tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8602167808094222357.post7096310391814539978..comments2023-10-28T12:54:37.739-05:00Comments on Not Another Dime: 2016.12.29 Ken "Whit" Whitman's Most Fervent Supporter Shills for the Man....Christopher Stogdillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07831712020518883173noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8602167808094222357.post-24731153900481742602017-01-14T00:38:43.744-06:002017-01-14T00:38:43.744-06:00I think the relation is the speculation that he...I think the relation is the speculation that he's using video production equipment purchased with Kickstarter funds for his new business. Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17675415106033909130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8602167808094222357.post-30039230379764487562016-12-31T15:46:55.874-06:002016-12-31T15:46:55.874-06:00I Don't see the relation to either KoDT or Tra...I Don't see the relation to either KoDT or Traveller kickstarter news. Good luck to this business.Taya Brownstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12511705062402901044noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8602167808094222357.post-6585593642420961772016-12-30T18:24:24.554-06:002016-12-30T18:24:24.554-06:00But Wait! There's More!
The VO sounds like i...But Wait! There's More!<br /><br />The VO sounds like it was shot in a barrel (horrible audio). There are no Nats in any of the shots or any music or underscore for the spot whatsoever. He laterally flipped the shot at :24 - :26 - demonstrating that he didn't have enough coverage (read ponytail guys shirt). He used an illegible font with an effect over the top to make it even harder to read. The overuse of wipes shows he has no F@#$ing clue about editing.<br /><br />...and I especially like his cameo in the opening crowd shot at :02 - :04 (and in the mirror at :25)...<br /><br />So, yeah - about what I'd expect for $250 in a small market by a guy who thinks he knows how to shoot commercials.TravellerWasAHorsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03764432815742796205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8602167808094222357.post-36124850642321390282016-12-30T14:50:22.227-06:002016-12-30T14:50:22.227-06:00Just watched the video done in this advertisement ...Just watched the video done in this advertisement for advertisement and I must say that I'm not impressed.<br /><br />The lighting was bad; made everything look flat and killed most of the sense of depth.<br /><br />The camera was often out of focus for most depths (used the wrong lens I'd guess, so the focus range was narrow--a good idea for use of a green screen, but not in most other medias).<br /><br />The editing was weak. Some shots were less than three seconds, which is generally considered the minimum you want to use. Anything less doesn't give the human brain to recognize and understand the scene transitions.<br /><br />And used the same special effect each time at the bottom for changing text. While a GOOD idea to use a similar effect to leave the audience with a sense of connection (and recognition should they catch only a glimpse of it in the future), the same exact star-twinkle effect becomes boring. Like watching the same epic battle scene time and again. Not matter how great it will eventually become dull.<br /><br />Even without all the hype about his failure to deliver on kickstarters, I wouldn't hire the man...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04034084528502070799noreply@blogger.com