Note that I've tried to follow the SHADO rules, by not repeating
messages, although this does result in quite a long message.
Thanks for all your feedback about the script books. I've had several
responses (including some off-list) from people willing to undertake
the task of transcribing scripts, and we'll be discussing them at our
next committee meeting.
Marc Martin wrote about script books:
>"I think this was a combination of an excellent copy plus a better
>scanner and better optical character recognition software. The
>character recognition was so accurate that there wasn't much for me
>to manually correct. I think it only took me a weekend to transcribe
>that script. And one shouldn't trivialize the job of formatting a
>transcription into a book.....in fact, I think it takes me longer to
do this than it does to transcribe a script!."
Of course, in my original mail I was talking about typing up a
not using OCR which, I'm sure makes the whole process much easier. No
trivialising intended - I'm not sure of your profession Marc, though
as a graphic designer, it's Chris Bentley's job to do this kind of
thing, and therefore should find it easier.
>"Although I think you'll find that many of the most interesting UFO
>scripts are already transcribed and available on my UFO website."
So why would anyone want them duplicated yet again into a script
if they're already there for the world to see, free of charge?
Rob Hemmings wrote:
>"Perhaps if you offered them something like a years free membership
>and a "thank you" in the actual book, you may get a better response?"
Although Fanderson is run by volunteers, everyone who contributes to
the club's success shares in that success, be it a free membership,
free gift of some sort, payment or whatever. And those volunteers get
the credit and recognition they deserve for their work. They club
simply couldn't operate without this help.
However, I don't think we should be going round saying "Do this for
us, and we'll do this for you." Individuals should want to offer
help simply because they want to see a job well done. To take pride
seeing their work in print/on video/CD, to see their models take
of place in an exhibition, or perhaps to have their work receive rave
reviews in the press. Not just to get something tangible in return.
But perhaps I'm just a little too altruistic.
Marc Martin wrote about soundtracks:
>"They were not as "authentic" as they could have been."
We all hear things differently, so we're never going to absolutely
please everyone, but considerable numbers of all-nighters were spent
(after the day jobs were over) trying to get as authentic a mix as
possible. At the end of the day the results were pretty spectacular,
and we got pretty good reviews, so we're pleased. It was just
particularly galling to read on the Space:1999 list about people
switching their equipment in mono to hear the music "as it should
sound." Gadzukes, makes me wonder whether we should have bothered at
all (and I wasn't even involved in the production)!!!
>"It is my understanding that if a Fanderson "UFO" soundtrack is ever
>released, the music will also be digitally remastered in stereo &
>have stunning sound quality, as many of the original multi-track
>studio tapes still exist in the vaults."
Absolutely. We won't do it if we've got to lift recordings off video
copies (as some commercial companies seem content to do), or use some
other inferior source. The only sources worth considering are the
master tapes which, as you say, do exist. There are occasions when
we've had to recreate some sections or sounds, or use an inferior
source because the masters don't exist, and it is then our decision
whether to do that or not include the piece at all. In the main, I
think most people prefer to have these pieces included rather than
have a less complete product.
>"Unfortunately, it's not clear to me how many of these tapes still
>exist, as I've heard that the studio tapes from THE LONG SLEEP are
I don't know the specifics of which episodes/tracks are available
either, but rest assured that Fanderson will release the most
soundtrack available to us, as we did with both years of Space:1999
(despite what some people seem to think). Remember, we're fans too,
and we want to see the programmes get the best treatment and quality
merchandise or this sort. By working together we can do it!
Finally, eGroups profiles. Nothing important really, but I did notice
a distinct difference of opinion between SHADO and OnlineAlpha
regarding the profiles. Whereas on SHADO there is some trepidation
about having such personal information available, some of the folks
over at OnlineAlpha seem to positively relish the idea of learning
more about fellow eGroup members through this facility. Ho-hum.
I was no doubt inspired from watching Gerry Anderson series in my youth... :-)
>So why would anyone want them duplicated yet again into a script book,
>if they're already there for the world to see, free of charge?
Yes, I see your point, but this assumes that the Fanderson membership
all have access to the Internet and know that these UFO scripts are
available for download. Is that a good assumption? I find that even
people on this mailing don't seem to know about all of the cool UFO
stuff on the web! :-)
Sea Launch looks great, Marc, although all this talk of computers et
al makes me yearn for a real Anderson-type launch site, complete
with great big levers, talking countdown clocks, and reels of tape
spinning round on huge computers!
>Yes, I see your point, but this assumes that the Fanderson
>membership all have access to the Internet and know that these UFO
>scripts are available for download. Is that a good assumption?
No, you're right. Only 52% of our members have access to the internet
(I only know that 'cos I calculated it last night in preparation for
our meeting this weekend) and many don't seem to know how to use the
various search facilities to find gems of information. So. let's do a
deal. If you don't tell anyone else about your site, we'll get
another script book into print, eh?
> Rob Hemmings wrote:
> >"Perhaps if you offered them something like a years free membership
> >and a "thank you" in the actual book, you may get a better response?"
> Although Fanderson is run by volunteers, everyone who contributes to
> the club's success shares in that success, be it a free membership,
> free gift of some sort, payment or whatever. And those volunteers get
> the credit and recognition they deserve for their work. They club
> simply couldn't operate without this help.
> However, I don't think we should be going round saying "Do this for
> us, and we'll do this for you." Individuals should want to offer
> help simply because they want to see a job well done. To take pride
> seeing their work in print/on video/CD, to see their models take
> of place in an exhibition, or perhaps to have their work receive rave
> reviews in the press. Not just to get something tangible in return.
> But perhaps I'm just a little too altruistic.
Erm.. aren't we actually agreeing here? <grin>
Not (yet) being a member of Fanderson, I obviously didn't know that
you already send volunteers free gifts etc. :-) Altruism - tell me
about it - I've worked in UK higher education for over twenty years,
which probably explains why I haven't been able to afford a
Fanderson membership.. ;-)
> Having said that, ISOS needs to update the information about this mailing
> list. They still have the old fab-ufo link, which leads to an error page now.
> Marc, did you want to add your site's url as a footer so that it appears on
> each post ? Off hand I can't recall if your site information is on the main
> Egroups page which describes this mailing list.
You've just reminded me my site is *well overdue* for an update..
Hmm, I can't decide whether to FLASH it or SHOCK it, IYKWIM!!!
I've a couple of weeks hols coming up in a fortnight, so don't
bother holding your breath (or green liquid) 'til then.. :)
Oh, and welcome back, Baruch (Bernard)!