#Human modeling
92 messages in this thread
"If you feel there is a more appropriate way of pricing KineModelz, I am
certainly open to your ideas."
Price'em like everyone else prices their models, after all that's all they are,
they are not actors. If you think you "contract out" a model like an actor, it
better does the same job (like acting for ex.) <g>
Any model I buy better be at my disposal for anything I plan to do with it,
without extra costs of thousand of dollars hiding behind some corner, once I
decide to actually use it in something commercial.
"If you just want a static model that sits there like a bump on a log, then
yes,… I don't see any reason in investing in KineModelz."
With Bones Pro from Digimation, that's actually all I need. It even lets me
simulate muscle movement etc. So, a static model will be just fine, no need for
jointed stuff that doesn't "blend" correctly during motions…
"They will be the principal *actors*, or *content* in an animated work, which
is not at all comparable to a procedure like a lens flare, or melt routine, so
different standards must apply."
Oh boy, now you've done it. The IPAS police will come and take you away <BG>
I'd like to see your models in an environment created without IPAS's. From
what I understand your first models are going to be something like dinosaurs,
aliens etc., try to imagine these in an environment without vulcanoes erupting,
stars moving, laser canons, trees, etc etc
In same cases the IPAS effects MAKE an animation, in others, they are an
important part of it. Try to imagine any of your models in a boring
non-happening environment and you'll get the drift. (like a non-melting
Terminator etc.)
They are just part of the animation, just like everything else that's needed to
complete the big picture. Besides, what good are they if everybody uses the
same "actor" in their animations (when it comes to people), pretty soon one has
to go and change at least the face, so not everybody looks like a clone.
So, you see, they are just as much an "actor" as a dancing car in a Chevron
commercial, a walking box in a Kellogs comercial and so on, therefore NO
DIFFERENT STANDARDS apply to them.
"I hear you saying that the KineModelz are too expensive,"
I think I'm not alone on that, not many of us can afford $2000-5000 for another
prop in the scene. Besides, for that kind of money, I sit down and model my
own: Just the way I imagine it to be…
"but if you are *seriously* interested in using my models in the future, then
it would be much more helpful for me if you could present what you feel is a
reasonable alternative. "
Sell'em just like you sell Humanoids (4 figures) for $195 and I think you got
an instant winner. Everyone I know will go for that, since now the
price-versus-modeling ratio is acceptable.
Jack
>>Sell'em just like you sell Humanoids (4 figures) for $195 and I think you got
an instant winner. Everyone I know will go for that, since now the
price-versus-modeling ratio is acceptable.<<
Ahaaaa!.. so you admit it. Humanoid *is* a good value, after all.
As for your comment NO DIFFERENT STANDARDS APPLY. I said `DIFFERENT' standards,
not GREATER standards, as you seem to be implying. This was not a knock on
IPAS-developers, I think some IPAS programs could well be worth more than my
models. My point was to discourage people from looking at `content' or
`subject-matter' in the same way as `procedures' and `routines', because for
me, they are very different things,… both tools for producing animation,…
but different kinds. *You* may chose to view a melt FX as the `principal actor'
in your animation. But I do not. That doesn't mean I have anything against melt
FX, or that I think they are somehow `inferior' to models. It simply means I
view their uses differently than I do an articulated, highly-realistic, set of
models with sophisticated motion support built-in. So please don't try to
reshape my comments into `anti-IPAS' lingo.
KineModelz ARE being designed to work as the `major actors' for animated
projects. If you are able to create models with the level of sophistication you
need already, that's great for you. But I resent attempts to deter me from
offering them to others, and frankly I'm a little confused by them.
>>With Bones Pro from Digimation, that's actually all I need. It even lets me
simulate muscle movement etc. So, a static model will be just fine, no need for
jointed stuff that doesn't "blend" correctly during motions…<<
Perhaps you've missed some of my other comments here, KineModelz *will be*
seamless! And designed to work with skeletal deformation routines like Bones.
There will be no *blending* problems at the joints, like there are with
hierarchical models. I simply feel there are a few improvements needed in the
current bones routines to get them to work properly with the designs I have in
mind.
However, it is possible that I might also offer `static' versions of the models
at lesser cost, so users like you can insert your own bones. But I figured
since I've spent much of my life *intensely* studying the anatomy and
locomotion of dinosaurs, humans and other creatures, that I might have just a
little bit of insight on how to set up these articulations for others in
advance. And, I figure some animation producers might want to take advantage of
this expertise, rather than spending several years studying biomechanics, and
paleontology to do the work themselves. This is not snobbery either, I have my
area of specialization, just the way other people do.
>>Besides, what good are they if everybody uses the same "actor" in their
animations (when it comes to people),<<
I can understand your feeling about this. And my remarks about selling the
models `singley' may have led to this assumption. However, as I've stated in
other messages here, I hope to make my KineModelz humans as customizable as
possible. I encourage people to alter the geometry of my current models to suit
there needs. And I did my level best to implement as much of this in Humanoid
as I could when they were initially developed.
>>Any model I buy better be at my disposal for anything I plan to do with it,
without extra costs of thousand of dollars hiding behind some corner, once I
decide to actually use it in something commercial…<<
They're ain't nothing `hidden' about it, I've told you up front precisely what
the plan is. When the first set is ready for release the final fixed prices
will be announced. I am speaking in general terms *now*, because I'm still
somewhat open to feedback on this. If you feel the PRO version will be too much
for your needs, then consider the PROSUMER version. Surely you could recoup
your costs from this?
And as far as your `suggestion' regarding price, since you intend to do all of
your own modeling anyway, I don't think it would be wise for me to take your
remarks too seriously. You obviously have very little appreciation for the kind
of work I do, and the work of custom modelers if you think $195 is the most
that should *ever* be paid for a model. But thanks anyway.
My pricing plan is not designed to shaft anyone. I'm sorry if it has given you
that impression. It is designed to insure that me and my collaborators on the
KineModelz project are compensated well enough so we don't have to go broke,
and can continue to maintain a viable existence. So far, Crestline has resisted
the temptations to go in with a major model broker, and that is partly what has
helped keep our prices so reasonable. But the pressures in the model market are
*great*, and quick-to-judge comments like yours frankly just make the situation
worse for struggling companies like mine.
– Tim
Tim, just go for it. You're setting yourself up for a fall by getting into this
debate. There are a thousand people that will argue the point and one who will
buy your product. Spend the effort, where it counts. Ferrari doesn't justify
its pricing and neither should you.
I applaud your work and hope people will appreciate the effort. I'm sure the
right people will.
John
John,
I guess I've developed quite a panache for sticking my foot in my mouth, first
with messages to M. Foster and now this. I feared this issue might come up, and
I don't think I could have let it pass without saying my piece on the subject,
at least once for the record.
When I got my CIS account barely a month ago, I had no idea I'd be planting my
foot so firmly in the dog doo-doo this soon.
