Cobi Cockburn
April 27, 2007
(Photo from Bullseye Gallery)
Picked up edition 69 of Craft Arts International, one of my favorite magazines and a terrific survey tool if you’re into glass, and Cobi Cockburn is all over it.
I met Cobi at a Bullseye class last summer; she was Kirstie Rea’s teaching assistant for “What do we make of glass?” I added a little coda to my blogpost about that class saying how much I liked her work.
A day or so after that class Cobi took two of the top prizes (non-functional glass and most popular) at Emerge 2006, Bullseye’s competition for new glass artists. I discovered she’d already won the prestigious Australian Ranamok prize for contemporary glass in 2006, and was a finalist in 2005.
Nice. Now she’s got a 6-page article in Craft Arts (page 69), along with a blurb about Ranamok 2006 on page 108. I do believe the lady is going places. 
BTW, this is a marvelous issue of Craft Arts if you’re into glass, quilts or ceramics. Really lovely articles with nice production values. Highly recommend picking up a copy…
Flushing the buffer takes on a whole new meaning…
April 23, 2007
Google is apparently getting into the residential broadband business; a friend sent me this most intriguing quickstart installation guide for its new TiSP service.
I won’t spoil your fun by describing it, but I think it’s a brilliant idea. In fact, having just done four hours worth of troubleshooting to figure out why the wireless router in my sister’s house suddenly refused to talk to ANYbody, I’ll admit that I nearly employed the TiSP solution myself.
Definitely worth a read. Thanks, Susan.
And yes, a belated April Fools.
Illustrous
April 23, 2007
(Warning: Nostalgia ahead)
Someone brought up the “good old days” of computing and computer magazines in one of the chat groups I frequent, and I realized I hadn’t really given it much thought until then. So I started browsing around and came across this interview with Robert Tinney that really brought back memories.
For those of you who never read the signature on BYTE Magazine covers, Tinney was the guy that illustrated BYTE for about the first three-quarters of BYTE’s existence. By the time I got to BYTE, Fred Langa had already nixed the whole illustrated cover thing in an effort to compete with PC Magazine, so I never had the pleasure of commissioning a Tinney cover.
But that didn’t mean I didn’t love them. When BYTE was bought by rivals and closed, its new masters decided to clean house and erase the magazine. Literally. They took the Aeron chairs and any stray office equipment home, then tossed everything else, including the entire BYTE library, into the trash. All those covers, issues of BYTE going back to its debut, interviews and manuscripts of the greats in computing…all gone.
We warned our west coast office to try and save any duplicates and bureau chief John Montgomery made a quick call for help to the local computer museum. Thankfully, they jumped in the truck immediately and managed to save whatever was left before the dumpsters arrived.
But the Tinneys were pretty much gone, and losing them almost hurt more than losing my beloved job. Jenny, our managing editor, knew that I particularly loved one Tinney cover (above), managed to find it and dig it out of the trash for me.
I still have it; I was happy to see they reproduced it in this article. I’ve always been fascinated with computer graphics and Tinney’s literal translation of “screen painting” was delightful.
OK. Enough nostalgia. Back to work!
Canon HV20 digital camcorder
April 20, 2007
The tough thing about being a gadget freak is the hours you need to work to pay for your habit…unless you can figure out how to make a living from being a gadget freak.
Which is why I became a magazine editor. I’d read BYTE Magazine since its inception and just about worshipped Jerry Pournelle’s “Chaos Manor” column. I was mesmerized by the idea of getting all that hardware and software stuff for free.
At the time, I was working three jobs to pay for my computer habit (it hadn’t yet dawned on me that most people worked on computers to pay for their hobbies–my hobby WAS computers). The notion that people were breaking down Jerry’s door to give him stuff I couldn’t afford…and all he had to do was write about it…was literally life changing. I became obsessed with getting a job as a computer reviewer for a big magazine.
More than a thousand resumes, one year and a lot of heartbreak later (I can’t tell you how many hiring managers made me second choice if the first guy didn’t accept the job), I landed a job as a reviewer at a then-Ziff-Davis publication, Government Computer News. I spent the next 5 years blissfully reviewing every PC and network gadget I could get my hands on. Then I moved into managing reviewers and finally wound up as editor of BYTE.
