Return-Path: <stagecraft-report [at] theatrical.net>
X-Processed-By: Virex 7 on prxy.net
X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net
X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.1.8
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stagecraft-off [at] theatrical.net>
List-ID: <stagecraft.theatrical.net>
Message-ID: <list-3819988 [at] prxy.net>
From: "Stagecraft" <stagecraft [at] theatrical.net>
Sender: "Stagecraft" <stagecraft [at] theatrical.net>
To: "Stagecraft" <stagecraft [at] theatrical.net>
Precedence: list
Subject: Stagecraft Digest #62
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 03:00:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline

For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see <http://stagecraft.theprices.net/>
---------------------------------------------------

Stagecraft Digest, Issue #62

 1. SF modestly presents . . . . 
    by Shell Dalzell <SDalzell [at] hawaii.rr.com>
 2. OT: logos onscreen
    by "Jon Ares" <jonares [at] hevanet.com>
 3. Re: logos onscreen
    by "Jon Ares" <jonares [at] hevanet.com>
 4. Re: OT: logos onscreen
    by Richard Niederberg <ladesigners [at] juno.com>
 5. Fall arrest and scaffolding
    by mat goebel <matg [at] comcast.net>
 6. Re: SF Modestly Presents. . . . .
    by "Storms, Randy" <rstorms [at] bham.wednet.edu>

*** Please update the subject line of your reply to use the subject
*** line of the message you are replying to! Please only reply to
*** one message subject in each reply.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 08:58:21 -1000
Subject: SF modestly presents . . . . 
From: Shell Dalzell <SDalzell [at] hawaii.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BD0EC8AD.41079%SDalzell [at] hawaii.rr.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-3812204 [at] prxy.net>

> I literally wore that LP album out listening to it as a kid. :-)

Me too.  Now I have it (and the second act) on CD.  I got it about 5 years
ago. Don't know if it is currently available.

Aloha, Shell

"What you mean: 'you discover US?'  WE discover YOU standing on beach here."


------------------------------

Message-ID: <000501c462ec$0b7b4b50$0201a8c0 [at] BRUTUS>
From: "Jon Ares" <jonares [at] hevanet.com>
Subject: OT: logos onscreen
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 16:59:00 -0700

I have an off-topic question for the stagehands at the bar.... maybe Richard
has the best info on this...  I have a filmmaker friend who has one of those
"making of..." films that will go into the 'extras' on a feature's DVD, and
I was watching a rough cut of it this weekend.  It looks like someone
smeared Vaseline on the lens in almost every interview shot - well,
actually, just parts of the frame.  The filmmaker had blurred out logos and
images in lots of places - sometimes it was the "Columbia Sportswear" logo
and name on the front of someone's coat, other times it was the name of a
film on a lobby poster in the background... where does one draw the line
with this?  He was under the impression that any 'works for hire' or any
works that may receive future monetary return can't show unauthorized logos
and products, but what's the word on this?  What if it's a documentary?  The
logos and clothing are intrinsic to the story (if there *is* a story) -
they're just 'there.'  The film, on which the set this documentary was
partly shot on, has nothing to do with Columbia Sportswear, or the posters
in the lobby of the theatre some of the actors' interviews were shot... any
thoughts on this?

I guess this could be on-topic -- what if a Costume Designer determined that
an actor onstage should wear a Coca-Cola shirt in one scene, even if the
scene is not about cola preferences?

 -- Jon Ares
www.hevanet.com/acreative


------------------------------

Message-ID: <000a01c462ef$44d6a540$0201a8c0 [at] BRUTUS>
From: "Jon Ares" <jonares [at] hevanet.com>
References: <list-3816907 [at] prxy.net>
Subject: Re: logos onscreen
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 17:22:05 -0700

I should have scribed, "....logos are NOT intrinsic to the 'story' (if there
is one)..."

 -- Jon


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jon Ares" <jonares [at] hevanet.com>
> What if it's a documentary?  The
> logos and clothing are intrinsic to the story (if there *is* a story) -
> they're just 'there.'