Thanks sincerely for you understanding views,
Tim
Tim,
It really takes a while to get used to this format of communication. I've stuck
my foot in it more than a few times. Sometimes even when I know better. <G>
BTW Your meshes would be perfect for use with Puppeteer, which is a motion
capture editor IPAS which interfaces with Flock of Birds amoung other MC
systems.
You should contact Schreiber Instruments so that you can incorporate the
"Puppet" structure into your meshes. Their number is 1-800-252-1024 and ask to
speak with Keith. He designed the interface. There's quite a few high end
clients that I think would welcome your models preconfigured for use with 3DS
and this IPAS.
As a rule prices aren't discussed directly on any of the forums as matter of
etiquette. If people are interested they can contact you through e-mail. You
find this is pretty much accepted practice all over Compuserve, so the issue of
price _won't_ be an issue. <G>
Best of luck, I look forward to seeing your latest creations.
John
John,
>>As a rule prices aren't discussed directly on any of the forums as matter of
etiquette<<
I was aware of that. I didn't really intend to get involved in this discussion
on the forum. I was hoping that folks would offer feedback on the subject via
e-mail after reading my news-items in the ANVENA library. Unfortunately J.D.'s
comments drew me out. But in the future I'll try to nix this stuff from the
airwaves.
Thanks for the Puppeteer/Flock idea, I was aware of it but didn't know who to
contact. I was kind of waiting until the seamless models were done to develop
this sort of support. I suspect game designers and other users of motion
capture will find them better suited to their needs.
However, I was hoping that some IPAS-dev would at least do a plug-in for the
BioVision datasets from Viewpoint. I think these could extend the range of
things that could be done with Humanoid more rapidly and easily. Perhaps this
is something that could also be handled under Puppeteer. If it is, I might
consider implementing the necessary support when I release the IK'd upgrades of
Humanoid, but we'll have to see. I don't know how many folks will want to foot
the bill for the additional time it may take to get that set up.
I'll look into it further though. Thanks again for the suggestion.
– Tim
Tim,
>> waiting until the seamless models were done to develop this sort of support.
<<
Sure, I thought having some additional info might help. Puppetteer does support
Viewpoints Biovision datasets. This happened early on in its development cycle.
Linking a "puppet" to one of your meshes isn't really that big a deal, but I
thought if you had them pre-configured for off the shelf sales that might be a
selling point. Puppetteer supports all data sets including ascii files and is
very open ended for data set editing etc. And they have access to a whole slew
of data capture files, which of course would need editing. Give em, I think
you'll be impressed with what they've done.
Anyway, sounds like your on the right track.
John
"Ferrari doesn't justify its pricing and neither should you."
But a Ferrari has a resale value, usually greater than the investment…
Jack
>> But a Ferrari has a resale value, usually greater than the investment…
Its hard to say what the resale value on a mesh will be. Depends on the mesh to
some degree. I don't include the buying of the model as part of the job unless
the client requests it. It is factored into the cost of producing the work,
however. If I sell the project outright with the models, yes in fact the resale
value is higher. Its a VA product.
John
"Its hard to say what the resale value on a mesh will be. Depends on the mesh
to some degree. I don't include the buying of the model as part of the job
unless the client requests it. It is factored into the cost of producing the
work, however. If I sell the project outright with the models, yes in fact the
resale value is higher. Its a VA product."
Well, what can I say, when you're right you're right. IOW, definite
agreement…
Jack
Tim,
Your Humanoids set at $195 is indeed a good value. I can say that with a great
deal of confidence since I've bought many other models at higher prices.
Maybe I've missed the details but what _is_ your pricing and breakdown on these
new model series?
Alec Jason
Alec,
Please see my message posted in the 3D Studio section around 2-1, called
`Humanoid/KineModelz News'. It contains directions to the info you asked about.
If you have comments on it please e-mail them. I don't want to get myself into
any more hot water discussing prices on the forum.
-Tim
P.S. Thanks again for your help when I called the other day.
Tim,
There are some people who have neurotic phobias about this issue but there is
nothing wrong with providing price information when you are asked.
I would appreciate your posting the information here where it belongs.
Alec Jason
>> There are some people who have neurotic phobias about this issue…
Its called COURTESY; a "neurotic phobia" is like the anxieties you were
expressing over your network. <G>
<< a neurotic phobia is like the anxieties you were expressing over your
network >>
Anxieties? Heck, it was more like delirium tremems. My own network was
rejecting me. I'm still in therapy.
"Everyday, in every way, my network is getting better and better." It's my
mantra now.
Alec Jason
>>
"Everyday, in every way, my network is getting better and better." It's my
mantra now. <<
Try "my network is good enough, it's smart enough, and gol'darnit, people
like it." <g>
Paul S.
<< My network is good enough, its smart enough and doggone it, people like it
>>
Very clever! Very Funny!
Alec Jason
>> << My network is good enough, its smart enough and doggone it, people like
it >>
Very clever! Very Funny! <<
There's a little bit of Stuart Smalley in all of us! <g>
Paul S.
>>I would appreciate your posting the information here where it belongs.<<
Alec,
I know its ha$$le to have to trek over to ANVENA. But in order to get my own
forum section, I need to build up some traffic over there to impress the CIS
folks. Its easier for them to see the activity relating to my products if its
consolidated in one place.
In addition, my models are also available for Imagine and LW as well,
and managing files in 7 different forums (Imagine has 3, and LW has
2) is just a little more than I can handle right now. So that's why I
put *directions* here at ASOFT. Sorry about the inconvenience.
There's no need to justify to anyone your pricing. If we as animators can
charge $1,000 per second for animation (and get away with it! :)), then nobody
has a right to complain if someone else wants to be compensated for their hard
work and expertise in a specific area. Thanks for offering your service!
-James Franssen
"If we as animators can charge $1,000 per second for animation (and get away
with it! :)), then nobody has a right to complain if someone else wants to be
compensated for their hard work and expertise in a specific area."
Yup, especially when that 1 second of animation only took a week two to
produce… <BG>
Why on earth should they "get away with it" those lazy slouches!
Just for kicks,
Jack
>> Yup, especially when that 1 second of animation only took a week two to
produce… <BG> <<
No matter how much you hide behind that pseudo-friendly grin, it is obvious
you are a flamer at heart, ready to offer your rousing opinion at any cost. A
snide attitude is really not that appealing. Hmm, let's see, where is that
option for ignoring a specific individual? :b
-James Franssen
" No matter how much you hide behind that pseudo-friendly grin, it is obvious
you are a flamer at heart, ready to offer your rousing opinion at any cost."
yahoo!, who asked your's? <MBG> "Flamer at heart", eh?
" A snide attitude is really not that appealing."
Couldn't agree more…
" Hmm, let's see, where is that option for ignoring a specific individual?
:b"
-James Franssen"
Godd flaming, down boy, down…
Jack
>> yahoo!, who asked your's? <MBG> "Flamer at heart", eh? <<
🙂 🙂 🙂 Hey, I know I must have read somewhere that it takes one to
know one. Your point has been made. Besides, how boring a forum
would it be without a little heat now and then.