Thanks, Jerry.
Anyway, enough backstory. The point is, I’m a pedigreed gadget freak, always will be, and yesterday I broadened my horizons into yet another class of gadgets: digital camcorders. Specifically, I bought a Canon HV20.
I got it for my business, the part that involves interviewing members of specific audiences and figuring out what they want in Web communications. But I also got it because it’s a new gadget, it’s time I learned how to shoot my own video instead of editing other peoples’ footage..and, well, it’s a new gadget.
It’s too new to definitively say much yet except that, unsurprisingly, this is not a cheap game to get into. And I’m surprised at the relative paucity of articles, books, reviews, etc., on digital video as opposed to digital photography.
I opted for the Canon instead of my first choice, the Sony HDR-HC7. The Sony offered some additional features, like the ability to shoot infrared at night, and I believe it offers slightly better resolution in some respects. But the Canon offered progressive scan at 24 fps, which simulates “movie-quality,” seemed just a tad easier for my small hands to manage, and had a nicer interface than the Sony’s touch screen. It was also cheaper.
Buying this thing is a bit like buying a brand new house–you get the basic stuff, but there’s still a LOT to add. It doesn’t come with Firewire cabling (an almost criminal lack, in my opinion, since that’s the preferred transfer mode). Nor does it come with any kind of video editing software; the software on the included CD is primarily for managing still images. That’s an appalling lack in a digital camcorder that costs more than a thousand bucks.
I needed to buy other accessories, of course, like a tripod, extra batteries and a separate battery charger so I didn’t tie up the camera charging extra batteries. The HV20’s got a built-in mike that catches a lot of heavy breathing but otherwise sounds like lousy home movie noises, so a separate mike was also in order.
If you’re a Windows user, you’ll need to buy video editing software, which can be spendy. A new Mac comes with HD-capable editing software (iMovie HD) so you’ve got a bit more breathing room. I suspect that most enthusiasts will wind up purchasing more capable editing software anyway. I (atypically) use FreddieMac, my MacBook Pro laptop, for business and do rich media and Web development on my Windows machines. That’s because they’re powerful with lots more storage, my software licenses are in Windows and well…frankly I’m a bit more comfortable (still) with the Windows interface.
But since Freddie comes with the necessary software and I’ll need to do video on location, she’ll be the system of choice for future video work. I’ve older copies of Premiere and a beta of Final Cut Pro, but I’ll see how far I get with iMovie before I invest more money.
I was pretty conservative in my purchases but you can easily spend more than the cost of the camera for this stuff, so be warned. Also, this is a new camera, apparently in demand, and extra batteries and battery chargers are in short supply.
Getting started was a LOT more painful than expected. Canon’s manual is badly written and more convoluted than an IRS tax form. Canon has perfected the page jump; the section on hooking the camera up to your TV for viewing refers you to the settings page, which refers you to the cables page, which refers you to the settings page. There IS no step-by-step complete instruction so I wound up figuring it out on my own.
At one point, just about ready to throw the bloody thing across the room, I trekked back to the store and asked for help. Turns out the camera will only recognize a computer connection on AC power and I’d been on batteries…
This is a MiniDV machine, and MiniDV tapes, by all accounts, are becoming less popular than direct-to-DVD or HD transfer. I figure that since I’m mostly going to use the tape for on-site storage and transfer everything via Firewire it’s not a big deal…but I guess I’ll find out.
I’m pleasantly surprised by the high quality of the video I’m getting, and the low-light quality is better than I’d been led to believe from reviews. The images are more stable than I’d expected, although it’s obvious that I need to practice my filming techniques. (There’s a reason I’ve relied on professional cameramen to shoot my footage…)
So this weekend will be spent getting to know my new gadget, making sure the components work smoothly together and practicing setup, usage and takedown in an interior situation. Hopefully I’ll be posting some ‘casts before long.
Later–
Frittery
April 19, 2007
As much as I like working with larger forms of glass, you just can’t beat frit for infinite possibilities.
