It's christmas so I won't be spending long on thei spost but please be aware that the following e-mail is a scam designed to get your bank account details:
Dear ASB FastNet Customer,
We are currently performing a full customer database backup, to improve our security measures and reduce the number of inactive accounts. Please follow the link provided in this message and confirm your personal information.
https://.www.asb.co.nz/
Your account will be limited and eventually deleted if not confirmed within the next 24 hours. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.
Lately I've been getting interested in the principles behind photography (think physics). One key part of this is focal length and the idea that focal length is the distance from the front of the lens to the image sensor (for digital cameras) or film (for film cameras). The focal length is also the point at which light passing through the lens becomes focussed. This should mean that lenses of a given focal length should only be able to focus on objects at a particular distance. To put it another way lenses of a given focal length should not be able to have variable focus.
Yet we know this isn't true. All of our lenses have a focus ring and they all allow us to control where focus is without changing the focal length...
Or do they?
I decided to test this out by slapping my 50mm prime lens onto my camera then setting my camera up on a tripod in my lounge. I then took two pictures, 1 with the focus ring set to the furthest distance possible (infinity), the second with it set to the closest distance possible (in this case 45cm). The results were surprsing and gratifying at the same time.
Photo taken with focus set to infinity
Photo taken with focus set to 45cm
As you can see in the images above the field of view has shifted between the 2 photos. In the first case with focus set to infinity we have a wider angle of view than the second case with focus set to 45cm. The changing focus has changed the focal length.
This is surprising because:
We expect fixed focal length lenses to maintain a constant focal length. Clearly this is not the case
This is not surprising/is gratifying because:
It fits with the basic physical principles of how light can be focussed on a surface
It fits with what you SEE happening when you adjust focus on a lens (the lens moves away from the sensor when focussing on close objects (increased focal length and a narrower angle of view) and towards the sensor when focussing on distant objects (decreased focal length and a wider angle of view)).
F numbers or F stops are an important concept to grasp in Photography. The F stop that you select will have important implications for your depth of field and the amount of light that enters the camera. But where does this value come from?
F numbers express the relationship between the focal length of a lens and the diameter of the opening through which light can pass (sometimes called a pupil or iris). The F number for any given lens is obtained by dividing the focal length by the diameter of the opening.
If they are equal the F number is 1.
If the focal length is smaller than the opening the F number is less than 1.
If the focal length is greater than the opening (the most common scenario) then the F number is greater than 1.
Now the truly interesting part about F numbers is the way that the relate to the amount of light that enters the lens. While doubling the shutter speed halves the amount of light that enters the camera doubling the f number more than halves the amount of light entering the camera. This is because the F number is related to the diameter of the opening while the amount of light that enters is determined by the area of the opening.
To illustrate this point we will compare the area and diameter of the opening for 3 F stop values in a 50mm lens: 1, 1.4, and 2.
F = 1
Diameter = 50/1 = 50mm
Area = 25 x 25 pi = 1964.29mm
F = 1.4
Diameter = 50/1.4 = 35.71...mm
Area = 17.86... x 17.86... x pi = 1002.19mm
F = 2
Diameter = 50/2 = 25mm
Area = 12.5 x 12.5 x pi = 491.07mm
NB:// This relationship holds for any focal length as F numbers take the focal length into account. 50mm simply used as a concrete example.
As it turns out in order to halve the amount of light that enters the camera you need to increase the f number by the sqaure root of 2 (1.4-ish). This is why the standard F stop scale goes:
Each value is an approximation to the preceding value multiplied by the square root of 2 (1.4-ish)
F = 1
Diameter = 50/1 = 50mm
Area = 25 x 25 pi = 1964.29mm
F= Square root of 2
Diameter = 35.53...
Area = 982.14
Now if you're super inquisitive you may be wondering why the square root of 2 is the magical number. If you're also super observant you may have noticed earlier that the change from an F number of 1 to an F number of 2 reduced the area by a factor of 4. If you extend that out to an F number of 4 the area is 16 times smaller than when you have an F number of 1.
F = 1
Diameter = 50/1 = 50mm
Area = 25 x 25 pi = 1964.29mm
F = 2
Diameter = 50/2 = 25mm
Area = 12.5 x 12.5 x pi = 491.07mm
F = 4
Diameter = 50/4 = 12.5.mm
Area = 6.25 x 6.25 x pi = 122.76mm
What's happening?
Every time you double the F number, by going from 1 to 2 or 2 to 4, the amount of light entering the camera reduces by 4 times (or 2 squared).
