Douva

That scenario is a little different in that you would have to spend extra time and energy to make that free jump--time and energy you could be spending on a paid jump. Camera flyers who shoot competition footage are going to be shooting the video regardless of whether or not it's later used by ESPN. All they would be asked to do is let USPA hand over its copy to ESPN. It's the same reason that our competitors can never expect to earn the same salaries or get the same endorsement deals as the other athletes on ESPN--There is just not an equal market for skydiving competitions, when compared to other competitive sports. The only way for skydiving on TV to work is if those of us who love the sport and live off the sport can mutually agree to forgo our own economic ambitions for the greater good of the sport. I'm not talking about giving up any money; I'm just talking about agreeing to not get paid for something you probably weren't going to get paid for anyway. And although it's not the ultimate goal, doing this might lead to an increase in demand for this type of video footage, and that might lead to an increase in the number of media outlets looking to purchase skydiving footage and the number of paying gigs available to professional camera flyers. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Okay, I'll grant you that any footage can potentially be sold, but I'd be interested in hearing from any camera flyers who have actually sold competition footage and hearing how many times they've done so and how much they earned. I'm just curious how much this is really a case of the camera flyers being afraid they'd loose money. I find it hard to believe that my proposal would cost many, if any, camera flyers a sale. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Believe me, I know well the problem of amateurs undercutting professionals. I saw it when I was doing video production, and I saw it when I was doing a lot of production assistant work--People always expected me to work for free. Anytime people know you enjoy what you do, they're going to try to screw you on your fee. But that's not what we're talking about here. I'm not suggesting anyone do a TV show or a movie for free. Undercutting professionals only applies to a situation where there is competition for the work. This is about handing over competition footage that you've already shot and have no chance of selling. Obviously only a team camera flyer can provide the team competition footage. You giving it away for free isn't preventing some other camera flyer from getting paid to do the work. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

They all say that. But if it's on TV, someone is making money off it. peace lew Yes, ESPN is making money off it; that's their incentive to air it. The question was about USPA making money off of the footage. As I said earlier, the agreement would have to state that USPA could not use the footage for commercial gain, and if a profit were made by the USPA, they would be required to pay royalties to the videographers. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

The AMPAS is not a union or a regulatory body; it's an honorary organization of top filmmakers. Membership is by invitation only. The unions that do exist, such as the IATSE, do not regulate the type of work we are discussing. In order to gain membership in any film or television union, you must have a certain number of credits in your field. A good percentage of these credits are usually gained by working for free. I don't know of any union that prohibits members from using any credits earned prior to joining. A quick glance at both Joe Jennings's and Norman Kent's online résumés shows no union affiliation other than SAG (Screen Actors Guild). I guess the negative tone in these two threads is finally wearing on me because I feel the need to close by suggesting that in the future you refrain from making comments or giving advice on subjects you obviously know very little about. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

But I've already explained that they're not making money, you are getting credit, and it's not the type of footage you're likely to sell anywhere else, so what's the problem with donating it to the betterment of the sport? I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

. . . and then they'd hire Joe Jennings. Seriously. He has far more movie and commercial experience as well as a 35mm movie camera helmet that most of us don't. For the videographers involved, there is simply -no- upside to this idea. Like I said, it's not a "big break" that's going to land you fame and fortune, but what is the downside? Why not allow your footage to be used to promote the sport? Hell, if nothing else, I think being able to have your friends and family all over the country tune in and see your work on national TV would be an upside. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Proper etiquette dictates that public farts, unlike belches which require an "excuse me," are ignored by all parties involved. I don't write the manner rules; I just live by them. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Having your work aired on ESPN wouldn't make you famous, but if you are trying to market yourself as a professional cameraman, wouldn't it be nice to tell a prospective client or team or whatever, "If you saw ESPN's coverage of last year's National Skydiving Championships, you saw some of my work." And you also have to remember that you're not looking to hire a sports videographer when you watch ESPN. A commercial producer or somebody like that could always see the footage and think, "That's exactly what we need in our next car commercial--Who shot this?" I'm not claiming this is the path to fame and fortune, but the upside seems to far outweigh any downside. You've worked hard to be able to turn out that quality footage. Your team has worked hard to be able to turn out a quality performance. Why not let the world see what you can do? I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

I think that's a very valid point, and it would probably have to be written into the Nationals registration agreement that said footage could not be used in any venture intended to earn a profit, and any profit earned through use of the footage would be subject to a reasonable royalty fee laid out in the agreement. Edited to add: A credit guarantee should also be included in the agreement. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

