Personal Expenses

Posted by Bill Cammack On September - 6 - 2007

When I was hanging out with Rox (Darling, from beachwalks.tv and barefeetstudios.com) @ BlogHerBiz ’07 back in March, something striking [at least to me] occurred. We did the conference thing and hung out for a few hours, and when she checked her in-box, she had *80* new emails…. EIGHTY!!!

I remember being surprised by two things. The first thing was that she had so many new emails in the span of probably four hours. The second was that….. she wasn’t surprised by this at all. She looked at her computer screen like “… here we go again…”… like this was something ‘regular’.

At the time, I was probably getting 15 emails tops in an entire day. 80 would have meant I didn’t check my email for an entire WEEK! :D … and that’s INCLUDING spam and bacn.

I remember considering the amount of TIME it would take her to go through all of those emails, particularly the relevant ones. I also thought about how more emails would be coming in during the time she was spending answering the 80 emails currently awaiting some form of action. She also DIDN’T start dealing with her email at that point, so I considered how much more would be built up until she allocated time and mental energy to her process. Months later, I watched an MSNBC video where Andrew Baron from Rocketboom actually DELETED all of his backed-up email! :O [video link].

The ‘problem’ isn’t actually email… it’s TIME as well as energy. There’s only so much time in a day. Some of that time has to be allocated to new things, other time to current thing and still other time to clearing your desk or archiving old things. On top of that, there’s a familiarity of process that’s actually repulsive when it comes to doing several of the same kind of project simultaneously. For instance… Many editors that I know don’t WATCH television. :) We MAKE television all day, so when we’re done with that, we want to do something different with our free time.

I think it’s especially important for freelancers to pay attention to these time and energy costs. It’s easy to overextend yourself if you don’t account for the ‘personal expenses’ of coming down from one project and getting in gear to do another one. It’s not necessarily easier on staffers either, depending on what you agreed to accomplish before leaving each day. A 9-5 could easily become a 9-7 or 9-9 depending on how many duplicate videos you need to create for packaging purposes or backup or delivery to different locations.

Looking back at my own archives, I realize that I lost control of my ‘personal expenses’ back in the beginning of July, two months ago. Ever since then, there hasn’t been enough TIME in each day to accomplish what I need to. Just the fact that I can take the time to think up, write and then post this blog is a testament to my regaining a handle on something that I wasn’t aware I could lose a handle on. :)

Probably back in June, I agreed to do a choreography video for my friend Violeta Galagarza, Founder of KR3Ts Dance Company, based in East Harlem, NYC. At the time, I ‘saw’ very clearly how I was going to get it done, and how long it was going to take me. Right after that, I accepted new client work, started editing a popular internet show, participated in a live internet show that required preparation, contributed a segment to a third internet show, thought up and created a video blog and accompanying social site, traveled out of state a couple of times and edited a cooking DVD. Priorities stacked up, and I have to apologize to Violeta for taking so long, but I literally have not had a block of time where I could get out of the mindset of mentally ‘living in’ my client work or other projects to ‘live in’ her project long enough to get ‘er done.

I realize I’m still too close to this phenomenon to succinctly explain it. :)

My advice is… If you’re in a profession where you need to FEEL the work in order to be good at it, such as video editing, pay close attention to the ‘emotional’ toll that it takes on your system. You end up paying that toll in TIME. People will not understand this, so you have to manage it on your own.

Same thing with email or any other time-consuming process. Nobody’s PAYING YOU to reply to their emails, but they still expect responses. The time you spend answering emails is the time you’re NOT spending clearing your obligations from your virtual desk. It’s time you’re NOT spending working on your own projects or doing what YOU want to do. It’s time you’re NOT spending thinking progressively about something you’d like to accomplish in the future. It’s time you’re NOT spending learning new technology that someone created or exploring a new social site. It’s time you’re NOT spending watching video blogs to check out new techniques or just enjoy what your friends are doing this week.

I understood the look on Rox’s face when she saw how many unread emails she had accumulated in the span of a few hours, but I couldn’t empathize with her. I most certainly do, NOW! I’m going to knock this choreography video out and make sure I don’t lose track of my ‘personal expenses’ ever again! :D

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

204-070512_ActionGirlRocketboomRobot

Posted by Bill Cammack On June - 22 - 2007

YouTube Sponsors Rocketboom

Posted by Bill Cammack On June - 4 - 2007

According to NewTeeVee, Rocketboom is launching a new sponsorship system today, with the first participant being YouTube.

