ASCII by Jason Scott

Jason Scott's Weblog

BBS Documentary: June 17, 2004 —

Like a lot of filmmakers, I have fallen into that “no new news” hole that leaves the waiting public in the dark while no progress or information comes leaking out. Unlike a lot of them, I will try to explain why that is.

For the last 3 months, I have basically been doing the clip culling that I mentioned in my previous news entry, wherein I take an hour of footage and turn it into a small pile of smaller clips, somewhat sorted for their possible final resting place in various episodes. This work is tedious, uneventful, and hard to keep updating folks on (“yes, I am STILL culling!”) and so I simply let the previous entries speak for themselves, because they were still quite applicable. I have gone through about 100 hours of footage, knocking it down to something like 10 to 15 hours. Obviously these hours will be knocked down even further in the final editing, but I need some flexibility depending on which sequences I think fit the different episodes. There are, roughly, 60-70 hours of footage left to cull, which are going very fast because I am an old hand at this by now.

If you are completely addicted to knowing every little thing being done, I started a little worklog that has no-frills day-by-day blows of what is going on. I will not explain what I write there, but stuff gets added nearly every day to it, so you can see motion if you want.

This is the required groundwork of any production; many places have interns or other folks working on it 8 to 12 hours a day, going through footage, getting out good examples of takes or shots, and then presenting them to the director or the editor to make choices. Since I’m the director, editor, AND the intern, I get to do everything at once, so it’s me with the 8 to 12 hours a day.

I should hasten to add that this work is not ALWAYS tedious, since I am in fact watching the full play-out of interviews I conducted months or years ago. In many cases, people are absolutely brilliant with their responses, considering I gave them little hint on what I would be asking, and for the fact that I often would switch questioning quite dramatically to make sure all relevant subjects were covered. While listening to the answers, I was often thinking about the next question I was going to ask, so even though I heard the answers, I didn’t HEAR them, if that makes sense. In many cases, this is the first time I’ve really, honestly heard the interview I’m editing.

The website has undergone a redesign to reflect its move into promotion and information. There is now a library which will hopefully reflect the more involved information that won’t make it on the screen, but which I ended up doing a lot of research on. The photos page will hopefully flower out now that the interviews are done, and folks can browse them.

Not a day passes by that I don’t get one or two letters with the same general question: “When is it coming out?”. I am not in a good position at this point to indicate when that time will come, although I am working quite hard to ensure it is 2004. Quality trumps deadlines; this is an all-in-one shot, and I want to be sure what goes on the DVD set is as good as I can make it. I’ve made sure to set up a notification page so that folks can be told when it’s ready for their order, so hopefully no-one feels left out.

I have forced some hard dates on myself to a small extent; I am giving a talk about the documentary at this year’s DEFCON convention in Las Vegas at the end of July/beginning of August. I will accompany it with some sequences from the documentary, and so now there HAVE to be sequences. I don’t expect this to be a problem, since it’ll be a number of weeks with all the footage in place to pull from.

All in all, the whole thing is coming along nicely. A lot of work, but well worth it.


A Call for some Hard Core Mirrors —

It seemed like a good idea at the time.

As I was collecting textfiles and other artifacts from the BBS era and beyond, I started to go after the logical next step: audio recordings and “art scene” creations. In the case of audio, it started with conferences from the 1990s and voicemail recordings, but it has quickly expanded into the current hacker radio shows and other collections that people have brought to me.

In the “artscene” section, I knew it was going to be large, since I would be collecting works from ANSI Art Packs, MOD and Music writers, and a whole host of other demos, drawings and works going back for a very long time. Indeed, the collection is already in the tens of gigabytes.

In both cases, the sites have gained in popularity, until the day has finally come that they are starting to hurt my bandwidth. This is bandwidth that comes out of my own pocket, with no advertising or other stupidities to augment them. I am fine with this, but people who use the sites are starting to notice the slowdown.

So, I would like to ask if anyone is interested in being a mirror for these sites. They are very large, and very popular with folks, and I don’t see the popularity coming down. I do not want mirrors who will add advertising to them, although the mirror link themselves will tell you who is providing it, and there can be a “information about this mirror” page that will be a “anything you want” sort of situation.

To save people some back and forth, I have to say that you have to be running your own server and have a lot of pipe to really be a mirror in this case; people often offer me space out of the goodness of their hearts, and I appreciate it, but this stuff will get you kicked off a shared server faster than you can imagine.