The Bonfire thread is not about USPA taking footage from previous Nationals and using it for broadcast. It's also not about USPA or anyone else making money off the labor of team camera flyers. This would be a more accurate way to phrase the question: If the USPA reached an agreement to provide ESPN 2 or some other secondary sports television network with a thirty to sixty minute broadcast of the U.S. Nationals, either for free or at cost (If anything at all, USPA is only reimbursed for the cost of hiring color commentators, the ground video crew, editors, etc.), would you be willing to agree as part of the Nationals registration agreement to release your footage for this purpose, the same way you now agree to release your footage for the Nationals DVD? Considering Nationals footage is not the type of thing you are likely to sell in another venue and exposure on ESPN 2 could look really good on a videographer's résumé, I think this would be a reasonable arrangement. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

I'm not talking about using the footage without permission. A release would have to be included in the competition registration. For any camera flyers who would still refuse to allow the use of their footage, my only question is "Why?" Do they expect to sell the footage somewhere else, or do they just figure that because everyone else who shoots footage for TV gets paid thousands of dollars, they should too? Why not use the footage in a manner that might eventually spark the right person's interest and gain them some real paying work? I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Ah, so Guy and Norm did't know what they were doing....I see. You don't know your (as you say) "B" movie history. Wow More insults: So if we don't think your idea is the cats meow we are jaded? Oh gezze. Look you think I am a jaded, greedy ...whatever. I think you are a young, new skydiver that thinks he has THE "majic" idea that is gonna make skydivng popular.....Just like every other new skydiver. Ron, you are more interested in winning a fight than discussing the issue of promoting skydiving. Your latest post doesn't contain a single supporting argument for your case nor does it elaborate on any of the points you've made in previous posts. Its entire purpose is to insult and discredit me. Apparently I missed the USPA meeting that set the line between infallible skygod and naïve newbie somewhere between seven and eleven years in the sport. I don't know why you take the suggestion that skydiving could be successfully promoted on television as a personal affront, but I will not continue this discussion with you as it turns into a mud slinging competition. Good day. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Cutaway was distributed by Artisan Entertainment, the distributors of Blair Witch. When Blair Witch II was released, the income sucked. Cutaway was sold by AE to the USA network to solve a cash-flow problem. That said, I don't think that any writer or director has a perfect record, so a less-than-blockbuster movie doesn't define a career. Guy Manos who directed Cutaway, also wrote Dropzone. Dropzone was relatively successful for an action movie. Guy Manos career profile He is probably the one person who could explain how to achieve as a skydiver and be successful in the skydiving business. DZ owner, movie director, stunt coordinator, world-level skydiver. I don't want to speak ill of Guy Manos or Norman Kent or any of the filmmakers who made Cutaway because they've done as much from this sport as just about anybody out there. I had a chance to work with Norman once, and he struck me as a really great guy. But I do think their strengths lie more in the areas of cinematography and stunt coordination than writing and directing. According to the WGA, the screenplay for Dropzone was actually written by Peter Barsocchini and John Bishop. Guy Manos and Tony Griffin, along with Peter Barsocchini, received "Story" credit on the film. The truth is, there are very few people in the movie business who can do everything (Robert Rodriguez). The rest of us have to play to our strengths. In my opinion, Golden Parashoot Productions would probably benefit from writers and directors with backgrounds centered more in filmmaking and less in skydiving. I know Guy Manos has another screenplay they were trying to get developed, called Vegas Falls. I certainly hope it gets made and look forward to seeing it if it does. Again, I don't mean to insult anyone; I'm simply stating my opinion as a filmmaker. And everyone knows what part of the body opinions are like. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

This one I am curious on - just how would you do that? ANYTHING aviation related is going to have a large overhead. Don't forget that most of it would have to be done by union TV workers - that adds to the cost as well. I happen to know a few people that do video production for a living - the cost of that equipment is not cheap at all...esp since you want good looking video. Then there is the character generation, animation, music, and license fees. Then you have to pay the hosts, editters, voice overs, etc. None of that comes cheap. I'm not telling you to not pursue anything. This sport is full of innovators that went against the flow and changed it for the better. Do what you need to do. But just realize there are significant costs when it comes to production for TV. As I suggested in previous posts, the key would be to broadcast existing competitions, rather than holding new high profile competitions the way ESPN did. I have worked in film and video production for eight years and am well aware of the costs associated with video production. I never said it would be cheap, but it also doesn't have to be prohibitively expensive. This is not feature film production. A small independent production company could handle the ground footage and editing for a reasonable fee. No union workers would be needed. Add a couple of color commentators (experienced skydivers with broadcasting experience--plenty of them around, like Troy Hartman), and you've got a quality production. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

