are self- referencial, but while “Adapatation” is inward-looking, “24 Hour Party People” uses the self-referentiality to tell the fascinating story of Factory Records, Manchester, England and Tony. Written by Frank Cottrell Boyce, the film uses Tony Wilson to tie what could be a massive undertaking into a quick history of how music, people, and how a city evolved from 1976 to 1992. Steve Coogan plays Tony Wilson and he talks to the camera, commenting on his character and the film. Beautifully shot by Robby Müller, the film visually changes to match the time where the story is taking place. The casual, hand-held look of the film hides the technical complexity of the film that is just lurking beneath the surface as the complicated story is illustrated with seamless story-driven special effects.

January 25, 2003 , , , , , , , , ,

Adaptation

I finally was able to see Adaptation yesterday and I wasn’t disappointed. It was made by the same team of writer Charlie Kaufman and director Spike Jonze that created the amazing Being John Malkovich.
It’s a great film that you end up thinking and talking about a lot about afterwards. It’s probably not a good idea to go to the film alone as you could be frustrated that there isn’t someone to talk with afterwards. A big part of the film is seeing how things unfold so I won’t spoil any of that… it’s not “The Crying Game” spoiling, but more how things happen.
The film is very much in the “meta” category and it reminded me a bit of Italo Calvino. There is a constant blurring of reality and fiction and it continues the style that began with “Being John Malkovich” both literally and figuratively. It’s a lot of fun, but seriousness creeps in from time to time and moves the film from being quirky and funny to a level of seriousness and poignancy that can be surprising. Jonze creates things that are deceptively rough. While a lot of it looks casual, rough and hand-held, it’s actually very meticulously constructed. I identified a lot with Charlie Kaufman (who is the main character in the film along with his (possibly fictional) twin brother Donald. I’m a shy, obsessive, procrastinator as well…but that’s where the similarities end…
I found out about Being John Malkovich from the great cheesy web site for JM Inc. which is now defunct, but I linked to the Internet Archive version of it so you can still see it. It features bad design and a scrolling status bar message. When you sign up for more info you go to the real site with info about the film. The DVD also features a great design along with a tv ad for the (fictional) Web site.
The site for Adaptation features a good use of Flash to present clips, script excerpts and photographs from the film. Jason Kottke has also assisted with the meta aspects of the whole thing with a ‘blog for Susan Orlean (regarding: Adaptation) about the film which is an adaptation of her book…

January 19, 2003 , , , , , , , , ,

Presentations and Storytelling

Doc Searls got me thinking about presentation software which has become a current topic with Apple’s new Keynote software. PowerPoint dominates presentation software and I really hate it. Maybe that’s not completely fair. I hate PowerPoint in the same way that I hate Flash…not so much the software itself, but how it’s used. With most applications there is a way that you are supposed to use them…it’s how they’re designed. You can work with them in a different way, but you’re going against the grain. PowerPoint seems to tend toward mediocrity in the direction that it pushes people.
Derek K. Miller explains “Why PowerPoint is like a sauna in a Saab” and Doc’s article “It’s the Story, Stupid” should be read before anyone prepares a presentation.
Years ago I had to make PowerPoint presentations for other people as part of my job. On the 7100AV that I used it was slow and an incredible memory hog. I didn’t help it a lot since I’d usually make up the shows in Photoshop as a series of images and bring them in. I much preferred doing things like that using Director and later Flash. But one of the hidden, but very useful features of Adobe’s Acrobat reader is the full-screen mode that turns a PDF file into a presentation. I’ve done some presentations that way.
The last presentation that I gave was supported with slides that I created in Photoshop and then assembled with QuickTime Pro as a series of stills. It worked well.
Now when I’m writing something more structured I’ll start in OmniOutliner which is probably the best outliner I’ve every used. Most other things that I write will be in BBEdit (where I’m writing this now). Whenever I have to do another presentation I’m thinking of using BigShow which was written by Aaron Hillegass of Big Nerd Ranch. It’s very small and simple and uses XML. I’m thinking that if I organize things in OmniOutliner and then maybe use a bit of AppleScript to reformat things into the proper XML it can be a quick way to whip something up.

January 18, 2003 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

iStockPhoto

Last year I first read about iStockPhoto when Zeldman wrote about them. iStockPhoto isn’t your typical online source of royalty-free stock photography. What makes them a bit different is that they’re more of a cooperative. Once you are acccepted (after submitting sample images) you can upload photos that others can license for use. It costs 50¢ US for each image, which is a bargain. The artist gets 10 of those cents which can be used for their own downloads-that’s the cooperative part. There are some very nice images there and new things are being constantly uploaded. The self-serving part of this item is that I now have a bunch of images up there under my online name of chrisxero. Why should I hoard stuff when it can be shared?

January 18, 2003 , , ,

BlogFodder: Anticipate

I’ve subscribed to BlogFodder which is a “micromail” that provides a seed for weblog posting. Meg Hourihan mentioned it and it intriqued me. I’m thinking that it may help me write more…kind of like bran increasing your regularity. I’m very much a creature of habit and I’m thinking that this may become part of my blogging routine to get things moving. It also reminds me a bit of Brian Eno and Peter Schmidt’s Oblique Strategies. So the first one is “Next year’s resolutions.”
Hmmm… I’ll resolve to spend more time tending to the garden and I’ll spend less time in front of computer monitors.

January 14, 2003 , , , ,