Eventide UltraChannel Demonstration Video

Bill Cammack demonstrates the free Eventide UltraChannel 64-bit dongle-less native plug-in for AAX64, AU, VST Mac and PC

Bill Cammack demonstrates the free Eventide UltraChannel 64-bit dongle-less native plug-in for AAX64, AU, VST Mac and PC

Download Link: http://bit.ly/UltraChannel
Code: 07CB9799Featuring:
Micro Pitch from the H8000
Stereo Delays
FlexiPath allows drag and drop reordering the signal path of the top section
5-band Parametric EQ
O-Pressor – the compressor section from the Omnipressor with sidechain
Compressor with sidechain and de-essing
Soft Saturation
Transformer emulation
Gate with sidechain

Take her to the Book Store!

ok… So, DatingGenius stumbled onto this great new technique for kicking it to geek-chicks! 😀 (assuming you’d want to do that in the first place)….

This chick was talking about how happy she was that she was on a date, and the guy took her to A BOOK STORE!!! :/ … Now, of course, DatingGenius thought this was a ridiculous as well as RETARDED idea, so I needed to get to the bottom of this…. hmm… does anyone know proper form for referring to one’s self in third person? It seems strange to say “HE needed to get to the bottom of this”… hmm… anyway…

Now, obviously, taking a chick to a book store doesn’t help you to get on, ASAP… which is the entire reason you took her out in the first place. If you didn’t want to tap that, you wouldn’t be on a date with her. You’d be HANGING OUT. So, since she considered herself on a date, the job of the guy was to demonstrate to her WHY she should be his girlfriend/fiancee/wife, whatever he has in mind for her. All he was expressing to her by taking her to the book store was that he DIDN’T intend to hit it anytime soon, and he’d rather read a book then try to get her alone in a bar bathroom with a couch and a lock on the door.

So we got into this conversation, and I can just see the LIGHT in her eyes while she’s talking about being in this book store, and being happy about his choice of books, because if they weren’t into reading the same kinds of things, she wouldn’t have been as interested in him, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah….. So I’m like WTF is she talking about? His choice of books? Do you even know if this guy likes chicks? Do you know if he’s going to tap it proppah? WTF difference does it make WHAT BOOKS HE READS if you’re DATING this guy, trying to find a boyfriend? :/

See, that’s what’s wrong with relationships, and that’s why the cheating and divorce rates are through the roof. People hook up for the most RETARDED reasons! 😀 … HEY! We like the same books! Let’s go out with each other! OKAYYYY! 😀 … Next thing you know, they’re calling themselves boyfriend and girlfriend, and he’s trying to screw her five times a week, and she’s trying to screw him five times A MONTH! :O

See the problem there? They didn’t check the IMPORTANT stuff before giving each other meaningless titles. That’s why taking a chick to a book store is RETARDED before hitting it, because it’s a waste of your time. You’re checking to see if y’all can be *FRIENDS*, NOT boyfriend/girlfriend.

However… hehehe Like I said, this chick was going for the okey-doke, so it occurred to DatingGenius that this was a valuable concept that needed to be explored.

As we all know, Chicks give sex to get relationships and guys give relationships to get sex. In the case of GEEK-chicks, though… they’re not thinking about the sex AT.ALL! 😀 They’re not even planning to barter it to you to get you to call them your girlfriend. See, what you have to remember about the geek chicks is that most of them grew up…… geeks. 😀 They were NOT the fashion plates. They were NOT the popular girls. They were NOT the pretty girls or the cheerleaders. They were NOT in high demand whatsoever by the male population. Therefore, by the time they get to dating age, they’re not used to being physically touched.

The reason this is important is that when they think about themselves with their hypothetical “boyfriends”, all they’re thinking about is someone to do stuff with. They have no mental concept of actually getting laid, other than by some fluke. They have no intention on “giving it up” on a regular basis, because that’s not their physical experience of life. SO… If you go out on a date, and you suddenly come to the realization that this girl is a geek, switch gears! Go into “fun stuff we can do together when we’re boyfriend/girlfriend” mode.