It does not...But 800 jumps and 5 years does not make you an expert on the sport. And people who have been in the sport for 20 years have seen these things tried before....Remember how big "Cutaway" was? People thought a big time motion picture with stars would be the hot ticket.....Yeah, it worked great. But you claim that they just didn't do it right. Not that it makes a difference, but I have 6 1/2 years in the sport. And yes, the problem was that they didn't do it right. Cutaway was at best a bad "B" movie made with bad "B" actors. It couldn't even get a straight-to-video release until it aired on the USA network a couple of times. I think a much better example would be Point Break. Although the whole movie contains probably less than ten minutes of skydiving related scenes, it caused an unprecedented interest in the sport worldwide. The X-Games is another example of doing it wrong. The overhead was simply too high to make it cost effective. Eliminate the overhead, and it's much more doable. That's not an insult; it's satire. I'm using hyperbole to discredit the notion that I am narrow minded for thinking somebody else might be wrong about something. sure you are. you are saying that anyone that does not agree with you has "other motives". You can't accept that we are just sick of people trying to make something popular that is not. You're putting words in my mouth. I never said that everyone who disagrees with me is greedy, and I never said that everyone who disagrees with me has ulterior motives. But I do think that some of my opposition is likely spearheaded by greed and ulterior motives. You just keep on trucking. I wish you luck. Do you really? I only ask because you're so vehement in your opposition for someone who simply thinks it's not possible. I kind of get the impression you don't want to see my ideas work. Because I haven't changed my opinion to agree with yours, I'm obviously not listening? "Sheesh." Now who's being narow-minded? When you say, "We have all been where you are," do you mean you've all been experienced video producers exploring the possibility of USPA providing skillfully edited skydiving competition videos to the secondary sports broadcast market, or do you simply mean you were all less jaded at some point in your lives? I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

There are twenty official Bond films and three unofficial Bond films to choose from, so which is your favorite? I choose From Russia With Love. I think it has the best storyline of the entire series. My choice for second place is a lot harder to choose. Any Bond aficionados out there who care to chime in? I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Here you go! DrunnkMonkey is officially "King of the Rabbit Posters." Now how about a shot of a rabbit eating somebody? I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

First person to post a still photo from Night of the Lepus, featuring a rabbit, is hereby dubbed "King of the Rabbit Posters." I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

I just wanted to respond to a couple of the different talking points I've seen in this discussion. 1. Skydiving will never be snow skiing. If skydiving grew to 100 times its current size (not something I think any of us would like to see), it would only be 1/10 to 1/5 the size of snow skiing. 2. Nobody in the sport of skydiving is ever going to be recognized in a bar as "that guy from the skydiving competition." I don't think anyone is really looking for that kind of recognition, but if they are, they are sadly misguided. I love catching extreme sporting competitions on ESPN 2, but I couldn't pick any of the competitors out of a lineup. The coverage of those non mainstream sports makes me much more aware of the sports than the competitors. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

