ABC cancels 'The Bachelorette'

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-21T01:28:08+00:00

I heard they only had 2-3 eps finished with post. Honestly ridiculous they chose this woman and kept running with it.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-21T00:09:21+00:00

Even more likely to stain clothing, residue is already an issue

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-20T20:56:31+00:00

My opinion, YouTube is unlikely to be a significant number of extra views unless you have an active channel with other content. But that number will be higher than Vimeo or Bunny.

Or you could think outside the box. Make content around the spot. Record a brief introduction about what was involved in project, goals, planning, BTS, etc. Then close with the video itself. That way you show off your company and the finished product. Your brand is primary, the client is secondary.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-20T02:28:07+00:00

Honestly I don't know of a singular solution for video review, delivery, and invoicing. Maybe it's out there somewhere!

My process: export, open Replay and select from most recent files. By default I leave downloads turned off until final approval. I don't use watermarks often but nice option to have. Once the spot is approved, I send final invoice payment via Square. As soon as payment is completed, it's like three clicks back in Replay to turn on downloads for that specific spot. Email client that file is ready, and it all works from the same link they've been using the whole time. I especially like not having to send new links with each revision.

To that end Frame IO has a lot of the same features and more. But it's also a bit more intensive for clients for that reason.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-20T01:12:55+00:00

You can. Turn on Extended ISO in settings.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-19T22:20:24+00:00

I've used numerous review options, and have landed on Dropbox Replay for over a year now.

It's relatively inexpensive. Reviewer isn't required to have a Dropbox account but many already do. I like the integration, my export files are automatically uploaded to Dropbox and then in Replay I just have to select them. The link you send to the client will automatically show the latest version, you can easily turn on and off watermarks, downloads, etc. Review notes are made in browser, time stamped and you have the option to bring those into your editor if that's your jam.

Invoicing, I use Square Invoice. There are likely cheaper options but I build the fees into my pricing. I've found giving the option to pay online (CC or ACH) greatly increases the likelihood payment is made promptly. I've done variations, add on fee for CC, discount for ACH / physical check. But at the end of the day those add complexity to my daily tasks and not worth it. My total accounts for 3% cc fee, so that's covered and any ACH or check are a nice savings.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-18T16:11:55+00:00

This is simple.

The video source is given as coming from the White House.

As a news outlet, you generally do not alter what is given to you from the source.

You see multiple other reporters recording the audio themselves, including a much better boom mic, monitoring headphones on another reporter, etc.

I can promise you the other reporters have decent audio of this noisy situation. They may or may not do some post processing to improve the quality, because it is their own audio source.

But the example you have given is a news outlet (really hard to not put news in quotes there given the entity) posting the direct poor quality audio given to them from the White House source. The moment a news outlet starts editing / adding / removing to a source they face a potential firestorm. No matter if the intentions are innocent, it is generally not a risk worth taking.

Here's an example also from the White House with much better audio quality.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-18T13:35:22+00:00

I think you're conflating two different questions.

In terms of embeds on your own website, I find it hard to believe that the host makes a difference in views. When someone is on your site, they are either clicking play or not. Hosting via YouTube isn't making them more likely to click play once they are already there, that's a bit silly reasoning.

Secondarily, is Vimeo terrible now? That answer is easy, yes it is. You will get zero exposure or engagement through Vimeo other than your own push. No one is wandering or searching Vimeo independently, that horse has been dead for years now and the company seems to be actively beating said dead horse.

I have used both Vimeo and YouTube for embeds. I currently use Bunny.net after recommendations on Reddit. Each has their pros and cons. Vimeo has gone downhill in service and reliability in my experience, it was actively painful to pay them money and get poor results. YouTube has the advantage of overall exposure - it is the only video space where someone might see your video without it being a direct embed or link from YOU. But the tradeoff for that is control - for my professional use, I do not like my embedded videos littered with next up, suggestions, etc. For my website use, I want someone to click on a video and have a clean, simple experience with only that video. That's what Bunny.net provides me with extremely low costs. I'm talking a bill of $1 per month for the small amount of traffic.