If you quadruple the F number, by going from 1 to 4, the amount of light entering the camera reduces by 16 times (or 4 squared). Turning this around if you wanted to decrease the amount of light entering the lens by 16 times you could quadruple your f number (4 is the square root of 16). If you wanted to decrease the amount of light entering your camera by 4 times you could double your F number (2 is the square root of 4). Finally if you want to reduce the amount of light entering your camera by two times (i.e. if you wanted to halve the amount of light entering your camera) you could increase your F number by ~1.4 (~1.4 is the square root of 2).
In fact this concept pops up a lot in photography and is known as the inverse square law.
- The survey requires you to download a file, this file may contain malicious content. Normally if you were operating an online survey you would just provide a web link
- The credit will be designed as a legitimate reason to ask for your bank account details
- The survey isn't being promoted on any of ASB's web presences
Today I got to put a couple of lessons I've learnt into practice with some landscape photography. These lessons were:
- Photographers Capture Luck
- Photographers Capture (and see) Light
- Photographers Capture these things with Cameras
The luck component, mentioned by David Oliver in a talk I attended earlier in the year, usually comes from being in the right place at the right time. Today's opportunity came about on a trip back to Auckland from a location scout in the Coromandel. Out of the corner of my eye, on the side of the road, I spotted something that I quite liked the look of, pulled over, and found the right spot for what I felt was the right shot.
The seeing and capturing has two parts to it. You have to be able to appreciate what light does and recognise when things are going to look pretty - this enables you to recognise the lucky combination of subject and lighting when it occurs. This sounds simple but is actually something of a stumbling block. I have included 2 images below to make the point that without the light the image isn't anywhere near as interesting. This image needs the contrast that the sun punching through the clouds to the left of the frame provides. When the sun is fully behind the clouds the light is flat, even, and uninteresting. To make things worse in order to compensate for the reduced light in the second image the exposure must be increased. Regardless of how you do it you end up blowing out the sky and losing some of the clouds and the blue of the sky.
Finally perhaps the most important component of the bunch is the fact that I actually had a camera on me. Having your camera on you as much as possible (preferably at all times) is a lesson worth learning. Think of all the photo opportunities you will be able to snag.
The Solution:
Ctrl + J
Press Clear all on the top right hand side of the screen
Why it works:
This error is due to google chrome being unable to find the last location that you saved a downloaded file to.
By performing the fix above you are clearing chrome's memory of what that last location was.
How this could be made clearer:
The error message the google chrome throws up is super vague.
It tells you that it can't find the hard disk which sounds like it's unable to find the internal hard drive.
This isn't what it means.
It would be clearer if it specified the path that it was unable to find rather than simply telling you it is unable to find something.
chrome.exe - No Disk There is no disk in the drive. Please insert a disk into drive \Device\Harddisk1\DR3. Cancel - Try Again - Continu
This morning I received a good old fashioned phishing request from someone pretending to be from ASB. I have included the message at the bottom of the post but first here are some reasons to believe it is a scam:
- The e-mail was sent to undisclosed recipeints meaning that the exact same message gas been sent to multiple people
- Details specific to me and/or my account are not mentioned
- BANKS WILL NEVER ASK YOU TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS
- My account has not been deactivated (you can check to see if your account is still active by heading to your banks website directly (not via a link) and trying to log in.
- The e-mail address is a string of incoherent letters and is not associated with the asb.co.nz domain
- The click here link does not take you to any part of asb.co.nz, instead it takes you to http://mail.edutech.com/asb-online/asb-co-nz/ <- Don't go here
From: wgtsxy@online.com
Subject: Notification
We would like to inform you that your registration for your ASB Bank online profile needs to be updated. Due to security issues, your account has been deactivated and you are no longer able to access our online features. To access your profile, please visit ASB Bank now by clicking here>
You are receiving this email notification because this email address is listed as the administrative contact email for your ASB Bank.
Version 2: From: me@locahost.com to: me We would like to inform you that your registration for your ASB Bank online profile needs to be updated. Due to security issues, your account has been deactivated and you are no longer able to access our online features. To access your profile, please visit ASB Bank now by clicking here>
You are receiving this email notification because this email address is listed as the administrative contact email for your ASB Bank.
While you probably know that you should put your money into your glass and you probably know that a longer focal length translates to a more telephoto/zoomy lens you may not know how the numbers written on the outside of your lens relate to the underlying physics or even how the lens ensure that images end up on your sensor/film rather than somewhere else in space. These things are worth knowing as they feed into deeper concepts further down the line. Luckily, they're actually very easy to understand.
A Basic Photography Lens
A basic photography lens has 2 key properties:
- It is a converging lens
- It has a focal length
Both of these properties are shown in the diagrams that are commonly used to represent lenses
Photography lenses are converging lenses
Photography lenses are converging lenses. This means that light entering the lens bends (or converges) toward the middle of the lens. This is an important property of lenses as it is this convergence of light that allows images to be captured on the film or sensor that sits behind the lens. This convergence also contributes to the circle of confusion associated with light coming from any single source.