Notice the pseudo-friendly raspberry –> :b
🙂 🙂 🙂 Hey, I know I must have read somewhere that it takes one to know
one. Your point has been made. Besides, how boring a forum would it be without
a little heat now and then.
Notice the pseudo-friendly raspberry –> :b
-James Franssen
Couldn't agreee more, he,he,he….
>>Sell'em just like you sell Humanoids (4 figures) for $195 and I think you got
an instant winner. Everyone I know will go for that, since now the
price-versus-modeling ratio is acceptable.<<
"Ahaaaa!.. so you admit it. Humanoid *is* a good value, after all. "
When did I ever deny it? If read the above, you'll find that this is exactely
what it says… Seems to me that you want to bring this down to an emotional
level of discussion, why does this remind me so much of discussions with
Jehovah Witnesses? <G>
"As for your comment NO DIFFERENT STANDARDS APPLY. I said `DIFFERENT'
standards, not GREATER standards, as you seem to be implying. "
That's what you imply, not what I said… The fact is that the same standards
apply…
" *You* may chose to view a melt FX as the `principal actor' in your animation.
But I do not."
Neither do I, what ever gave you that impression?
"So please don't try to reshape my comments into `anti-IPAS' lingo. "
I didn't… (care to re-read the original message?) Seems to me you are getting
way too excited about all this.
" But I resent attempts to deter me from offering them to others, and frankly
I'm a little confused by them."
Now what on earth made ever think that? Why should I? You're jumping to
conclusions (all over the place)
"Perhaps you've missed some of my other comments here, KineModelz *will be*
seamless! And designed to work with skeletal deformation routines like Bones."
All the better. See what an IPAS can do for you? <BG>
" There will be no *blending* problems at the joints, like there are with
hierarchical models."
Definetifley not, since you use BONES PRO from Digimation…
" I simply feel there are a few improvements needed in the current bones
routines to get them to work properly with the designs I have in mind."
Sounds like your design hinges on an IPAS capability. Now why does that make me
snicker? <G>
" But I figured since I've spent much of my life *intensely* studying the
anatomy and locomotion of dinosaurs, humans and other creatures, "
Hmm, studied the locomotion of Dinosaurs? Neat, real neat. Besides, when and
where was that mentioned in the original threat? You seem to make this a
personal affront issue, emotionally laden, when there was no malicious intend.
"This is not snobbery either, I have my area of specialization, just the way
other people do."
Couldn't agree more… Just wonder where I ever mentioned any of this in my
orig. message.
" However, as I've stated in other messages here, I hope to make my KineModelz
humans as customizable as possible. I encourage people to alter the geometry of
my current models to suit there needs. And I did my level best to implement as
much of this in Humanoid as I could when they were initially developed."
That's all great, but they are still "naked". That's why the pricing is ok, the
customer still has to model clothing, shoes etc. around them, which kind of
defeats the purpose of buying a "ready to use" model IMO. Nevertheless, don't
get me wrong, I think the models are excellent for what they are…
>>Any model I buy better be at my disposal for anything I plan to do with it,
without extra costs of thousand of dollars hiding behind some corner, once I
decide to actually use it in something commercial…<<
"If you feel the PRO version will be too much for your needs, then consider the
PROSUMER version. Surely you could recoup your costs from this?"
The deal here is your "licensing" out your models, instead of selling them with
the right to use for whatever. You try to sell an "actor's contract" on a
model. What if the actor later on wants to have a wage increase?
"And as far as your `suggestion' regarding price, since you intend to do all of
your own modeling anyway, I don't think it would be wise for me to take your
remarks too seriously. "
Here you are jumping to more conclusions, when and where did I say that I want
to do ALL of my modeling anyway? This whole threat seem to have sparked a lot
of suppressed emotions, just make sure you don't let'em run too wild,
interpreting other peoples' statements instead of just taken them the way they
were written.
"You obviously have very little appreciation for the kind of work I do, and the
work of custom modelers if you think $195 is the most that should *ever* be
paid for a model. But thanks anyway. "
See comment above… Insulting prospective clients is not going to improve your
business's survival chances. Besides, where did I say MOST and EVER?
"My pricing plan is not designed to shaft anyone. I'm sorry if it has given you
that impression. "
Now why would you think that? You asked what I think about the pricing, you
didn't like the response, you lash out, not a good way to make a favorable
impression.
" But the pressures in the model market are *great*, and quick-to-judge
comments like yours frankly just make the situation worse for struggling
companies like mine."
Such is life in the fast lane, the only quick to judge comments I've seen here
are yours, sorry about that…
If you intend to stay in the market your approach has to be one of professional
quality (especially towards your potential and existing customers). By striking
out and making unfounded allegations and interpretations you will not succeed.
You asked questions and got a non-emotional response, leave it on a factual
level and you won't run into the mess you are about to get yourself into.
I wish you good luck in your enterprises, and want you to know that there is
nothing personal here and that the quality of your model seems to be surely one
of the finest. Just don't make it an emotional or personal issue, instead,
wonder about the response you asked for and the fact that it might not be an
opinion of just one individual, maybe the rest of the potential clients thinks
along those lines. In other words, make the best out of it, not the worst.
Jack
Jack,
After further reflection on some of your comments I am beginning to see a
little better where you're coming from. I can understand your frustration with
the high cost of models. And I was hoping that a tiered system of pricing would
be adequate to address that. I must begin charging more for my work though,
because right now my business is just treading water, and I won't be able to
offer the kind of sophisticated tools I'm capable of making to other 3D artists
without greater financial support. I can envision a day when models like mine
will be avilable for $25 at Toys R Us, but right now I need much more support
than that to do good work.
I may be able to work something out with the static models to make them more
affordable. I *do* want as many people as possible to have the opportunity to
work with them. But I don't want my business to fold up at the same time. So
that is why I have found it necessary to devise a new system of pricing. My
intention with this plan was to lay the biggest burden on those who could
afford it most, making the models available to other users at more modest cost.
I did put a lot of thought into this.
In my other message to you I had intended merely to address your criticisms.
But some of your comments cut me to the quick. Honestly, I've never before had
anyone throw things in my face quite the way you did. And I let my emotions do
more of the talking than I should have. So I apologize for that. One of the
things I'm discovering here in my first month on CIS is that it's difficult to
enter into a spirited debate, without someone taking things personally (myself
included). I'll have to work on that.
However, I wanted you to realize that your comments are not harmless, and *can*
have an effect on businesses like mine.
I know this probably doesn't help much now that the damage is already done.
– Tim
Jack,
"After further reflection on some of your comments I am beginning to see a
little better where you're coming from. "…"In my other message to you I had
intended merely to address your criticisms. But some of your comments cut me to
the quick. Honestly, I've never before had anyone throw things in my face quite
the way you did."
You do realize that this is a subjective impression, don't you? I didn't
"throw"anything in your face, actually I didn't even know you 'till then. In my
original message was nothing personal, just some advice to the person asking.
He might be better of with low-res (but dressed people) for background issues.
He'd be bettter off with your models for close-ups.
" And I let my emotions do more of the talking than I should have. So I
apologize for that."