If you know someone with a lot of space and a need to flex their muscles, please contact me: mirrorhelp@textfiles.com. Thanks.


Five Documentary Manias —

I’ve been watching an awful lot of documentaries for the past couple of years, mostly out of a self-interest, but also because I tend to like them. I especially like documentaries where the subject matter is not so self-evident, like people who play lots of online games or The Fisher-Price Pixelvision Camera or people who wait in line for 30 days to see a movie.

But I also watch dozens of other documentaries in which the subject matter is pretty well established. They cover subjects like skateboarding, or historical figures, or eclectic characters. Certainly every year there are a dozen or so “celebrated” documentaries that have gotten the attention of the culture at large that I see out of duty or interest.

And through this mass of documentaries, I see a bunch of cliches or common choices that I think of as needless and weakness. They may represent, possibly, inherent flaws in the medium. Just like heavy makeup is often required to make people look a certain way under the lights used to shoot professional television shows, perhaps these shortcuts are simply endemic to the process. I call them “manias”, because the filmmaker seems to be overcome with them in the deep throes of the editing room, faced with a piece of dead space and trying desperately to make the film compelling where it might not be.

I’m sure a lot of these are already covered in some manner out in the wide world of film criticism, but I’ve built these up in my own mind, and as a result, I have my own terms for them. They are:

Perp Walk, Monkey Dance, Picture Postcard, Clown Show, and Razzmatazz.

I’ll cover them and then be on my way.

Perp Walk is where the interviewee is shown walking down the street, or down a hallway, or any sort of general location. It’s nearly always accompanied with a voiceover by the interviewee. In some cases, it might be a way to mask a problem with the original footage of the interview, but more often it’s just to be able to fit in some pleasant shots of the outdoors into a film that might not have them, like an in-depth documentary about an engineer or an overview of politics. You see the person, looking down, looking away, and down the street they go. Sometimes the camera is still, sometimes it follows them or walks ahead of them like a stalker. Extra bonus if the person you’re making walk doesn’t actually seem to do much walking in their spare time.

Monkey Dance is filming the interview subject “doing what they do”, even if it makes no sense that they would be doing things. If they do work with crime-solving, they’re shown looking through a microscope. If they’re a computer hacker, they are shown typing something at the keyboard. It feels stilted and weird, and oftentimes you can see the look on their face as being somewhat distant or confused, since in point of fact they are not actually doing anything. Dance, little monkey, Dance.

Picture Postcard is a meaningless shot of a vista, a landscape, a place, with no commentary, or commentary unrelated to what you’re looking at. They’re often shot beautifully, with just the right hint of sunlight and blue skies or interesting buildings, but they’re not actually of a place that exists within the story, they’re just general shots that could have been purchased off-the-shelf from a stock footage company. Maybe they even were.

Clown Show is the use of someone who is not really related to the subject at all for the purposes of being “unusual” or giving comic relief. If you pull a homeless guy aside and aim a camera at him and ask him stuff he couldn’t possibly know about, you’re going to get some pretty “funny” footage. If no homeless are conveniently located near your studio or house, you can just do “man in the street” interviews and ask people questions. Since most people aren’t interested in your subject at that exact moment and are unlikely to be thinking ahead of time with answers (since they were, by definition, on their way to somewhere when you stopped them), their answers will be inaccurate, misguided, smirking, and, in some fashion, comedic. This is, basically, a slight of hand trick, replacing time that could be spent going over the subject with a knowledgable person with someone who is neither interested nor prepared to discuss the subject with you. It is not difficult to make anyone seem like a clown. And it fills time nicely.

Razzmatazz is the most alluring and easy of the shots, actually part of the same family as picture postcard: long, lingering closeups of some object vaguely related to the story being told, shot with loving caress by the lens to give you a different perspective about the subject, but really just filling space. Maybe if you’re doing something on the space program, you look at a close-up shot of an LED counter clicking down, or maybe you see a slow-motion shot of water dripping into a cup while someone describes the murder that went on in the house. Either way, you’re looking at the beauty of the shot and not really what’s being covered.