Take her to the book store.
Go roller blading with her.
Buy her ice cream in Central Park.
Take her to the waterfront in Brooklyn so you can see the Manhattan lights at night…

All that waste-of-time stuff that you wouldn’t actually do with a regular chick… DO IT! 😀 This way, you endear yourself to her because you socialize in the same way she does. You come off as one of those geek-guys that had the same experience of life that she did. BADA-BING, BADA-BOOM, next thing you know, you’re tapping that, and all is right with the world! 😀


Light & Magic


Make sure you play your environments to your strengths. Use the effects of Light & Magic to your best advantage when you’re out kickin’ game to the chickadees! 😀

I went to watch the Queens of Pain demolish the Brooklyn Bombshells in Roller Derby the other day. So after the game, there was an after-party. The first thing I noticed was that I could hear the music VERY CLEARLY from outside of the bar. :/ When I walked inside, the first thing I noticed…….. was NOTHING! It was so dark in there that my eyes needed to adjust, and it was ALREADY NIGHT-TIME before I walked in the bar! :/

Needless to say, every step I took, the music got LOUDER and the bar got DARKER! 😀 On top of that, they had invited a whole gymnasium’s worth of people to a little storefront bar with a bunch of tables in it, so we were packed in there like sardines! :/

Now… depending on who you are, each one of these elements is either a good thing or a bad thing. 😀 It’s up to YOU to figure out how to play the room to your personal strengths… and lacks thereof! hehehe.

Darkness – If you are a good-looking guy, avoid the darkness like the plague! Find as much light as you can, and park yourself under it! 😀 In the dark, you lose your natural advantage over the next guy, so he’s just as likely to get a rap as you are….. no good. 🙁 You want to make sure the ladies can SEE YOU. Also… you want to make ABSOLUTELY SURE that *YOU* can see *THEM*!!! :O

Busted chicks are experts in remaining in the darkness and seated at tables or surrounded by girlfriends or wearing non-reflective clothing that cloaks their actual physique like a Romulan. By the time your eyes adjust to the darkness, you’ve already drank too many beers to care what she looks like…. and then you’ve fallen into her TRAP!!! :O This is another reason you want to stay in the light. When your boy falls for the okey-doke, he has to bring the girl into the light to tell you he’s breaking out. That’s your chance to see what she really looks like and hopefully talk your boy out of it! 😀 …… Because YOU KNOW he’s going to call you the next day asking “Yo… HOW did you let me go home with HER? :(” as if it’s YOUR fault that he didn’t stay in the light!


If you’re NOT a good-looking guy… Darkness Is Your Friend! 😀

Find about the darkest section of the establishment, hopefully right near the bar where the chicks need to come to get their refills. Keep your eyes open for favorable signals, such as her stumbling towards the bar or having a very hard time counting how many singles she has in her hand. 🙂 While she’s waiting to get the bartender’s attention… which she’ll have a tough time doing, since you pre-selected the darkest section of the bar… Strike up a friendly conversation. You’ll get extra points for talking to her because she knows full well that you can’t actually *SEE* her, so you *can’t* be after her for her looks.

Now… Hurry up and kick your game before someone yells “LAST CALL!!!” and turns on the lights!!! :O


The Lab – Production Log Pickup 03

So it got to the point where I knew what clips I was going to use, and I had my script for my dialogue. I had already finalized my intro, and “all” I had to to do for the credits was edit the template. Unfortunately, I messed that up because I didn’t keep track of how many “special thanks” I had. The way I did it, when I looked at the credits, they looked normal. I hadn’t recognized that a row of people I wanted to thank had fallen beneath the frame, and wasn’t showing up on the screen. The only reason I noticed this at all was because I looked at the credits after compressing and uploading the video, and I noticed that the bottoms of the letters on the lowest names on the list were slightly cut off. In my curiousity about how this could be possible, I realized that there were two more names that completely didn’t show up at all in the credits. When I increased the font for the names, the lowest ones got pushed off the bottom of the screen. Adjusting everything higher in the frame and recompressing took care of that. 🙂 So the initial 6 or 7 people that downloaded episode 05 with Democracy Player got the version with the incorrect credits. 😀

I put people in my “special thanks” section that I could remember offhand and that I could go back to my comments and see had given me constructive criticism or something that was useful to me as support in doing this 3rd (Technically episode 05) episode of “The Lab”. Based on comments that Justin Kownacki, creator of Something To Be Desired made, as well as things I’ve noticed about internet shows and understandings I’ve achieved through myriad conversations with Dre, I intend to do more with viewers and commenters than say “thanks for the info” and keep on rollin’. I agree with Justin that the future of internet shows is interactivity. I wanted to make sure I mentioned some of the key people that gave me the energy that eventually became “The Lab” Episode 05.