I was actually involved in a relatively heated legal negotiation with Chunk (a.k.a. Jeff Cohen) once (he's now an entertainment attorney). It's my "fun fact" when I'm teaching AFF courses. That's Awesome! Did you ask him to do the "Truffle Shuffle!" That would've been awesome! Everyone asks me that. Unfortunately I just couldn't work it into any of the legal discussions we had. I was a little concerned that I might slip and call him "Chunk" in the middle of a phone conversation, though. Can you imagine how embarassing that would be? "To be honest, Chunk, I'm not at all happy with the way the sequel rights are structured, and....DOH!" I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Now this seems reasonable at first glance, but it's flawed in it's execution, and I say that from the experience of managing one of the world's largest drop zones. I'll agree that good relations are important as far as a drop zones survival is concerned, but that is almost without exception accomplished on a local level. No matter how good a DZ is, it cannot survive without the goodwill of the local community. We put a huge amount of effort in at Z Hills to restore the image of skydiving in the local community, right down to supporting candidates for the local elections, and for the airport management board. We eventually got the local public on our side after they had become severely jaded with the whole idea of skydiving after years of infighting between the two dop zones that were on the airport at the time. Our survival as a drop zone depended almost entirely on that local effort at one point. If drop zones are poing to expend that kind of public relations effort, you'll normally see it going into the local community. If it's done right, things like access issues and the like go away, and you'll build up a reserve of goodwill for the occaisions when you might really need it. I completely agree that for an individual drop zone local relations are the most significant, but I still believe that acceptance on a wider level would help assure the survival of our support. I don't think acceptance would necessarily kill the image associated with skydiving. Snowboarding and skateboarding still maintain their "bad boy" images, despite gaining nationwide acceptance in the last fifteen years. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Hell, I don't know what a tripple lutz is...But if it is Ice Skating...Have you ever Ice skated or roller skated? If so, then you have a frame of reference to how hard a "tripple Lutz" might be. A person who has never solo freefell has no idea how hard a 4 way is. The general public is not as interested as you think they are. Take a tape of skydiving into a bar. It will not stay on the whole tape, unless it is a dead bar. I have TRIED this. I have gone to bars and helped in a Tandem Give aways...Most times the people never show for the jump. As I stated in another post, there is a big difference between watching skydiving highlight videos and watching a well crafted skydiving competition. Really? Was not there just a recent freefly comp where the rules were made up as they go? Do you know the difference between an NJ, Incomplete Seperation, Incidental Contact in RW? Hell I don't understand all the RW rules and I am a judge. There are still aspects of football that I don't understand, but I enjoy watching it. Or you could relate to it since you skysurf. Uh, no. Aside from a similarly sized board, the two sports have nothing in common. And I was watching snow boarding for years before I started skysurfing. I was also watching skysurfing years before I started skysurfing. You seem to be ignoring anyone that does not fit into your view of the world. Might I add that many of these folks have been in the sport twice as long as you and have many more jumps. A small hint...When Gareth talks...I tend to listen. I even listen to BillV when its not about politics. CBS has raised some very good points. You just keep saying the same thing over and over like we didn't understand it the first time. We got it...It will not work. It has been tried...Ever heard of Arch Deal? You are being narrow minded by simply saying the same thing over and over and assuming we just don't see the beauty of your plan...We see your plan. We have seen your plan and others fail before. We understand your plan....We don't think it has a snowballs chance. Hell, I think we all wish you the best of luck, but ignoring the advice from people who have been there and done that is just setting yourself up to fail the ways they have on your own. It's called emphasizing a point. If I've ignored some statement, please direct my attention to it, and I'll be sure to respond to it in-depth. You didn't use those words but you said those ideals...Here are some of them: So if we have tried and lost before, and don't buy into your new shiney plan we are all "short sighted"? Notice the trend here. You and another guy on here both think skydiving could be the best thing since sliced bread. You have 6 years in the sport and 805 jumps. He has 5 years in the sport and 800 jumps. Some of the people who don't think its a good idea: 26 years in the sport 3300 jumps 13 years in the sport 3800 jumps 11 years in the sport 3300 jumps 18 years in the sport 7800 jumps. I think these folks have seen plans like this from stary-eyed folks before. Reference this great thread: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1442524#1442524 You are in #4. I am personally in #7. CBS summed it up really nicely: But in your opinion we are just "short sighted". How exactly does 20 years in the sport qualify someone as an expert on broadcasting and the media? If you like, I'm sure I can find some people with 10+ years and 1000+ jumps who agree with me, but it won't prove anything. Twenty years ago, the 20 year veterans were convinced that nobody with less than 100 jumps should be allowed to jump a ram-air canopy. Sometimes a long history with something makes it harder to see the future. Then you go back to insulting people: So if a person wants to get money for his hard work he is a "primma donna"? Anyone that does not buy into your idea needs to "wake up"? And if we don't march to your drum we are labled as "not a team player"? You are the only one with the right answers? How could I be so narrow minded an uninclusive? I hereby declare today "Everybody Gets to be Right Day"--There are no wrong answers. That's not an insult; it's a scathing remark against the uber-capitalist ideaology adopted by a small minority of skydivers. This is called Ad Hominem or attacking the person. You attack the "image" of the "type" of peorson who opposed your idea instead of the argument. I'm suggesting that there are reasons beyond lack of merit why some people might be reluctant to see skydiving on TV. I'm not attacking anybody. And I have provided valid reasons why it could work. Everybody who has been involved with efforts like this in the past (excluding the X-Games, which we have discussed in-depth), please enlighten me. I don't recall a plethora of failed televised skydiving events being mentioned in this thread, but then again, I've been "ignoring anyone that does not fit into [my] view of the world." If you disagree with me, that's fine, but grow some tougher skin--This "personal attack" witch hunt is the first real insult I've seen in this thread. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

The ranger who finds the blind girl mentions that the wildlife preserve is a no fly zone because the planes disturb the animals. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Really?? What happened? Ah, Chunk. I always liked that movie. But my Dad HATED Chunk's character. I can just hear him now, bitching at us to turn the movie off because he couldn't stand Chunk. Memories... He was representing a relatively unknown director who wanted to option a screenplay from me. He and the director were trying to royally screw me, but my lawyer wasn't going for any of it, so Chunk and the director eventually walked away from the deal. File that in the "big breaks that never happened" category. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.