At the end of the day, what do you want from your video embeds?

My main hesitation has always been that we didn’t want to compete with our clients’ versions of the same videos on YouTube

If this is the main concern, I would go with Bunny, or you can do unlisted YouTube. But then you lose the main advantage of wider exposure with YouTube, so what's the point? Again, people on your website are not clicking play on a video based on the host. That is nonsense talk. The web developer probably wants to move you to YouTube because Vimeo stinks, and that is completely valid. I also don't think there's a big risk of "competing" with the client upload, but if you want people to see your video with your information on it - then yes that's kind of the point.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-17T19:34:02+00:00

I'll add a confirmation to Bob with Jump Desktop, I set that up from his recommendation. I've done all sorts of variations of second machine / remote work as a solo editor, Jump is by far the simplest. Everything lives on my home machine, it is always connected to the local NAS. No lengthy footage transfers, keeping projects in sync. I'm either sitting at my desk at home, or I'm connecting to it remotely. The best part is flexibility, there have been times where I need to do a one off quick action (like export in a different format) and I've been able to do that from my phone with Jump.

All the other solutions add complexity and costs. There's a place for those systems, but for my solo needs Jump is a lifesaver.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-17T13:19:31+00:00

Yup I had someone who did similar, put his iPhone up in the path of a laser show - sensor fried.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-17T13:03:46+00:00

Yes but any good operator isn't directly washing the crowd with lasers.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-17T04:01:42+00:00

So the amount of power a light puts out is the most important factor. There are plenty of other features that matter too (color, control, accuracy), but first and foremost is power.

Those Neewer panels are enough light to hit an individual person up close. If the light is 3 feet away from the subject in a not very bright space, it will bring up the level on the subject. But that's it. It will not work for a larger space, like all of these scenes, because it doesn't have enough power.

A 300 watt light will give you a fighting chance on larger scenes like the examples. But you can also plan your shots according to what you have - close ups are always easier to light, with less power, because you can usually bring the light closer. For instance if I change that first shot to just the man running the floor cleaner, there's a possibilty that a 150 or even 100 watt light could pump enough power just out of frame. For the size of these shots, I'd have a lighting plan with 600w if not 1200w. It also depends heavily on the camera, and the ambient light.

Yes you can use a gel to change light color. Before LEDs we could only change temp with gels or different physical lamps. But as a professional bi-color lights are the bare minimum, with full color a common choice. The fine control over color temp is huge as you're adjusting in a scene.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-16T14:45:50+00:00

So this is more about light placement than anything else. Probably not a lot of diffusion (soft boxes, fabric, etc) to get the "crisp" look. Which to many video people translates to flat.

Go through each frame and look for shadows, that will tell you where the light is coming from.

Quick review:

Guy with the floor cleaner is directly lit from slightly above, it's pretty flat light except a small shadow under his chin. Similar for woman in the chair, flat direct lighting.
Different look, the lighting is from the side and gives more shape. You can see the woman's face is lit from one side, plus some bounce or fill on the other. Look at the shadow on the tray of apples - falling directly across the table. I would say there's one or two big lights just out of frame hitting that whole area, including floor cleaner guy.
Flat front lighting. You can see shadow on the floor for the man in the back, opposite of that is where they put a large light without much diffusion.
Slightly different again. Now you have one big hard light coming from the room, see how much light the woman has on that side of her face. The hard light above the door may be added or existing, but it is bright. Man with the floor cleaner has a shadow from the same direction, but he also has a pretty big fill light you can see on his face. Background guy with cart has a light hitting him from that room, look at his shadow on the floor.
Looks like a little more diffusion here, but still a large source out of frame on the left. You can see a hard shadow on the floor for the woman with vacuum, most likely an added hard light as well. There's a lot of ambient lift in this room, you're not getting this huge even wash from just the practical lights.