Unfortunately, having everything together isn’t the end… it’s the beginning. You still have to make it happen. You still have to deliver the lines you wrote with the intention with which you wrote them. Without that, all the surrounding elements are perfectly worthless. As I mentioned in Recording Episode 01 of “The Lab”, “performing” dialogue isn’t as easy as it looks, AND it’s an emotional drain… or maybe it’s not a drain… Perhaps it’s the opposite… an emotional high that you go on and then you’re released from it at the end of the process when you wrap, and that’s what feels like a drain. Either way, it’s not something you want to do when you’re not in the mood to do it. I’m very glad I’m not a peformer, because I wouldn’t be interested in doing that every day…. not even MOST days or even SEVERAL days! 😀 Putting in my hour in front of the camera once a week is WAY more than enough for me.

Doing my lines was easier for me this week, because I’m pretty much “over” the process. I’ve already done it enough times to know that I *CAN* do it and approximately how long it takes me to do it. I was more in a “get it over with” mode than a “get the lines perfectly the way I want them” mode. It still took me 45 minutes to do, because until you physically say the lines over and over, they’re not natural enough to “perform” them AND remember what the next set of lines is. I remember looking at one section in particular and thinking “Damn… I shouldn’t have written so much stuff!” 😀 It was something like three full sentences with a break point at each one of them, so as I was finished “performing” section 1, I had to start ‘loading’ section 2 so I could pass through seamlessly as if it were ‘stream of consciousness’. Like I’m writing this right now as it comes to me, but if I had to SAY all of this stuff… in a row… in one take… it would take me forever to practice it long enough to have it seem like natural conversation. I could probably repeat it verbatim very quickly, but I would sound like a robot… worse than when people read information off of teleprompters that they really have no technical knowledge about.


2007 Broadband Emmy Awards

NATAS + MySpace = 2007 Broadband Emmy Awards

National Television Academy press release

LOS ANGELES – January 8, 2007 – MySpace, the world’s leading lifestyle portal, and the National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, presenters of the coveted Emmy® Awards, today announced they have joined forces to honor premium broadband content on the Internet. MySpace will serve as the exclusive online partner of the Broadband Emmy Award submissions, empowering video producers and filmmakers to submit self-generated content for consideration through the official MySpace Emmy profile at http://myspace.com/MyEmmy.

The National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences debuted its first Emmy Award for content distributed via broadband and portable delivery last year and honored creators in four categories. This year, The Academy will triple the number, honoring creators in 12 categories in four content areas: Entertainment, Sports, News & Information, and Public & Community Service. In addition, high school students are eligible for the National Television Student Awards for Excellence for broadband-delivered content in all seven student categories. Read entire NTA press release…

Now THIS is going to be interesting. 😀

[Full Disclosure: I am a NATAS Emmy Judge as well as an International Emmy Judge]

There are several ongoing debates within the community of people and groups who make videos and post their created content on the Internet. One of them is “what is and what is _not_ a video blog”. There’s another debate about videos posted in “closed” environments vs those posted in ways that make them accessible to whomever happens to be searching the net for video content. A MAJOR debate is what aggregators should and should not be doing with RSS feeds from either content creators or hosting sites.

Yet another daily debate is “what is QUALITY content?” or perhaps “what makes a show popular” or “what makes a show _good_”. The problem, IMO, with making distinctions about what constitutes a popular show is that depending on where you look and how you look at it, shows that get similar amounts of hits can be spun to look like either one is more “successful”. There is no agreed-upon site that can actually track site date consistently and accurately.

This makes sense, because there’s no bottleneck… Meda that goes to the internet goes straight out. It doesn’t have to go through EPs, producers, editors, quality control, legal, studios, stations, channels, local distribution points, cable boxes, televisions. There’s nowhere you can go and say “this show delivered 80,000 units through here and that show delivered 50,000 units, so the first show has more viewership for this period.