Photography Lenses have a focal length
The focal length is the distance between the lens and the point at which light entering the lens converges. In the case of cameras this doubles as the distance between the lens and the film or sensor as we want the light to converge on the film or sensor in order to be able to take well focussed images.
So far so good. But how do all the numbers and moving parts fit in?
The Role of the Focus Ring
The Focus Ring allows the photographer to adjust the point at which the light rays converge after passing through the lens.
Zoom lenses
Zoom lenses have a variable focal length. While this could be achieved by moving the lens further from the film or image sensor it is usually achieved (at least in part) through the inclusion of additional lens elements in the zoom itself. These additional elements bend light inwards (converging) or outwards (diverging) as required.
The 1:X number - The Aperture Number(s)
This number (or these numbers) show the F number associated with the largest aperture(s) for a given lens. In the case of prime lenses or zoom lenses with a constant maximum aperture only 1 value will be shown. In the case of zoom lenses that do not have a constant maximum aperture the range of aperture values will be shown. Aperture values themselves are a ratio of the diameter of the opening compared to the focal length of the lens (focal length/Aperture diameter). The 1 in the 1:X represents the focal length of your lens while the X represents relative size of the aperture. In a 1:1 lens the aperture's maximum diameter is equal to the lens's focal length. As the X gets larger the diameter gets smaller.
Zoom Lenses and Variable Apertures - Why?
Remember that the F number is the ratio of focal length to the diameter of the aperture. Unless elements inside the lens are compensating for the variation in the focal length the F number will have to increase as the focal length increases.
Despite sounding like group therapy for dementia patients the circle of confusion is a remarkably simple concept to grasp. It is often talked about as an unfocussed spot of light produced from a cone of light.
If you think about how light travels through a lens and the cones that it produces in doing so it soon becomes clear that the circle of confusion produced by objects at different distances from a lens will produce different circles of confusion when the recording medium is at different distances from the lens. Any combination that creates a circle of confusion that is too small for our eyes to resolve appears as a single crisp spot and is deemed to be in focus. Any combination that produces a larger circle of confusion is deemed to be more out of focus.
In this way the circle of confusion is related to the depth of field. Any circle of confusion that produces a finer resolution than our eye is deemed to be in focus.
As the circle of confusion essentially relates to the image that gets recorded on a sensor or frame of film it is calculated in relation to the size of the sensor or frame of film. Commonly the diagonal length of the recording medium is divided by 1000 or 1500. In the case of a Nikon APS-C sensor the value obtained by dividing the diagonal by 1500 is 0.019
Over the years, in addition to an interest in photography, I have developed an interest in science. I love reading about and discovering the relationship between different variables and there is nothing more exciting than when that relationship can be boiled down to a clean equation. Luckily for me Photography is essentially applied physics and, as physics is also in love with equations, this means photography has plenty of lovely equations for those keen enough to be interested in them. As I am not a formal student of photography I have not been exposed to these equations so I am currently collecting them as part of my learning process and also with an eye to a wee project I'm working on.
Calculating Depth of Field
Depth of field is something that many amateur photographers express an interest in. Often they will tell you that an image has great depth of field or a lovely shallow depth of field but it is far rarer for them to say that the depth of field is 143mm. Depth of field refers to the amount of an image that appears to be in sharp focus. It has depth because the image is produced by light bouncing off objects in the real world. The distance from where sharp focus begins on an object to where it ends on an object gives us our measure of depth. Hence, depth of field.
While most photographers quickly learn the general relationship between focal length, aperture, subject distance, and depth of field physics allows us to specify it exactly. That being said the first step to making this determination comes from defining something else, the circle of confusion. For our purposes, we will use the circle of confusion value for an APS-C (crop) sensor. 0.019948
The next step is to determine the hyperfocal distance of the lens. The hyperfocal distance is the point at which an object at infinity appears sufficiently sharp when photographed. It varies with focal length, aperture, and the circle of confusion and is defined below:
Focal Length2/(Aperture x Circle of Confusion)
While hyperfocal distance alone tells us little about the depth of field produced by the factors mentioned ealrier it is calculated first as its value is required when calculating the nearest and furthest focal point. The distance between the nearest and furthest focal point being the depth of field.
Nearest Focal Point = (Hyperfocal*distance to subject)/(Hyperfocal+(distance to subject - focal length))
Furthest Focal Point = (Hyperfocal*distance to subject)/(Hyperfocal-(distance to subject - focal length))
Depth of Field = Furthest Focal Point - Nearest Focal Point
This video and the the description that accompanies it on YouTube tell the story of how Joshua Bell (a famous violinist who played to a sold out audience the night before) played Bach on a $3.5 million violin in a Subway at Rush hour and almost nobody noticed.