When I shot my documentary, I intentionally crippled myself and filmed no monkey dances, picture postcards (although I did take photos) or perp walks for any of my interviewees. I just couldn’t stand the idea of making these nice people “do things” for fame and fortune (which a good portion of them neither want nor need, and my interviewing them was a gift to me, not the other way around). The camera can make people agree to a lot of stuff they normally wouldn’t, and that influence should not be taken lightly.

The question, of course, is how many of these I will fall into as I edit my own work. Razzmatazz is kind of unavoidable, although it is my hope to stuff the documentary so full of information that multiple viewings will yield additional facts and figures that you didn’t get the first time through. Clown Show might happen, although more because someone said something amusing than because they know nothing about BBSes or textfiles; everyone I interviewed either knew what a BBS was or knew what I was doing.

Next time you watch a documentary, especially the short ones on TV that were done under a very tight budget or schedule, see how many of these little short-cuts they’ve peppered even with a 20 minute segment. It’s stunning. I hope I didn’t spoil your next dozen hours of viewing.

Also, while I’m ruining Christmas, watch one of these “reality shows”, or documentary-like series, and ask yourself the one question that tears down the suspension of disbelief like the flimsy wax paper it is:

How did the camera get there for that shot?


BBS Documentary Optimizes, Gets Reviews Already —

“Bottom line, I made a mistake: I thought you were approaching this BBS documentary project as a scholar and a historian would. In my own work I’ve found that sometimes the most interesting threads uncovered in any history are not the obvious ones that everybody knows about, but the non-obvious ones, the exceptions to the rule, the people trying to be Macintosh in a Windows world. Looks like instead of approaching this with some scholary historian’s due diligence, you’re approaching it as a filmmaker producing a work of art. That’s your call. It’s too bad, but it’s nothing new, I’ve seen it before.”


Buy Textfiles.com For A Few Bucks —

Imagine my surprise when I found the following auctions up on Ebay (they’ll disappear soon, like all truly fly-by-night operations and deals):

Old School BBS Files Volume 1 (15,000+ files)

Old School BBS Files Volume 2 (25,000 files)

Old School BBS Files All (52,000+ files)

Essentially, they’re selling a copy of textfiles.com for somewhere between $5-$8 bucks (including the forced shipping price). The first two CD-ROMs are the collection split into halves, and the third is both halves sold together as one large one.

There’s really no question this is my website; the layout of the directories is the same, the descriptions are the same… it’s definitely textfiles.com in a box, ready to drop off to you if you click their buy it now button.

Once one gets over the surprise, it’s kind of hard to feel miffed or wronged by this action. After all, I go on and on in all of my website about how I was trying to save these files, to put them together in one collection, and I’ve used bittorrent and zip files to throw complete copies of the website into the world. How big a jump is it that someone would then go on and try to make a few bucks?

The reasons I don’t sell copies of textfiles.com are because of concerns of liability (I might find down the road that something was copyrighted, and I can’t just “remove” it from a sold product) and because, well, it makes me feel icky. I like making the knowledge available for the same price I got it: free.

On the other hand, I could see where people would prefer to drop $5 and get a copy of the site in the mail. It would be more convenient than days of downloads, and it would put it in a backed-up form they could refer to whenever they wanted to.

The only thing that kind of galls me is that the little tyke has rebranded the whole thing, calling it “The Ultimate Nostalgic Electroniuc Library Collection Volume 1 Thru 2”. This sounds NOTHING like textfiles.com. So he uses a lot of my effort but acts like he did all the work of classifying them and collecting them. That’s relatively on the lame side, and makes me wonder if all the rest of the CDs he’s selling (he’s selling dozens of them), aren’t also exacting rips of other websites that he’s acting like he put together?

But, as I said, I should take the high road, and appreciate the service being done. When the textfiles.com torrents re-arrive, I hope people will use them as well.

(By the way, his site sucks.)


Goodbye, John Aleshe —

It was inevitable that the BBS Documentary would need a sizeable appendix of information and related subjects that came up during the production but likely won’t be in the final “films”. Either I won’t have interviews to accompany them, or they’re too hard to get right, or another reason.

As a result, there’s now a library of information I’m building that will put these discoveries of mine in one solid place for the forseeable future. There was a similar research page out there, but this new version is meant to specifically be an exhibit and not a set of scrawled notes. Ultimately, I expect most of them will end up in the Wikipedia.