On top of that, there are several ways to get data from a site. If someone goes to my web site, they might view a page and then not view the video. They might open the page but not read anything on it at all. They might bypass the main page because they linked to a permalink for one post. They might not hit my site’s pages at all if they subscribe to my videos in RSS. They might not hit the RSS more than once if they are downloading the videos and watching them offline. So… if one site uses page hits to judge popularity and another site uses video downloads, they’re going to see things completely differently, even looking at the exact same site. If you have to have a particular widget installed to count in the rankings, you can forget it entirely as far as accuracy. Anyone who hits the site without being “part of the program” doesn’t count in the stats.

Anyway, I doubt the 2007 Broadband Emmy Awards will have anything to do with page hits and downloads. The Emmys in general are about quality content and quality production values. That’s what makes this contest interesting. MSM (Main Stream Media) is now getting involved in putting clips on the internet in mass quantities. All of a sudden, there are videos on MySpace with laugh-tracks. :/ All of a sudden, a “new” show appears with 30 episodes uploaded on the same day! :/ Reading the eligibility requirements for the MySpace contest, “Repurposed material originally produced for traditional media is not eligible”. That’s good, because cutting three minutes out of a professionally produced, shot and edited piece shouldn’t put you in position to compete with someone that made their video specifically for the internet. That doesn’t mean the internet piece isn’t well done or professionally produced, but it’s apples vs. oranges.

The first category open for submissions is “Entertainment”. It’s open right now, and “News & Documentary” opens on Feb. 26th. They both close on March 26, and finalists will be notified in April.

As usual, make sure you read the fine print in contests or even when you choose a hosting service to upload your videos to. Check out these terms of service in The Rules of the MySpace My Emmy contest:

By entering the Contest, you grant Sponsors a perpetual, fully-paid, irrevocable, non-exclusive license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, distribute, display, sub-license, exhibit, transmit, broadcast, televise, digitize, otherwise use, and permit others to use and perform throughout the universe the Material (including without limitation, the underlying intellectual property therein to the extent necessary to exploit Material) in any manner, form, or format now or hereinafter created, including, but not limited to, on the Internet, and for any purpose, including, but not limited to, advertising or promotion of Sponsors and their services, all without further consent from or payment to you. The completion, expiration and/or termination of the Contest shall not affect Sponsors’ rights regarding Materials or Sponsors’ other rights hereunder. Sponsors shall have, forever and throughout the universe, the right to use such Material in any manner as determined by Sponsors in their sole discretion, including without limitation, the right to make changes, alterations, cuts, edits, interpolations, deletions and eliminations into and from such Material and the right to package such Material with those rendered by other Entrants in connection with the exploitation of such Material, all without further consent from or payment to you.

That’s fantastic! Look how progressive those terms are! Throughout the universe! 😀 Wow! They must know something we don’t know about pending space travel. Anyway… here’s the link to the Broadband Rules from MyEmmy.TV. If you’re willing to pay the $400 entry fee, you can skip all the TOS shenanigans and soul-selling.

The MyEmmy.TV page also includes the Judging Procedures & Criteria:


Content, Creativity and Execution are the primary standards for judging. Each criterion is given equal weight.

Judges will focus on the clarity of presentation of information, as well as the visual impact of the entry. Judges can also give weight to the entrant’s utilization of “broadband” capabilities, (e.g., interactivity, and viewers’ choice of images). Although any entry originally produced for “broadband” transmission is eligible to compete, the more the web’s capabilities are demonstrated in the production, the better the chances may be for winning.

Advocacy and presentation of strong points of view are eligible for award consideration. “Self-published” work by individuals as well as production entities is also eligible for consideration.
All “Broadband” entries/URLs will be viewed at home and judged in one round to determine the nominees and winner. Judging panels will consist of content experts rather than technicians. There will be separate panels for each category, although there may be an overlap with some judges serving on more than one panel. Judges vote via secret ballot using a scale of 10 for the highest and 1 for the lowest rating in each area (Content, Creativity, and Execution), for a total of 30 possible points.

OK… So I see what’s going on now. 🙂 Myspace is holding a contest in which the winners will be sponsored to the official Emmy competition. There are going to be two levels of judging. You can skip one level altogether by paying the entry fee and going straight to http://www.myemmy.tv/ . If my understanding after skimming the official entry rules is correct, as long as you made your content specifically for the internet, any level of professional involvement, time or money spent on the project is fine.