It is presented as an experiment, which you might be able to justify if you incorrectly defined an experiment as doing something and checking to see what happened without worrying about why it happened, with astounding results. However what is truly remarkable is that it is neither an experiment nor an event with astounding results. Here's why:
It's not an experiment
In an experiment you try to test an idea. You do this by carefully adjusting one variable in a situation at a time while holding everything else constant. In an experiment you are in control and you measure the effect that changes you make to one thing (say the price of the violin in this case) have on the measure that you are interested in (people's tendency to stop and listen). Here's why the situation they describe is, at best, an awful experiment or, most accurately, an anecdotal observation
A comparison is made between the people in the Subway and the people in the concert hall the previous night. It is noted that those in the Concert Hall sat and listened intently to the performance while those in the subway did not. The reasons for this difference is suggested to be that when we don't have time to appreciate beauty we don't appreciate it. While this is possible it is by no means proven and this 'experiment' is incapable of addressing this idea. Why? It has failed to control for, and therefore has failed to rule out, the 4 following potential explanations among many others:
1) The audience
The people in the Subway and the people in the concert hall are, in all likelihood, not the same people. As such there are any number of potential reasons for them not stopping to listen to the music. While the fact that it is rush hour may be one of these other plausible explanations include a different taste in music, a dislike of subway stations (reducing the total beauty content of the situation), and even a higher proportion of deaf people (deaf people are unlikely to be well represented at a concert). These are just a few reasons.
2) The beauty signals
Those attending the concert the night before would have been given all kinds of signals about how beautiful they should think the music was. For one thing they probably knew what was going to be played, who was going to play it, and how much they had to pay for a ticket. The combination of all these branding elements sends a stronger signal to pay attention to what is happening than a guy standing in casual dress in a subway station does. As such it is entirely possible that it wasn't the time pressure that stopped people perceiving the beauty but the fact that the performance itself may have less beauty in it than we would otherwise expect.
3) The measure doesn't match the conclusion
This one is actually the most important of the bunch. While the authors talk about our inability to notice beauty this is not what they actually measured. They didn't stop anyone and ask if they noticed the music and, if so, what they thought of it. They measured the length of time people stopped for and the amount of money they placed in the violinist's case.
4) The change in sound Quality
A quiet concert hall sounds far different to a busy subway station at rush hour. If people were less likely to notice the beautiful music in the subway station it could be because it was less audible over the surrounding noise or it could even be that the acoustics of the station itself made the music sound less beautiful. This failure to control the quality of what your testing with is a fatal flaw.
It's not actually surprising
While the reasons I have outlined above are probably enough to convince anyone that the experiment performed by the Washington Post was destined to succeed in finding a difference between the number of people listening to a violinist play a piece in a concert hall and the number of people listening to the same violinist playing in a subway there are a number of other things to keep in mind. These findings are well established through strong experimental testing but are somewhat less sexy than a violinist in a subway when addressed in isolation.
1) The best predictor of whether someone will stop for someone else is whether they are in a hurry or not
There is a famous psychological experiment that pitted priests in training against the general public. Who would be the most likely to stop and help someone in need? As it turns out, whichever person was not in a hurry. Stopping then appears to be a function of hurry.
2) Conformity
Like it or not we try not to be special unique snowflakes. Instead we try to fit in with what everyone else is doing. If everyone else at the concert is listening to the musician so do we. If everyone else is ignoring him and trying to get to work, so do we. We even engage in behaviours that run completely opposite to our own beliefs.
3) Schemas
We tend to act the way we think we should act in any given situation. In a subway we think we should be in transit so we travel from point A to point B. When in a concert hall we think we should listen attentively to the music and appreciate its beauty even if we don't really know what that means. When we see someone dressed casually playing in a subway with no indicators of importance we take this to mean that they are a busker. When we see someone dressed well in a concert hall we take this to mean they are a professional. As such behaviour doesn't really give much of a clue as to what we think of the music or whether we notice. It is probably a better indicator of how we think we should behave.
4) Most people are useless at discriminating between high and low quality unless they have specialist knowledge.
Note in the description of the video they seem to suggest that the violin should be beautiful and produce beautful music because it costs $3.5 million. If we recorded music from that violin and a cheaper violin under equal controlled conditions and presented it to the author of the article and a few hundred other people without telling them which was which do you think they would be able to tell the difference? In most cases the answer would be no. This does not suggest that we can't identify beautiful music in a Subway station because it's in a subway station. Instead it suggests we can't tell the difference between beautiful music and non-beautiful music unless we are told that the music will be beautiful or not beautiful. If it's being played in a concert hall we are likely to think it must be beautiful because the setting tells us so. If it is being played in a subway we might think the person playing it is quite talented but, because they're in a subway, obviously they're not that talented and the music then can't be that beautiful.