It’s still being worked on, but at least one entry is basically ready for public
consumption, and it’s a doozy:

THE JOHN PAUL ALESHE STORY

Come find out how a Fidonet sysop disappeared one day, and how his secret life came out, only to catch up with him 13 years later upon his death. It’s quite an amazing story to read, and I’m glad to have as much information as I do in one place, where others can see it.

It’s worth the time. Have fun.


No Matter the Intention —

Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 11:39:25 -0500
From: “dC :: Contact Desk”
To: ascii@textfiles.com
Subject: Good of History? Stupid and BORING

Mr. Scott:

I was recently forwarded a link to https://ascii.textfiles.com/ and a particular article was brought to my attention.

First and foremost, I would like to apologize for the rather unsettling approach by one of our users under the alias depthCORE in the IRC channel you were speaking in. He is not an official representative and shouldn’t have spoken on behalf of our artgroup to public relations in the demanor that he did.

I would also have to ask that you do either of two things. 1.) Delete the article from your site, or preferably 2.) alter the user’s alias “depthCORE” to something else, because it gives off the notion that the artgroup as a whole speaks in the way that he spoke, and that is not very good for our image. This is an odd request, I know, and I respect everyone’s freedom to write as they please, but given the circumstance that a user used our name directly as a speaker, I need to request such things.

As for your request initially… Despite what other artgroups have done, we will not allow a third party to be hosting duplicates no matter the intention. Also, we do not archive our packs in a zip, rar, etc. because we need the copyright notice to be retained above and below every image upon full view on the website.

Regards,

Brian Smith

depthCORE Administration
// www.depthcore.com


Good of History? Stupid and BORING. —

Sketch> Hello!

tuxie> oO

Sketch> Is someone who runs depthcore here?

depthCORE> Hello.

Sketch> Hello!

Sketch> I run a site called artscene.textfiles.com. I work with Rad Man of ACiD and a few other folks and try to collect together as many “art packs” as I can, as well as other art scenes. Is there any way you guys are releasing zipped or rar’d collections of your different packs? I really would like to add your breathtaking work to the collection.

depthCORE> Why would you want them in a Zip file?

depthCORE> When you can browse the whole pack on the website?

depthCORE> No.

depthCORE> Hell fucking no.

depthCORE> I am not the Official speaker for depthCORE. But I know damn well they would turn you down.

depthCORE> So NO.

Sketch> OK.

ndey> Why dont u just link the pack

depthCORE> ^

depthCORE> That is a good fucking Idea.

depthCORE> Don’t expect a link back tho.

Sketch> If you look at artscene.textfiles.com, say, at http://artscene.textfiles.com/artpacks/2000 or /2001, you’ll see a good number of groups who also ran websites,who also said why not just link, who also said there was a website, and who would want a pack. I or others collected them up, and in some cases my site and mirrors are the only collections downloadable from the web now.

Sketch> I don’t do ads, I don’t make money, I do it for the good of history.

Sketch> No evil here.

depthCORE> Good of history?

depthCORE> That sound’s kind of stupid and BORING.

Sketch> Occasionally a place is so good, I try and contact them and see what the thinking is.

depthCORE> You’ve got to have absolutely NO FUCKING LIFE to do some dumb shit like this.

depthCORE> Hell, I have NEVER heard of your fucking website.

ndey> You do it so your site gets popular

depthCORE> You can link us on your site. And that is the end of that.

Sketch> Well, I can’t argue with these statements, can I?

depthCORE> No. Because I am your god.

ndey> Honesty man, I would rather browse the site then download a damn zip

depthCORE> And what the FUCK kind of file is .ASC and .MOD?

depthCORE> When I download an artpack. I expect .JPG or any other common Q0‚ne formats.

depthCORE> But .ASC? What in the fuck.

Sketch> Well, let’s see. .ASC is usually ASCII art or at least ANSI-based. (DOS, or Amiga)

depthCORE> That’s kind of stupid.

Sketch> .MOD are music files, first for Amiga, later for PC.

ndey> wtf

depthCORE> If anything, you’re wasting your time doing this site thing as HISTORY for groups.


The Haters, The Haters —

This essay is not much about textfiles at all, though perhaps it’s entirely about textfiles.

My work on my sites and documentary stem from several major drives: The desire to save a history I’m afraid is disappearing, the need to explain this history to folks who did not live through or personally experience the events surrounding this history, and, in some small way, to personally leave a mark upon this world.