Apology accepted… (now it's your turn to forgive the sarcastic response <g>)
" One of the things I'm discovering here in my first month on CIS is that it's
difficult to enter into a spirited debate, without someone taking things
personally (myself included). I'll have to work on that."
You sure do, but lets face it, it's just more fun that way. <g>
"However, I wanted you to realize that your comments are not harmless, and
*can* have an effect on businesses like mine. "
Do not ask for opionions, if you don't want to hear them. You have to realize
that this is a world filled with diversity, not everything you (or I in that
matter) think is accepted as the golden truth by everyone…
"I know this probably doesn't help much now that the damage is already done. "
Forget it! It's already forgotten on my end, lets make up and uh, well, let's
just make up… (no hugs and kisses) <G>
Jack (the merciful?) <g>
PS: Keep up the good work, nothing is wrong with what you're doing, I'm sure
you'll come up with a pricing structure that everyone will like. I know it's
tough out there in the eat-or-be-eaten business world, but with the right
approach, you'll make it…
Just don't fly off the handle and keep it "clean"<g> (the mandotry sarcasm)
Tim:
>> My intention with this plan was to lay the biggest burden on those who
>> could afford it most…
Read any Ayn Rand books recently? 'Atlas Shrugged' comes immediately to mind!
Greg Pyros
Greg,
No, I'm still working on the `The Cat in the Hat.'
-Tim
Tim:
>> No, I'm still working on the `The Cat in the Hat.'
One of my all-time favorites, right after "Green Eggs and Ham".
Greg (Sam I Am) Pyros
Greg:
/_______________________From your message________________________\\ >>
My intention with this plan was to lay the biggest burden on those
who >> could afford it most…
Read any Ayn Rand books recently? 'Atlas Shrugged' comes immediately
to mind!
__________________________________________________________________
You're quick and perceptive. I gasped when I read Tim's strategy.
>>I gasped when I read Tim's strategy.<<
Did I miss something here? What's causing you to gasp? <sincerely
inquisitive> Noone sent any e-mail with objections, so I assumed this
plan sat well with most folks. I think its appropriate for users to
pay more for the models if they are using them in applications that
earn a lot more. N'est-ce pas?
Did you think I meant that the `wealthiest' users should pay the most?
Because that's not really what I meant.
The collectivist strategy of penalizing the 'producers' to help the
'non-producers' is a theme throughout Ayn Rand's writing. She rails
against this concept with venom. Greg Pyros and I picked up on the
similar sounding strategy which you posed in your message. I bet
Michelle Bousquet would have picked it up in a heartbeat as I know
her to be well read in Rand's 'Atlas Shrugged'.
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
My intention with this plan was to lay the biggest burden on those
who could afford it most, making the models available to other users
at more modest cost. I did put a lot of thought into this.
__________________________________________________________________
Graduated income tax, welfare and all other 'Robin Hood' theories of
stealing from the rich (the ones who actually produce) to give to the
poor (the non-producers) were favorite topics of Ayn Rand as she
wrote several books and articles trashing this concept.
My take on your message was that it was reminiscent of the antithesis
of Rand's philosophy.
>> The collectivist strategy of penalizing the 'producers' to help
the 'non-producers' is a theme throughout Ayn Rand's writing. <<
Sure, right on, but we do not live in a collectivist society. You
don't honestly think that Tim's models will be the only ones
available? His so called strategy is totally dependent on the idea
that he can make the best models. And if that's the case, then people
will pay a premium no matter what. But there are other talented
modelers like Tom Knight who is also developing a CD of his people et
al. not to mention Viewpoint which has some extrordinarily talented
modelers in house. Market forces will dictate which product sells
best. No question!
So just out of curiousity, what do you think about single source
IPAS developers? They can ask whatever price they want. I can think
of several examples of products which are totally outrageously
priced.
I just bring this up because I think the picture is very slanted on
this whole issue of Tim and his models. It doesn't matter one iota
what he wants to charge. Some people will pay it and some won't. If
he prices them right then alot of people will. Basic economics.
One of the things I think is bad about this whole discussion, is that
a developer gets alot of flack about XYZ (price product performance
etc.) and he's backed into a corner. The impression is that if he
backs down, that he's a pushover, and people will continue to push.
Anyone here believe that's not the case? No one could argue that's
not true, because A its never happened and B with all the heat some
of these guys get, who would want to?
In a fortune 500 company when they decide to lower the price, there's
no one screaming, "its too high" to motivate the decision. They look
at the number of units sold and compare it with their competition.
Its basic numbers arrived at by market analysis. Non of the
developers who speak up and are trying to get some feedback are being
given the same leeway. Its being rammed down their throats. Dongles /
price, you name it! Its very unfortuneate! Locks them into a
position and as a result _we_ all suffer. I have a feeling that what
this is really doing is forcing the price up not down. Really
counterproductive IMO.
As always, I'll be most interested to read your view.
John:
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
but we do not live in a collectivist society.
__________________________________________________________________
Thank your lucky stars for that but some collectivist thought still permeates
our sociecty, just think of how many times you have heard the phrase "common
good."
/_______________________From your message________________________\\ You don't
honestly think that Tim's models will be the only ones available? His so called
strategy is totally dependent on the idea that he can make the best models. …
Market forces will dictate which product sells best. No question!
__________________________________________________________________
I haven't speculated at all on what models will be available, I don't
understand why you bring this up. However, as a capitalist, I agree that
market forces will dictate which product sells the best or at all. My point was
that I understood Tim's strategy as meaning that he would try to get more money
out of those who had more money and would drop the price for the SAME product
for those who had less money. It sounds so rediculous to me (and to Greg P,
apparently) that it reminded us of a similar strategy which upset Ayn Rand.
/_______________________From your message________________________\\ So just out
of curiousity, what do you think about single source IPAS developers? They can
ask whatever price they want. I can think of several examples of products which
are totally outrageously priced.
__________________________________________________________________
I know my budget and I know I can't afford many plug-ins as they often provide
too little for the money. I have no problem with an IPAS developer charging
$800 for one routine as I know I won't buy it. A smart upstart will come along
and develop one better for less, no doubt. In general, I MUCH prefer having all
of these plug-ins become part of the basic package, but for this to happen 3D
Studio needs stiffer competition from Lightwave or SoftImage or somebody else.
Doesn't it burn you to think of how high prices are on many products just
because of the risk of piracy, insurance claims or liability?
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
I just bring this up because I think the picture is very slanted on this whole
issue of Tim and his models. It doesn't matter one iota what he wants to
charge. Some people will pay it and some won't. If he prices them right then
alot of people will. Basic economics.
__________________________________________________________________
I was not critical of Tim's prices, just his strategy (as it was quoted and as
I understand it). The strategy sounded double-tiered and misapplied. Frankly,
I don't even know what he charges for one model, I just know how much I would
be willing to pay someone else do the modelling for me.