------------------------------

Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 20:37:57 -0700
Subject: Re: OT: logos onscreen
Message-ID: <20040705.205228.3724.0.ladesigners [at] juno.com>
From: Richard Niederberg <ladesigners [at] juno.com>

        You do not have to blur anything out that does not qualify as
'indecent' by FCC, Supreme Court, or other government standards, except
if there is a contract with another entity such as a competing
manufacturer, where there is an agreement not to show a certain logo or
category of logo. For example, when Coca-Cola owned Columbia Studios,
they prevented the Pepsi logo from appearing in Columbia-TriStar films.
Also, you can not portray a product in a 'false light', such as grossly
exaggerating the effects of 'Viagra', or displaying the MGM logo at the
start of a film that you were releasing, without their permission.
Wearing licensed-logo off-the-rack clothing purchased at retail is not a
problem. Of course, if a producer has not received a product-placement
fee for showing a logo, he might threaten to blur out a logo to coerce
payment.
/s/ Richard

> I have an off-topic question for the stagehands at the bar
> .... maybe Richard has the best info on this.
> The filmmaker had blurred out logos and images in lots of 
> places - sometimes it was the "Columbia Sportswear" logo
> and name on the front of someone's coat, other times it was 
> the name of a film on a lobby poster in the background... 
> where does one draw the line with this?  He was under the 
> impression that any 'works for hire' or any works that may 
> receive future monetary return can't show unauthorized logos
> and products, but what's the word on this?  
> I guess this could be on-topic -- what if a Costume Designer 
> determined that an actor onstage should wear a Coca-Cola 
> shirt in one scene, even if the scene is not about cola preferences?
>  -- Jon Ares

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!

------------------------------

Message-ID: <40EA3A93.8090706 [at] comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 22:37:23 -0700
From: mat goebel <matg [at] comcast.net>
Subject: Fall arrest and scaffolding

Does anyone have specific information about the requirement for fall 
arest when using scaffolding, genie, and scissor lifts in california? If 
so please contact me off list.

But here is my specific situation - the safety department is trying to 
get us to use fall arrest on scaffolding (good idea) but insists on us 
anchoring to the scaffolding (bad idea). It seems that if one were to 
fall, the alluminum bracing would simply unclip off and fall down with 
you - most likely hitting you after you land. Even worse, it could 
conceivably weaken the structure of the scaffold enough to create an 
even more unsafe situation. Am I wrong in thinking all this?

-- 
Mat G.
Entertainment Technical Services
Paramount's Great America
"Remember kids, an *actor* shot Abe Lincoln."



------------------------------

Message-ID: <CAAA0A148189D311A7640050DA5F8F110691987B [at] es.bsdnet.wednet.edu>
From: "Storms, Randy" <rstorms [at] bham.wednet.edu>
Cc: SDalzell [at] hawaii.rr.com ('Shell Dalzell ')
Subject: Re: SF Modestly Presents. . . . .
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 01:25:47 -0700 

Whoa, Shell; way to pull one outa the vault - back in the day my dad used to
play that album for his 5th grade students, by way of a fun intro to
American history.  I doubt that "Take an Indian to Lunch This Week" would
meet current PC curriculum guidelines, though.

I still have it on vinyl, along with "Free to Be; You and Me" and other
treasures from my youth - alas, I haven't owned a turntable for at least two
decades.

Interestingly, on the back of my Stan Freburg album is a disclaimer - it
reads: 

"This monophonic microgroove recording is playable on monophonic and stereo
phonographs.  It cannot become obsolete.  It will continue to be a source of
outstanding sound reproduction, providing the finest monophonic performance
from any phonograph."

-- r.
Randy Storms
rstorms [at] bham.wednet.edu

What I want to know is:   "Who's that kid over there; the serious one with
the paintbrush and the pipe...?"

-----Original Message-----
From: Shell Dalzell
To: Stagecraft
Sent: 7/3/04 9:17 PM
Subject: SF Modestly Presents. . . . .

For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see <http://stagecraft.theprices.net/>
---------------------------------------------------

> Grumble, grumble,
> grumble....mutiny, mutiny, mutiny....
> 
> Happy 4th, everybody!  Blow things up safely....
> 
> Michael Finney
> Thinkwell Design & Production
> mfinney [at] thinkwelldesign.com =20
> http://www.thinkwelldesign.com =20

What's that? . . . . . French horns!!!!

------------------------------

End of Stagecraft Digest #62
****************************