Eye track U
April 16, 2007
The Poynter Institute’s latest eyetracking report offers some unexpected twists.
Their conclusion: People really do read online. A lot. Around two-thirds of the 600 people tested clicked a continue/jump button to keep reading a story beyond the first screen. And online readers are more likely to actually finish the story than people in print. (well, duh–it’s easier to FIND the rest of the story online)
Since conventional webwisdom says nobody ever reads online, I suppose that’s news. It’s not particularly huge news as far as I’m concerned, and it doesn’t change the really important stuff about writing for web: Make it easy for the reader to find stuff, grab his attention once he gets there, and give him lots and lots of ways to explore that don’t confuse him to death.
The report adds that people online are more likely to scan instead of read methodically than they would with print, that sidebars, Q&As and other “alternative story forms” are a good idea. They say that signposting (providing directional elements like navigation, teasecopy, photos, etc., drives higher attention.
Ultimately, though, the report pinpoints the importance of content, or rather, the importance that site managers and designers place on content. A lot of the more speculative stuff in this report notes that (1) online readers are “trained” by site conventions and that definitely influences what they do when presented with content in a new way and (2) the structure of online content probably has more to do with its readership numbers than previously thought. (i.e., if blogs don’t get much attention, it’s more likely because they’re buried in the wrong place than because visitors aren’t interested).
Gee. I feel validated.
No Bell prize
April 13, 2007
Cute story running the rounds this week: Famed and prizewinning violinist Joshua Bell played his Stradivarius at the L’Enfant Plaza metro station in DC and was almost completely ignored by 2,000 rushing commuters.
In a PBS story, Bell said he did it on behalf of a Washington Post columnist who wondered if metro riders would stop for a really great street musician. Turns out they won’t, but Bell did make about $60 out of the experiment by borrowing a woman’s violin case (I don’t guess you leave your Strad’s case on a metro floor) so people could drop money into it. They only counted $40 in the story because at the end of his session a woman recognized him and dropped a twenty into the case. He gave the money to the case owner.
Most of the stories seem to be pushing the Joni Mitchell “Playin’ real good, for free” angle. I dunno. Maybe they had to get to work. Maybe they prefer clarinet. Me, I’ve never cared all that much for Bach’s Partita No. 2 (although why you wouldn’t stop for Ave Maria is beyond me). Now if he’d played his Rachmaninoff Vocalise…there would have been 2,000 angry bosses.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK: If you only own one CD of violin music, buy Bell’s “Voice of the Violin.” It’s about as nakedly emotional as the violin gets, and the sound engineers deserve some kind of award. As does Bell, of course.)
Google had some extra money lying around, so they bought DoubleClick at the bargain price of $3.1 billion. Add the DoubleClick empire to AdWords and…hmmm….what’s left?
Don Imus (gosh, aren’t we all tired of that one) called the Rutgers women’s basketball team “nappy-headed hos” in a really stupid reminder that I can call myself anything, even dumb, racial, degrading remarks, but you can’t, not even in fun.
Seems to be a rising concensus that what Imus did was horrible, ignorant, embarrassing and about as negative as you can get but that he shouldn’t have been fired for it. I dunno–if you’re making $50M/year as a “shockjock,” you have to keep topping yourself to attract an audience. Sooner or later the only topics left are going to be too outrageous to be uttered, you utter one of them…and that’s that.
I think he had a long run doing nasty-dumb stuff, any one of which COULD have gotten him canned, one finally caught up with him, and it’s over. Neeeeeeeeext….
Speaking of dinosaurs, turns out that maybe Tyrannosaurus Rex really did taste like chicken. Scientists have recovered proteins from a T.rex femur and linked some of them to modern day chicken collagen. Gee, I hope the guy running equipment hadn’t eaten chicken salad for lunch that day….
Finally, Apple said it’s got too much to do and can’t get both the iPhone and the new Leopard Mac OS done this summer. It’s one or the other and–surprise–the iPhone won. Can’t say I disagree; Freddie Mac’s OS is working fine and she’s getting along well with the rest of my Windows network. Can’t say the same for my phone, so let’s go, iPhone.