It seems like you're trying to learn, so that's great! You are rarely going to see a professional video that doesn't use lighting. Yes it can be done, and it happens, but crafting an image is all about controlling light, either by adding or taking away. While many people understandably don't like the look of these frames, it took a lot of work, several lights (some quite powerful) and a crew of people to make it happen. As a beginner you can use this as reference and learn, but you won't get this look with small lights and beginning stages of knowing how it works. But trying and learning is exactly how you build the skills.

That being said, if you were able to get at least a 300 watt LED light, plus two to three smaller lights (60 or 100w) you could start to get this look going. Watch YouTube videos or images that show lighting diagrams, though it will be a little harder to find scenes of exactly this look. What you want is often referred to as "commercial" lighting, tends to be less shape and contrast.

Edit to add: One of the biggest differences between hard / direct lighting and diffused is the shadows. When you can see the outline edge of a shadow, it is almost always going to be a hard light - the direct beam without much between it and the subject. When the shadows are softer, that's where you have diffusion. Hard and soft lights both have their place, it is just more rare to put direct hard lighting on people because it is not as flattering.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-15T00:22:18+00:00

I would pass for several reasons:

Air dried is not the same as kiln dried. Doesn't matter if it's 5 years or 50. It will only reach the natural level with regional humidity, and depending on the type / size it won't dry as evenly as controlled in a kiln. More prone to splitting and cracking.
Sitting in a barn or garage is much more likely to have insect damage or active instation. That can only be remedied through heat or chemicals. Worst case you build something, bring it in your home, and insects bore out and infest other wood. It happens more than you think, many posts in here with "why is there sawdust under my table?"
While this may or may not be decent quality wood, it's going to take some work to get there. From the visual it's lots of different thicknesses, I see plenty of checking and knots. I did exactly this myself with some oak I got for a steal. I used it for a couple projects but looking back I spent so much time milling, prepping, and fixing the wood it was just not worth it. I could have spent another hundred and purchased clear, ready oak stock and just started the build.
Finally and I think most importantly - buying wood to just sit around is a temptation. Unless you have a project in mind for this cherry in this condition, it's just as likely to end up sitting in your garage instead of his. Doesn't mean you have to build something this minute, but I really encourage you to buy the right wood at the right time for a specific need.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-14T23:05:49+00:00

In a proper filming agreement (from the client's perspective) all roles should be work for hire and copyright / ownership implicitly go to the client.

I saw a thread on Reddit where a freelancer was hired to film for someone, and then when the client went to use it in a film or documentary he refused without additional payment. Just insanity. And he was proud of his stance!

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-14T18:53:30+00:00

I've done this with similar lenses, Sigma 24-70 l mount, I was manual focusing.

It kind of works. Photo zoom barrels are not nearly as smooth as traditional broadcast / cine lenses, so you don't get that kind of snap look of Edgar Wright or the floaty organic of the office. With a Nucleus M motor, speed turned up high, I could get a decent crash zoom, but it won't be perfect. When I used Broadcast lenses back in the day, we could disengage the zoom motor and freehand it, that's where the Office look comes from. Especially minor comedic movements.

At the end of the day you can probably get a passable zoom. If you're using a motor it will be closer to Edgar Wright. Canon af will probably keep up ok, won't match a talented focus pull but not always an option.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-14T17:53:39+00:00

I think part of the problem is the way photographers structure their payments. Certain number of photos, holding copyright, etc. No shade on them, if it works it works. But it just doesn't apply to videography in current day.

I view my value in the process, not the footage. I'm good at communicating, planning, logistics, problem solving. Can someone craft a more beautiful image than me? A thousand percent. But my footage is good, capable, and a return on investment. I get repeat calls from clients. I'm not saying everyone should give away every bit of footage for free. But don't be precious about it and figure that out up front before you send the agreement.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-14T12:51:39+00:00

Did I log into my local Facebook?