I’ve been working on textfiles.com for six years, and I have a lot to show for it: many thousands of textfiles saved and categorized, entire series of BBS-related text restored or sorted, and a huge amount of side projects that have made themselves a part of the whole, such as the universal BBS list and the BBS Documentary. This should be a happy time for me, and I should feel like I’ve really done something.

Buy my symphony of good fortune has a sour note in it; a steady blaring, blatting noise aimed at me that sometimes can drown out all the good even though it itself is of the weakest strength. If you care what others think (and I do), then if someone is less than pleased with your work, you want to know what you can do to fix it. You want to inquire further to understand their discontent and perhaps bring in their ideas to make your work on your projects better.

Some of these folks turn out to be the sort of Internet user who thinks that anyone with a half-decently designed website must naturally maintain that website full-time, and that any flaws in the HTML, project downloads, or images must be their top priority in life. They blurt out some sort of demand from you, and get angry and demanding if you do not respond immediately. We call that sort of person “Spoiled”, but at least they’re addressing an improveable aspect of your site, and when time, bandwidth and money permits, the fix can be applied.

But what if the person has no such suggestions? What if the message they bring is that you are worthless, misguided, in some way ugly, or suffering from a core delusion? What if you pursue them for an opinion and the only response you get is a deep, personal insult each time?

Bear with me a moment as I correlate my experience with a somewhat related but more controversial subculture: The emulation scene.

Not that this was entirely hard to accomplish, but I was there at the “beginning” of the timeline for emulation. You could play the historical game and say that emulation has existed in various forms from before the 1970’s to make certain chips function, but I would mark things as beginning from the IBM PC Emulator “SoftPC” for the Macintosh by Insignia Solutions in 1988 (they also released an IBM PC emulator for Sun Workstations that same year). One or two other such programs were available as the years went on that allowed one personal computer to run the programs of another (DOS programs on a Commodore Amiga, for example), and this was all fine and good, but mostly a convenience and the province of commerical software firms.

In 1995, a Williams Electronics emulator appeared for the Sony Playstation, called “Arcade’s Greatest Hits”. This proved a very important thing: That it was possible to emulate arcade games on present-day machines.

To emulate an arcade game, you need to have a copy of the game’s ROM chips (ROMs), which contain the actual program that the machine is running on whatever bizzare architecture comprises the “computer” for that game. To get a copy of a ROM, you need to physically yank the chips out of a working game and read them using a ROM reader, to a computer file which you can then download through the Internet or from friends via a disk or what have you. Once you have ti8file, you can burn it onto a “Write Once, Read Many” sort of chip and install this repaired chip into your machine. This is time consuming and bothersome, but as it turns out, there was for many years an active group of folks who collected physical arcade games and would provide each other copies of the ROM images so if a machine were damaged in some fashion, new ROMs could be burned and the machine could function again. No harm, no foul; everyone had a physical machine and they were just helping each other to repair these wonderful toys.

All this changed in the Spring of 1996 with the release of the first widely-available arcade game emulator, Sparcade, created by Dave Spicer. This program allowed an Intel Box to run perfect quality arcade games, functioning just as one remembered them, because it used these somewhat-available ROM images to program themselves. It was like an explosion shot across the gaming world; if you grew up on these games, Mr. Spicer and friends had dropped into your lap your entire childhood in perfect 8-bit color and vector graphics. The sound was there, the gameplay was there (and by this time, gameplay was precious stuff indeed) and it was FREE. The only thing was, he only emulated a handful of the thousands of games that had been produced in the last 20 years…. And the race to emulate everything was on.

Fast forward to today, when emulators of all sorts are everywhere and nearly every platform, arcade, home system, and even 1970’s-era hand-held LED games are emulated or “simulated” (a program perfectly imitates the logic of a game that has no CPU). You now have a situation with three strata of people in the sub-culture: A small handful of emulator programers, a somewhat larger base of support and media-related folks (running websites dedicated to the emulators and contributing supporting artwork or sounds) and, finally, hundreds of thousands of people collecting both the emulators and the ROMs necessary to play the old games.