Unified desktop, updated
April 13, 2007
So…after my little rant about what I want my desktop to look like, I come across an article on BBC.com that’s talking about where Mozilla wants to take its Firefox browser. And buried down toward the bottom of the interview with VP engineering Mike Shroepfer I find this:
Mozilla is also experimenting with using structured data on the web so that applications can use data intelligently.
Knowing the difference between a phone number or an address, for example, makes that information more valuable and flexible.
“With a little bit of structured data we can add things automatically from web pages to calendars, or you can click to dial with VOIP, or export an address to contacts. “We only need minor tweaks to web pages to get that to work.”
Interesting. Wonder if he’s talking about IBM’s microformats, i.e., standardized mini-data structures that a lot of people hope will become a standard part of electronic taxonomies. There’s already a following for very simple, well-defined microformats, such as contact information and calendar items.
The rest of the interview is very much about the kinda stuff I was talking about. Be interesting to get a side-by-side comparison of Internet Explorer and Firefox roadmaps in this regard. I’m inclined to think that–with what BBC says is a 12% marketshare–and the enthusiasm of the Open Source community behind them, Mozilla will just try harder. Certainly Mozilla add-ons make the Firefox browser a LOT closer to what I was talking about this week than what’s on IE7. But I’ve also learned never to discount Microsoft’s determination.
Worth watching, anyway.
Interfacial wishes
April 11, 2007
Here’s my biggest hope for the mashup of stuff we’re calling Web 2.0: I want to design my own environment. And I want applications (as such) to go away.
I use a lot of different software applications and three different operating systems, and they all have strengths and weaknesses. I want to pick the best from everything, munge them onto a serious machine with multiple displays, and that’s why I’m so excited about what’s going on with Live and Ajax and Protopage and all the rest.
For example, I’m not a huge fan of Internet Explorer 7–maybe it’s a brainfreeze, but I have to hunt for stuff and it’s screwed up my toolbars. Firefox suits me better (and crashes less often) but…I sure wish the Firefox people had opted for IE7’s “new tab” feature.
In FireFox, you hit up the File/New Tab menu or use a key combo to get to a new browser tab/window. In IE7, you click on a tab stub:
For me, at least, it’s intuitive, it’s right there, and whenever I need to open a new browser window it’s ready. Also, new tabs open with a “success” message which prompts me to type in a URL where Firefox stays blank, leaving me staring at the screen like an idiot, waiting for the screen that will never paint. (Talk about conditioning)
Now, why can’t I just drag those things into my Firefox browser and start using them?
I’ve got a whole list of things I’d like to take with me into a brave new desktop. I want the Mac dock instead of a Start Bar. But I want the Windows filing system instead of the Mac’s–drilling down a Mac file hierarchy to store things in a fifth-level folder is a tedious experience.
My computer time–which is considerable–is all about communications into cyberspace. I use a browser to blog, participate in online communities, search, surf and manage my websites. But I use Outlook/Entourage to send e-mail, the house phone to call family, the mobile phone for business, Adium or Trillium to IM–why is that? Gimme a single interface that uses the current best method to move my thoughts to the right destination…and initiate conversations. Don’t bother me with details, just get me what I want when I need it.
Keep my favorite tools right there but give me the ability to clear the screen and just create when I need to. Note that I’m working with graphics or lots of numbers and change my toolset to whatever’s needed without my having to ask…or leave my workspace. Track my hours (since I need that for billing purposes), correspondence and files and give them their own project workspace…without forcing me into a clunky project collaboration interface that I have to learn.
Now, I can pull widgets and APIs on my browser home page to do a lot of that, or go to Live, but that’s only as long as I stay in the browser. Someday the browser will become the way I work and I won’t need other applications…but right now that’s a long way from reality.
There is a day coming when I buy a new laptop, turn it on and enter my contact info, register my identity…and my environment pops up, readymade. There are no “applications,” only my rich workspace, and it follows me from computer to computer, from device to device, maybe even from TV to refrigerator. If I see a new tool, a couple of mouseclicks and maybe a few bucks install it into my menu…and now I have a new capability without leaving my old familiar environment.