Andrew Michael Baron, who has been publicly opining about new models for monetizing online video, announced today his pioneering video show Rocketboom is launching a sponsorship system, with YouTube being the first participant, starting tomorrow.

They also link to Andrew Baron’s personal blog, Dembot, where he gives some of his personal views and insights on how Rocketboom arrived at this sponsorship model.

Congrats to Drew, Kenyatta, Joanne & Ellie. Keep up the good work! :D

ReelSolidTV Episode 45: PodCampNYC – Rocketboom

Posted by Bill Cammack On April - 7 - 2007

PodCampNYC Party @ Slate

Posted by Bill Cammack On April - 7 - 2007

The kickoff party for PodCampNYC was this evening @ Slate. Amongst others, I got to meet and/or hang out with:

Vergel from Lx7, visiting from Canada
Chris from Network2
Grace from FearlessCooking
Drew & Alisa from Scriggity
Mike, Charles, Dina, Angus & Eric from blip.tv
Drew from Rocketboom
Kathleen from TheBurg.tv
Sandra from agtv
Nathan from Cruxy
Julien Smith from inoveryourhead.net
Malia from PBS
Karin from her mystery location… plus Karin’s sister

I didn’t see Eric Skiff, but my camera did.
I’m pretty sure I saw Christopher from financialaidpodcast, but he was ushered out of the aisle before I got a chance to say “hi”.

Here are the pics from the PodCampNYC @ Slate flickr set:

The Lab – Episode 01: Response To Randolfe

Posted by Bill Cammack On March - 19 - 2007

In response to The Lab Episode 01: Swingers, Randolfe wrote:

It was well edited and entertaining.

Thank you. :)

Ultimately, I think you fell into the trap of allowing the film to pull you down to it’s (their) level.

This statement assumes a couple of things. A) It assumes that I’m not “down to their level” already. B) It assumes that whatever I say in a video has anything to do with my actual personality. C) It assumes that “their level” is below someone else’s level. I see why you feel that way based on your statements below.

“IF” I were fifty years younger and female in gender (‘if’ is a famously BIG word), I don’t think I’d be interested in getting to know you better and/or dating you.

This is an interesting statement because I realized after I read this line that in all of my calculations about set design and show concept and DVD selection and graphics and music and decisions on commentary and editing….. that I gave *ZERO* thought to A) whether females would watch my show or not, B) whether they’d want to date me, or C) whether anything I said might increase or decrease my chances of getting a rap.

The reason I can’t be concerned with that is that it’s tough enough to get topics that I want to talk about and make it all happen without adding in the filter of “I can’t use this clip or say this or that because some chick might not want to hook up with me”. :D

I agree with you that if my goal were to present myself as a candidate for marriage, talking about not only manipulating women, but in fact manipulating guys into having abilities beyond their natural capacity to “pull chicks” would be just about THE LAST thing I’d want to do. :D

As a matter of fact, if you watch the video again, you’ll notice that I call guys out for their bullshitting, lying behavior. They don’t ACTUALLY own yachts and expensive apartments. They just SAY they do because that’s what they think women want to hear in order to give them some. They’re hoping they can hit it before she figures out that they don’t have any of that stuff. That’s why Mikey got caught in a lie. Instead of just coming at her straight up, that he liked how she looked and wanted whatever he wanted from her, he went the typical route and tried to talk himself up and got busted. The problem with that technique is that so many guys use it that it’s effectiveness is diluted. You may as well walk up to her and say “I’m about to lie to you so I can try to get laid”. :)

Anyway… Having thought about what you said, and appreciating your comments, for sure… I STILL can’t be concerned with whether some chick wants to hook up with me or not because she doesn’t like something I said in a video. hehehe Something about that just makes me laugh. :D

Actually… Your suggestion that I tailor what I say on the show to present myself in the best light as a suitor is merely a different technique of manipulation. That would be as bad, ethically, as the behavior I just finished discussing. :)

This “game” single males (of all orientations) play demeans the really important dynamic in sexual-social relationships by reducing them to the level of a sport like fox-hunting and/or archery practice.

Yes. You are right about that. However, that doesn’t make “the game” any less of a reality for very many guys. Some guys chase chicks just for sport… just because they can. Other guys try to develop skills because they CAN’T pick up girls to save their lives. It’s because of Mikey’s lack of confidence in himself that he decides to lie about his job and what he owns and what he plans to buy. It’s because he doesn’t believe this girl will like him for who he actually is. For some guys, having some sort of tactics are just plain necessary, or they’ll never get on in their entire lives.

