This was exactly the logic I used when explaining to the producer that we have to give them more than one option so they can have a choice. If we just send one revised treatment that they can review on their Fisher Priced Monitor system they won't be able to piss on the project and leave their mark.
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Pomerantz" <sppomerantz@...> wrote:
>
> I used that trick for years with a certain network program exec. He never caught on, and spent his entire tenure at the place thinking I was the idiot in the equation. I could also throw him completely off his track by complimenting his tie.
>
> Steve Pomerantz
> www.stevepomerantzeditorial.com
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Roger Shufflebottom <rogershuff@> wrote:
> >
> > No, it's not that - the producer needs to feel he's made a contribution of some sort - so use the old trick of leaving one glaringly obvious mistake. Producer spots it, you thank him and fix it the way you planned in the first place. All editors do this (don't they?).
> >
> > On 5 Aug 2011, at 20:26, Gajit wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > and...if it was shot gritty, the producer would have wanted you to clean it up...kinda like polishing a turd.
>
If you want to donate to Red Cross quake relief, you can do so through your cell phone. Text redcross to 90999 to make a $10 donation. It will be on your next cell bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment