Slashdot Mirror


Rings Digital Dailies Circled Globe via iPod

KD writes "During the making of the 'Rings' trilogy, Jackson and his crew upped the ante on Apple's innovative iPod storage technology, using it for filmmaking sessions during production on The Two Towers and The Return of the King. Media was transferred from Weta to Pinewood Studios in London. There Jackson then viewed the QuickTime files on an Apple Cinema Display, tied to his G4 laptop, which drew directly from his iPod. The director's setup was mirrored in New Zealand, and crew could step through shots with the help of their iPods, with Jackson's guidance piped in over a videoconferencing system. During the course of two movies and four months, 'Rings' iPods stored and served up nearly one-half terabyte of digitized footage from 'Towers' and 'King.'"

274 comments

  1. Versatile by pb_boi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which goes to show how rediculously versatile the iPods are in relation to almost anything. A task that important, for which they weren't designed, and STILL they're used, and STILL they perform amazingly well. Impressive. pb_boi

    1. Re:Versatile by pldms · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Versatile indeed.

      "Jackson then viewed those 1K-resolution QuickTime files on an Apple Cinema Display, tied to his G4 laptop, which drew directly from his iPod."

      I've been warned against using the iPod in this way. It was designed (I was told) for brief disk access, i.e. pulling the next x minutes of compressed music into ram. Sustained access, however, will invite disk problems due to cooling problems. (Indeed I find mine heats up noticeably when copying large amounts).

      Perhaps this quote is misleading. OTOH I guess their budget could cope with a few failures (unlike mine :-).

      --
      Slashdot looked deep within my soul and assigned
      me a number based on the order in which I joined
    2. Re:Versatile by Liselle · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, that's why it has the heat-conducting metal back. Take it out of the case, maybe point a fan at it.

      --
      Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
    3. Re:Versatile by vandel405 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Um, what about the first time you plug it into your computer and it syncs 20gigs?

      I use mine in this fashion regulary.

    4. Re:Versatile by mj_1903 · · Score: 5, Informative

      As someone who writes software for the iPod all day, I can say without reservation that iPod's can stand up to this usage pattern. My iPod 5gb has been running basically non stop for 16 months in this mode with no adverse affects.

      My tips for cooling:
      - Keep the metal side up (the dock is fine)
      - Never cover your iPod while connected to your computer
      - Never place it metal side down while connected to your computer on a blanket/pillow or something similar
      - Place a small fan on it if you are very concerned

      I have not had my iPod go above touchable temperature (any of my iPod's, 5gb, 15gb, 40gb). Touchable from memory is around ~55C and hard drives can usually handle 60C quite fine.

    5. Re:Versatile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You regularly rewrite all 20 gigs of data back to your iPod? What a waste of time. I prefer to just sync up the songs that have been added.

    6. Re:Versatile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You write iPod software all day? How about writing a custom firmware pack for me that has playlist software that *doesn't suck*. What is it with the on the go playlist that is so difficult to get right?

      I play a song, then I browse around and hold down the "select" button to add to the playlist. I add a third song, and so on... then I set the iPod down and when the original (first and only) song ends, the playing stops. That's so stupid. It should automatically "see" that I just created an on-the-go playlist and start playing it.

      The way it is now, I have to sit in several minutes of silence why I build my on-the-go playlist so I can then go back up, up, up, up to the top level menu, then into the playlists menu and start playing the on-the-go playlist from the beginning.

      Totally F'd up if you ask me.

    7. Re:Versatile by bfischer · · Score: 1

      If you re-read the post, you will notice he says "the first time you hook it to the computer". This does not sound like they are resyncing all data every time.

    8. Re:Versatile by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 1
      If you reread the post you'll see he wrote the following:

      I use mine in this fashion regularly.

      --
      Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
    9. Re:Versatile by dave420 · · Score: 1
      They're hard disks. You can do that with any external firewire hard disk. And, what's more - the iPod was designed to do that. Apple always mentioned the fact it can be used as a HDD.

      I love iPods - I've had 2 (original 5gig, and now a 40gig), but this strikes me as pro-Apple marketing. There's nothing special about what Peter Jackson did that required Mac hardware - you could do it on anything.

    10. Re:Versatile by jdreed1024 · · Score: 1
      Which goes to show how rediculously versatile the iPods are in relation to almost anything

      I can see it now:

      Jack Valenti: A gang of pirates, let by this Jackson fellow (whoever he is) copied footage of the Lord of the Rings trilogy and delivered it halfway around the world, thanks to Apple's technology. Think of the poor directors and film crews who would be put out of business if pirates like Peter Jackson continued to steal footage. Rest assured, we will prosecute Mr. Jackson for pirating footage of this film, while the film's director, Peter Jackson, has seen revenue losses because of this...

      voice offscreen whispers

      Oh, uh, really? But, Jackson was copying movies. But he's the director. But, but, copying.. But.. but.... Valenti's head explodes

      --
      There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
    11. Re:Versatile by brianosaurus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Some people with large (ie. more than will fit on their ipod) use applescript and smart playlists to change the music on their ipod very often.

      If you have, say, 100MB or so of MP3 to pull from (either due to a huge library, or high bitrates), and use a random playlist generator, its quite possible that most of the 20G (and much of even a 40G) could be re-written every time you sync.

      (and it is quite possible to have a 100% legal music library that goes beyond 100MB. its just probably not terribly common.)

      --
      blog
    12. Re:Versatile by Eraser_ · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I bet what the poster is thinking is the battery is made for this kind of use. Editing movies on my ipod w/o wall-power would drain the battery very very quickly (Use a 6-to-4 pin firewire cable). However with juice, the ipod runs just like a laptop.

      I leave my ipod plugged into my windows computer all day long charging when the battery dies, and windows doesn't know how to spin down the disk. I come back and sure it's warm, but as another poster said, just flip it over and it cools right off. My mac does spin down the hard drive after a few minutes of non-use.

    13. Re:Versatile by sirsnork · · Score: 1

      Of course you mean GB, since 100MB is about an album.. and an album of legal music isn't that strange at all..... Well OK maybe it is on _some_ peoples HDD's ;-)

      --

      Normal people worry me!
    14. Re:Versatile by Moofie · · Score: 1

      And, I suppose since Jackson and his crew could have used any hardware they wanted to, the only reason they used Macs is because they're stupid zealots, right?

      I'm sure there's not a rational reason they would have wanted to use Apple hardware. Must be the reality distortion field.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    15. Re:Versatile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't know what the production company's requirements were. If they boiled down to "portable hard drive" with no audio playlist features, then yes, buying a bunch of iPods was completely ridiculous.

    16. Re:Versatile by Graelin · · Score: 1

      (and it is quite possible to have a 100% legal music library that goes beyond 100MB. its just probably not terribly common.)

      It's quite common I'd think. I have 2 gigs of OGGs sitting here, made up of 41 CDs, which are also sitting within 2 feet of me at this moment. I own them all.

      100MB? Pish.

    17. Re:Versatile by rcloud · · Score: 1

      I recall reading a newspaper article or column that reported the 15 gig IPod being able to be hooked to an ISight camera, the combination then being able to serve as a form of portable camcorder. Was this piece misinformed?

    18. Re:Versatile by brianosaurus · · Score: 1

      crap. yeah, i meant GB.

      --
      blog
  2. Slow news day? by rokzy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    not meaning to troll or anything, but surely anyone who cares about this kind of trivia (like me) would have known about it months ago when watching the TT DVD documentaries?

    are the slashdot editors trying to have a competition of who can post the oldest story?

    1. Re:Slow news day? by BlueCodeWarrior · · Score: 0

      This was on TTT DVD? I haven't gotten the chance to buy it yet (it's not quite at the top of my list at the moment, and when it is, places seem to be sold out)....so this is news to me. I'd think Apple would have bragged about this one a lot more...I know I would have, had I been born Jobs instead of Klabnik :-p

    2. Re:Slow news day? by pb_boi · · Score: 1

      Someone actually posted something about it a while ago, but think it was just in a comment to another post. Still, impressive. pb_boi

    3. Re:Slow news day? by iethree · · Score: 1

      i'm usually so impressed with the content of slashdot, but this hardly qualifies as news.

    4. Re:Slow news day? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't a troll, it's insightful. I, as well as anyone else who bought the TT extended DVD and actually watched the extras DVDs, have already known about this for months and months. My very first thoughts when reading the article were identical to the post I'm replying to. Just because someone is critical of slashdot doesn't make them a troll!

    5. Re:Slow news day? by Simon+Garlick · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Who the hell modded parent as "Troll"? It's a legitimate comment. What next, Slashdot stories on the AI agents in the Battle of Helm's Deep? Sheesh, is there a Slashdot reader out there who hasn't seen the TTT DVD extras?

    6. Re:Slow news day? by Emil+Brink · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but the original site had quotes around "Rings", which (at least for me) made the headline a lot easier to understand. I wish they would have kept those. Of course, English isn't my native tongue, so maybe it's just me.

      --
      main(O){10<putchar(4^--O?77-(15&5128 >>4*O):10)&&main(2+O);}
    7. Re:Slow news day? by GTRacer · · Score: 1
      Me?

      I'm waiting for the complete Trilogy super-ultra-mega-platinum-special Edition boxset before I invest any more money in Sir Jackson's retirement fund...

      GTRacer
      - Saw all three theatrically on opening weekends

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
    8. Re:Slow news day? by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1

      Then you're not a true slashdotter. If you were, you would have bought the original DVD release, then the extended edition, and then whine about how you're going to be "forced" to buy the boxed set.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    9. Re:Slow news day? by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

      You're not trolling - the whole time I read the article (all few seconds of it) I was thinking "wow, someone put the documentary stuff from that DVD set onto the *web*! This is news!"

      Honestly, I think the char AI they developed for the batle scenes (mentioned in another post) was *far* more interesting than the use of expensive Apple-brand portable hard drives and teleconferencing software. *I* have used portable hard drives and teleconferencing software (much like many here have), but I've never developed software to make realistic large-scale battle scenes. :)

    10. Re:Slow news day? by StingRay02 · · Score: 1

      I bit my tongue and held out for the extended Fellowship set, then couldn't wait any longer for Two Towers and bought the theatrical version on DVD as soon as it came out. I also then bought the extended version as well. I'm actually looking forward to buying both versions of Return of the King and have this aching need to buy the theatrical Fellowship, and the thought of one giant compilation is a prospect too fascinating to pass up. Since I'm not whining, what does that make me?

    11. Re:Slow news day? by ubertote · · Score: 1

      That makes you a man with a little bit too much money laying around, which, BTW, i'm more then happy to help you depart with.

    12. Re:Slow news day? by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      is there a Slashdot reader out there who hasn't seen the TTT DVD extras?
      j0
    13. Re:Slow news day? by StingRay02 · · Score: 1

      Ahhhhh.... but the problem is, this man doesn't have that much money lying around..... You'd be surprised how easily one can survive without food.... Those aren't hunger pangs, they're- Look! A flying three legged pig! Now what were we talking about?

  3. Odd irony by donscarletti · · Score: 4, Funny

    This could have well been the first time that scores of nerds would have wanted to copy something _off_ an ipod and onto the internet for their own entertainment.

    --
    When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    1. Re:Odd irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This could have well been the first time that scores of nerds would have wanted to copy something _off_ an ipod and onto the internet for their own entertainment.


      We do that kind of things all the time...

      in Soviet Russia.

  4. Not exactly exciting news. by MountainMan101 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Someone uses a portable large (10-20GB) USB harddrive to transfer data. Okay, so it was non-Microsoft. This would have been news if it had been new hardware/software/protocols, but honestly. Is this worthy of Slashdot?

    1. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by mirko · · Score: 1
      Someone uses a portable large (10-20GB) USB harddrive to transfer data.
      Firewire, most probably.
      But I agree.
      We'll soon learn that somebody else used his digital camera's removable memore module (SM/CF/XD/SD/MMC/MC) in order to transfer data without playing Johnny Mnemonics.
      --
      Trolling using another account since 2005.
    2. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by ernstp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just one thing.... its a FireWire mp3 player!

    3. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by Hast · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So? It's the same as any USB mass storage device, it just uses FW as a hookup. Virtually any USB flash based MP3 player can be used as a storage device for non-audio data. Colour me unimpressed.

    4. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by shockbeton · · Score: 5, Funny

      In other "news," the mighty Peter Jackson reportedly uses a telephone to transmit voice data in real-time to his mom. Rumors also suggest that he and other key players in the production of the widely acclaimed LotR trilogy purge their bodily waste into a toilet.

    5. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by kfg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There is a tendency these days for even the technologists to look at a core technology wrapped up in a shiney new shell and view it as something essentially new and more technologically advanced.

      This tendency is "good" for the industry but financially draining for the customer. The entire software industry rests upon this tendency and the recent recession in the purchasing of software by business represents a crack in this point of view. Office 97 works.

      In point of fact the core technologies of all office software have been in place since the release of Visiscalc. Database, spreadsheet, text editor. Everything else is just variations on these and the latest new feature of Word is nothing more than a text editor macro attached to a button.

      It's akin to painting a disposable razor pink instead of orange and calling it "for women," a technique that works distressingly well.

      A Perl script wrapped up in Royal robes isn't "new technology" and a portable HD is just a portable HD.

      Maybe I need to make an iPod clone, put it in a titanium case and call it the "Movie Meister" or something.

      KFG

    6. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by TwistedGreen · · Score: 0

      Exactly. I fail to see how the iPod is innovative.

      But, since I'm sure I'll get a hundred Apple weenies trying to explain it to me as soon as I click Submit, I'll concede that maybe some innovation lies in the software. However, the iPod itself is just another HDD-based mp3 player.

      And it's also ugly.

    7. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by kfg · · Score: 1

      It is an innovation in marketing.

      Quite frankly we could use a bit less of that sort of innovation right now and get down to the business of making things, and software, that just works.

      KFG

    8. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by jeffehobbs · · Score: 1


      And it's also ugly.

      you forgot to mention how it smells bad and has cooties.

      ~jeff

    9. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by kfg · · Score: 1

      Don't be silly. It doesn't have cooties.

      KFG

    10. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by TwistedGreen · · Score: 1

      I knew some zealot would mod me down. Heaven forbid anyone on Slashdot mention the truth of Apple's ridiculous marketing schemes. Beware!

    11. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by Gumber · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ah, but seing as how this was an iPod hooked to a mac, this was surely a FireWire disk , so it is news
      !

    12. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by Gumber · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On the other hand, there is a tendancy for technologists to look at new applications of technology and say: Thats no big deal, its just a perl script, or, thats no big deal, its just a portable hard disk. Bittorrent is nothing, its just a python script. This jaded attitude can blind them to the implications of technology change.

      Perhaps there is nothing new about this, but I'd suggest that it is an extreme illustration of a change that may have real implications.

      With the rise of the iPod, and similar devices, people are now in the habit of carrying around a significant amount of storage, in many cases, a 10 GB iPod is already enough to carry their entire corpus of personal files and settings, along with a decent sized collection of music.

      One thing to consider, is that this effectively gives people dramatically more effective bandwidth out of their homes. How might we, as technologists, make use of that fact to do cool and useful things?

    13. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by Chiron+Taltos · · Score: 1
      Maybe I need to make an iPod clone, put it in a titanium case and call it the "Movie Meister" or something.

      Ssh ... Don't give Microsoft your ideas for free.

      --
      CT

    14. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by Marley · · Score: 1

      ...and to think he can do it ALL with THIS.

    15. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Where, pray tell, can I find these flash-based MP3 players that can carry a non-hilarious amount of high resolution video?

      What, pray tell, is the color of the sky on that strange alien planet?

      You don't have to be impressed. The guy who's made three bajillion dollar grossing movies is impressed, and that's enough.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    16. Re:Not exactly exciting news. by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1

      Someone uses a portable large (10-20GB) USB harddrive to transfer data. No, it's Firewire. That makes it much, much cooler.

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
  5. Also by sfraggle · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you watch The Two Towers Extended Edition commentary, you'll find that one of the crew was chased through the streets of London in the early hours of the morning one day by people who wanted to rob him. Fortunately he managed to get away and the iPod in his pocket with the entire film on didnt get leaked :)

    --
    were you expecting to see a sig here? perhaps you'd rather see the inside of an ambulance!
    1. Re:Also by jtrascap · · Score: 1

      nevermind the iPod - YOU are not worthy of slashdot! :)

    2. Re:Also by cyberfunk2 · · Score: 1

      I barely know who the man is.. but I know a GOOD movie when I see it.. and ROTK was a GOOD movie. It was one of the best book/movie conversions i've ever seen. It also happened to be visually impressive to boot .

    3. Re:Also by danila · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I am happy that you enjoyed it, but the fact is - I didn't like the second and the third part. There are reasons for that and they are discussed all other the Net (various character and plot changes, which in opinion of some people, weaken the films and go against the ideas of Tolkien). The fact that we hold different opinions doesn't make one of us a troll.

      I still think that Faramir's character was butchered by PJ, Arwen's subplot was unnecessary, conflict between Sam and Frodo was stupid, Aragorn was not kingly, dialog in TTT and ROTK was lame and contrived, the quality of special effects was not consistant (just think, why all agriculture in the movie was concentrated in Shire? PJ was too cheap to add a few CGI fields/villages/gardens to Gondor/Rohan panorama shots?). The movies sucked. Many people and critics enjoyed them, but they sucked.

      That someone can downmod this comment doesn't change the fact that TTT and ROTK were just lame B-movies with expensive CGI.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    4. Re:Also by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Yeah... he ran pretty fast. I let him get away in the end, though. I saw the wachowski brothers getting into a cab and thought I'd get the new matrix films while I was at it.

    5. Re:Also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree that you shouldn't be modded down as a troll just for voicing your opinion...but then you go ahead and bitch about Liv Tyler having too much screen. That alone is deserving of negative karma points. Perhaps (-1, Homosexual)?

    6. Re:Also by danila · · Score: 2, Funny

      I never said she got too much screen time or that she played Arwen poorly. What I said is that the subplot with her going away was contrived, stupid and contradicted the book.

      I didn't mind her appearance at all and the expansion of her role didn't bother me per se, only the direction in which it was expanded.

      As for the (-1, Homosexual), I believe that stupid movie deserves it! :) The scene with Sam in nightgown was so gay (as in fag) a lot of people in the theatre bursted out laughting. Sam positively looked like Frodo just made him his bitch. :)))

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    7. Re:Also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As for the (-1, Homosexual), I believe that stupid movie deserves it! :) The scene with Sam in nightgown was so gay (as in fag) a lot of people in the theatre bursted out laughting. Sam positively looked like Frodo just made him his bitch. :)))

      Yeah...I'll give you that one. And what about Merry and Pippin? They definitely heated things up in ROTK.

    8. Re:Also by danila · · Score: 1

      What heated things up, in my opinion, was a little bit of implied interspecies relations. :) Quoting from the script:

      ROHIRRIM CAMP
      EOWYN: Here, little fellow. Put this armor on.
      MERRY: Thanks much, my lady. Ooh, I don't think you fastened my belt right. Could you put your hands there again? ...Ahh, that's it; right there...
      EOMER: Wow, sis, you are getting desperate.
      EOWYN: Look at this hobbit: can you honestly tell me he isn't brave and handsome, and doesn't inspire your courage?
      EOMER: (snicker) Uh, sure. Sure, he's great. Yeah. (gives MERRY thumbs-up sign) You go, dude.

      I am not particularly perverted, but that episode clearly was either totally exhilarating or horribly disgusting. :) To hear Eomer worrying about the reach of Merry's arm. :))) Priceless!

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    9. Re:Also by mbbac · · Score: 1

      They could have put the files into an encrypted disk image to prevent that from happening.

      --

      mbbac

    10. Re:Also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because the parent modded you as a troll doesn't mean the rest of us think you should be modded a troll.

      Why do you have to glob all of Slashdot into a singular entity?

      BOOB.

    11. Re:Also by melatonin · · Score: 1

      I still think that Faramir's character was butchered by PJ

      Yes, I didn't like that either, but I can't deny it when PJ says in the DVD that "let's all sit down and have tea, and then off you go!" or something like that. The extra scene in the DVD about Faramir's "chance to show his quality" was desprately needed in the theatrical release, and I think it was foolish to not include it.

      Arwen's subplot was unnecessary

      A matter of opinion; I think it was perfectly necessary, if for the very least that a king like Aragorn needs a queen like Arwen.

      conflict between Sam and Frodo was stupid

      I didn't 'enjoy' it I guess, but no sense in being chummy all the time. The conflict arose from Frodo being taken by the ring, which was more intense than in the book (where Frodo sits around with it for 30 years or so without being drawn to it). The only thing that bugged me was inside Mount Doom; at one point I was just thinking, Sam, push him over already :P

      Aragorn was not kingly

      I thought he was. He was always assertive, wise when it counts, and passionate for those he needed to protect. And yet, they made him 'unexperienced' compared to Theoden when needed, which broadened his wisdom further. I especially liked how he said to the hobbits, "you bow to no-one." Nicely humble. The book mentions, at one point, that Aragorn stands very kingly. Does that make him more 'kingly' in the book?

      dialog in TTT and ROTK was lame and contrived

      At least they weren't singing all the time like the books :P Seriously, would you have been happier if they all spoke in Shakespearian tongue? As directory/writer, you have more to express than dialog; you have an environment that you want the viewer to absorb too. Simple dialog is effective in movies, but not in books.

      the quality of special effects was not consistant (just think, why all agriculture in the movie was concentrated in Shire?

      Because the shire was the purest place in Middle Earth, and served as a foil to the environment outside. The only place not ravaged by war. The plains of Rohan looked desert-like to me, despite the fact that they were green. I felt that was appropriate.

      Many people and critics enjoyed them, but they sucked

      A lot of people liked all the Matrix movies too, but Leno doesn't talk about those people. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but one's a fool to not recognize the difference between opinion and facts.

      Movies that I think suck: After Earth, Batman Forever, Terminator 3 (although I didn't see it). Some people think Unbreakable sucked. I saw it before I saw the Sixth Sense, and as such I thought both were great. It also helps that I'm a fan of some American comics, and Unbreakable resonated very well. But to some, it sucked.

      Note to moderators: it's not off-topic to talk about how much the movie did or didn't suck; it's the fricken LOTR topic. OK, it's a matter of opinion, but be nice :P

      --
      Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
    12. Re:Also by danila · · Score: 1

      I can't deny it when PJ says in the DVD that "let's all sit down and have tea, and then off you go!" or something like that
      Why do you think that wouldn't work? IMHO it was worth trying. And in any case, PJ mostly argued that it would be downplaying the power of the Ring. Well, first of all, I don't like PJ hammering down the same ideas and the same scenes in every film (e.g. Elrond+Isildur and Sam+Frodo, Gimli+the horn and Pippin+beakons, etc.). And second, Aragorn refused the Ring, Gandalf refused it. Why can't Faramir do it as well?

      A matter of opinion; I think it was perfectly necessary, if for the very least that a king like Aragorn needs a queen like Arwen.
      Again, I am not against Arwen per se, but against her "departure" to Valinor and that bullshit about her connection to the Ring. There was lots of stuff for her to do, such as make a goddamn flag for Aragorn. :) And although I appreciate her actually turning back in ROTK, it was handled pretty lame (especially her Elf companion).

      I especially liked how he said to the hobbits, "you bow to no-one."
      I hated it. :) In the book they only bow to Sam and Frodo! What did Pippin do that was so great? :) He couldn't even kill a troll.

      Seriously, would you have been happier if they all spoke in Shakespearian tongue?... Simple dialog is effective in movies, but not in books.
      No, I would appreciate if they simply made some sense. It should be simple, but coherent. As it is, almost every time someone spoke, I cringed. :) Of course, it's a matter of opinions and quite difficult to objectively judge, so let me just say that I thought the quality of writing was very poor. A problem with this movie is that at no point there existed a coherent script. I appreciate PJ fixing some of his mistakes in the process (Arwen in Helm's Deep, etc.), but it would be better if he had a detail vision beforehand and then implemented it. Right now there are several glaring examples of revising the story in mid-course (the hug of Aragorn and Eowyn in TTT, Eagles vs. Nazguls in ROTK), when first shot is from one version and the next one is from another.

      Because the shire was the purest place in Middle Earth, and served as a foil to the environment outside.
      The problem was that there was nothing outside of Minas Tirith, Edoras, Helm's Deep. Nothing at all. The only Rohan village was the one necessary to the plot. The backgrounds were completely lifeless, which is nonsense. In the book these places were real, they were alive, there were peasants, merchants, etc. going in and out. Second problem is that PJ has completely fucked up the scale. That idiotic beacons episode took place over the whole 24 hours (started in the day, ended next day) and still each next beacon shone after just 5-10 seconds. Assuming 1 km separation, Edoras is about 5000-10000 kilometers from Minas-Tirith. Does that make any sense? And then we have Osgiliath and Minas-Tirith conviniently brought together to be at most 1 km away from each other and also just next to the harbour (which we only see a few piers of, as if it doesn't exist at all). And the Gorgorat plain is so small that all Orcs manage to leave it in just a few minutes...

      BTW, I am pretty happy about people, like you, who liked TTT and ROTK overall. What annoys me, though, are fanboys who absolutely refuse to acknowledge that there is even a single problem with the films. I guess, I should just ignore them, but I can't, as long as they downmod me. :)

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    13. Re:Also by melatonin · · Score: 1

      And second, Aragorn refused the Ring, Gandalf refused it. Why can't Faramir do it as well?

      Did you get to watch the extended DVD? :-/ It really was bad for them to cut out that scene, as it set the stage for Faramir's behaviour in TTT. Otherwise it's just a butchering of the character. Taking that scene into account, the ending where he finally lets the hobbits go and Sam says that "you've have shown your quality" shows us Faramir's character. Really, Faramir didn't desire to have the ring. He was drawn to it as Gandalf ("don't tempt me Frodo!") and Aragorn (end of fellowship) did, and all he really desired was to get it to Gondor; the motivation behind that is in the cut scene.

      Again, I am not against Arwen per se, blah blah

      Agreeded, her use in the movie is far from perfect, and I really didn't 'get' her bonding with Aragorn while he was far away (turns out they were dream sequences; I really didn't know what was going on). But hey, it's not like Tolkein wrote LOTR in four years. And PJ had to produce, direct, and edit three movies too!

      I hated it. :) In the book they only bow to Sam and Frodo! What did Pippin do that was so great? :)

      Well, yes, but it's a direct scene (people bow to the short hobbits who have never been regarded as heros, if their existence had been acknowledged at all) not a factual scene :-/ It takes time to set up a sequence to describe 'we only bow to these two hobbits, and we only praise these other two for their valiant service." It's hard to get the point across and not bore the audience. But it's really easy to offend people who know the story well :)

      The only Rohan village was the one necessary to the plot.

      I think that the village that burned down was a major failing of the movie. A couple houses burning down in a field by crazy aggressive people is normal course during war times. If it felt that they destroyed something more significant (a prosperous town), not only would it have given the audience a better perspective of Rohan, but it definitely would have been more impactful and make the subsequent events (Theoden choosing to do whatever) easier to accept.

      Assuming 1 km separation, Edoras is about 5000-10000 kilometers from Minas-Tirith. Does that make any sense?

      It's a movie... you have to get the point across and hope that the environment presented fills the gaps so that the audience accepts what they're witnessing as they watch it.

      What's a really good exercise, as far as learning what time constraints can do when trying to visually present a story, is to watch the Macross Plus OVA series and then the Macross Plus movie. Both were created by the same team, director/writers. However, one is 45min x 4, and the other is movie length. And the movie length one has extra scenes. With the OVA, you watch each volume one by one. In Japan, they were released several months apart, so each volume is expected to be watched over and over; there's much more detail and depth than is apparent at first. Shockingly, not a single frame of animation is wasted! Every second of the story has something that contributes to the understand of the plot, the characters, or the world they're in.

      Then there's the movie. The first 30-40 minutes is pretty much, WTF? And then, WTF? But when it's all over you see what Kawamori-san meant when he said that it's how he expected to present Macross Plus. It's a different representation of the same story, pulled apart and re-assembled by so many constraints. But in this case, it's the same person who chose to do that as the person who created it. And it's not George Lucas we're talking about....

      Anyway, I like your response. Your initial post was too short and lacked the depth needed to properly appreciate it ;-)

      --
      Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
  6. One big ad for Apple by fruey · · Score: 5, Interesting
    And not in the Apple section (even as a subsection?)

    Kudos to the fact it was indeed the iPod, but it would be cheaper to use a generic portable hard drive, since this is movie footage and not soundtrack data. The iPod wasn't used for what it was designed for.

    The laptop needn't have been a G4 either, and they stuck in iSight as well. What they SHOULD be telling us is whether these things were purchased at RRP, at big discount, or given away for free by Apple...

    --
    Conversion Rate Optimisation French / English consultant
    1. Re:One big ad for Apple by Mononoke · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Kudos to the fact it was indeed the iPod, but it would be cheaper to use a generic portable hard drive, since this is movie footage and not soundtrack data. The iPod wasn't used for what it was designed for.
      The iPod was designed from the very beginning as a data storage device.

      Where else are you going to find something that small, with that much storage and speed, that also looks (to the general public) like nothing more than an mp3 player? For that price?

      The laptop needn't have been a G4 either, and they stuck in iSight as well.
      Professionals in the movie business use Macs because Macs can reliably do the job.

      If you want to get mired in the "needn't have been" excuses, well, they needn't have bothered to with digital dailies at all. In fact, why bother even making the movie.

      --
      NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
    2. Re:One big ad for Apple by TheHummer · · Score: 1

      Since the guy walked to the studio, I bet he listened some music on his way there. Not too bad use for mp3 player...

    3. Re:One big ad for Apple by Saven+Marek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly. It's a bit of an apple fanboy story, something I doubt the veracity of. It didn't have to be an iPod , didn't have to be a G4 laptop, and didn't have to be a cinema display. Telling us the equipment used for the film is quite irrelevant.

      Would it have been the same story if it was a Dell DJ, on a Dell laptop, with a Dell monitor? No it wouldn't. I don't see what the fuss is about

    4. Re:One big ad for Apple by gobbo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The fuss is about this: a trendy consumer appliance is being used as a mission-critical device. It's a nerdy change in consumer behaviour that heralds something significant about the way technology is crossing professional/consumer boundaries.

      I have a co-worker who is directing/producing film and video and uses his iPod for just this purpose, both sneakernet and as a presentation external hard drive. Of course, he also loads it up with his music collection, and does the standard iPod-snob-ish "here, listen to this" sort of thing.

      Another interesting thing in this story is how these things are damn reliable, damn fast, damn flexible, and very well integrated into mac users' lives. They're being trusted with more important tasks than consumer devices typically get, and at the end of the day it's just something to put on your head and bop around with.

      No, I don't own one, but if I had to play large video files off an external portable drive, I wouldn't use a Dell, dude! Especially on a deadline. iPod + mac pc = time (and face) saved.

    5. Re:One big ad for Apple by dave420 · · Score: 1
      Professionals in the movie business use what they know can accomplish the job. Some people use macs, some use Windows machines. The thing is, they're both as good as each other to do the job. You get Adobe Premiere on both platforms. They both support all sorts of firewire devices. They both support gigabit ethernet connections. They both have stupidly-large graphics cards. They both have massive screens. They both have 7.1 digital surround sound. (In fact, does the Mac have THX-certified sound hardware? Just a question - I know the PC does)

      Saying people use macs because they "can reliably do the job" shows a wee bit of your bias. I'm not in either camp, but I know that macs == wintel boxes on every front. The only thing wintel boxes don't have is raving zealots who think wintel solutions are stuck back in '95, and that any piece of hardware with the apple logo is instantly worth 1.5x its market value.

    6. Re:One big ad for Apple by (void*) · · Score: 1
      The fuss is about this: a trendy consumer appliance is being used as a mission-critical device.


      Call me silly, but what's so mission-critical about making a movie? Someone gonna die if LOTR could not be made on time?

    7. Re:One big ad for Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You get Adobe Premiere on both platforms.
      Premiere for the Mac has been discontinued, because it couldn't compete at all with Final Cut Pro. The last available version of Premiere (6.5?) is also quite slow under Mac OS X.
      I'm not in either camp, but I know that macs == wintel boxes on every front
      Except for the software...
    8. Re:One big ad for Apple by gobbo · · Score: 1

      spake the void*: "what's so mission-critical about making a movie?"

      OK, that's stretching it a bit, I'll admit...

      But there's so much money involved in a project this scale, the deadlines can pucker your nether orifice. It's mission-critical if you love your job. With millions at stake, your technology had better work right.

    9. Re:One big ad for Apple by ObiWanKenblowme · · Score: 1

      It's mission-critical to the studio that had ~$300 million invested in these movies.

      --
      Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.
    10. Re:One big ad for Apple by b-baggins · · Score: 1

      -I'm not in either camp, but I know that macs == wintel boxes on every front. The only thing wintel boxes don't have is raving zealots who think wintel solutions are stuck back in '95, and that any piece of hardware with the apple logo is instantly worth 1.5x its market value-

      Sounds like you're in a camp to me.

      The fact is, Macs are used by a large majority of film makers. It's something on the order of 70 to 80% That definitely implies a superior platform.

      Find some other reason to love your PC.

      --
      You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
    11. Re:One big ad for Apple by b-baggins · · Score: 1

      Um, it would be called, making the scheduled, advertised, contractually obligated release date.

      This is the movie industry, not software development. Product slippage is NOT tolerated.

      --
      You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
    12. Re:One big ad for Apple by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

      Linux render farm on commodity x86 hardware.

    13. Re:One big ad for Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Apple never gives stuff away because of fame - you have to buy it like everyone else.

      There was an article in (printed) MacWorld a while ago about a bloke employed by Apple to go round to professional musicians and demo Apple kit to them.

      People like Paul McCartney and a few other big names have tried to blag Apple stuff for free, but they're always turned down.

    14. Re:One big ad for Apple by dave420 · · Score: 1
      It's not because it's a superior platform - it's because it's legacy. Media companies have historically used macs since the days of DTP taking off. When they near the end of their life, they get replaced by more macs. The companies have vendor accounts already in place, and tech support who know macs. That's why. I've worked at companies like that, and that's what happens. The tech guys know macs so well that when it's time to upgrade, they reach for the mac catalogue.

      There is absolutely no technical reason why they should use macs over wintel boxes - none whatsoever. The reason for the use of macs in the film industry is purely a social one.

    15. Re:One big ad for Apple by radish · · Score: 1

      Where else are you going to find something that small, with that much storage and speed, that also looks (to the general public) like nothing more than an mp3 player? For that price?



      Oh dear. How many times must we go through this? There are several HDD based mp3 players out there which are just as small as an iPod, hold just as much (or more) data as an iPod, look like mp3 players (although I have no idea why that matters) and COST SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN AN IPOD. What people choose to listen to their tunes on is none of my business, but please, for the love of all that is good and pure, stop perpetuating these "iPod is the one true device" myths. It's pretty, yes, but it's also short on features and very overpriced compared to the competition. In this particular application, I don't see why external cosmetics are of any relevance. They probably used them just because they'd only ever heard of iPods, not because they were in any way "the best".

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    16. Re:One big ad for Apple by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      Generic portable harddrives are much larger and clunkier than an ipod. Even as a portable drive, an iPod is sleeker and easier to pack around and use than anything else.

      Expensive? Yes... Expensive compaed to the LOTR budget? No way.

    17. Re:One big ad for Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      G5 - realtmie rendering - don't need the render farm any more!

      Also, PC's don't have FinalCut - which is supplanting Avid as the dominant non-linear editor

    18. Re:One big ad for Apple by TechniMyoko · · Score: 1
      People like Paul McCartney and a few other big names have tried to blag Apple stuff for free, but they're always turned down

      Why should the rich get stuff for free. It's the poor that deserve a free iPod not some multimillionare bastard who could buy them by the ton.

    19. Re:One big ad for Apple by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Indeed - I guess Apple's philosophy is "you can afford it, so stump up the cash if you want one!"

    20. Re:One big ad for Apple by cosmo7 · · Score: 1

      There is absolutely no technical reason why they should use macs over wintel boxes - none whatsoever.

      Well, software is a big deal; many publishers rely on Mac-specific Quark XTensions.

      During the 90s I remember Quark XPress on Windows being the absolutely worst piece of software I'd ever used. Since then Quark has realized that there was a quality gap between their PC and Mac versions and has made the Mac version equally unusable.

    21. Re:One big ad for Apple by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1
      Actually, to store and carry files was one of the design specs for the iPod. Plus I do believe the time frame was about 2 - 3 years ago when other portable drivers were larger and slower, and DVD burners were slow and expensive. And as the guy said, the iPod is a smal form factor.

      Actually, the laptop needed to be a G4 the reason being Final Cut Pro. FCP needs a G4 in order to achieve real time rendering of some features. Although I do believe they used AVID to edit the films, but incase he wanted to make a change or something, the G4 would be handy.

      I know a couple indy nature filmers that do most of their editing work on the road on G4 laptops. Go out shoot in the day, come back, plug in the DV camera and start editing in FCP.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    22. Re:One big ad for Apple by miller701 · · Score: 1
      There was an article in (printed) MacWorld a while ago about a bloke employed by Apple to go round to professional musicians and demo Apple kit to them. People like Paul McCartney and a few other big names have tried to blag Apple stuff for free, but they're always turned down.

      Steve Jobs Probably wanted to frame Sir Paul's invoice for his office wall.

      no sig.

    23. Re:One big ad for Apple by Moofie · · Score: 1

      No technical reason, other than the fact that creative professionals time and time again find that Macs enable them to work more efficiently, and therefore make more money.

      You might not agree, but then again you're probably not a creative professional.

      (don't misread, I'm not saying that you're not creative or that you're not a professional. I am stating that, by alleging there is no ease-of-use advantage to the Macintosh, that you are not in the business of producing art for money. If you were, you'd buy a Mac.)

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    24. Re:One big ad for Apple by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Reviewing the dailies was certainly critical to the mission of completing the film.

      There was a lot of money riding on that deal. People's lives? No. People's livelihoods? You bet.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    25. Re:One big ad for Apple by laird · · Score: 1

      "There are several HDD based mp3 players out there which are just as small as an iPod, hold just as much (or more) data as an iPod, look like mp3 players (although I have no idea why that matters) and COST SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN AN IPOD."

      OK, name one that they could have used to carry LOTR dailies (without a time travel device). There were HDD-based MP3 players that cost less than the iPod, but they are much larger. There are RAM-based MP3 players that are smaller than the iPod, but don't have enough storage.

      For a little trip back in time, read Transportable FireWire Hard Drives from December 2001. The drives are larger and heavier than an iPod, and the costs are "Price: $219 (10GB), $269 (20GB), $349 (30GB), $699 (48GB)". The closest in size to the iPod is a Toshiba PCMCIA card for $399 that provided 5 GB of storage (and didn't play music, etc.).

      Heck, even considering all of the iPod copies that came out since LOTR was finished shooting, the iPod is probably still the best choice, because it's a firewire device (i.e. much better than USB for playing video), and almost all other MP3 players are USB.

      The only HDD-based MP3 player that's smaller than the iPod is the iRiver oHP-120 which doesn't have Firewire, and they "cheat" on size because all of the controls are on a remote control that they don't count against the size and weight. Still, it plays Ogg Vorbis, which is cool, even if they do calculate their capacity using 64 Kbps WMA's in order to inflate their numbers.

    26. Re:One big ad for Apple by Hao+Wu · · Score: 1

      This is very funny, but I have no more mod points.

      --
      I suggest you read Slashdot
  7. Batteries by Davak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the ipods were really going to have battery problems, surely somebody would have noticed during all these transfers.

    Anyway, chalk up one more iPod award...

    Assisted in obtaining The Return of the King 11 Oscar nominations

    All of that data transfer... and none of it got released to the public by "accident?" We should be ashamed at ourselves.

    Davak

    1. Re:Batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      yeah, seeing how you use the batteries a whole lot when you have it connected to the computer :P

    2. Re:Batteries by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      If the ipods were really going to have battery problems, surely somebody would have noticed during all these transfers.

      Ipods don't use the battery when they are connected to a computer.

      If you ipod had a dead battery, this is the ONLY thing it would still be good for.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    3. Re:Batteries by Kris_J · · Score: 1

      Insightful? The iPods would have been powered while connected to the computers.

  8. Quite frankly... by DiscoOnTheSide · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think this is absolutely amazing. Yes, we all knew you could do stuff like this, but you'd never think of it until you read stuff like this. Not only is it a great MP3 player (I've owned three as well as MiniDisc players, it's hands down the best I've used), it's an amazingly fast firewire drive (although I find that formated for windows it's not as fast, perhaps HFS+ is a better file system then most think?) and I've noticed that while I use my iPod for storing papers, projects and movies to watch at friends houses, it screams. I think after hearing this those 40GB iPods are going to be the new pro-video clip bin. Sure, you won't fit an entire three hour epic movie's worth of footage in DV format on it, but it's good for fleshing out whole scenes. Plus it's widely supported for Windows and Mac so no worries (and Linux can mount them as a simple firewire drive if I stand correct...) Neat stuff. Hopefully we'll get video iPods this year, to combat those foreboding MS portable media players...

    --
    Viva La Revolucion! Buy a Mac!
    1. Re:Quite frankly... by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      Not only is it a great MP3 player (I've owned three as well as MiniDisc players, it's hands down the best I've used), it's an amazingly fast firewire drive

      Thanks, but I'll stick to my 250GB Maxtor firewire/USB disk if I wan to transfer data. Seems like it'd be incredibly silly to use a small iPod to transfer video. They could've just burned DVD-RW copies of the video.

    2. Re:Quite frankly... by Hast · · Score: 1

      Considering todays quality computer products it is sort of amazing that one of them happen to do what it was designed to do. Instead of using an iPod for this you can just get a standard stand alone HDD with USB/FW enclosure. That will save you quite a lot of money too.

    3. Re:Quite frankly... by dj245 · · Score: 1
      I have 2 large hard drives in one firewire enclosure, for a total of 220gb in one box. Its about as tall and wide as a 50-pack spindle of blank media, and a bit deeper.

      Surely this is twice as "absolutely amazing" because there are two drives in one box? 14.6 times as "absolutely amazing" because there's that much more space? Or perhaps only .71 times as "absolutely amazing" because the drives are that much bigger.

      The external firewire drive is hardly newsworthy.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    4. Re:Quite frankly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks, but I'll stick to my 250GB Maxtor firewire/USB disk if I wan to transfer data.

      Too big. Literally. A drive that big must be six or eight inches across and weigh two or three pounds.

      They could've just burned DVD-RW copies of the video.

      Too small, too slow, and way too wasteful.

      So far both of your alternatives suck. What else you got?

    5. Re:Quite frankly... by b-baggins · · Score: 1

      From the You aren't getting it department.

      They ALREADY have the iPod to listen to music/relax. They can ALSO use it to transfer previews for review by PJ. They don't HAVE to carry a BIG, CLUMSY, BULKY external hard drive. They can use the music player THEY ALREADY HAVE.

      Get it, yet? They didn't buy the iPod to transfer the files. They used the iPods they bought for music to do this extra chore as well, SAVING them from having to use ANOTHER external hard drive.

      --
      You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
    6. Re:Quite frankly... by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      Geesh! LOOK AT http://www.lacie.com and TELL me the slim 40 GB and the bigger, yet still portable drive they have on their and tell me they are BULKY! Yes, they ARE bigger then a iPod, but they are not that much bigger. BOTH are very easy to stuff in a pocket on your laptop bag. The portable HD's are just cheaper then the iPods by many factors. They are also alot of times much faster then a iPod. The fact that Jackson used thes for ROTK is just saying "Hi....I'm Peter Jackson, director of ROTK and have scads of money and bought 100 iPods for sending my dailies back and forth." Jackson has money. We know that. He could have easily used DVD-RW's, firewire hard disks, hot swappable SCSI discs....

      He had money and he used the iPod. He used the iPod because it was what he knew. He looked no further to see if something could be better and have more space and could do cheaper then a iPod. Any geek could have told you it could have been done cheaper and faster with a 160 GB firewire hard disc.

      --

      Gorkman

  9. Dailies almost got stolen, too by jokkebk · · Score: 5, Informative

    I watched Two Towers extras where the fellow who was doing the transportation of iPods to Jackson's hotel told that he was almost robbed by two thugs following him one day.

    Thankfully the guy was pretty quick sprinter, so the dailies (and I even seem to recall that they exceptionally had the whole version on iPod that day) narrowly escaped the London underworld.

    As a funny sidenote, I don't think any beautiful women offered to plug their earpiece into iPod while waiting traffic lights, too bad for them. :)

    --
    http://codeandlife.com
    1. Re:Dailies almost got stolen, too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they wanted to mug him for the I-Pod.

    2. Re:Dailies almost got stolen, too by Hagen · · Score: 1

      It makes one wonder. If the muggers had gotten the iPod, would they have had any clue about its contents? Would they even have plugged it in?

      Think of how many times a thug has fenced some piece of storage technology without ever realizing the value of the files on it...

  10. Apple's next ad campaign? by darnok · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wonder why Apple hasn't made more of this in their advertising. It seems that having possibly the highest-profile series of movies in many years put together using your gear would be worth telling people about.

    If the article is accurate, it's a great example of working globally that a lot of Apple's potential customers might want to hear about.

    It'd certainly attract more positive interest than those ridiculous "HP Invent" advertisements - they're just laughable. Every time I see a new one, I think "What the hell am I looking at?" which I suspect isn't the message HP wants to be getting across.

    1. Re:Apple's next ad campaign? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Although iPod makes a useful and convenient portable hard drive, there are some real drawbacks to putting this into an ad.

      The main problem is that it would confuse some less computer-savvy people. They would watch a 30 second ad (only halfway paying attention to it) and wind up unsure about what iPod is for, and how they are supposed to use it.

    2. Re:Apple's next ad campaign? by kinnell · · Score: 1, Funny
      I wonder why Apple hasn't made more of this in their advertising

      You mean like having the guy who plays Frodo appear in the iLife '04 video, for example? Or were you thinking of golum dancing in silhouette with an ipod?

      --
      If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
    3. Re:Apple's next ad campaign? by rbbs · · Score: 0

      gollum dancing etc......that would surely be the greatest piece of cross branding ever!

    4. Re:Apple's next ad campaign? by Makali · · Score: 1

      Though it's possible to use an iPod as a portable hard drive, the hard drive just isn't made to run continuously and they seem to wear out quite quickly. I'm not sure it's a major selling-point for iPods, and if people did start buying them to use as hard drives, I think that there'd be a few more support calls and bad vibes about failing devices before long.

      Caveat: this is based on the old first-gen 5G iPods, and the quality of the newer 20, 30 and 40 gig pod drives might be higher. Nevertheless, I suspect that Apple isn't confident enough about the reliability of the hard drive for that kind of use to promote it. The blog article claims that Apple doesn't even support it in the warrantee, but I can't back that up.

  11. And that is supposed to be impressive? by smchris · · Score: 2, Funny

    During the course of two movies and four months, 'Rings' iPods stored and served up nearly one-half terabyte of digitized footage from 'Towers' and 'King.'"

    What's a half terabyte? 500 gig. 75 days. Sounds like a college student with a heavy download habit.

  12. Re:Also Also (wik) by rokzy · · Score: 0

    1. how do you watch a commentary?
    2. whether they wan't to rob him or not was not proven,

  13. Style over substance? by the_duke_of_hazzard · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Absolutely. Sounds like a waste of money to me when all you're doing is moving data around. Then again, one of the main criticisms of the iPod is that it is style over substance (short battery life, poor sound quality, overpriced), rather like certain films I could think of...

    1. Re:Style over substance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can agree with the short battery life criticism, and understand that people think it's overpriced, but poor sound quality? Even Google doesn't really turn up anything about that.

    2. Re:Style over substance? by the_duke_of_hazzard · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. That particular crit was based on a friend of mine who spends a *lot* of money on high-spec sound equipment and was disappointed by the iPod's low bit rate "given it's one of the most expensive mp3 players around".

    3. Re:Style over substance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The iPod doesn't have a bitrate. It plays your files at the bitrate you encode them. That can be uncompressed WAV/AIFF, if you are so inclined. For both mp3 and aac, the maximum supported bitrate is 320kbps (+vbr). I'm not sure how much there is to gain by going higher than that.

    4. Re:Style over substance? by mbbac · · Score: 1

      Poor sound quality isn't a criticism of the iPod. See the Stereophile review for more info.

      --

      mbbac

    5. Re:Style over substance? by TechniMyoko · · Score: 1
      The iPod doesn't have a bitrate
      the maximum supported bitrate is 320kbps

      That would be it's bit rate
      However, isnt 320 relatively high? Most people encode at 128 or 192

    6. Re:Style over substance? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      An audiophile doesn't like an MP3 player? STOP THE FUCKING PRESSES!

      Duh.

      I am SO GLAD I don't have golden ears. If I want music to sound substantially better than it does on my relatively inexpensive home stereo, I'll perform it myself.

      I've always thought of the audiophile hobby as a particularly obnoxious form of masturbation. I mean, if it gets you off, fine. I just don't really care to hear about your pure silver $200/foot speaker wire.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    7. Re:Style over substance? by melatonin · · Score: 1

      Most people encode at 128 or 192

      Most people listen to Britney Spears. Try something complex at those bitrates (such as Dire Straits or Yokko Kanno) and you'll butcher the music. I encode at 320 kbps AAC :-/ It's not necessary for all music, but I'd rather take up the extra HD space than to cringe at the one point in the song that stresses treble and bass at the same time.

      --
      Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
    8. Re:Style over substance? by TechniMyoko · · Score: 1
      I meant to ask dont most ppl encode at that rate, but I can accept it'll ruin more complex music. But isnt 320 still enough though?

      Also the point of my post was him contradicting himself

    9. Re:Style over substance? by melatonin · · Score: 1

      But isnt 320 still enough though?

      The problem is that MP3 in particular always butchers treble, no matter what the bitrate. It's just what it does (I'm not an audio codec expert, but that's the way MP3 behaves, in the same way that CinePak often looks like pixel-doubling).

      320 AAC is quite good and I haven't passed judgment on it yet. But when I regularly listened to AACs at lower bitrate (say 192-256) and put the source CD into the drive, the CD sounded less artificial at times :-/ A large part of it depends on what you're using to listen to stuff; 320 ACC isn't going to help you if you're listening with $50 bargain-bin speakers :P

      --
      Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
  14. Wonder how much that cost. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Must have been expensive... A half TB of ipods!

    What does that cost, compared to tape?

    1. Re:Wonder how much that cost. by MinutiaeMan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not necessarily -- they could easily be referring to the total amount of video transferred back and forth during the entire production process. In which case they just deleted the stuff from the iPod and placed it on some hard drive or backup somewhere.

  15. funny quote during the article... by derekb · · Score: 5, Funny

    After spending time frustrated at the battery life of my ipod, I read this bit of sentence...

    Just as Frodo exists basically to transport that precious ring to where it needs to go, ..

    and thought about how many times I've wanted to send my ipod to the same firey doom..

    ahh but I couldn't do that to the little guy..

    1. Re:funny quote during the article... by Billy+Donahue · · Score: 1

      Here's an SAT question for you...

      Frodo : Ring :: iPod : ____

      A) some wrong answer
      B) Jackson's PRECIOUS video data.
      C) some other wrong answer.
      D) yet another wrong answer

      Yes, the answer is B.
      Now, the analogy to the RING's fiery doom
      would therefore be a fiery doom of some
      iPod-borne data you're trying to get rid of
      (let's not speculate on what that might be).

      Joke REJECTED!

      --
      -- The Funk, The Whole Funk, And Nothing But The Funk
    2. Re:funny quote during the article... by AaronStJ · · Score: 1

      You could always just mail it to me. I'll even pay postage.

      --
      Stupid like a fox!
    3. Re:funny quote during the article... by MrBrklyn · · Score: 1

      OK

      I don't get it

      --
      http://www.mrbrklyn.com/amsterdam.html http://www.brooklyn-living.com
  16. One big advertisement by The+Pi-Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This article seems to read like one big advertisement. It mentions no less than four specific Apple technologies that are really nothing special and could be replaced by other cheaper technologies. I understand that it may be cool because it's on an iPod, but honestly, do you need to mention the Apple Cinema Display??

    *sighs as his karma falls*

    joshua

    1. Re:One big advertisement by Hast · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think they forgot to mention that Mr Jackson was using a Apple(tm) Wireless Keyboard and Apple(tm) Wireless Mouse both using Bluetooth(tm) technology to enhance the editing experience. Naturally all mobile devices used Duracell(tm) bateries to go the extra mile. Mr Jackson transported the iPod (tm) in his Lee (tm) jeans.

    2. Re:One big advertisement by Monkey+Overlord · · Score: 1

      Despite being an Apple fan/user I have to agree the you.
      Perhaps, the fact that it was an iPod makes it special to some degree, but they used it as a firewire hard drive ... gid deal. They would have probably been better of using a proper firewire HD (those FireLite HDs are just as small).
      Cinema displays? Great, but CRTs are still better when it comes to refresh rates, color accuracy etc. Not to mention the price. Regardless, it didn't have anything to do with the iPod story in the first place.
      Lastly, the iSight reference and the part about video conferencing is utter bull shit. Video conferencing on a Mac means iChat AV (which is not free either), which also means that you can only chat with people on iChat AV ... hence only fellow Mac users ... and thats pretty useless (considering that 90% of people use various flavours of Windows OS). Further more, there isn't a cross-platform solution for video conferencing between Mac/PC (Yahoo Messenger works, but frame rates and quality suck), MSN sucks and does not allow to video chat with a Mac MSN messenger user (although its a snap to set up a Windows 2 Windows video session). iSight is a great little camera (good lens + firewire), but there is no basis to hype video conferencing on Macs, because currently it just does not exist and having iSights would have made no fucking difference.

    3. Re:One big advertisement by fyonn · · Score: 1

      Video conferencing on a Mac means iChat AV (which is not free either), which also means that you can only chat with people on iChat AV

      well, steady on there chap. ichat AV is free if you're using panther, and only $30 I beleive if you're still on jag. and if they were using $15000 dollar video conferencing systems, then they could easily have bought some isights and even extra powerbooks.

      and by the looks of it they had quite a few mac's about anyways so I'd say it's reasonable to assume that they had them at all principle locations.

      if you're working within a small group like that then I'd say it's perfectly acceptable to use something like ichat AV for video conferencing.

      but there is no basis to hype video conferencing on Macs, because currently it just does not exist and having iSights would have made no fucking difference

      I don't understand this. while I don't have an isight (I would love one but no-one else I'd wanna video conf with has one) by all accounts they work very well. sure they don;t video conf to a windows bux, but then they aren't advertised as being able to. atm it's a pure mac to mac solution and from what I've heard. it works very well at that so your comments seem very harsh unless you have more to back them up with.

      so it seems to me that mac video conferencing *does* exist. I don;t see where your comments are coming from.

      I would love to see mac to windows video conferencing I have to admit. apparently aol's beta video stuff doesn't interact with apple's (I can't imagine why, it's an obvious one to work with, both are "official" clients after all).

      dave

    4. Re:One big advertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cinema displays? Great, but CRTs are still better when it comes to refresh rates, color accuracy etc.

      1999 called. They want their complaint back.

      Seriously, it's gotten to the point where a decent LCD (and a Cinema Display is far beyond merely decent) is superior to all but the most expensive studio-quality CRT's for color and pixel response.

      Video conferencing on a Mac means iChat AV (which is not free either)

      Well, apart from the fact that iChat AV is merely one videoconferencing program, it most certainly is free. Comes with the OS.

      which also means that you can only chat with people on iChat AV ... hence only fellow Mac users

      Except that isn't true. iChat AV is based on SIP, which is an open standard specification. It just so happens that Apple is way ahead of the pack in implementing that spec, but they're not the only ones who have.

      and thats pretty useless (considering that 90% of people use various flavours of Windows OS).

      Except if you're working in an environment like (for example) motion picture production, where pretty much everybody uses a Mac.

      Further more, there isn't a cross-platform solution for video conferencing between Mac/PC

      You need to get out of your mom's basement. Yahoo Messenger is not a videoconferencing platform, okay, Sparky? It's a free toy given away by an Internet startup to build their branding. It's the software equivalent of the toy you get in your cereal box.

      iSight is a great little camera (good lens + firewire), but there is no basis to hype video conferencing on Macs, because currently it just does not exist

      Funny you should make that assertion. Our newspaper is in Dallas. Our press is in Gainsville, a small town about two hours away. We have an iSight in our production department and one at the press, and we just keep a channel open all the time via iChat AV while we're working. The money we saved on long distance calls in the first month paid for the cost of the two cameras.

      I personally use videoconferencing via iChat every single day. So I find it odd that you suggest that it "just does not exist." Since, you know, that's so much bullshit and all.

    5. Re:One big advertisement by Monkey+Overlord · · Score: 1

      My comments are coming from my experience a few weeks back when I decided to buy an iSight so that I can video chat with my gf and a few other friends that have video cams. I do a little research before any purchase and I learned that in the current conditions I will only be able to chat with one or two people from my buddy lists, because they have OS X (mind you one of them would have to buy iChat AV or Panther to do so, I have Panther myself). I would not be able to chat with my gf and my family because they are on Windows boxes and there is no cross platform solution worth bothering with. Perhaps, I over exagerrated saying that video conferencing doesn't exist, its does but for a very limited number of people and there is lack of choice. Official AOL and MSN clinets don't work, quality of Yahoo messenger is not much of an upgrade over text chat considering the investment involved and there are a couple of programs that can connect with Windows machines using NetMetting are in alpha stages and don't work (in my experience) 90% of the time.

    6. Re:One big advertisement by mbbac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How are they going to replace the iSight and iChat with cheaper technology?

      While you're at it, explain the other three too. I bet it is much harder that just saying they could replace them with cheaper technologies.

      --

      mbbac

    7. Re:One big advertisement by jxa00++ · · Score: 1

      "Mr Jackson transported the iPod (tm) in his Lee (tm) jeans."

      Ha, Peter Jackson in jeans? He wore shorts to most of the premiers. Shoes only sometimes too.

    8. Re:One big advertisement by fyonn · · Score: 1

      welll, if you're a regular slashdot reader, I'm sure you've now seen the news that the latest ichat beta (will panther users have to pay for it when it becomes production I wonder?) can video conference with the latest aim client for windows.

      good news for all I think... now I just need my best friend to get a webcam for his windows box... and err.. dsl or cable internet :)

      dave

  17. Finding it hard to differentiate by NoGuffCheck · · Score: 1

    Im getting to the point where Im so suspicious of Apples advertising tactics that I think this whole thread may be ad. I think this is a direct result of the more subtle (or not) approaches (outlined in this thread) marketing departments use in their struggle to increase brand awareness.

    --
    serenity now!
  18. what we do by snatchitup · · Score: 4, Informative

    We actually use broadband to transfer our digital daily "rough-cuts" as they're known in the industry.

    We use these guys' to software to help us manage it.

    It's amazing how many TBytes flow back and forth. And admittingly in the current reality, it's not a smooth process. Funny thing is, the hard-drive sizes change so rapidly, but the system planning isn't based on this. No one has gone said... You know, this system will be so cheap to build because in about a year, you'll be able to walk across the street and buy a Terabyte hard-drive at Best buy for about $400. Why not just plan on a cheap server farm of about 20 pc's each with about 3x1TB of disk space.

    Throughput hasn't been too big an issue, it's dealing with all the anomalies of the formats and simple things such as. MPEg vs. JPEG vs. PAL

    1. Re:what we do by dave1212 · · Score: 1

      Throughput hasn't been too big an issue, it's dealing with all the anomalies of the formats and simple things such as. MPEg vs. JPEG vs. PAL

      Not to take anything away, but last I checked, PAL isn't a compression method, the way MPEG and JPEG are. More correctly, you should have wrote NTSC vs. PAL, although that shouldn't be an issue at all if you know what country you're making it for.

    2. Re:what we do by snatchitup · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I wasn't looking to flood you all with needless info.

      Country is an issue with this company since we're world wide, and have producers giving input to projects from around the globe.

  19. English usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pipe - transitive verb [...] 1b. To convey as if by pipes, especially to transmit by wire or cable: piped music into the store.

    reference

  20. "only" 500GB ? by selderrr · · Score: 1

    I don't know exactly which iPod models they usedm but I assume at least 10GB. The article mentions that they all have one, so that's at least 100GB. conclusion : they used their pods 5 times. Not all that spectacular,

    1. Re:"only" 500GB ? by tim_uk · · Score: 1

      RTFA, old boy.

      "There, Jackson's 30-gig iPod was ready and waiting to upload Weta's daily fresh-baked shots and sequences."

      Pip pip.

    2. Re:"only" 500GB ? by Splunge · · Score: 1

      Well, if you assume they had at least 8 GB of mp3s on their iPods, that means it'd only be 10GB of free space. Therefore, they use them 50 times. :)

      --
      "Brown University? We have one of those in Providence!" -- Outside Providence
  21. iPod firewire issues. by DigiShaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wish I could store large files on my iPod. But every time it's in the middle of a large transfer, I get buffer error or something. I hear it has something to do with FireWire (IEEE 1394) compatibility. I'm not sure there is anything I can do about it at this point. I've already ran the built in harddisk checking utility on the unit and it checks out fine. I guess I will have to wait for an update from Apple and hope it addresses this issue. Untill then, I guess I will just have to keep the files under 20MB or something.

    Anyone else have this issue on slashdot?

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:iPod firewire issues. by dave+at+hostwerks · · Score: 1

      I transfer fairly large (2-3gb) files on a regular basis. No problem whatsoever.

      I have, however, come to the conclusion that I am unable to burn a DVD if I have booted from the Panther installation on my iPod. I always get a buffer underrun error.

      --
      d a v e
      "Hmmm...upgrades."
  22. Never Underestimate... by erpbridge · · Score: 5, Funny

    the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with iPods.

    1. Re:Never Underestimate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New Zealand is an island nation, old chap. I think you meant a 747 filled with iPods.

      I'm reminded of the line from Snow Crash about how the fiber optic connection to Hiro's computer had so much bandwidth that if you were going to try to move that much data physically you'd have to power-dive a 747 cargo conversion filled with phone books and encyclopedias into his cubicle every few seconds forever.

    2. Re:Never Underestimate... by erpbridge · · Score: 1

      OK, ok, you got me...

      Just drive that station wagon into the cargo hold of this Cargo jet, or overseas shipment... now make fun of it...

  23. Sorry by GQuon · · Score: 1

    Sorry. I do know what they meant. It's just I got the image into my head of Peter Jackson speaking with a terribly high pitched voice.
    Now I'm getting the picture of all the actors doing the same. Saruman tries his evil laugh, but it comes out as a giggle. :-D

    --
    Irene KHAAAAAAN!
    1. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  24. Re:Also Also (wik) by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
    2. whether they wan't to rob him or not was not proven


    IIRC they looked like criminals. They started walking after him. When he tried running away from them, they started running as well, trying to catch him.

    What do you suggest they were planning to do? Give him some flowers?
    --
    Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
  25. ha-ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I guess someone just finished watching 4th DVD of the set :>

  26. News for Nerds by kinnell · · Score: 5, Funny
    My tips for cooling:

    you forgot:

    • Put a cup of liquid nitrogen on it
    • Modify the case to incorporate an overly expensive liquid cooling rig
    • Drill a hole for a firewire cable into your USB mini refrigerator
    --
    If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
  27. Seems to me pretty stupid too by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you compare the price of an IPod to a 200 GB hard drive, it seems to me that for storing video footage it's the most stupid solution ever. An exteral USB or Firewire case and a couple of 200 GB drives would have been:

    - cheaper

    - faster (I don't think the IPod comes even close to a 7200 RPM drive)

    - able to store a lot more data

    Or here's another random thought: if they're sending data all the way across the globe, exactly what's the unprecedented advantage of sending an iPod instead of a DVD-R? No, seriously.

    Of course, seein' the usual "even a fart smells sweet if it's got the Apple logo" crowd on Slashdot, maybe it's worthy of Slashdot after all.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Firstly, why transfer low res digital half way round the world (presumably using the internet) then copy the video onto a hdd storage device and courier this from pinewood to jacksons home? Surely jackson would have simply downloaded the footage straight of an ftp/secure website onto his notebook?

      Secondly for vfx work 1k res quicktime is more or less useless in terms of the review and approvals process. In reality for approval sequences are rendered off into MPEG2, transferred globally via a networked device like a telestrem (www.telestream.net) or clipmail pro and then reviewed on TV at near DVD res via a hardware MPEG2 decoder / settopbox device.

      This whole piece smells of marketing, pr and an exercise in brand association.

    2. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      An exteral USB or Firewire case and a couple of 200 GB drives would have been: cheaper, faster, able to store a lot more data

      You left out "larger, more fragile, unable to multitask as an audio player and PDA."

      Or here's another random thought: if they're sending data all the way across the globe, exactly what's the unprecedented advantage of sending an iPod instead of a DVD-R?

      You're kidding, right? DVD's are far too small and take far too long to burn to be useful for something like this. Besides, after you're done with one, you have to throw it away. After you're done using your iPod for this, you've got... an iPod! A singularly useful device in and of itself.

      Doing anything else would have been wasteful and dumb.

    3. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by kzadot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As far as firewire harddrives go, is there anything that doesnt need a whole computer to sit between it and a DV cam?

      A while ago, I was looking for a portable hard disk recorder that I could simply plug a DV cam into via firewire, and push record. And later, plug it into a PC and push play to transfer it to the PC.

      It seems I was able to find firewire drives that connect to a PC like a normal external hard drive, and I was able to find some consumer dvd recorders with hard drive and firewire connectors, but no simple, portable firewire hard disk recorders.

      It seems like iPod is one of the view devices that can do this. Do you know of any others that can connect directly to a DV cam as opposed to a PC?

    4. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by davechen · · Score: 2, Funny

      And, if you put that 200 gig drive in your pocket, it's much more impressive to the ladies.

    5. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by bfg9000 · · Score: 0, Troll
      Of course, seein' the usual "even a fart smells sweet if it's got the Apple logo" crowd on Slashdot

      LOL! You really hit the nail on the head there. I'm amazed that a Linux company owns Slashdot and not Apple themselves, there's so much pro-Mac / anti-Linux propaganda here. What kind of business plan does Taco and friends *have*? The entire "resurgence" of Apple lately is due to word-of-mouth and sales pitches from "the hardcore Linux geeks" of Slashdot.

      I am definitely a Macintosh lover, but a lot of what I read on /. is pure crap intended to move units. No kidding. There's a LOT of outright lies, white lies, halftruths, propaganda, deceit, sales pitches, and astroturfing here. Caveat emptor. Macs are very cool, but I'm sorry, you won't plug into GarageBand and a week later find yourself getting job offers from Eric Clapton. Remember, Apple is an advertising company who also makes computers. They're not selling computers, they're selling image. That's why people plugging into each other's Rio's doesn't make the /. front page, but people plugging into each other's iPods does. Jackson uses an iPod to carry data, that's COOL. I use a 320 Gig external harddrive, I'm apparently NOT cool. But I got the better deal price/performance-wise, one that every real computer expert would agree on the utility and wisdom of.

      I'm sorry, I think Macs make cool hardware and software, but this smells like astroturfing at the highest level.

      --

      I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."

    6. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by phong3d · · Score: 1

      There was a bit on the Two Towers DVD regarding that. I don't remember it word for word, but apparently, the huge pipe from which they recieved the dailys ended short of where Jackson was staying and cutting the soundtrack/movie/whatever, and they needed to use IP-by-foot to get it the last mile.

    7. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by telstar · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "You're kidding, right? DVD's are far too small and take far too long to burn to be useful for something like this. Besides, after you're done with one, you have to throw it away. After you're done using your iPod for this, you've got... an iPod! A singularly useful device in and of itself."
      • Something tells me that Jackson could probably afford an external hard drive AND an iPod without breaking the bank.
    8. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You don't send 1k res quicktimes down a 'huge pipe'...

    9. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by kalidasa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Size. It's a hell of a lot easier to carry an iPod as carryon than a 200 GB harddrive (which will get banged about in the overhead bin), or heaven forbid in checked baggage (where it will be delayed by 2-3 days every 10th flight or so). And if 200 GB is preferable for size to the iPod, how can you logically argue in favor of the DVD-R which is only 4.7 GB? You can't have it both ways.

      Fact is, it's a nice formfactor and a good size/capacity compromise.

    10. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by mbbac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I bet the physical size was an issue for them as far as transporting the devices was concerned. Plus, the iPod is probably (I'm guessing here) more resistant to shock than your standard 200GB external FireWire hard drive.

      --

      mbbac

    11. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by bfg9000 · · Score: 1

      Note to Moderators: Intelligent posts being modded "troll" just prove our suspicions of pro-mac astroturfing.

      --

      I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."

    12. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      Size matters? How about this or this? An iPod, while nice, and a small size, these drives from LaCie also fit the bill and are much cheaper and possibly faster as well. Lesseee.....40 GB for 499 or 139....what do I want? I could see if these iPods were capable of showing the video as well, but since they can't...YET...it's just stupid.

      --

      Gorkman

    13. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      Somewhat agree with you. The article is stupid. It would gain more credit with me if Apple had a iPod with a 4 inch color screen on it. That would make a bit more sense then.

      Agree with you on Garage Band. You can make music, but in order to make good music you have to have some talent. Garage Band ain't going to give ya that! ;)

      I don't agree on the advertising end. First, except during the super bowl and other events, it's RARE that I see a commercial for anything Apple. Apple makes very fine hardware and I finally have a Mac and let me tell you it IS the best comptuer I have owned. It is not without bugs. The battery indicator is not always consistent(yes I have calibrated my battery). My BEFW11S4 siwtch only works with it when I slow it down to 1-2MBps (need more bandwidth on my LAN). Ther e are other issues, but those are the big two that btoher me most....that and iSync does not work with anything but iPods and Palms without buying the missing sync (but thats mostly a Microsoft thing). My point is Apple DOES make good hardware. Hardware worthy of praise. They DO need to make some changes. If they made them perfect, they'd never sell another Mac, iPod, or OS.

      --

      Gorkman

    14. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Snocone · · Score: 1

      But I got the better deal price/performance-wise, one that every real computer expert would agree on the utility and wisdom of.

      ...I'm apparently NOT cool.

      "Apparently" is perhaps not quite the perfect adjective to use in this context. "Obviously", or perhaps "markedly" or "conspicuously" or even "incontrovertibly", would fit your expressed sentiments and values far better.

      Hmmmm ... come to think of it, is there any context, anywhere, any time, that "utility and wisdom" has ever been even remotely equatable with "cool"?

    15. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by kalidasa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Both of the drives you point out are larger than an iPod - enough so to make carrying them in a pocket uncomfortable. The mobile drive (your first link) is 0.59 x 2.99 x 5.35 in. and .396 lbs. The pocket drive is 1 x 3.5 x 5.75 in. and 0.78 lbs. The iPod is 0.73 x 2.4 x 4.1 inches and 0.35 lbs. For size comparison, a "slim" jewel case is 0.13 x 4.86 x 5.63 in. I don't know about you, but I find a jewel case too wide to put in my pocket: but the only drive with both its "height" and "width" smaller than both the "height" and "width" of a jewel case is the iPod. So, no, those two drives from LaCie do not necessarily fit the bill. They're too big for a shirt pocket. The pocket drive is right out, at more than double the weight. So maybe it's not stupid that the producers decided to spend a little extra money on them to make it easier for the couriers to carry them. (Besides, they're recognizably music players, and that might make life easier with airport security.)

      You can use what you want, but don't dismiss their choice as "stupid." If the marginal size and weight difference mattered - and I know that for me it would - then it might be worth the extra two eighty compared to the pocket drive (and I notice that the mobile drive doesn't have a price listed for 40 GB; apparently you thought the $139 price was for both the 20 GB and the 40 GB? Or for the FireWire, since they were using Mac desktops that didn't (only the newest Macs do) have USB 2.0? Which makes the Mobile drive pretty hard to use, no? That's ignoring the fact that these two products you're linking to are both described as "new" and the movies were finished some months ago (but then, so do my specs for the 40 GB).

    16. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by fhmiv · · Score: 1
      Of course, seein' the usual "even a fart smells sweet if it's got the Apple logo" crowd on Slashdot, maybe it's worthy of Slashdot after all.

      As an Apple shareholder, I think if Steve can put chrome on farts and sell them at a profit, more power to him!

    17. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Quikah · · Score: 1

      There is no advantage, in fact according to the DVD documentary they only used an ipod because they couldn't get a network link to Jackson's house from the studio. (too far away or something)

      --
      Q.
    18. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Judging from your "+5 Insightful" posting history, you are not a troll. Welcome to Slashdot, where any post that does not praise Apple gushingly is silenced. We all learn the hard way that Apple is off-limits here. Sorry.

    19. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by tvsjr · · Score: 1

      They exist, but hold on to your wallet - every one I've seen is in the pro/broadcast category.

      Videonics Firestore(available in rack, portable and on-camera configurations for professional camcorders.)
      Sony DSR-DU1 (note the DU1 is intended for use with the DSR line of professional shoulder-mount camcorders.)

      There are others out there, but those are a couple of the common ones. Why are they so expensive? If you can afford broadcast cameras and broadcast glass, they aren't expensive.

    20. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by mbbac · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, there is the FireStore

      --

      mbbac

    21. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you watch the extended 2 Towers DVD, they say quite clearly that

      (1) Jackson had to go off-site, on short notice, to do some stuff in the UK that hadn't been in the normal schedule
      (2) when they got to his hotel room, it *didn't* have broadband access, otherwise they would have used that
      (3) the nearest place with high speed net was in walking distance, so somebody came up with the idea of using an iPod to make the transfer over (Jackson obviously isn't going to be sitting in an Internet cafe doing his dailies)

      This pretty much puts to bed:

      (1) those who say, gee, why didn't they just use broadband
      (2) those who say, why didn't they shop around for alternatives and have long slashdot arguments over their platform choice -- they were trying to get a job done, on short notice with equipment on hand, not re-invent the wheel or keep PC advocates (or Mac fanatics either) happy.
      (3) (partially) complaints about security and encryption, etc. Certainly, in hindsight, they'll be more careful but I think it's understandable that they were in a rush and didn't plan this out in detail.

      Some people complained about the Cinema Display and Apple Laptop (vs. cheaper PC stuff or CRTs)--dudes, get a life. You're gonna lug around a CRT that can do wide aspect ratios to a hotel room? Ever heard of Avid or Apple Final Cut with Cinema Tools? Industry pros know that Apple laptops are a proven/tested and familiar platform for off-line movie editing--I think they know what they are doing....

    22. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by jonhuang · · Score: 1

      A 200GB drive is about the same size as 5X 40gig ipods, however. And cheaper than even one of them.

    23. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Something else tells me that he didn't bother because it would be redundant, and the iPod did the job just fine thank you.

      What? Do you have something invested in WANTING the iPod to not be the right tool for the job? It obviously was, or else they would have used something else. Why do YOU care?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    24. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Note to posters: Not everybody thinks that posts you think are intelligent are intelligent. Some of those people moderate.

      It's pretty funny to me to imagine /. as being pro-Apple. Those of us who have been around for a while chuckle at the alleged change in attitude.

      Of course, if you want to believe that Apple is paying people to mod on /., that's cool. I'll even send you some tinfoil for your hat.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    25. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by bfg9000 · · Score: 1

      Okay, so I'm officially a troll now. I merely thought that Peter Jackson choosing iPods as a way to store his uber-valuable dailies from LoTR was a bad decision. The unthinking Mac users (myself not included) thought I deserved the death penalty and flamed me like I was a heretical witch. Funny thing is, I asked my friend John, who is a big-time tech guru, about using an iPod for backup or carrying important data like the LoTR dailies around, to which his response was a quizzical look and a curt "That's f**king retarded."

      I agree with John's in-depth assessment. The article smelled like ass-troturf, just like the one about iPod-using strangers plugging in to each others' iPods as if it were some sort of hippie love-in in 1960's San Francisco. The thing that makes it astroturf is the heavy emphasis not on the phenomenon, but on the actual product itself . The article wasn't "Famed director uses MP3 player to transport videos", it was "Famed director uses his 30 gig iPod to transport videos, then plugs it into his G4 PowerBook laptop with external cinema display". Hopefully, some of you will note the subtle difference in tone and intent. Similarly, "Strangers meeting up in a park listen to each other's music out of interest" never happened; the emphasis in that article was directly on the actual brand name as well, thereby excluding the competitor's products as being inherently unworthy of such a cool greeting, and likewise driving sales for the iPod.

      And this is like my 10th nym, I've been here for years. I remember when /. was anti-Mac, but if you haven't noticed a *massive* attitude swing, you haven't been watching. Mac OS X is great, don't get me wrong. But many of the posts here are UNFAIRLY pro-Mac. I'm not out to attack Apple, I'm out to attack lies and astroturfing. And if you don't believe Apple astroturfs, you probably also believe Microsoft doesn't sponsor "independent research".

      --

      I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."

    26. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Moofie · · Score: 1

      My point is, Jackson could afford to use whatever damn hardware he wanted to. He chose the iPod, and it did the job.

      Seems like you and your tech-savvy friend are, well, wrong.

      So the article's slanted. It's a puff piece. What do you expect from journalism today?

      And, re: Apple-sponsored astroturfing, Apple's never been busted for doing it. Microsoft has. If you have documentation that belies that contention, I'd like to read it.

      Me, I think Apple has done a hell of a job reinventing themselves over the last few years, and some good grassroots PR is the fruit of that reinvention.

      But, I'm probably wrong. I guess since I disagree with you, I must be drinking their kool-aid and basking in the comforting rays of the reality distortion field.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    27. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Fatmiko1 · · Score: 1

      I don't think the article is trying to promote the use of an iPod for video storage, but to point out how versitile the device is.

    28. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by thedbp · · Score: 1

      You really hate Apple don't you? Seems like a lot of your posts are fueled by your hatred and jealousy.

      You truly are a Dark Lord of the Sith.

      Cheaper: not an issue when you're filming fsck'ing LotR.

      Faster: Not an issue when you're using it to TRANSPORT video and not EDIT DIRECTLY FROM.

      Capacity: Not an issue when you've got a finite amount of data to carry anyway.

      Why buy a 200GB drive that weighs a couple pounds and requires external power to use when it'll fit on an iPod that is smaller, more versative, can keep you in music while you're traveling, runs off bus power, can be personally engraved (comes in handy when trying to identify what in on which drive), and, here's the most important part: GETS THE JOB DONE.

      You're a very well dressed troll, sir, but a troll you remain.

    29. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      re: Apple-sponsored astroturfing, Apple's never been busted for doing it.
      shit retard ive never been busted for piracy so i must not be doing it
    30. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Hagen · · Score: 1

      If you compare the price of an iPod to a 200 GB hard drive, it seems to me that for storing video footage it's the most stupid solution ever. An exteral USB or Firewire case and a couple of 200 GB drives would have been:
      - cheaper
      - faster (I don't think the IPod comes even close to a 7200 RPM drive)
      - able to store a lot more data


      I should think that portability is a factor. Sure, you can get 200 gig hard drives for that cost, but you have to plug those into the wall for power. Not good if you're working in remote locations with a PowerBook. By using the iPod, you can power the drive from the laptop. Maximum portability, minimum trouble.
      Granted, you can get a 80GB bus-powered 2.5" drive instead, but you can't listen to music while you're transporting that. :-)
      *assuming there's any space left on the drive for music...

    31. Re:Seems to me pretty stupid too by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      You DO realize your quibbling over INCHES! You can still stuff these in a breast pocket in a coat. The iPod hase alot of superflous junk you have to carry like a LCD and headphone jack.....etc. Oh ans Lacie has had drives like these out for a while. They may have been a BIT bigger, but for what was needed, they still would have been a better and cheaper choice.

      --

      Gorkman

  28. Enforced DRM by Scutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just goes to show you what enforced DRM and EULA's will do. Hardware and software manufacturers should always let us utilize their products the way we need to, not the way they want us to. You start throwing DRM into the mix and that limits the usefulness of the product. Go iPod!

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    1. Re:Enforced DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      heh, lyra jukebox 20gb has no "drm" or "eula" and i can put movies on it if i wanted to, big shit!

    2. Re:Enforced DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um.

      Can somebody please tell me WHAT THE FUCK this idiot's comment has to do with the story?

      One: there's no mention of DRM or licensing agreements ANYWHERE in the context of this discussion... except possibly the implication that Weta would have been a lot happier if they'd been able to encrypt their dailies since they came so close to losing them once or twice. Which is the OPPOSITE of what "Scutter" (please) rambled on about.

      Two: this isn't some kind of bizarre, subversive use of Apple technology we're talking about here. You plug your iPod in, it shows up on your desktop. You copy files to it. That's how it was designed. End of discussion.

      Three: I'm getting SICK AND FUCKING TIRED of idiots like "Scutter" (good lord) using Slashdot as their own personal bully pulpit, taking every opportunity--real and imagined--to advance their personal agendas.

      HEY "SCUTTER" (jeez): Here are some facts for you. 1. The world needs DRM. DRM is good. DRM enables content creators to give consumers high-quality reproductions of their work without having to worry about shrinkage due to widespread piracy. 2. The only people who have a problem with DRM are idiots like yourself who have no idea what it actually means, but who read on Metafilter or whatthefuckever that it's a bad thing because "Micro$oft" likes it. 3. SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU STUPID WANKER.

      End of transmission.

    3. Re:Enforced DRM by dave420 · · Score: 1
      What are you on about? These guys made the material - even if they were using the most heaviest Microsoft DRM, it's original content so they can do whatever they want.

      DRM isn't a technology to screw people - it's simply to enable people to keep control of their media files after they've left their control. As these people were the creators, they would be able to specify which DRs to be Md.

    4. Re:Enforced DRM by Scutter · · Score: 1

      What are you on about?

      Perhaps I wasn't clear with my last comment. I have seen several MP3 players (and similar devices, such as the Sony Minidisc player) where you can transfer content to the device, but you can't transfer it back off again. Some MP3 players have built-in DRM software that modifies or watermarks content when you transfer it to the device, so that when you transfer it back off again it is no longer the same content. One of my Diamond Rios did that after a firmware "upgrade" with the end result being that mp3's played on it sounded flat.

      The point of my post was that I applaud Apple's decision to make the use of DRM user-selectable instead of forcing it down our throats. This makes it possible for people to use the technology in the way that best suits their needs. In this case, Jackson was able to use iPods as a sort of multimedia portable harddrive instead of what the iPod was originally designed to be - an MP3 player.

      --

      "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    5. Re:Enforced DRM by dave420 · · Score: 1

      It was being used as a hard disk, which was one of its original purposes. Your point is somewhat moot :)

  29. Re:Also Also (wik) by sholden · · Score: 0

    Criminals are easily identifiable on sight? That must make it damn easy for the police, how come they don't just arrest them all?

    Walking in the street is a pretty normal thing to do, I do it a lot. Does that mean I want to rob everyone who happens to be in front of me?

    Maybe they figured he saw some criminals (who are easily identifiable by sight) and hence they ran away from said criminals (they didn't want to risk turning around to see for themselves and hence slowing down) as well.

  30. OMG by Magada · · Score: 0

    Oh Lordy dearie! Next in line: IPods get enlisted into the drive to Mars. On a more serious note, I'm sick and tired of the Apple PR machine. Kudos to whoever's behind it, but please, stop it already. I'm sure that by this time *everybody* knows the IPod is the next best thing after the mouse.

    --
    Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
  31. Apple and the movie industry by CdBee · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Recent industry comment on some sites sees now-distributor-free Pixar Inc teaming up with Apple to offer digital video distribution.

    While this may not be the case, its small stories like this that make me suspect that apple does have a future in the movie industry that goes beyond Final Cut and iMovie

    Apple is getting in with the consumer of media products as well as the producer, and that has to be a good thing for them.

    --
    I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    1. Re:Apple and the movie industry by dave420 · · Score: 1

      errr... are you forgetting Steve Jobs is on the board of directors at Pixar? I'd say that's having a large future in the movie industry... ;)

    2. Re:Apple and the movie industry by Fatmiko1 · · Score: 1

      More than that, man. Steve Jobs OWNS Pixar. He bought it from George Lucas like 10 years ago.

  32. iPod durability and heat output by jfaughnan · · Score: 1

    Excellent post. The consensus on Apple's Discussion boards is that the iPod should not be used as an external drive because of the heat output. In particular, the LiON battery is easily damaged by heat. The drive and electronics may survive, but battery life will suffer greatly. Did your LiON battery survive?

    In my experience my iPod became very hot during extended r/w usage -- it was lying metal side down on an insulating surface. Others have described video distortion due to the heat output.

    I suspect if one keeps it metal side down on a conducting surface (a tile counter for example) it will do fine. In the cradle is probably okay, especially if one is not overly concerned about battery life.

    When mine was very hot, I've been known to rest it on a sealed freezer "ice" pack until it was comfortable to the touch; obviously "cold" to the touch would be a bad idea.

    --
    John Faughnan
    jfaughnan@spamcop.net
    1. Re:iPod durability and heat output by mj_1903 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The battery is getting 4-6hrs of life, which is reasonable I suspect for that age period, although the heat could easily be attributed to it I am sure. Also, my 5gb is not used as my daily music machine so charge up/down cycles are irregular or do not happen at all.

      The video being distorted is something I have witnessed but quickly disappears after temperature returns to normal with no ill effects from my observations.

      There is also another issue of the ambient air temperature. I guess people's mileage will definitely vary in that regard.

  33. Yes, it will! (was Re:Quite frankly...) by nomso · · Score: 1
    Sure, you won't fit an entire three hour epic movie's worth of footage in DV format on it,

    Yes, it will in fact store three hours worth of DV quality video. One hour DV is just under 13GB and so three hours is just under 39GB - which will fit on a 40GB iPod. Which is really cool.

    Would it not be cool to be able to hook your DV camcorder to the iPod and record direct to HD? (probably not possible, but it would be cool, would it not?)

    but it's good for fleshing out whole scenes.

    Yes, it's good for that, too.

    And, as mentioned before, in the documentary TT DVD one guy talks about being chased by ruffians containing (if memory serves) a full-length almost-done version of TT.

    --
    there is no spoon
    1. Re:Yes, it will! (was Re:Quite frankly...) by BitHive · · Score: 1
      And, as mentioned before, in the documentary TT DVD one guy talks about being chased by ruffians containing (if memory serves) a full-length almost-done version of TT.
      Wow. I hope the ruffians had Firewire too, or did they have to type the movie out by hand?
    2. Re:Yes, it will! (was Re:Quite frankly...) by DiscoOnTheSide · · Score: 1

      well, yes, you can fit three hours of footage on it, but I meant three hour final products worth of footage. IE all the footage shot that would end up getting cut down to the three hour total.

      --
      Viva La Revolucion! Buy a Mac!
  34. Re:Also Also (wik) by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
    Criminals are easily identifiable on sight? That must make it damn easy for the police, how come they don't just arrest them all?


    Of course one shouldn't arrest people based solely on the way they look. But quite often crimilans and thugs do have a certain look to them.

    Walking in the street is a pretty normal thing to do, I do it a lot. Does that mean I want to rob everyone who happens to be in front of me?


    If you start following someone (not merely walking in to same direction) in an otherwise empty street, the person in front of you might start to think that you are about to rob him. And why would you be following him in the first place?

    Maybe they figured he saw some criminals (who are easily identifiable by sight) and hence they ran away from said criminals (they didn't want to risk turning around to see for themselves and hence slowing down) as well.


    Uh-huh. And I'm the Queen of the Jungle and I have 7 pairs of boobs.
    --
    Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
  35. Apple leads the way in the digital creative arts by SPYDER+Web · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They really know what the artist needs. Apple has become the art supply store for the world. Being able to take any work no matter what medium and help with its creation is truly a wonderful thing. I am not a big apple supporter but its hard to argue with the impact apple has from Pixar animation to Lord of the rings. Every musician, film maker, and digital artist has an apple for a reason.

    --
    Trix are for kids!
  36. miniDV by alecks · · Score: 0

    I still wish there was software you could install on the iPOD to make it act as a video drive. Hook it up directly to a miniDV camera via firewire and record video to it, rather than tape (or both)

  37. Only for LOTR... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's not like many other films can do this. Who else could get a budget big enough to buy that many Apple products!

  38. Re:Also Also (wik) by mog · · Score: 0

    Criminals wear black masks and carry sacks with dollar signs on them, duh.

  39. Re:Also Also (wik) by palndrumm · · Score: 1

    It was an interview with the guy in one of the bonus features, rather than part of the commentary. The story (as I recall it) went something like, he was walking down the street with the ipod in his pocket and passed two guys walking in the opposite direction. The two guys then turned around and started following him. He walked faster, they walked faster. He started running, they started running after him. From there on he basically sprinted until he got to the motel, losing them somewhere along the way.

    Sure, it's possible that they might not have wanted to rob him, but given the fact that he was walking through a major city in the middle of the night carrying some extremely valuable material, you really can't blame the guy for a) considering it as a distinct possibility, and b) not hanging around to find out for sure before he bolted.

  40. Marketdot by arashiakari · · Score: 1

    The reason iPods wer eused is because the "last mile" cabling to Jackson's apartment, where he was working on the film's music, didn't exist. Nobody could afford to wait so they just started sending runners from the end of their secure digital pipe a mile or so away. AFAIK the iPods were not used to go all around the world.

    Why use iPods? Small, inconspicuous, ready-to-go off the shelf, reliable. Nobody's going to raise an eyebrow if you go jogging by every day with an iPod. A guy walking through a residential section with a briefcase housing a firewire HD bay might (1)provoke people to beat him b/c he's a solicitor or (2)invite more coordinated mugging.

    Do you remember when Slashdot became a pay site? One of there announcements was that they would start taking paid articles while staying true to the community. All the play Apple gets around here may be just that, but the world will never know. Like "The Giver" said... "You may lie."

    Anyway: good for Apple. I'm glad MS, and even Linux, is not the only game in town. Choice is wonderful. I chose to buy an iPod and iBook last week - first time I've ever bought Apple stuff in my life. :)

  41. What a waste by Staporn · · Score: 1

    wenn they were filming ther 20GB ipod was the larges avalible, and maybe the 30GB for the last film. Lets see 20-30 gigs for $500 or 200+ Gigs on a firewire HD that was actually designed for that kind of access. Seems like a waste to me

    1. Re:What a waste by trashme · · Score: 1

      From the commentary on TTT DVD set, it seems that transferring dailies with hard drives was never planned. The large data pipe stopped something around a mile short of Peter Jackson's hotel room. So they probably chose to use the iPods as an easy solution because they are small. And when you are done using it as a transfer device, hey, you've got an iPod. =)

  42. Old news? by TachyonAT · · Score: 1

    Didn't you see the spot about that on TTT extended edition dvd??? you insensitive clod!!!!

  43. Apple leads the way in style by swb · · Score: 1

    I work professionally with both platforms, and I think Apple appeals to creative types for stylistic and emotional reasons, not because it's always the best/cheapest product or technology for the job. Most of our creative types have weak computer skills and little technology "confidence" and tend to seek Apple solutions because the tiny computer skill they do have is with Macs. Since "everyone else" does this same thing, you get a herd mentality, coupled with fear and willful ignorance.

    It's not that there aren't good reasons for desiring Apple stuff from a technology perspective, but I have seen few creatives able to do this.

    1. Re:Apple leads the way in style by b-baggins · · Score: 1

      Spoken like a true elitist snob. But even in your snobbery, you hit the truth. You just screw up the conclusion.

      "Most of our creative types have weak computer skills and little technology confidence."

      They seek Apple solutions precisely because Apple doesn't require heavy computer skills or tons of computer confidence.

      --
      You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
    2. Re:Apple leads the way in style by swb · · Score: 1

      No, it's not elitist, these people can't keep track of files ("Where did I save this?"), they have trouble with running programs, lots of things. It's a big problem, as they feed the pipeline for production and it drives the production people batshit because they'll get print jobs from them that are broken and the creative people can't find the files, the CDs they burned are empty, it would be funny if it wasn't such a pain in the ass.

      And I'm not sure Apple's solutions are any easier than Microsofts. I've been doing some testing with an iBook and wireless, and it's kind of astounding how many different dialog boxes I have to use to configure and manage a wireless connection and a vpn connection, but I think Apple's taken a beating from a lot of long-time MacOS fans over this kind of thing.

      I think ultimately sticking your head in the sand and saying "I don't want to know about computers" and then wanting to use computers -- especially wanting to RELY on them for getting work done for money, ie in your job -- and then just grasping for a Mac just seems naive. A woman I worked with here, who was also a die-hard Mac user ended up quitting to deal with a sick husband. At home all she had was his Win2k PC and when I talked to her about six months after she left she actually apologized for being so rude about Macs.

      Anyway, I just wish that a lot of creatives wouldn't be so knee-jerk about Macs. I'd bet half of them would find a PC just fine, of if it was roughly equal from a functionality perspective, make a choice based on some other rational criteria like money or compatibility or whatever.

  44. and the ugly by sacrilicious · · Score: 1
    During the course of two movies and four months, 'Rings' iPods stored and served up nearly one-half terabyte of digitized footage

    ... while the ipod given to me list past Christmas died two weeks ago, a mere three weeks into owning it. I'm pretty sure I had only 'served up' about 2 gigabytes of data at the time.

    --
    - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  45. Not USB. by burgburgburg · · Score: 1

    Firewire. If they were doing this with USB, TTT wouldn't have even come out yet.

  46. well said. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well said.

  47. Re:Also Also (wik) by trashme · · Score: 1
    Criminals are easily identifiable on sight? That must make it damn easy for the police, how come they don't just arrest them all?

    Walking in the street is a pretty normal thing to do, I do it a lot. Does that mean I want to rob everyone who happens to be in front of me?
    Oh c'mon. They ran after him! Is that a normal thing to do? Or do you always try to match the speed of the person walking in front of you?
  48. What advantage did an iPod give him? by Experiment+626 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So, while I can certainly appreciate portable mass storage, what was the benefit of using an iPod instead of a regular USB or FireWire drive? It was plugged into a computer so the battery isn't a factor, he was using it for movies so it wasn't the MP3/AAC playback. Basically he paid twice as much for half the storage (compared to a 2.5" 80GB USB drive), but gets a lot of points from the Apple crowd for using one of their products.

    As for the thing about him being chased around afraid robbers would get his draft copy of the movie, it sounds like the real story here is not the technology he used, but the technology he didn't use: encryption.

  49. Why using an iPod vs external HD makes sense: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Physical security. Half the planet would have loved to steal the dailies from LoTR and more than a few were possibly actively looking to get their hands on them.

    - The iPod is smaller than most dedicated external drives and thus easier to conceal and transport.
    - The iPod looks like, well, an iPod and might not raise suspicions that they are actually storing the dailies, if word does not get out.

    While an iPod in itself is a huge thief magnate, it inspires more casual theft from lax owners than attracting the eye of a more determined, professional thief.

    I mean, who would get suspicious of a bunch of movie types walking around with iPods?

    Anonymous Joe

    1. Re:Why using an iPod vs external HD makes sense: by cosmo7 · · Score: 1

      While an iPod in itself is a huge thief magnate, it inspires more casual theft from lax owners than attracting the eye of a more determined, professional thief.

      I mean, who would get suspicious of a bunch of movie types walking around with iPods?


      On one of the TT documentaries they mentioned that the flunky who had to carry the iPod to Jackson's place - they didn't use a courier for security reasons, I guess - nearly got mugged by two guys. He ended up running down the street.

      I don't think the would-be muggers knew he had an iPod; he was just wandering around a dodgy part of town.

  50. Hard drive? by Mr_Silver · · Score: 1
    Am I missing something but this story basically boils down to the fact that the crew of LOTR used a portal hard drive to transport content, which, just so happened to be an iPod?

    I mean, you could do that with almost any portable hard drive or hard drive based MP3 player.

    --
    Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
  51. Money no object for studios by romanval · · Score: 1

    A $500 item is nothing for an industy that'll spend millions for a few actors, or a few seconds of SFX, or constructing a huge set that's only used for one scene.

    Heck, I'll bet the daily catering bill alone could buy hundreds of iPods.

  52. Wow, Apple is so great! by skintigh2 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So, instead of paying $70 for a 40GB firewire drive, they spent $500. Talk about news! Or maybe the news is that the 614% more expensive device didn't fail?

    Apple sure is amazing and superior and stuff.

    Heck, for $500, all a lowly PC user could afford is half a terrabyte in firewire drives, and still have money left over to buy some pizza and beer, and catch a movie, and buy a CD. Not nearly as cool as a 40GB iPod.

    But I admit, if I could convince my boss to transfer terrabytes of data on iPods that I could snake afterwards, I would do it in a heartbeat.

    1. Re:Wow, Apple is so great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why you work in the "food service" industry and why they makes movies.

    2. Re:Wow, Apple is so great! by skintigh2 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I do pretty nifty technical stuff, and get paid well, too. (A better attack would be to attack my spelling -- I misspelled "terabyte" twice) But then again, maybe they are where they are today because they boldly spend rediculous money and call it a sucess no mater how it turns out. Often it seems that confidence in a decision is more important to people than the logic of a decision.

      Anyway, I've been modded an insightful troll. My work on this planet is done. Aloha!

  53. "Worthy of Slashdot" by bonch · · Score: 1

    What exactly defines being "worthy of Slashdot?"

    After the ridiculous "Microsoft Violates Human Rights In China" article, in which Microsoft is blamed for bad people using their software even though China has its own custom Linux distribution (!), and KDE removed the Taiwan flag so they could sell in China, there isn't much for standards around here, not that there ever was.

    Here's the part where people chime in about how this is just a "hobby site" for the editors and that they post what they like, because it's not some journalistic site. Here's a clue--it doesn't matter, because the readers treat it journalistically. This site is where a lot of people get their news and treat the articles as fact. And the fact that people ignore that this place is corporate-owned, with a bias against Microsoft, is silly.

    1. Re:"Worthy of Slashdot" by TechniMyoko · · Score: 1

      I have to agree, I do notice a huge bias against Microsoft. And I wasn't aware /. was coporate owned until now

    2. Re:"Worthy of Slashdot" by bonch · · Score: 1

      VA Software employs Slashdot and all its editors. The company itself has been doing poorly for years yet manages to stay afloat.

    3. Re:"Worthy of Slashdot" by TechniMyoko · · Score: 1

      Interesting. What do they do? Are they victims of some Microsoft antitrust thing or do they just not like them?

    4. Re:"Worthy of Slashdot" by bonch · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      VA Software is/was one of the dot-com Linux companies of the late 90s. I don't know how that affects their employment of Slashdot's editors, but clearly the editors are biased whether or not it's a result of VA Software.

      It's not even a matter of being pro-Linux or anti-Microsoft. Sometimes facts are completely deluded for story hits.

    5. Re:"Worthy of Slashdot" by TechniMyoko · · Score: 1

      Sounds logical. Thank you for taking the time to explain to me.

  54. You *knew* it was coming! by Txiasaeia · · Score: 1

    Imagine a beowulf clus... oh, wait, they were using one. Kinda. Never mind!

    --
    Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
  55. USB Harddrives by TechniMyoko · · Score: 1

    Someone should make a USB key like device that is an mp3 player, but uses those usb harddrives instead of an internal one. Then put the lcd on the remote

  56. Story I heard... by sushi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    (direct from a person at Weta Digital) ... was that in London one of the production runners was walking from one central city location to another, carrying one of the (fully loaded) ipods.

    Gang of youths approach him and try to mug him, they see he's got this ipod and really want it... the runner realises that he *cannot* lose the ipod, so puts up a good fight and then hi-tails it outathere.

    --
    --- cut: Eat well, exercise, die anyway.
    1. Re:Story I heard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did he refer to his iPod as "my precious?"

  57. Not to troll... by ixpro · · Score: 1

    Oh whoopty-effin-doo, let me pee from all the excetement! iPod can be used as an overpriced energy-inefficient lousy-seek-rates-and-transfer-speeds removable storage device! Who would have thought... fanboys.

  58. Brownie Points for Personal Video Players by meehawl · · Score: 1

    I have a co-worker who is directing/producing film and video and uses his iPod ... as a presentation external hard drive.

    You know you could get brownie points by letting your co-worker know about Personal Video Players (PVPs), systems from Archos and RCA and Creative and others that not only store video, but also play it back, either on-screen on using video outputs. The iPod seems a little limited in this respect - it's just a storage medium, with a mnonochrome display that does not, in fact, display video. Even the old Archos Recorder can now display 30fps video (mono!). PVPs were super-hot at CES... Apple better get a move on releasing that video iPod.

    --

    Da Blog
    1. Re:Brownie Points for Personal Video Players by gobbo · · Score: 1

      He makes movies for a living on a mac (like me). When it's tiny, works flawlessly with the professional tools he relies on, and is truly useful most of the day (mp3/aiff/aac playback, great while working or playing), what's left to be desired? Do you really want to watch a video on a 4" screen, when it's what you do all day? No, rest the eyes, listen to music. PVP's aren't for videographers. Might as well use a vhs tape.

      Well, maybe I'd like one for professional field use with some modifications: firewire, 720x480 rez support (or 640x480 at least), s-video-to-mpeg2 encoding + composite in/out, and some pro-level mac OS X integration. Then you're talking about a great way to backup tapes in the field and grab analog footage, and for that I'd be willing to pay well over a grand. Actually, I'd waffle unless it had modularity like a balanced mic input add-on capability. Otherwise, give me an external firewire drive/iPod + iTunes/Quicktime.

      Thanks for trying, though.

  59. Compared to What??? by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    Which goes to show how ridiculously versatile the iPods are in relation to almost anything

    What is this "anything" exactly? If you mean anything as in "any object known to man", sure the iPods are veristile in comparison.

    If however, you mean "any portable music player made in the past 5 years", you'd be very mistaken, since pretty much every single one can function as an external USB / USB 2 / Firewire drive (depending on available interfaces). It's not an Apple innovation... companies were doing this for years before the iPod.

  60. hmm by asscroft · · Score: 1

    Imagine if apple would have shyed away from the ipod because of the "evil dangers of MP3". this never would have been possible.

    --
    because I have been enjoined by this Holy Office to abandon the false opinion which maintains that the Sun is the centre
  61. one good reason for Ipod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can see the usefullness of having the LCD screen so you could see what files are on the iPod's drive without having to hook to a computer(although I'm not sure if the iPod does this, or if it only shows audio files). Also, I think they just transferred the files from an office with a dedicated, secure, high-bandwidth connection to one of the exec's homes a few miles away, not long distances.

  62. Output Options by meehawl · · Score: 1

    Do you really want to watch a video on a 4" screen, when it's what you do all day?

    Of course not, but it beats lugging a 48" screen around on the train! Seriously, I think the point is that PVPs come with output jacks so you are not limited to the on-device 4" LCD. And the on-device recording is a nice touch.

    What you're describing in terms of features sounds more like a notebook computer than a PVP, and I think they have already been invented, and cost seriously more than $400.

    I do note IBM's nice new double-density-pixel LCDs mean a nice boost for small-screen devices. Finally, for multimedia, streaming, transcoding, codec support and so on, the freeware iTunes really isn't going to cut it. Consider something more along the lines of Media Center. ALthough I am still looking for a good all-round solution that also supports OGM and Matroska.

    --

    Da Blog
  63. Versatile, but definite marketing. by digital+photo · · Score: 1

    It's odd. People will see things as either one way or another.

    Look, th iPod is useful. Certainly more so than a dislocated hard drive with a USB/FW port.

    At the same time, the crew of the rings movies has been on Apple's advertisements alot.

    The iPod is cool & this is a marketting campaign. The two do not cancel each other out. Period.

    You pay $$$ for a portable storage device you can fit comfortable and easily in your pocket. It can play music and some other neat feats. It is also a good portable hard drive.

    The fact that there is a strong marketing campaign around it does not and should not belittle the innate usefullness of the device.

    I don't personally own an iPod, but having been using an iBook alongside my Windows and Linux boxen, I would have to say that what Apple's got is a heck of alot easier and nicer to use than most other things out there.

    The right tool for the job. It was the right too for their team. End of story.

  64. Re:Also Also (wik) by sholden · · Score: 1

    Did you not have the attention span to reach the next paragraph?

  65. Any other firewire box would have been cheaper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is the big deal? Just take a firewire box, put a laptop drive inside, you get something whith the size of an iPod but much cheaper and with more storage than an iPod.

    Right now a firewire box it is about $50 and an 80GB laptop drive (toshiba or Hitachi) is about $220-230. You get 80 GB storage for $270-280!

  66. What a waste by Laconian · · Score: 1

    They could have purchased firewire hard drives instead, rather than going through the extra expense of the Apple branded firmware and designer casings.

  67. This is cool by TurnerK12 · · Score: 1

    The iPod is a great piece of hardware, and The Lord of the Rings is a great trilogy. Interesting to see the two going hand in hand.

  68. Rings Digital Dailies Circled Globe via iPod by arthurhh · · Score: 1

    In New Zealand there is a Television Advert by the dominant Teleco suggesting that they provided a broadband connection for Jackson to use as a virtual directors chair allowing him to direct in real time to as many as 3 or 4 locations from anywhere. This appears to be a more current technology solution than using what is basically a portable hard drive with a custom media interface.

    --
    24 Hours in a day - 24 Cans of Beer in a carton - Coincidence
  69. Professionals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Professionals use Unix SGi workstations with Inferno and stuff like that...:) hehe I like it anywayz...:P

  70. Re:Also Also (wik) by trashme · · Score: 1

    The paragraph that was pure speculation and had no basis in fact? Yes. I read it.

  71. Re:Piped by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  72. USB flash based MP3 players? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

    How many frames of HD resolution can you carry around on a 256 MB flash based MP3 player?

    Maybe you should stick to low resolution porn.

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.