I’ll be interested to see what MySpace promotes to entrance in the actual Broadband Emmy Awards. Let’s see if any of the “mom & pop” user-generated content gets the nod over studio-produced work. I’ll refrain from mentioning any shows that I think could compete favorably… VERY favorably in the competition, just in case my region is involved in the judging and asks me to participate.

Either way, I think both the MySpace contest and the official Broadband Emmy Awards are fantastic ways for content creators to gain exposure and/or accolades. It’s definitely worth considering entering… whether it’s a video that was already done (since March 2nd, 2006) or one that you’re planning up until April 2007.

Bill Cammack • New York City • Freelance Video Editor • alum.mit.edu/www/billcammack

Videoblogging Careers

Response to Penelope Trunk’s article on videoblogging as a career.

Penelope: I understand your point about your blog being about careers. As someone who was pointed to this page directly, having zero context for your statements, I read the title literally: “Thinking of video blogging? You should probably forget it.” and that’s what I responded to.

Had the title been “Thinking of video blogging _as_a_career_? You should probably forget it.”, I would have agreed with you along the “don’t quit your day job” lines. 🙂 One of the most technically well-done videoblogs/shows that I’ve seen is Galacticast, and Rudy still has a day job. I can only think of two situations where an independent production company created a videoblog and got picked up and funded to the point that they can call that their career. I’m sure there are probably a couple more, but I’m not aware of them.

In the context of a career, the ‘problem’ with videoblogging is convincing someone that their money is well spent funding YOUR collection of videos on the internet. To do that, you would have to convince them that you had X viewership, and that the ROI is there from your viewers to justify them sponsoring you. I don’t think there’s enough data yet for anyone to speculate on which videoblogs are going to be financially viable. It’s all a gamble.

For instance, television is based on advertising. So many people own televisions. So many people subscribe to cable. So many people are known to watch X television show. Stations can use this to sell advertising space during their 30-minute or 60-minute shows to companies attempting to sell to the demographic that watches their show. That’s what the advertisers pay for. They pay to get their product in front of X eyes every Tuesday night @ 9pm.

Without concrete ideas about potential ROI, there’s no incentive for anyone to fund a videoblog, so the concept of videoblogging as a career is currently a longshot.

… currently 😀


A few days ago, I became aware of a… series of comments (because it wasn’t actually a conversation or a debate) that revolved around the reasons someone would choose or hire someone else to be a spokesperson for them. I missed that conversation, entirely, so I’ll just mention my thoughts about it here, and be done with it. Specifically, it pertained to whether a woman should be chosen for the job? and if so, should it be an attractive woman? and if so, should that be the deciding factor in hiring her? To be even more specific, they were looking to hire someone to be on-air talent… not on television, but on the internet. A host of a show. “The Face” of their broadcast.

Anyone could have been chosen to be the host of this show, yet they specifically requested an attractive female. This was called “sexism”. Definition #2 of sexism, according to m-w.com/dictionary/sexism, is “behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex”. Could choosing an attractive female to host a show foster stereotypes of a woman’s social role? Could choosing a more attractive woman who knows nothing about the topic (but is going to be fed her lines anyway, via a script) over a less attractive woman who knows a lot about the topic imply things to the viewers or people that become aware of this situation about the role of a woman in this society or what’s valued about her? I think it says more about the people looking to hire this attractive woman and their target demographic than it says about the woman herself or women in general. What could be the reason that an attractive woman was desired for the position? How about RATINGS? 😀

How about if one of the reasons… if not the ONLY reason to put on the show was to get viewers? How about if they knew that they would get MORE viewers to tune in with an attractive female spokesperson than an unattractive female or a male? What’s their incentive to go with decidedly less effective ‘bait’ when they’re fishing for viewers? Where’s the ROI?

On top of all that, it’s not like they were trying to hire her for some kind of intellectual show
like “On The Record w/ Greta Van Susteren”. 😀

All this new spokesperson has to do is study some simple introductory lines or read them from a teleprompter. She’s there to wave and smile and look good and ATTRACT viewers to watch the show, which benefits the guys that were looking to hire her in the first place. Mission accomplished. If you’re trying to do a show about lawyers, and you hire a woman that looks good and is NOT and never WAS a lawyer, you’re a fool. If you want someone to turn letters on a game show, there’s no need to hire a lawyer. 🙂

What does that say for the _content_ of a show that needs eye-candy to get viewers? hehehehe… well…… 🙂

However, like I said… I think it says more about the show and the show’s demographics than it says about women. If the show’s topic is appealing to men, then putting an attractive woman in the spotlight is only going to benefit you. Look at Harlequin….