Two of these groups produce what could be considered content. The emulator programmers are deep into development of the fastest and most versatile emulators they can, and the process is often a tedious reverse-engineering of hardware that often lacks documentation. They are like solid gold, comparatively, as there are only a couple dozen of them around at any given time (although some go out of their way to write tutorials of their work to encourage others to join). The media-related folks go through the effort of trying to both report on advances in emulation (and for a long time there was near-exponential work being done) and to collect screenshots, reviews, and sounds from the resultant emulated games.

As one of the hundreds of thousands of others (not counting the extremely short time I helped with the “Stella” Atari 2600 Emulator), I would spend my time browsing different sites, finding out what new games and machines had been emulated, and reading up on different interviews and news about what people were accomplishing. I thought it all very neat, and an interesting way to bring history back.

But within a short time, things got ugly for the content creators.

You see, ROMs were no longer backups of actual physical machines that people owned; they were now playable software that only needed a readily-available program to be available, free, on a home computer. What were previously archives of backup images were now potential dens of software piracy. These sites dried up very quickly, now being overloaded with download requests where previously there had been none. This was a bit of a blow, but things adjusted and ROMs are still available to shifting degrees, although nearly anyone associated with emulation in any context is asked constantly to supply ROMs for emulators they code and review. This is evident in the many, many “Please do not ask for ROMs” admonitions that appear before any e-mail address.

This “gimmie the ROMs” issue is just the surface of a deep, deep problem that until recently I considered a bit of a myth: Some emulator authors claimed to have been forced out from working on their projects due to a continuing pattern of abuse and harassment! From the users of their programs! I would watch this website or that project talk about shutting down because they couldn’t take the threats anymore, or the personal attacks, or the hacking attempts on their servers. This made no logical sense to me; how could someone try to damage, destroy or harass someone creating interesting things for free?

In fact, for a while I didn’t actually believe it. I watched as people updating their project logs left messages like “I’m sick of all the backbiting, the bullshit, the idiots ruining it for me, and I am ceasing work.” and I would naturally think the person had found other things to do and was just getting out with a cheap excuse. If you can’t take the heat in your e-mail, get out of the website, and all that. I figured if someone could show the intelligence to emulate arcade games and home entertainment systems, which I personally considered a sort of magic, then there was no reason they couldn’t manage to ignore or not be bothered by the occasional less-than-positive e-mail.

That is, until I started getting them.

I see it more and more; there is a small but vocal backlash against aspects of my sites that means that I am receiving a rising amount of hate mail to my mailbox. Mail that degrades me, calls me names, insults my purpose, dismisses my enthusiasm. Written by people that obviously have a grip on the construction of language but see my amount of success at my endeavors and let loose with all the hate they have inside. In other words, I am seeing why people would turn and drop the whole mess, focusing on pursuits no longer a few browser clicks away. I can see why they would change their e-mail addresses to something unrelated, abandoning their old embattled addresses like a sinking ship.

This isn’t to say that I am giving up; far from it. Textfiles.com is something like the fourth or fifth major “project” I’ve been a part of, and it’s the first that’s so big and so encompassing that it has a long way to go to lose my fascination. But I have thought about how angry these attacks have made me and how for flickering seconds I wanted to walk away, and I want to warn others who might get this pressure.

If you put your energy and tears into something you firmly believe in, something that opens for public consumption, focus on the people who are grateful, who write you and tell you what your project means to them. Even if it’s a few words, those words were written by someone who thought you should know about them, and that means something. Focus on these lights; and when the darkness comes from the one or two energetic folks who think you owe them something, that you were endentured to them by default the moment they downloaded you work, that a flaw in the program that they see is automatically a flaw in you, it won’t have the same effect.

Rap calls them “The Haters”, the folks who, lacking much talent or drive of their own, attack others who’ve risen above and accomplished something. They do nothing but bring each other down, say that it’s all useless or that you have no talent or your dreams are unobtainable and you should just give up. They preach death; death of creativity, death of goals, and want to just rain down failure on you, until you too are as drowned as they.

You never hear of the haters in history because by the very nature of what they do, they do not persist; they simply slip into the oblivion they seem to crave.

The solution to this onslaught of hate, failure and despair is not to jump into it yourself, guns blazing and flames flying, but instead do what you do best; keep building what it is you build or continue being a part of whatever projects you are assisting, and direct all your anger into a positive, or at least creative manner.

Which is what I’ve just done.