Gee. Sounds wonderful. Hurry up and get here.
Subliminally yours
April 10, 2007
There’s no such thing as subliminal advertising, right? Maybe, but seems like we no longer can dismiss it out of hand.
I read Wilson Bryan Key’s Subliminal Seduction as a kid, and spent the next few weeks carefully examining magazine ads for hidden pictures of couples in passionate embrace and ice cubes that spelled “sex.” And, for probably the same reasons people find the image of Jesus in a sweet potato, I found them. “See, Mom? No? Well, the round part of that chair is the girl’s head and the tree is the boy’s…”
I had remarkably patient parents.
In fact, once I’d read Key’s book I really got hung up on the idea of using eyecatchers to grab an audience to deliver an entirely different message. So when I ran for office in junior high I used that trick for my absolutely UNsubliminal campaign posters:
I didn’t win but I did get a lot of attention (from the principal’s office). I looked forward to the day when I, too, could airbrush hidden messages into ad content and influence customer behavior.
Subliminal messaging was one of those things that ought to be true, even if nobody could prove it. Yeah, there were problems with manipulation and mind control and all that but…the notion that there were hidden depths in the brain that could be used to improve things was, well, seductive. Of course, Key and Vicary were pretty much discredited and the whole concept joined the ranks of Commie threats and underground bomb shelters.
Until now (maybe). I just read Ed Schultz’ article in Marketing News saying that researchers think there might after all be something to subliminal messaging. Specifically, David Penn of British brain research group Conquest says the brain learns implicitly as well as explicitly, and implicit learning may lead to stronger product/brand affinity than typical “whack the customer over the head” techniques some marketeers prefer.
He’s basing his findings in part on fMRI work done at University College London. By restricting participants’ vision and tracking what’s going on in the visual cortex, they showed that the brain did, indeed, record stuff that wasn’t consciously seen and acknowledged.
So Penn’s thinking is that before your brain ever consciously registers, processes and understands a message, it recognizes and responds emotionally. Moreover, that emotional response can predispose a favorable or unfavorable rational reception to the message.
Or in other words, the old “don’t confuse me with the facts–my mind is already made up,” is not too far from the truth.
Of course, we’ve known this anecdotally for centuries: Magicians use it to misdirect the audience, directors know that inserting celebrity breasts or a cute puppy in a crummy movie saves it at the box office and anybody who’s heard a siren gets out of the way. But mapping where in the brain this happens? And being able to track (and possibly forecast it) when it does? Wow.
I’ll bet the brand recognition guys are buying Penn a lot of drinks. It’s certainly a good argument for brand continuity, anyway. And I wonder, then, if we’ve underestimated the cost of changing something as small as a color in a brand palette. At what point do accumulated minor changes cross the recognition threshold? Or could a minor change to a well-recognized brand (say, Coke), cause an unconscious doubletake and provoke a fresher response?
The online implications are interesting, since a lot of organizations have trouble synching up their offline and online personas. Companies tend to build their image offline and shoehorn it into cyberspace, where it’s not always a good fit.
In one case, a corporation spent millions and millions on international rebranding that included a gorgeous, proprietary, custom-designed typeface. Unfortunately, nobody thought to test it on a 72 dpi Web page, where its thinner strokes faded to almost nothing. 10- or 12-point text was literally unreadable, the company was forced to head back to a standard Web font throughout the site…and an expensive piece of the new identity was lost.
Corporate branding groups are generally underfunded and overburdened, which (forgive me) often means they wind up being fashion police, not brand enhancers. The out-of-the-box innovators, the employees pushing out podcasts and blogs and SEO and mobile marketing and flash mob sites and interactivity and wikis and live chat soon learn to ignore them. At best, the company loses the opportunity to extend the brand envelope effectively.
At worst, the company’s online presence becomes fragmented, disorganized and confusing. I suspect, as blogging becomes the way you set corporate tone and wikis take the place of FAQs, that we’re going to find this “integrated communications” stuff isn’t as easy as it looks…