Taking these factors into account the results are not surprising in the least and also do not suggest that rushing it what causes us to miss beauty. It may mean we are less likely to stop but that is not the same as saying that we do not notice it.
Maybe their results just mean that Bach being played on a 3.5 million dollar violin isn't actually that beautiful to most people
That is an equally valid interpretation of the same data. This time instead of blaming the public for being too busy I'm blaming the classical music crowd for being out of touch. Instead of saying "Aha! When people are in a hurry they don't notice beauty" I have said "Aha! When people have nothing else to do and have paid to listen to music that they like enough to pay money for they are more likely to listen to that music".
If you found this web page chances are you found it using google.
Furthermore you probably clicked on it because it was ranked high enough on google for you to see it.
How can you get a similarly high google ranking for your photography site? If you have done a bit of reading about Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) and how it can help in improving your google ranking you've probably found that most people suggest that the basics of SEO are fairly simple. You increase the number of inbound links to your website and optimise your site for google. While both of these things are entirely correct the challenge in optimising a photography site lies in understanding that what we have been taught about images doesn't hold when we talk about google; rather than an image being worth a thousand words most images on the web aren't even worth one.
How then can you take your photography website and increase its google ranking? The tricks lie in transorming your images from mere coloured pixels to information rich, quality content.
Beyond these standard points you should also consider what you're trying to get to page one for. If you're just starting out you're not going to get to the number one spot for any highly competitive search term. For example chasing after the search term Wedding Photographer will be a spirit crushingly impossible mission. Instead try to focus on something specific, preferably something that makes you unique. This could be the geographical area in which you operate, the way you shoot, or even the way you write. Once you develop one foothold it will be easier to create others.
The White Zombie is a 1972 Datsun with an electric motor that leaves gas guzzlers for dead over 1/4 mile drag races. In this video it breaks its own records a number of times finally coming in with a time of less than 11.5 seconds over the quarter mile.
The secret? The torque provided from electrric motors is able to reach 100% of capacity immediately. This provides incredible acceleration that the petrol cars cannot match.
If you want an electric car of your own have a chat to the lads at earthling EV. They've done the research and can help you build the car of your dreams.
This morning while doing a quick check of my spam folder I came across a scam e-mail from someone pretending to be New Zealand's Inland Revenue Department. They were telling me that I was owed a refund of over $1000 and all I had to do was click on a link and fill in a form.
The most terrifying thing about this scam is its potential to catch people out through its use of a legitimate looking link.
While the link appears to take you to www.ird.govt.nz/income-tax-individual/ (a legitimate website operated by the actual ird) the link itself will take you somewhere else entirely if you choose to click on it. In fact if you hover over it and inspect where it's going to send you it tells you the link will send you to
http://www.ingelam.cl/ingelam.php
This is a Chilean domain, not a New Zealand domain.
I have not visited it myself and would strongly advise you against visiting it yourself.
In the least dangerous scenario it will look like the official IRD site and ask you to submit personal details that will be used to steal your money or identity.
However it is also entirely possible that it will steal data more surreptitiously as well/instead through infecting your computer with malware that could track personal and financial details and send them to the scammer.
Reasons to believe it is a scam:
- It sends you to a site that differs from the one it says it is sending you to
- The IRD does not usually communicate via e-mail
- The IRD does not usually inform you that you are due a refund (although you can ask them to check to see if you are due for a refund for free by calling them)
- Our Tax year ends on March 31st, this e-mail was received in December
- The refund is specified in NZ dollars, I've never received anything from the IRD that has specified an amount in this fashion
- The e-mail is addressed to undisclosed recipients (meaning it was sent to a lot of people)
- There is no mention of a name or IRD number, these would be required in order to make a refund calculation
The E-mail Itself:
After the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity, we have determined that you
are eligible to receive a tax refund of 1,478.20 NZ Dollars. Please submit the tax refund
request and allow us 2-3 days in order to process it.
Click link below to submit your tax refund request.
www.ird.govt.nz/income-tax-individual/
Note : A refund can be delayed a variety of reasons, for example submitting invalid records or applying after deadline.
Guidelines:
Appropriate dress - usually formal. If it's not formal have a good reason such as 'we wear these clothes to demonstrate that we will be there on the ground getting the work done.'
Visual Impact
Unintended Consequences:
raises expectations
Getting the wrong idea across
Practice Makes Perfect
Know your presentation
Know how your product works and practice your demonstration
Know your numbers
Know it all inside out and back to front. This will tie back to the first point, it will be part of making your first impression
Keep Your Nerve
Practice will help with this and, again, it will feed into helping you make a great first impression.
Avoid Arrogance
Don't confuse confidence with arrogance.