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
In a fortune 500 company when they decide to lower the price, there's no one
screaming, "its too high" to motivate the decision. They look at the number of
units sold and compare it with their competition. Its basic numbers arrived at
by market analysis. Non of the developers who speak up and are trying to get
some feedback are being given the same leeway. Its being rammed down their
throats. Dongles / price, you name it! Its very unfortuneate! Locks them into
a position and as a result _we_ all suffer. I have a feeling that what this is
really doing is forcing the price up not down. Really counterproductive IMO.
__________________________________________________________________
Yikes, I think you've misinterpreted my statements. The difference between the
scenario above with the Fortune 500 and with Tim's policy as stated is that the
Fortune 500 cut THE ONE AND ONLY price, not create TWO DIFFERENT prices to
apply to TWO different types of customers. Tim's approach was to put the
biggest financial "burden" on the ones who could afford it. I think Tim
misspoke as it sounds rediculous to me. High prices are one thing but
subsidized pricing is an entirely other thing. Tim's comments made me
understand that he was going to offer some form of subsidy to those who
couldn't pay more and it was at this that Greg raised the same flag as I when I
read the message.
FWIW, I don't mind having dongles (until someone steals one or I have a
hardware conflict), I could give a rat's @ss how far they stick out my
computer. I despise student pricing on software as it causes many honest joes
to become sneaky b@stards who get a student to buy software for them. I hate
patches to get around dongles. I don't know how to solve these issues or even
if they are solveable.
Concisely, I would prefer one price on each piece of software which would apply
to any human and not descriminate on race, OS, creed, color, CPU, student
status, employment status, net worth, political ties, or sexual preference.
Bob
Bob,
>> I haven't speculated at all on what models will be available, I don't
understand why you bring this up. <<
Because it is very relevant to the topic at hand, if there is competition no
matter what a person's reasoning for his pricing strategy it is totally
revelevant to the reality of the market place.
I also read Atalas Shrugged although the Foutainhead was my favorite.
>> that I understoo Tim's strategy as meaning that he would try to get more
money out of those who had more money… <<
Right, well I suspected as much, but I think this was a mininterpreation of his
intent.
>>>> What do you think about single source IPAS developers… <<<<
>> A smart upstart will come along and develop one better for less, no doubt…
I think the point I was trying to raise got lost, I was talking about Single
Source IPAS developers, who have no competition because for instance they
support a popular specialized piece of hardware. A monolopy is part of the
definition of a collectivist economy, which I find in context absurdly ironic.
>> The strategy sounded double-tiered and misapplied. <<
Again I don't think that is what he inteneded to imply, but I won't speak for
him, although I can say that is not the way I interpreted it.
>> the scenario above with the Fortune 500 and with Tim's policy as stated is
that the Fortune 500 cut THE ONE AND ONLY price… <<
Well aside from the fact that I don't think this is what Tim intended to imply,
there are several large Fortune 500 companies that do just that; market very
similar products at different pricing structures, which have practically
monopolistic control. (Just for the sake of argument. <g>)
>> Concisely, I would prefer one price on each piece of software… <<
Well I would agree with that, no problem there as long as its fairly priced to
begin with.
John
John:
I think we've managed to come to some understanding on this topic but I still
think that Tim is vulnerable to the teeming weasels who will try to scam the
non-commercial version of his offerings.
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
I think the point I was trying to raise got lost, I was talking about Single
Source IPAS developers, who have no competition because for instance they
support a popular specialized piece of hardware.
__________________________________________________________________
An IPAS developer who finds itself in the position of offering the only
solution to a particular problem should be able to charge as much as it
possibly can. When the price gets too high the market will start to live
without the product.
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
Well aside from the fact that I don't think this is what Tim intended to
imply, there are several large Fortune 500 companies that do just that; market
very similar products at different pricing structures, which have practically
monopolistic control. (Just for the sake of argument. <g>)
__________________________________________________________________
Marketing similar products vs. marketing identical products is quite a
distinction.
Bob
>> “Concisely, I would prefer one price on each piece of software…'' Well I
would agree with that, no problem there as long as its fairly priced to begin
with.<<
John,
By offering different prices I was responding to a general dissatisfaction I
sense from many 3D users about the high cost of most commercial models. I run a
large 3D user group in the LA area and have gotten impressions from many people
on this subject.
To give a crude example, it seems a bit unfair to charge a company like ILM the
same price for a model to use in a theatrical release, as you would a small
home video producer doing industrial work. I think different licensing is an
appropriate way to deal with this. I realize that a tiered system is more
confusing and difficult to enforce than a flat rate, and this in itself could
derail my plans, but I'm determined to give it a try so many more users will
have an opportunity to work with my models, than would be possible with simply
one exorbitant flat rate.
If the model sets were not aimed at such a small niche, and I could draw
customers from a much larger base, then it might be feasible to go with a lower
flat rate for all users. But since these models will, at least for now, be used
primarily for highly specialized purposes, I think a system of pricing that's
more adapted to the way the models will be used is needed, at least for the
foreseeable future.
I think this plan is actually quite progressive, and beneficial for both users
and Crestline. By offering a pricing structure that's more responsive, there
will be more flexible ways for users to support my work. This, in turn, should
allow me to get higher-quality models into their hands more rapidly than if I
were to wait until there was a broad enough market for the models at a lower
overall flat-rate.
Hopefully this will strengthen the market for commercial model sets.
-Tim
(P.S. Until I bone up a little on my economics, I think I'm going to have to
leave the questions of anti-collectivist monopolies to you Bob, and Greg for
now. <g>)
OK, so I'm into this thread a little late.
>> >> The collectivist strategy of penalizing the 'producers' to help >> the
'non-producers' is a theme throughout Ayn Rand's writing. <<
>> Sure, right on, but we do not live in a collectivist society.
We don't live in a collectivist society???? Have you done your taxes lately??
<G>
Really, I was approached to perform some consulting services at a very hefty
salary increase – 60%. After realizing that the contract would pay me as an
ind. contractor, I cal'ced out the net after taxes. I mean ALL taxes, the US
IT, state IT, FICA (15.3%), paying for my own medical, paying for my own
pension (no use relying on Soc Sec being around, it won't), and come to find
out that I will be taking a PAY CUT to take the job. And I'm in the 28%
bracket!
So, am I being 'penalized' for wanting to move up? Darn right I am!!
And what are these taxes paying for? ENTITLEMENTS. I don't mean so much the
po', but all the middle class entitlements as well. Including Soc Sec. Hey,
I'd walk away from my 'investment' in FICA, if I never had to pay into it
again. Can't do it on a country wide basis? Don't tell that to Chile, where
they privatized their Soc Sec system.
When you look at a 1.4 trillion dollar budget, divide it by 250 million
population, you've got to figure Uncle is 'collecting' from somebody.
William,
The term "collectivist" was being used in the classic sense. The issue's you
raise are certainly valid, but I've got my hands full dealing with the concept
of "altruism". <g>
John
Robert,
Now I understand a little better what you and Greg were talking about. This is
very interesting, but I do see an important distinction between my plan and the
Robin Hood analogies that are being drawn. I am not offering the _same_ product
for different prices, although it may have sounded that way in some of my
remarks.
