gracenmichelle asked: lol RE: "must name sequences" - this was one of those projects where there's a drastic technical error in the first sequence and you end up starting a new project file and doing a million test sequences until you get one right and then at that point you're like FUCK NAMING SHIT because every time you name one "test" or "try" or "new one" you eventually get to "this better fucking work" and "omg I'm gonna slit my throat" as sequence names. I hope I'm not the only one that experiences this :)
hahaha yes, I have had the same problem(s) and I am sure ANY editor has! I just got a nervous tic because I have been spending the whole week organizing 20+ 3-4 year old jobs across 8 different TB drives. Yay downtime. Anything called “Untitled”, “Sequence 1726481”, “Final Rev Rev v3 ALT”, or with any other program default name is enough to send me into tears. Just don’t let my present become your future! I also cried for you when I saw the missing footage problem, thats the whole reason I am organizing these jobs. Capture/export to desktop? Save footage on one drive and project file on another? Whyeeeeeeee?!?!?!
fartwithheadphoneson asked: That was an excellently articulated response. Thank you! I don't believe it's one sided. My intention is always to challenge the way people think and I can only do so with a strong voice and strong opinion. At least, that's how I roll, usually. There are a million modifications I could make to any statement I put out there, but I choose the route of being more stern on one issue in order to stir up thought and discussion. I appreciate your reblog :)
No problem, thanks for drumming up some interesting conversation!
And I assumed it wasn’t really how either of you felt - it’s just much easier to simplify viewpoints in order to make a point yourself sometimes. I only lumped you into the “one sided” view that I did because I know from personal experience how hard it can be to see past your own blinders (better known as “intentions”) when you are creating media, written or visual.
I am actually an editor myself, and totally not at work…I promise…OK, I lied. Anyway, I know it can hard for me to get past what the client or audience is “supposed” to think or feel in reaction to my work. What I want, or what the project intends, isn’t always what happens when you share your creation with the world. Sometimes, maybe more often than not, what you put out into the world has a completely different impact than what you anticipated or intended. I’m guessing this has happened to you at some point. A funny scene turned out sad, a serious portion gives everyone the giggles. This can be awesome when you get something more than what you intended…but it can also be terribly frustrating if the actual result works against your needs. Funny is great, but maybe not in a spousal abuse PSA, right?
So essentially I assumed you may think the same way as me from time to time, rather than call upon my non-existant mind reading abilities ;)
I know what it feels like to be called a “dirty spic” does that qualify me? :)
When you’re hurt by hearing a word, it isn’t so much the actual word as it is the hateful intention behind the word. We could replace the word faggot with the word cookie and as long as everyone knew that cookie was the new word for it, people would then be offended by me saying cookie.
The word alone is not the problem, the intention to harm is.
Actually, you are both right (M.A. in Communication here, not saying I’m perfect, just adding to the discourse). The problem isn’t the word (or any word), it is your view of communication.
You (message sender) apparently see communication as transmission focused. Your meaning is the “true” meaning, and any error is on the part of the receiver. This is very much related to mass communication (more TV/magazines/radio than blogging) because there is no back and forth to reach an agreed meaning.
Both smthngironic and nikaras apparently feel that the “true” meaning lies in the interpretation of content - the message received trumps the meaning intended. How I feel because of what you said/did is the most important factor. This lies a little closer to the PC/Critical view of communication that sees meaning as independent from (or at least not entirely dependent on) the message sender’s intent.
Me, I think the “true” meaning lies somewhere in the middle. Communication is NEVER one sided. It takes at least two, and the more people you add the screwier it can get.
For example, if I see a person in need of assistance, walk up to them and say “may I help you (derogatory term)?” there are at least two possible ways for each of us to understand this interaction. I could be unaware that I am using a hurtful name, and my intentions are good. Or perhaps I am trying to make them feel bad without being overtly agressive. They can choose to interpret my actions in either of these ways as well. But what happens next will be because of a combination of my meaning and their understanding of it.
1. They think I’m an asshole but I’m trying to help? They flip me off and I’m confused or hurt (looks like what happened here?). Pretty much just a big misunderstanding!
2. I’m an asshole and they think I’m an asshole? Same interaction, but I get the satisfaction of knowing I accomplished my goal of hurting them.
3. They think I’m nice but I’m an asshole? They accept my help, and I have to choose between helping someone I dislike, or being more overt in my intention to hurt their feelings.
4. They think I’m trying to help and I am? They accept my help and everybody feels all warm and fuzzy.
Obviously things can get pretty complicated pretty fast, but hopefully you all can also see (if you didn’t already), that there is more to communication than intention OR interpretation.
Too true…
via thedailywhat
This also applies to every first day of class. I don’t know why I’m surprised every time…
It wasn’t until much later in the story that Alice ate the “use your critical thinking skills to assess the situation before jumping to the conclusion that everything will turn out well” biscotti.
I know my calculus.