Don't try to replace knowledge with false bravado.
Be Passionate
This should come across in your attitude, your presentation, and your personal financial and time investment in the business. If you're not passionate about it, if you wouldn't invest in it, why should anyone else?
Get Real
While Passion is good don't lose touch with reality. Passion alone will not sell a product. It must also be marketable, provide a point of difference, and be profitable.
Be Honest
This is similar to getting real, in fact getting real is a subcomponent of this point. Answer everything and answer it honestly. Don't inflate numbers to make things look better than they are. This will have the opposite effect. In fact it is best to take this a step further. Don't just be honest about your business proposition, be honest about yourself. Let the real you shine through.
What is a VC looking for?
The single most important thing is YOU
Most pitches are 15-30 minutes if you're lucky.
In Reality you have far less time than this to make your first impression
What then do you need to convey?
- Integrity
- Passion
- Experience
- Knowledge (domain expertise, know your market and your area)
- Skills (in you and/or in your team)
- Leadership (especially when leading a team)
- Commitment
- Vision
- Realism
- Coachability (You must be prepared to listen and learn)
How deliver these and other messages?
All pitches are emotional.
At the start you have about 10 seconds to get people's attention.
Make sure you grab their emotional attention and keep the emotions positive.
Make things better, and better, and better until you reach your knockout punch at the end.
Things that will help your pitch:
- Logical Progression (don't skip steps)
- Link to things your audience will understand
- Validate your idea (sales, success, evidence that the world wants your product)
- Show a believable upside
Things that hurt
- Things that are untrue
- Things your audience doesn't understand
- Things that make the audience think for you
- Inconsistencies
- Basic errors including typos etc.
Presentation tips
- Keep the focus on YOU during a presentation. That is what they are interested in afterall
- Avoid bullet points, aim only for images
Include:
Company Logo
Business Overview
Management Team (highlight relevant experience and skills)
Market
Product
Business Model (how do you make money?)
Strategic relationships (helps with validation)
Competition and how you're different (all companies and products have competition, even if it's only the old way of doing things)
Barriers to Entry
Financial Overview
Use of Proceeds
Capital and Valuation (how much do you want?)
In the video above there will be a phrase that will catch your attention:
Find the Pepsis
At first this is unlikely to make sense, afterall surely there is only one Pepsi, right? Wrong is actually the correct answer.
Instead of looking for the single best combination of ingredients to satisfy everyone you should look for the combination of ingredients that satisfies each group.
With the right data this could be achieved through Factor Analysis.
This review of Freakonomics may look a little different to other book reviews you may have seen. This may be related to the fact that Freakonomics is likely to be different to others books you have read but is most likely due to the fact that most of this review is a video. Why review a book with a video? The answer is simple - the video is the book. Rather the video is one of the authors of the book presenting information outlined in the book in a similar style to the way the book is written. As such if you enjoy this presentation, in terms of information and style, chances are you will also enjoy reading Freakonomics.
The above post on PhotoRumors suggests that Olympus are aiming to tackle the challenge of creating 3D images through the use of an additional camera that mounts onto a standard camera via the hot shoe. A second camera will provide a second viewpoint (like a left eye and a right eye). Assuming it will mount a simpler camera to a dSLR (as suggested in the pictures in the patent application) this would suggest that you don't need high quality information in both visual channels. In many ways this makes sense. The brain is very good at working with impoverished information. Exciting if it works.
Social Monkee is an SEO tool that creates 25 links to your site once per day for free.
While you can pay for additional links created more frequently the location of the links (the pages that your links will be created on) is said to be the same.
While you may find reviews raving about the benefits of using Social Monkee before you jump in you should keep a few things in mind:
1) Social Monkee runs an Affiliate Program
Affiliate programs provide incentives for people to rave about a service. Through raving about it the odds of you clicking on a Social Monkee signup link that the affiliate provides increases and the odds of them making money increases. As such any raves should be taken with a grain of salt, especially if they are accompanied by a sign up link.
2) Ideally you want Quality Backlinks
Social Monkee is trading on the quantitiy of the backlinks that they can provide. While Quantity can be helpful in boosting your google rankings what you really should be looking for a Quality backlinks. This is especially true when you consider what Social monkee might be doing to create your 25 backlinks a day. In all likelihood they're creating links for all of their clients on the same webpages. This means that while you will get 25 backlinks per day the benefit you receive from each backlink is likely to be negligible as your backlink will be one of many on the same page reducing its value.
3) The Googleplex Effect
If you're looking to boost your google ranking you should proceed with extreme caution. Google is interested in providing people with useful information. As part of this they attempt to create algorithms that sort and weight data in a way that is similar to the way a human would sort and weight data. This often means that they get wise to scams and blackhat SEO. Linkfarming was a big issue a few years ago and this sounds suspiciously similar - the creation of a lot of backlinks out of thin air.