BBS Documentary Update —

In a move to allow people who are interested in my BBS Documentary to get news about it in a timely fashion without constantly hitting the website, I will be cross-posting news stories from the BBS Documentary site on this weblog. Updates happen once a month or less, so I don’t expect it to be that disruptive, and the ability of people to use RSS to get news is worth the trouble of posting it twice.

With great happiness, the interview phase of the documentary is finished. There are actually a couple more interviews to happen, but they’re all planned now and will happen piecemeal, while editing and other production work is done. While it would be nice to have them, the documentary does not rest on them, so basically, the load is off my shoulders.

The final number of people interviewed for the documentary is about 200. This is almost beyond reckoning. There are few productions of any size that interview that number of people on camera, about a single subject. This translates to over 250 hours of footage, also a little out of control by most standards. My reasoning at the beginning of the production was that to really tell the story, you would want to get as many opinions of people as possible, not just “famous figures” and a few pundits. This theory (and it really was just a theory) has worked out to be accurate. While many people might only get a line or two in the final episodes, they’re really good lines and represent the cream of an hour or two of interview time. That’s pretty valuable, and makes the whole production better.

There’s also an interesting situation where people in different parts of the continent, with different ages, and different platforms, say entirely complimentary things. There’ll be a lot of that in the final work.

Editing began in earnest months ago, mostly consisting of “clip culling”, where I take each hour of footage, and from that pull multiple minutes of clips usable for the final film. They might be a description of a favorite board, a thought or statement on a subject, or a reaction to a question posed by someone else that I’ve brought up. I then have all these clips sorted into general folders and sub-folders, where I…..

You know what? Not everyone wants to hear about this process, while others want even more detail than a few paragraphs could give them. So, I’ve started work on the first of several explanatory pages. How I Did It: Editing explains in quite heavy detail about how I’ve gone about setting up an editing station, and the hardware and software concerns, as well as how much space this works out to. I think you’ll like it if you came to this documentary site to get tips for your own project or are amazingly voyeuristic. There will be a bunch of pages, ultimately, linked from the front page when they’re done, which people can take inspiration and knowledge from, and go on their way. When people with professional pedigrees called or wrote in offering help, I asked a lot of them the same question: What are the 10 biggest mistakes you’ve made? From that simple question I can’t imagine how many pitfalls I’ve avoided. I hope my informative pages will do the same. See, it’s not just about BBSes, it’s about learning.

To celebrate the ending of the interview phase, I have edited together the first teaser trailer for the documentary. Entitled “Heroes”, it shows a collection of some of the more “famous” nam{bÒn my interview list (though not all of them) and invites you to come hear from them. It’s worth checking out if you’re interested in the documentary, if for no other reason than to see exactly what my style is. (In trailers, anyway, which is an entirely different art than moviemaking or documentary-ing…)

People who would like more information about what I’m up to and who want the bonus of my rants and thoughts on long-gone historical subjects will want to look at a weblog I am currently using, called ASCII.TEXTFILES.COM. This weblog includes an RSS Feed, which a number of people have asked for with the documentary site. With my crossposting of new documentary news in both the weblog and the documentary site, this will probably be the closest I can get to it. So download your news aggregator software and go grab the RSS feed off the weblog. If it sounds like I’m just blowing out a bunch of buzzwords, I’m sorry for that, it’s just a new thing people like. It used to be hard to explain BBSes as well. To help you get a leg up, here’s a webpage about RSS. It turns dozens of websites into feeds on your desktop. It’s nice.

Whole-scale digitization of artifacts, articles, magazines, photos, and even audio and video-tape is now at full bore. These will show up in the documentary to balance off the “head shots”, which a lot of industry folks think are inherently boring (hence you have such odd sets and backgrounds in a lot of “professional” documentaries, with flowers and a streak of light or some such). Personally, I find the wide variance of folks in these many shots to be fascinating in itself; the way people live, the way their environments are set up, the whole deal is still of great interest to me. But along with these thoughts, you’ll see a lot of information go by visually, too. Might as well cover all the bases…

Additionally, some of the artifacts I’ve been digitizing are rare or one of a kind, and I intend to make them generally available. So the documentary will have that secondary effect as well. As one person who lent me stuff said, “Finally, someone cares.”

The site is slowly shifting over to “Here’s what’s in the documentary” from “Here’s what I hope will be in the documentary”. Promotional and Informational instead of speculative… and it feels great. Was it worth three years? It’s worth twice that.