They’re selling fantasies to women. Does Harlequin hire busted-looking, out-of-shape, unsuccessful-looking ‘Joe Average’s to model for the covers of their novels for women? NOPE! 😀 You know why? Because fewer women would BUY.THE.BOOK. They’re better off using covers that don’t imply anything about the guy’s looks at all than they are using a cover that defines the protagonist as visually unattractive.

That’s not to say that I don’t see the other side of the ‘argument’. Television’s filled with uncommonly attractive people, percentage-wise. Most places you go, people don’t actually look like that. 😀 I understand that a lot of girls and women feel pressure to attempt to make themselves look like models because they think models are the definition of good-looking, when, in fact, models are models because they fit the ONE.SIZE.OF.THE.DRESS that the designer made for the show. They hire models to fit clothes… they DON’T make the clothes to fit the models. I understand the reasons that women want to ‘fight the power’ and get more unattractive women into on-air-talent positions. However… what they’re missing is that the woman wasn’t being sought because she was a woman. They were looking for someone that would have been attractive to their target demographic… MEN. If you take away the desire to hire someone attractive, that doesn’t mean that the unattractive woman has a chance at all. She’s on the same level (if not lower) than a man now, because neither the man nor the unattractive woman is going to add to the show’s ratings. Unfortunately, even fighting the power doesn’t mean a win for the unattractive woman… it’s merely a loss for the attractive woman. And, yes… I’m aware that I’m using terms that relate to _visual_ attractiveness, because that’s the line that was drawn in this particular case.

Do I think this situation was sexist? No. It would have been sexist if what the new employee looked like wouldn’t have mattered at all to their ratings. If they were hiring a video editor, who was never going to be seen on the broadcast, choosing a more attractive and less qualified woman would have been a sexist decision, benefitting the men in the company that would rather walk in the editing suite and see an attractive woman, and hurting the bottom line, since she would be less effective at getting the job done than the less attractive woman. In the case of hiring on-air talent for a mindless hostess position, go for the gusto. Get all the ratings you can, because that’s where you’re going to get viewers, fame, advertisers, more work… whatever. If you need the new hire to actually DO SOMETHING, go with the most qualified person in the best interests of your business.

Like I said, I missed the boat on this conversation, but it ended with ZERO resolution, whatsoever. Each camp rallied around their respective positions, and no solutions came up that might have gotten a less attractive, yet more qualified female the job. In this case, its absolutely right what the women were saying, that her personality wasn’t being showcased and that she was chosen for her looks instead of her ideas and thoughts. “Someone” also said something that I found interesting and true. One of the arguments from the “good looks” side was that “sex sells”. Her response was that it wasn’t actually sex that was “selling”… it was how attractive the woman looked. I think she’s absolutely right. I don’t think a more sexual or sensual, yet visually unattractive woman would have stood a chance of being hired for this position, because she still wouldn’t have helped the ratings.

What never came up in the conversation is Human nature. Regardless of the technology, it’s still people on the other end of the line. Attractive people get more ‘stuff’ in this world. That’s how it is. Every time there’s a scientific study done, those are the results. All other things being equal, attractiveness wins the position. Even when things AREN’T equal, attractiveness wins the position. It’s valiant and respectable to fight the good fight, but until the society changes to the point where the viewers don’t care what the host / hostess / romance novel cover model looks like, their visual or physical attractiveness is going to be a tool to use to bait viewers into watching something they otherwise wouldn’t even consider taking a FIRST look at.

ReelSolidTV Episode 15

Keep Rising To The Top (KR3TS) performs Violeta Galagarza’s choreography for various artists and shows… including:

Joe “I Wanna Know”
El General “Muevelo”
D-Stroy “Roll Out”
Los Hurikanes Del Caribe “El Pinguino”
Criollo Con La Motivacion “Chevere”
555-Soul Commercial
Dance in the Square
KR3TS Annual Dance Showcase
“Studio Y” on New York’s Metro Channel