What people are purchasing is different *use permits*. The lowest cost one is
restricted to _noncommercial apps_, with no profit potential. The highest cost
one allows virtually _unlimited commercial use_, and a high potential return on
the investment. Yes, the model sets may be the same, but it's not the models
that are being bought it's the _use permit_.
Sorry about the confusion, I guess I need to make this clearer in some of my
posts.
-Tim
Tim:
Thanks for clearing up the issue.
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
I am not offering the _same_ product for different prices, although it may
have sounded that way in some of my remarks.
__________________________________________________________________
OK
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
What people are purchasing is different *use permits*. The lowest cost one is
restricted to _noncommercial apps_, with no profit potential. The highest cost
one allows virtually _unlimited commercial use_, and a high potential return on
the investment. Yes, the model sets may be the same, but it's not the models
that are being bought it's the _use permit_.
__________________________________________________________________
I thought it was clear but now I'm uncertain again. Your two product types are
exactly the same physically (mesh files) but one has the restriction of
noncommercial use and the other has no restriction. The prices are different
based on the type of license one purchases. Do I have this correct? How are
you able to discern how one uses the noncommercially licensed versions? As you
are well aware and as I have said often – WEASELS ABOUND! To be clear, I'm on
your side, I want you to get as much money as possible for your hard work.
Bob
>>The prices are different based on the type of license one purchases. Do I
have this correct? <<
Yes, but there are actually 3 tiers in the KineModelz plan:
CONSUMER no commercial use
PROSUMER limited commercial use
PROFESSIONAL unlimited commercial use
And the first two tiers would be upgradeable for the simple difference in cost.
>>How are you able to discern how one uses the noncommercially licensed
versions? As you are well aware and as I have said often – WEASELS ABOUND! <<
Here's the issue, the way I see it, Bob.– Is it better to charge one high flat
rate, thereby restricting the number of users who have access to the models, OR
better to have different permits, more users, and some violations? Although it
will be somewhat difficult to enforce the latter, I've chosen to give it a try
because I want the models to be more accessible. And I hope to minimize
problems of misuse by carefully controlling distribution, making sure users
understand precisely what permit they have, and religiously registering all
users, perhaps with occasional checkups to verify compliance. (No dongles are
planned though.) Since my user base is likely to remain rather small, I think
such a plan is feasible.
It's an experiment, I admit. And it may fail, but I'm willing to give it a shot
because I'm not satisfied with the higher flat-rate approach, and lower
standard prices would probably put me out of business. For further elaboration
on this, see my most recent message to Anigrafix in this same thread.
>>I'm on your side, I want you to get as much money as possible for your hard
work.<<
Right back atcha.
-Tim
Tim:
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
Is it better to charge one high flat rate, thereby restricting the number of
users who have access to the models, OR better to have different permits, more
users, and some violations? Although it will be somewhat difficult to enforce
the latter, I've chosen to give it a try because I want the models to be more
accessible. And I hope to minimize problems of misuse by carefully controlling
distribution, making sure users understand precisely what permit they have, and
religiously registering all users, perhaps with occasional checkups to verify
compliance. __________________________________________________________________
From my vantage point, a customer's vantage point, I don't like the idea of
knowing that others can obtain a product for less due to some quirk of
circumstance. For instance, students have gotten so used to getting software
at a greatly reduced price that they feel they have a right to see this
continue. Next we will have student drivers demanding reduced rates on the
cars they train on. <G> All confusion and temptation drops out of the picture
if a product has basically one price. Common motivation is to reduce the price
if purchased in bulk, this seems to work for both the consumer and the vendor.
Its time I left the economics alone, I've had my say. One price for all.
Bob
>> I've had my say. One price for all.<<
Okay, I've done my best to explain why a system of different prices
for different licenses is valid. And I think many users are going to
be grateful for the opportunities it will offer. I don't think this
has anything to do with `student pricing', but I guess we'll have to
leave it that. Chow for now.
Tim, PMJI, but I had to get in on this. While I did agree with you up to this
point on your plans, I have to disagree now. I think your idea to have
different prices for the same models is not very well thought out. Why would a
"consumer" as you put it buy any of your models at all? No one is going to
purchase a model if they don't plan on making some money with it. I find it
hard to believe you could imagine someone paying good money for a model just
because they want to see it rendered or something. I haven't even purchased
humanoid yet, because I haven't had any jobs that require it. I would certainly
not buy it just to see it. I don't mean to jump on you or anything, I think
your work is great, I just think you should possibly reconsider your stand on
pricing etc. I just bought a Viewpoint elephant for a job. It cost $600.00.
This may well be the only time I'll ever use it. But I have it. I'd rather have
paid $600.00 for it and have it forever than pay $400 for it for a one time
usage. Besides how would you monitor this. You could keep the best books in the
world, but unless you wathed local TV in southern Wisconsin, you're not going
to have any idea if I reuse a model for an animtion. Hell, I'd just buy it at
the consumer price and use it for whatever. This is what people will do you
know. I just fell it's much easier and far more simple to implement a simpler
pricing structure. I'd sell it all at the prosumer price. That way _all_ the
pro's will buy it, _most_ of the prosumers will buy it and all but the
thriftiest consumers will get it. It's just more of a win win. Of course this
is all just IMHO, and should be taken as that. Just food for thought.
DM
>> I find it hard to believe you could imagine someone paying good money for a
model just because they want to see it rendered or something.<<
David,
I don't know if you've had a chance to look at the more detailed info I posted
on KineModelz in the ANVENA/New Anim. Vendor Library yet, but in the plan
outlined there, the Consumer version would not just be for home use, but also
*Evaluation* and *Demo Reels*. As you say, most users will probably opt for the
Prosumer version. That's what I would expect as well. However, many users have
purchased my models just to beef up their demo reels, or for their own personal
projects.
I've done my best in this thread to explain how compliance with the use permits
would be handled, and why I think the different prices for different licenses
is valid. I don't think I can say anymore on these subjects. But I do
<sincerely> appreciate your feedback.
-Tim
P.S. The tiered pricing does not apply to Humanoid.
Tim, I haven't the vaguest idea what your product is about, but I have some
observations on the implications of your pricing proposal.
1. Your pricing structure assumes that you know my business. It has to. If
you are to police your licensing like you are attempting to, then you MUST make
value judgements about all the licensees, even if the judgement you are making
is to accept our characterization of our business. And if your judgement
differs from mine (and you challenge me), the unstated implication is that I'm
a liar, or cheat, or ignorant of my own business. I would resent these
implications, even subconciously. I would be motivated to find another
supplier, even home-grow one, in order to avoid dealing with one who makes me
feel uneasy. I have two good friends in entirely different lines of work who
are feeling *dissed* by their suppliers for reasons similar to this.
2. How can you tell who has the greatest ability to pay? A supermarket may
appear to have bundles of cash lying about, after all, look at all the food
they throw out. Yet, their margins are only about 1%. Ford may make $5
billion profit, but they are required to fork that over to their shareholders.
What is ILM's ability to pay? How can YOU tell?