I had a parting of ways with a friend of mine over just this very issue. For some odd reason, he wasn’t getting any interest from girls that he liked. I mean, he was really in a bad way about it. Once he started learning how “the game” works, his first reaction was JOY that now, he could pull girls that used to NOT give him the time of day. Eventually, he rejected “the game” for the very reasons you mention. What he wanted was a girl that he liked that also liked him. You can’t get that by lying to her, because she likes who it is that you told her you are, and she doesn’t know a damned thing about YOU at all. She likes what you told her… It’s not that she likes YOU. What he learned for himself was that he was better off going the honest route and throwing his hat in the ring, win or lose, without manipulating the ladies into giving him what he wants. Unfortunately, once he “converted”, I represented the dark side of the force to him, so we didn’t hang out after that. I respect his decision and wish him all the best.. but that path doesn’t work for everyone.

I agree with you though that “the game” has a desensitizing effect on guys. Women become expendable when you can get another one five minutes from now or by turning the next corner. The more effective you get in “the game”, the less each individual “success” matters at all. It’s merely repetition and reinforcement that the same stimulus creates the same response in many different women. *YAWN* For guys that can get on without gaming chicks, I recommend that you don’t get involved in the sport of it all.

You’re a bright perceptive guy. Focus on more serious and deeper stuff. Leave films like this one to the loners and losers who inevitably end up living them :-).

Thanks. :) However, you’re projecting _your_ value system onto *me*. I’m sure there are serious as well as deep topics that I’ll get into eventually… however… hahahaha it’s NOT going to be in Episode 02! :D If you disliked Episode 01, you’re going to HATE Episode 02! hahahaha

Please take all this as a compliment not as criticism.

I appreciate your comments as well as your being up front about how you felt about the episode instead of just saying something generically nice. I really hadn’t noticed that I honestly didn’t consider AT ALL what chicks might think about my “Swingers” commentary. I’m glad about not caring about that, but I can’t take all the credit for it. Not that I would ever compare a single-episode-show to Rocketboom, but look at the statistics. They had something like 8% of their viewers as females. There’s a low percentage of females in the Yahoo Videoblogging Group. Even out of the females that are apparent, the vast majority of them are in some form of relationship or are for whatever reasons completely undateable. From Friday to right now, approximately 48 hours, I have a reported total from blip.tv of 116 views. Even if all of those were unique visitors (which they aren’t), there are two chances that one of them would be a “dateable” female… SLIM… and NONE…..

….. and Slim left town! hahahahaha :D

I thought the ending credits were the best part :-).

Again, thanks. After all I went through to get Episode 01 “in the can” and then back out of the can, I had to give myself proper credit for doing EVERYTHING. It’s out of my system now, and I’ll be using “regular” credits from now on. :D

Thanks for the note, Randolfe. :)

Citizen Journalism

Posted by Bill Cammack On February - 28 - 2007

PBS’ “Frontline” is doing a series called “News War: What’s Happening to the News”. Part 3 aired last night @ 9pm, but you can watch it online.

Segment 19 in part 3 is of particular interest to those of us involved in videoblogging, which is, on the simplest level, putting videos on a blog. These videos could be personal. They could be something created or acted out. They could be just about anything…. Except they could also be a documentation of something that happened. For some reason, there’s a debate surrounding the importance of this. It seems completely obvious to me that if you document something and post it for people to see….. right now…… ALL around the world…….. that makes your work just as valid, if not MORE SO than someone who has a job called “journalist” and took some courses explaining HOW they’re supposed to report things and WHAT they’re supposed to report. :/

The first part of Segment 19 features an interview with Andrew Baron, creator of Rocketboom, as well as clips featuring Joanne Colan, current Rocketboom anchor and Amanda Congdon, former Rocketboom anchor, subsequently of Amanda Across America, and now ABC News. There’s also a clip of Amanda interviewing Josh Wolf, who’s currently in jail because of “citizen journalism”.

In another segment of the show, they mention that Amanda ‘made the jump’ to ABC News. I think that’s an interesting piece to the puzzle of “us vs them”, with independents on one side and MSM on the other. I suppose that those who are interested in attempting to invalidate “citizen journalism” could argue that ABC simply hired “on-air talent”. They chose HER and not necessarily “her journalism”. Read the rest of this entry »

Rocketboom Party Photos

Posted by Bill Cammack On January - 21 - 2007


Subscribe / Connect

facebook.com/ReelSolid.TVtwitter.com/BillCammackyoutube.com/reelsolidtvmyspace.com/reelsolidtv

Enter your email address to
receive my blog in your inbox