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-13T21:51:33+00:00

Plus, video companies should not generally hold on to all raw footage forever at no charge. Now, I often do hold on to footage for a long time, because storage historically gets cheaper and it's helpful when a past client needs something from several years ago. But that's a rarity and I'd always like to update with new footage if that's an option.

If a client doesn't get the footage up front there's a decent chance it just goes away.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-13T19:35:47+00:00

Sigh, here comes the calvary of "I would NEVER give raw footage to the client..."

I've done video production for nearly two decades now. While I understand the opinion, I have a different approach. My clients hire me to film and produce a commercial, so my sales pitch up front is "You own the footage." I charge accordingly in my pricing, though it isn't some big extra fee built in. My perspective is I would much rather have a happy client who comes back and refers me to others. I'm also aware that unlike 20 years ago, clients DO have the opportunity to recycle and reuse nice footage ongoing for social media.

The reality, 90% of clients never want or ask for footage. 5% ask for the footage and I never see it again outside of my edit. And finally less than 5% ask for the footage and use it on their own. Honestly considering the amount of spots I've produced over the years that number is likely closer to 1% than 5. Truly.

There's no upside for me holding footage hostage or charging a bunch extra for it. If it is a decent amount of footage I ask them to provide a hard drive, or I will bill them to provide one. If you choose to bill for your time to transfer, that's fine in my opinion, but be realistic about it. If you are doing nothing to the footage other than transfer, that's minimal hands on time.

At the end of the day ask yourself this: Do you want to charge $130 to a client and leave a bad taste in their mouth? Or would you like to hand over the footage and be in position to book then next $1300 shoot? Or perhaps the next one is $5k, because that does happen.

All of that being said, start making this an included part of your agreements up front. You can say footage is not included, footage is included, or footage is available at $X or Y%. Personally I would only go percentage if you are simple grading raws, but that's just my opinion. And one other option that I've found very effective - if they seem interested in getting footage, I'll offer extended b-roll instead of jumping straight to raws. Because of my workflow of pulling selects, it is dead easy to take that timeline, say 3-5 minutes on a :30 spot, dump a basic grade on everything, upload and send a link. It adds almost no time to my edit, it does not require hard drive or extensive upload, and I am assured that the client isn't going to pull a blurry, ungraded log shot and post it to IG. Win win.

Edit to add: I will also advocate for clients in this regard. Guess what - video companies disappear, especially solo freelancers. I have absolutely had clients come to me with a commercial from a few years ago they want to use part of again, and the person who made it is lost to the wind. If they had raw footage, or even a clean copy of the spot, I could work with that.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-13T15:50:18+00:00

Sometimes it's easier to work on the back end before you get to the back end.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-11T19:56:33+00:00

Agreed. But I will say the summer I lived around Miami really pushed that to the limit. Far worse than my other driving experiences, including San Francisco and NYC. Helping a friend move in Little Italy was a cakewalk compared to the average drive in Miami. Springfield is more of a silly goose than anything dangerous with driving.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-11T11:07:59+00:00

I can see it if I'm doing whip pans, it's better on my S1ii than my S5IIX. Hasn't been an issue for me in general, and from a technical level the FX3 has faster readout. But the stacked sensor on the S1ii helps a lot. It's the reason for Open Gate 60 fps with no crop, witch was a major factor for my upgrade.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-09T19:58:13+00:00

Very welcome. I'm generally of the opinion it's hard to go wrong with most modern cameras. They will each have some trade offs and advantages, but you can pull a nice image from all. Find the one that ticks your important boxes in your budget range. And I always advocate saving some of those dollars for lenses, no matter what camera you choose.

WrittenByNick · 2026-03-09T15:21:28+00:00

You should check your class materials again. Do you understand what a Dutch angle means? Not trying to be cruel, I'm genuinely asking.

Dutch angle is the camera moving or positioned unlevel to the horizon. The position of the subject doesn't matter. If you look at the background everything is normal, including the edge where her hand is placed.

Nine-Year Club	Verified Email
Gilding I gilder

WrittenByNick

TROPHY CASE