3. Rather than engaging in such amphigory about *use permits*, which may not
be legally enforceable (what is 'limited commercial' after all) the only way to
retrieve your investment would be to make the best products priced at the
highest level. That way, only those whose apps require the highest quality
would be forced to crowbar out the bucks.
4. If nobody buys at the highest level, then the market is signalling you to
either lower your price, or lower the quality. After all, whereas I would
truly love a PC with quad Pentium-100s and 512 Mb of RAM, the fact is that I
really don't need it, my work is satisfactorily done using lower performance
equipment. Remember how most engineering is done, anyway:
Calculate to the angstrom.
Specify to the micron.
Measure with a micrometer.
Mark with a crayon.
Cut with a chainsaw.
Putty and shim to fit.
Paint to match.
Bill:
I enjoyed reading your message as it probably made a more practical point of
what my reservations were to this pricing scheme.
Your engineering insight was a humorous closing, quite similar to the way
architecture is done.
Bob
William,
>>How can you tell who has the greatest ability to pay?<<
I can't. I think if you'll look at the detailed descriptions of KineModelz in
the ANVENA/New Anim. Vendor Library, you'll see my plan is to offer 3 different
permits, and users may choose from among them to determine *themselves* which
is appropriate to their needs.
>>…which may not be legally enforceable<<
There are plenty of precedents for limiting the commercial use on software
products. My plan will not deviate from this basic tenet.
>>(what is 'limited commercial' after all)<<
For my products, there will be very simple and clear limits on their use. They
are roughly outlined in the ANVENA files I referred you to above.
As for your other comments, I've already done my best in this thread to explain
why I feel different prices for different licenses is valid. I did not invent
the terms `Consumer, Prosumer, etc.' And there are plenty of examples in
marketing where these distinctions work very well. But I do honestly appreciate
your feedback. It's certainly food for thought.
-Tim
>>>> Read any Ayn Rand books recently? 'Atlas Shrugged' comes immediately to
>>>> mind!
>> You're quick and perceptive. I gasped when I read Tim's strategy.
Thanks! I was actually surprised that more of the Ayn Rand followers
on this forum (and there are lots of us here!) didn't pick up on this
– it's practically a direct quote from the book!
Who is John Galt?
You've reminded me to buy another copy of 'Atlas Shrugged' as I keep
allowing my friends to take the book home with them if they're
interested in it. I've had close to a dozen copies over the years.
> Who is John Galt? <
Listen to Mr. Thompson's speech on November 22. <$>
— James — Choreo Motion —
Bob:
>> Who is John Galt? You've reminded me to buy another copy of 'Atlas
>> Shrugged' as I keep allowing my friends to take the book home with them if
>> they're interested in it. I've had close to a dozen copies over the
>> years.
Same here! In fact, I just got Doug Wolfgram a copy of that and the
Fountainhead last week.
I keep paperback versions around for emergencies like this, the hardcover
anniversary editions are mine! :^)
Greg Pyros
I can understand an anti-collectivist mind sight, but monopolistic practices
are hardly a better alternative. But all that aside, the fundemental problem
with Ayn Rand is that there is no altruism, and while as a boy the world did
look that way, as a man I realise otherwise.
John
John:
>> …the fundemental problem with Ayn Rand is that there is no altruism…
But that's exactly what she was fighting against! That you shouldn't be forced
to work for the benefit of others instead of yourself!
Naaa, cancel that. I don't have the bandwidth for a full Objectivism thread
right now. Can we take this up in a month or so? :^)
Greg Pyros
Greg,
>> That you shouldn't be forced to work for the benefit of others instead of
yourself! <<
By definition "altruism" is not forced.
>> don't have the bandwidth… <<
That's O.K. I was just curious about your perception on the basis of her work,
which is that no one does a selfless deed, as every human motive is based on a
selfish interest. We could debate it but that's the scholarly interpretation.
John
John
PMJI, but how would you define a selfless deed? It seems to me that any
conscious action is an action on behalf of the desires or needs of the self;
all actions are a result of value. Hence, there is no so such thing as a
truely selfless deed; no altruism. So to profess altruism as the justification
for any action is, at best, a false pretense.
I think there is a common misconception in what constitutes value. A desire to
attain no value is itself a value. To put it another way, it is impossible to
intentionally act without motive, because to do so is itself a motive.
— James — Choreo Motion —
John:
//_______________________From your message________________________\\
the fundemental problem with Ayn Rand is that there is no altruism, and while
as a boy the world did look that way, as a man I realise otherwise.
__________________________________________________________________
All major religions profess altruism to some degree. Socialism legislates it.
Unfortunately, altruism is everywhere.
Bob
Bob,
>> All major religions profess altruism to some degree. Socialism legislates
it. Unfortunately, altruism is everywhere. <<
Boy that sure explains alot! You've provided an important missing element. No
wonder my intent is so misunderstood. I didn't know "altruism" had such a
negative connotation. It certainly explains alot of things including the
Sanfords and Studio City, Greg P and a host of other motivations around here. I
guess I've had the wrong motivation for years.
I'm not sure how this is going to affect me, but it certainly is an eye opener.
John
John:
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
I didn't know "altruism" had such a negative connotation.
__________________________________________________________________
Here's a Rand quote, "Do not confuse altruism with kindness, good will or
respect for the rights of others. These are not primaries, but consequences,
which, in fact, altruism makes impossible. The irreducible primary of
altruism, the basic absolute, is 'self-sacrifice'-which means; self-immolation,
self-abnegation, self-denial, self-destruction-which means: the 'self' as a
standard of evil, the 'selfless' as a standard of the good."
Negative connotation? More like a pure evil.
Bob
Greg:
Hmmmm, which should I get 'Inside 3D Studio Release 4' or 'Atlas Shrugged'? <G>
Bob
> which should I get 'Inside 3D Studio Release 4' or 'Atlas Shrugged'? <G> <
Get both, but don't try driving home with both in your car . . . bad on the
suspension. <G>
— James — Choreo Motion —
Bob:
>> Hmmm, which should I get 'Inside 3D Studio Release 4' or 'Atlas Shrugged'?
They both have many similarities – especially in size and weight!
Greg Pyros
Watching architects talk about Ayn Rand is like listening to dancers talk about
the first time they saw "The Red Shoes." <g>
– Jack
<G>
– G
Bob
Speaking for us really rich folk did you catch the "thank you" to G from
the guy from Sheppton Studios? Holy, Pinnanfarina!! "2 YOST" on the plates
for his Testarosas!! Don't it make you want to go buy Doom! Those partners
have 2 each and they bought plate frames that say "my other car is a
testarosa"!! This new digital market is really something!! I can read the
comments of the chosen ones
(w/ great taste in cars) and get the echoes of Ann Rand all in one sitting!!
Life don't get much better than this!!
