Personally, I prefer Dropbox syncing text apps like Elements and Writing Kit. The next update to Elements will support the .fountain extension, and Writing Kit can be configured to open any file extension you like.

But by all mean, use whatever you like. That's the whole point.

I've followed SPMD from your first post on it. I've been using Screenplay for iOS for awhile but the exporting to a successful file on a Mac has led me to writing sad songs so I am feeling very positive about this development.

Had a thought...what about writing in fountain directly into the notes app on the iPhone?. These sync with your Mac wirelessly and automatically via Mail. I recon this would be a pretty cool way to write in the format.

Can you recommend the best app (in your considered opinion) for writing from iOS with a the best way to get your fountain marked app into Scrivener on the Mac?

Thank you Mr Maschwitz

Cheers

Alan

I'm not the only one who thinks full OS tablets are the future and "mobile/phone OS" are just a temporary thing until mobile hardware can run what we call a "desktop OS". Ironically, Microsoft is ahead of Linux and Apple here.

I already own great applications for reading and writing screenplays. The only real reason to buy a bunch of new applications that offer less, run slower etc. is to make Apple, Google etc. rich.

I think the future is full power on an a phone/tablet form factor. And I think that future is not that far away.

The two of you share professionalism with kind of grounded enthusiasm that's exciting and informed; I always read what you both say with care. Because you say it with care.

You've managed to turn my iPad into a screenwriting device. Thankyou Stu!

MATT
Stu, I am not a screenwriter, and I was not thinking of writing a script/screenplay -

STU
(internal chuckle, apathetic gaze)

MATT
- But now I want to try this! You have put so much practical thought into SPMD and from my brief experiences at The O, I know your input on this has most certainly made the result better! Very cool stuff!

STU
(genuine smile, turns back to his computer screen intently)

2. Yes. Those were Grinder proxies.

3. No, I do it just like you see there. I precomp shots if I need to add VFX.

1. Ist it possible to do a 90 min feature this way?
2. Your clips have name and timecode on it. Do you replace them afterwards?
3. Do you usually precomp footage and grade on the precomps?

Kind regards and thanks a lot for sharing!

Andreas

Gerry

coming from a film background where, in comparison, things are rather simple- minded and left better concentrate on the business of filmmaking i.e. storytelling,

I do like to keep abreast of the "advanced" digital age and when kodak is on the verge of bankruptcy, find it ironic everyone continues to strive for DOF...more 'film-look'.

in the meantime, corporations have simply created the enslavement 'business-model', keeping everyone on-hold so to speak, until the next best thing comes along leaving a wake of obsolescence.

they never ever quite incorporate a definitive upgrade to each camera offering, leaving the user wanting always more insuring their next product line.

there are meetings in japan each year, dividing the latest techno-spoils keeping everyone inline and in a state of perpetual gadget limbo.

keeps writers like stu employed dishing out all the conflicting confluence of quasi-useable updates/upgrades.

a very funny state of heightened anxiety!

some are for nice colors and easy grading, some for extended DR at cost of noise: tool for the job

http://vimeo.com/34666308

confirmed uncompressed* 4:2:2 1080 via HDMI port
* not using the in-camera H.264 compression
http://vimeo.com/34720376

New video feature called "Power Aperture" for smooth aperture control in live view that provides a steplessly open and close of the aperture.

Video is scaled down via EXPEED 3 Plus a new "P" crop mode to use pixel match to create 1080p movie with no EXPEED 3 resize.

wireless iPad/ iPhone control with touch screen focus is awesome!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vP1x2DbS55E

I'm all for "wait and see", but: can we call this one dead yet?

also: I'm having a lot of fun with my Flaat picture styles, I'll post the video tests today or tomorrow

Rob, According to the brochure the actual frame rates are indeed 23.976 & 29.97
http://pauld.tv/zdQBqz

Samuel, I'll take a look. I like your thorough approach! And I like the way you're thinking about the 91% thing too.

I'm trying to go beyond CineStyle: would you tell me what you think of my new Similaar suite of Flaat picture styles?
http://www.similaar.com/foto/flaat-picture-styles/index.html

At least the whole lot of tests of other picture styles should be interesting...

alternative theory:

the processor (whatever they call their digic equivalent) has a set of hardwired demosaicing algorithms, that take the original 4928x3280 bayer pattern and create jpg files of different sizes; the one closest to 1920x1080 is the algorithm that leads to 2048x1360 images
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7799914638/nikon-d4-overview/2

run that algorithm 24/25/30 times per second, discard everything around your 1920x1080 target resolution, and encode resulting image stream to H.264
(nice thing about this is that an eventual hack could deliver 2K footage; there: no cameras anywhere for months yet and I'm already talking about a hack)

1920/2048=0.9375 - close, but still some work to do; maybe the 2048 path has a bit more deadweight than the 4928 path (I'm calling deadweight to that thing that makes your 16.6 million photosites translate into an image with 16.2 million pixels)