4) The use of Jargon to Sound clever
If you've checked their main page you've probably noticed that they brag about Unique C Class IPs.
C Class IPs are simply IP addresses of a class level that is reserved for sites that use unicasting - sites that send information from their server to your computer. Class C IPs are associated with the smallest number of related network addresses. Unique C Class IPs is another way of saying different websites. Usually if someone is trying to blind you with science they're trying to hide something. something like the fact that they're not that special.
An alternative view is outlined in the video below. While the video might seem to raise a good point you should take note of the following points:
1) The test is not scientific
2) We don't know what other SEO techniques have been employed
3) His google search knows about him - it is unsurprising that his website ranks high when he is searching for his target keywords.
Oddly enough while people are quick to criticise news networks, such as Fox in the US or even the Herald locally, our new information source, the internet, is not yet subjected to the same critical eye. Yet in this age of increasing personalisation Facebook, Google, and other providers using similar algorithms to determine the relevance of information are acting as the new censors. Ironically though this censorship does not (yet) serve to expose you to the views of the censor, instead it seeks to expose you to your own views. In so doing it will reinforce your existing beliefs at the expense of providing opposing viewpoints.
This is especially dangerous given the way that we work psychologically. If we hold a particular viewpoint we are likely to hold onto it even in the face of conflicting evidence. In fact we will use any supporting evidence at our disposal, no matter how weak, to counter any perceived need to adjust our viewpoint. Furthermore instance of information that are in line with our viewpoint are more likely to be remembered than those that do not. This all culminates in an idea known as confirmation bias - essentially our tendency to continue to believe things that we already believe.
When our innate confirmation bias is combined with an external confirmation bias the danger is that false/incorrect beliefs may be held even more deeply. Afterall instead of information in line with our thoughts being the exception to the rule the additional filter will now ensure that our belief is the rule.
In the video above the presenter rightly points to the importance of being exposed to information outside or personal bubble and suggests that those from Facebook and Google should listen. Arguably they may feel that the focus on social networking should achieve some of this already as we are being exposed to the filters of others. However in order for this to hold the exposure to these filters needs to be immune from the relevance shaping that we have seen occuring, so far it is not.
New dog, old tricks?
In the video below Joe Sabia talks about how storytelling has changed over time...
Or should that be how it has stayed the same over time?
Really the take home message in this presentation is one of consistency rather than one of change.
Ironically it is also worth noting that while the technology he has chosen to tell his story does enable him to tell his story it is little better than a powerpoint presentation. While one could argue that some of his examples are performed live or on the fly, such as the use of google, these examples would need to have been pre-prepared. As such the live on-the-flyness of them becomes somewhat irrelevant. In fact the one thing that could not be easily replicated in powerpoint is the use of the camera at the end of the presentation. However this adds very little to the presentation as a whole and could also be replicated (or outdone) by cutting to a live feed of the audience..
At this stage then he has failed to make a strong case for the basis of his argument - the idea that storytelling evolves to take advantage of new mediums. In order to truly demonstrate his point greater interaction with the device or the audience would need to have formed a key component of the presentation.
However this does not mean that the ipad has failed where other mediums have succeeded. It simply means that storytelling has not caught up with this particular piece of technology just yet - that or this particular piece of technology has nothing new to offer and/or is merely a passing fad that will not need to be adapted to.
If you have a friend of family member who can be difficult to buy gifts for but is showing an interest in photography here are a few gifts that you might like to consider:
One of the best gifts you can buy someone who is interested in photography is one that will help them develop their skills. Tom Ang's Digital Photographer's Handbook is a detailed but easy to read introduction to digital photography. It covers camera mechanics (how your camera works), image composition (techniques that will help make your images more pleasing to the eye), visual effects, and even includes projects to help develop photographic skills. In fact it even goes beyond cameras taking in film scanners, lighting set ups and more. While the title suggests that it focuses solely on digital photography if your friend or family member is more interested in film most of the lessons contained in the book will still apply. In fact the section on Film scanning is targeted specifically at film shooters. As an added bonus it even includes some photos taken in little old New Zealand. Awesome!
A Tripod
Blurry photos should be a pet peeve for photographers in the making. A tripod is a great tool that can be used to reduce the odds of encountering this problem. It also has the added benefit of making night-time landscape photos possible. If you live near a road a tripod will help your photographer in the making take photos with blurred lights passing through. Focus on getting the sturdiest tripod you can for your money. If the tripod is likely to shake or wobble under the weight of the camera it is not worth paying for. As it is best to test tripods out in person I have not provided a link here. Instead pop down to your local camera shop (NB:// by this I mean a shop that specialises in selling camera equipment - I would advise against visiting a chain store that does not specialise in photography equipment as, chances are, the salesperson will not be able to give you the information you require to make the best decision).
If your friend or family member already has a tripod a shutter release cable is another tool that can help photographers reduce the chances of taking blurry photos. By taking photos by pressing something that is not part of the camera the odds of producing camera shake are greatly reduced. These are also usually fairly affordable.
Prints or a Print Voucher
In the age of digital cameras we often forget that photos are things that used to be printed an hung on a wall. You can remind your friend or family member of this by organising to have one of their favourite images printed to a large scale or getting them a voucher to enable them to do this themselves.
A Film Camera
This is the option that I would most and least recommend. I strongly recommend film here as it will force them to shoot differently. If they use the film camera they will have to slow down and think about their shots a lot more. Raising the stakes in this way will highlight the importance of pre-visualising images. Try to purchase one of the same brand as the odds of knowledge around layout transferring from their digital camera to the film camera will be higher. The odds of them being able to use lenses across systems will also increase. The key reason to avoid this option is the fact that you will be introducing an ongoing cost to your friend or family member. Additionally as film photography differs from digital photography in the delay between shooting an image and seeing an image the film camera may end up being left on the shelf.
Bad Science is a book with a great idea. In fact it could well be the perfect antidote to the way that science is presented in the media.
Unlike many introductory textbooks that deal with issues of experimental design Bad Science avoids getting overly technical. It aims to explain things to lay people with a passing interest in the subject matter rather than people with a need to understand the information. Through this user friendliness the concepts become easy to grasp. Through repetition of ideas they become cemented in the mind of the reader. Through the use of entertaining, and sometimes frightening, specific examples the ideas are clarified and given something to hold onto.
However the more relaxed approach also gives rise to an interesting and aggravating weakness. Rather than providing the reader with the tools required to make the call on whether certain claims are valid or not or even allowing the data to speak for itself from the first time any study or person is mentioned the author makes his own view perfectly clear. Given the books focus on the importance of objectivity, of letting data speak for itself, this approach feels particularly jarring. Furthermore it inadvertently and counter-productively throws the responsibility of identifying bad science off the reader and back on the author themselves. While the author does a great job of identifying issues with research, as far as journalists go, Ben Goldacre is the exception not the rule.
Separately Perspectives Photography and Jared Brandon Productions have produced reliably stunning work. With a clear passion for creating beautiful wedding photos and stunning wedding videos these two teams of wedding creatives have been a source of inspiration; they know their equipment back to front and know exactly how and where to push it to create beautiful results. Now, in a mind bogglingly awesome move, they have joined forces to create combined wedding photography and video packages to completely capture you and your day. For those prepared to pay the premium that experience and talent come with at the upper end of the wedding market these guys will certainly be a force to be reckoned with.
Photography Style - an outside photographer's perspective
Isaac, Amber, and their helpers consistently produce stunning images from all parts of the day. Common features of their work appear to be the appropriate use of high powered flash and ambient light in their photo shoots. Critically the decision to roll with a shot dominated by flash or ambient light is a function of the setting/conditions and vision of the photographer rather than the blind application of a preferred technique. Indeed the subtle use of remote flash is also frequently employed to enhance an otherwise flash free image. All in all the Perspectives team know what they're doing and, if you like what they do, are well worth the money.
Video Style - an outside film-maker's perspective
Jared Brandon seems to be something of a pioneer in the New Zealand wedding video market. Drawing inspiration from established professionals outside of New Zealand he appears to take a more cinematic approach to wedding videography than what most people think of when they hear the phrase wedding videography. While the use of dSLRs is part of this - helping to achieve the cinematic look through their ability to produce images with shallow depth of field - the key aspect is in the departure from recording a wedding day. Instead Jared appears to focus on recording the story of a wedding day. By focussing on recording the story rather than simply recording the events his videos seem to invite you in - you feel like you are part of the day instead of just a spectator. You feel the emotion rather than witness it. You cry as they cry.
The Joint Venture - a prediction
This joint venture will be successful. However, given that they would each be successful alone the notion of a successful partnership may seem to be something of an obvious statement. Here though is the key. This venture will be successful because of the speed at which they will help their clients find what they are looking for. People who care about great images should care about great photography and great videography. While people often ask photographers to recommend videographers and vice verca this new venture does that immediately and demonstrates the added value that the other side can bring.
Here Steve Jobs talks about focussing on your customers rather than your products. Create something that customers will want rather than trying to sell them something that you have. This core idea has some similarities to the idea of communicating from the inside out...
Kind of.
While Simon Sinek suggests that Apple's core belief is in doing things differently here we see it is more refined. Apple do things differently by not only communicating backwards, but also by thinking backwards. Rather than telling people what they want they ask what customers are likely to want.