Didn't Ann Rand star across from Gary Cooper (as an architect) in an
adaptation of a Stephen King thriller where she kind of grabs him by his big
ego and does a Bobbit thing? I may have it confused w/
Sargent Yankitov. (just pulling your leg)
Well on to NT (Nasty Technicals)
Goalie!!??You are brave! Do you still play rec? I have for Many years and
have finally met the ultimate goalie!! A Brit named Ian, as large as Lawrence
Taylor quick as Romario w/ an attitude! Cutting the angle is an understatement
here. He deals PUNISHMENT in a one on one! After Cupo Mundial and this
guy I have a new respect for that position!!!!!!! Gary
Gary, et al
Does Testarosa mean "pink balls"?<BG> Just curious!
TedB
!^NavFont01F0007MGHHG3B46E3
Means red head, Ted, after the red color of the valve covers.
-Alan (at least, that's what I read in Car & Driver<g>)
Gee Alan, thanks, I just KNEW the Italians wouldn't have named a car any such
thing. I get Road and Track, guess I'd better switch<g>
TedB
!^NavFont01F0007MGHHG72F4B0
Ted
The Italians just design for everybody, they cut out before it's wrapped
around the frame….so Spain=Diablo & Testarosa….Germany=Carrado, etc.
Who do we favor….. americans=Edsel & Dimaxion!!
He, he…
-Alan
Ted
How shocking!! No, Testatrosa is Spanish for testosterone the harmone most
active in the body of
a person who will own one of these cars!! It's the thing that makes the car
the ultimate property of their wives after the divorce. I see quite a few
geeks in Testarosas and cobras around here; makes me want to go hug a cherry
'57 chevy!
Gary
Thanks, I thought a 57' Panhard was pretty exciting! Guess I'll have to study
my Romantic languages.<G>
Later
TedB
!^NavFont01F0007MGHHG65B766
Ted
'57 Panhard?? I said '57 Chevy!! The '57 should be 57' Panhard
(from Pizza Inn). You must have picked up part of the msg from the
guy from Shepton studios; he ordered pizza for everyone on the forum!
Nice guy!!
By romantic language are you talking about C++? (shudder) We live
in changing times!!
I usta know how to make a hormone…
Doesn't that kind of talent belong in the Masters and Johnson forum? I think
it's the one w/
Heidi Fliece as the new sysop.
Gary:
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
Goalie!!??You are brave! Do you still play rec?…Cutting the angle is an
understatement here. He deals PUNISHMENT in a one on one! After Cupo Mundial
and this guy I have a new respect for that position!!!!!!!
__________________________________________________________________
I'm retired, broke my nose for the third time and figured why do I need this
hassle? I've dealt out a few myself though. I once knocked out (literally) the
leading scorer in the state when he thought he had a breakaway. I came way out
to the top of the box and went high to grab the cross. Had it not been for
this guys head I would have landed outside the area and faced a certain
handball. I caught him with both knees to his noggin' OUCH! They had to
scrape him off the field poor guy. He ended up playing for Team USA in the PAN
AM games and bit in the pros.
That was Patricia Neal with Gary Cooper not Ayn Rand but you knew that.
Bob
There's a lot of correlation between computer geeks and Rand fans. "Liberty"
magazine did a survey of its readers, the most popular occupation was
self-employeed in a computer-related business, as I recall.
If you ever see/hear of Lee Stranahan, a big guy in the LightWave and Toaster
training market (literally and figuratively :-), he was Rand's "sound guy" as a
teenager. In her Ford Hall speech tapes, you can hear her say, "Lee, can you
fix this mic". NewTek was a hotbed of Objectivists, the place was spackled
with Rand posters, Gordon Gecko's "Greed is Good" posters, Lloyd Wright
posters, etc.
As for Wilson's pricing structure, I didn't get the impression he was being
collectivist about it. Perhaps I should re-read the post. Was it a matter of
"what the market will bear" or "what professionals expect" versus "what
hobbyiests will settle for"?
John:
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
As for Wilson's pricing structure, I didn't get the impression he was being
collectivist about it. Perhaps I should re-read the post. Was it a matter of
"what the market will bear" or "what professionals expect" versus "what
hobbyiests will settle for"?
__________________________________________________________________
No, what he said was that he was attempting to put the biggest financial burden
on those who could afford more. What I pointed out was that this sentiment is
strikingly similar to collectivist thought which tends to reward those who do
not produce by taxing or burdening those who do. On the other hand, "What the
market will bear" is a good capitalist phrase. "What professionals expect"
versus "what hobbyists will settle for" are quality issues which I'd rather not
comment on as I could only speak for myself.
Bob
Hi Bob,
>> No, what he said was that he was attempting to put the biggest financial
burden on those who could afford more. <<
PMJI, but I thought he was talking "use permits" based on different types
of use (casual, low-level professional, high-end commercial), rather than based
on ability to pay (although they are linked to an extent). I imagine Pyros
Pictures could get a casual permit to play around with a mesh, then upgrade to
a commercial use permit if needed for a job. Quite the nightmare to check for
compliance, eh?
That's my take on it, I didn't save any messages. Interesting watching
this from the sidelines. I read a Rand book in high school, can't recollect
the title… I seem to remember that the protaganist rebelled against the
system and hid out in a nice house in the woods???
Liked the engineering "method" too. <g>
Paul S.
Paul:
/_______________________From your message________________________\\
I seem to remember that the protaganist rebelled against the system and hid
out in a nice house in the woods???
__________________________________________________________________
"Atlas Shrugged"
Bob
Greg,
PMJI
<Ayn Rand followers…there are lots of us here>
Add me to the list.
Who is John Galt?
Todd
Todd:
>> <Ayn Rand followers…there are lots of us here> Add me to the list.
>> Who is John Galt?
Another one sticks his head up! Greta!
Greg Pyros
Greg,
<Ayn Rand followers…there are lots of us here>
Me too!
Read everything she ever wrote. Anybody remember her interview on Carson in
the late sixties? She really was a character.
-Paul G
>> Anybody remember her [Ayn Rand] interview on Carson in the late
sixties?
No, but I wish I had seen it! Anyone have a tape? :^) (Wishful
thinking)
Add me. Just gave the anniversary edition of "The Fountainhead" to my
stepdaughter, who's starting school in architecture, and is delightfully
impassioned about it all.
But did you see Rand's interview with Donahue, in which she designated him a
"worthy opponent". Yech. Well, it was many years ago.
Gayle G de N
Gayle:
>> Just gave the anniversary edition of "The Fountainhead" to my
>> stepdaughter, who's starting school in architecture, and is delightfully
>> impassioned about it all.
Great gift! It was reading "The Fountainhead" as an impressionable
high-schooler that my _father_ decide to become an architect. Not to imply
that the book's been around for a while, (he's retired now!) <g>, but that the
concepts are still relevant today!
Greg Pyros
Greg
I also read it as a high schooler and it added to my feelings for
architecture(not the part of blowing up
any creations or anything)
It HAS been around for a while … a durable classic.
It's the perfect field for this phenomenally talented young woman – she has
represented her state in Mexico in national math AND art competitions – and she
turned down several med school offers in favor of architecture. I can't wait to
see what she creates!
Gayle G de N
Gayle:
>> I can't wait to see what she creates!
Keep us informed!
Greg Pyros