All opinions expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of OSNews.com, our sponsors, or our affiliates.
  Add to My Yahoo!  Subscribe with Bloglines  Subscribe in NewsGator Online

published by Eugenia on 2017-03-15 19:52:14 in the "Politics" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

I’m personally against the recent European ban on wearing religious or political symbols at work (or in public). To truly be a well-functioning multi-cultural race, we must accept other people’s freedom to dress as they like. What this law is doing, is simply trying to equalize people by saying that “in work, or in public, you’re just one, bland, neutral culture”. But that’s wishful thinking, an illusion.

This is bound to create resentment, and in my view, it’s simply evil. As long as the job is not required to have very specific requirements (e.g. teachers having eye-contact, or special uniforms in chem labs etc), then people should be free to wear anything they want, at any time. Or wear nothing at all. Anything else, is tyranny, and not worthy of a progressive ideology.

True progressiveness gives freedom to the people to express themselves any way they like and at all times, not in time slots of 9-5, Mon-Fri. If anything, the enlightenment and individualism wave dictates as much! True progressives don’t hide behind the lame and hypocritical “your religion is a fairy tale, so I don’t want to be reminded of it”. Either you’re a true progressive on this, or you’re a closeted conservative.

What’s next? If there were aliens from another planet landing, that happened to be “spiritual” in some definition, to dictate to them what to wear and how to behave just so you can feel “European”? You know very well that the answer to that would be “no”. So why treat humans differently?

Star Trek: The Next Generation would be ashamed of you.


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2017-02-20 00:42:12 in the "Metaphysics" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

If extraterrestrials were to land on Earth, here is how five types of people, based on their soul evolution, would react:

Infant souls: “Ugly m0therf/ers. Kill ’em and steal their tech.”

Baby souls: “They’re demons! Pray, pray to be saved! Oh Lord!”

Young souls: “Gentlemen, let’s do business! Coffee?”

Mature souls: “They’re different than us, but we accept diversity.”

Old souls: “Aliens? What aliens?”


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2017-01-26 23:23:34 in the "Politics" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

All these anti-Trump posts are laughable. Your fellow citizens VOTED for him because they felt desperate: racism is stronger when there are financial problems in the middle & lower class. You should have knocked THEIR door and ask them if they needed help BEFORE the election. Yes, it is your fault liberals. It is your FAILURE to be a truly progressive person in your daily life that drove everyone else towards Trump.

When was the last time you gave half of your earnings to a family down the street that’s out of work for months? When was the last time you actively decided to not buy something created in the slums of Asia? When was the last time you decided not to eat an animal that had lived a terrible life and had never seen the sun or ever walked? When was the last time you actively decided to buy an electric car instead? When was the last time you decided to not join the military, and not be in the business of killing? When was the last time you invited a homeless person in your home, even with the risk that entails? When was the last time you decided to not work for that oil firm, even if it’d make *you* homeless?

Oh, all that stuff are too drastic for you? Don’t say! Sorry, but that’s the price of humanity. That’s the price of love. That’s what needs to be done for things to CHANGE. It’s not a matter of a president, it’s a matter of EVERYONE changing. Without showing love, you get an opposite reaction. And this time around, it manifested like a Trump presidency. Now, go and march on, idiots. Trump doesn’t give a rat’s ass about you, he’ll still do what he wants. You did this. Look at the mirror, before you start pointing fingers to others. Your marches and your posts are nothing but hypocrisy.

I’m sick and tired of your blindness. You fail to understand that your life experience is utterly democratic. You create your reality with your everyday actions. If all citizens are all about themselves and no one else, they will create that shared reality, even if some of you paint yourself a “progressive” or not. You’re only progressive in theory! In action, you’re just as ineffective or close-minded as these “alt-right” [complete] idiots. And so you get what you deserve too, along everyone else.

Boo-hoo.


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2017-01-24 23:45:35 in the "Metaphysics" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

That’s the premise of a well known book by Nigel Kerner. Below, I will delve into such popular mythology, to logically explain why Kerner’s theory is wrong. Let’s assume that the alien agenda mythology of our time, is true.

So, the whole premise of Greys trying to acquire a soul is truly laughable. It makes no historical or logical sense. It’s been widely reported that Greys also abduct in the astral world, not just the physical. So Greys do have souls (or a group soul with limited individuality). Not to mention DMT reports of getting abducted in spirit. These abductions don’t have to do anything with trying to get a soul. If that was the case, they would have accomplished that *thousands of years ago*, on this planet, or some other planet with similar life. There is ZERO logic to think that these beings would suddenly get interested in getting a soul in the 1950s (when their program intensified), and not in 10000 BC. Obviously, their motives are different.

It probably has to do with trying to “save” the human race (which is why their program intensified after the first atomic bomb went off, after a grace period of thousands of years of letting humans figure out peace by themselves failed). Just like priests go and preach in other continents to convert natives into a new way of thinking (for better or worse), same way, the Greys are trying to shove some logic into us, via releasing these hybrids onto the world. Just like our priests, they think they’re doing the right thing. Usually, it proves to be a disaster because the populations in these converted places don’t have the background and culture to sustain a civilized Western society (think the state of Africa today, with continuous warfare).

The Greys are doing the same mistake, thinking that offering us telepathy, it would fix us. I’m certain that it would fix a lot of our problems, for sure, but at what cost? Telepathy and empathy are good things, but only when the species is ready for it. Humans aren’t ready for it. If we were ready for it, we would have evolved (or manufacture) these senses ourselves. Instead the Greys are pushing the matter for us. Maybe they see our demise in our current ways and they can’t stay idle by. But it’s our right to destroy ourselves up if we’re that stupid. It should be our decision, not theirs. However, you need to take into account here that humans aren’t the only life on this planet. Taking ourselves out would most certainly mean animals and plant life too, which is something we do NOT have a right to decide for them!

So someone might ask: why do they even care? Well, maybe we belong to a bunch of planets under someone’s rule, without ourselves even knowing it. In that case, the Greys are simply contractors, trying to keep the livestock from killing itself by altering its genetic makeup, instead of playing cop 24/7 which would be much more costly, and intrusive in the daily life of the planet.

The way Pleiadians on the other side go about the whole thing, is more careful and wise IMHO. Instead of doing genetic experiments to alter our way of thinking, they get volunteers to incarnate here as 100% humans (aka starseeds). These starseeds simply offer their spiritual point of view to their fellow humans, and then it’s up to these humans to decide if they want to adopt that point of view, or simply dismiss these “spiritual” people as cranks. Pleiadians offer a CHOICE. Greys do not.

In a sense, if the Greys are professional contractors hired to do a job, the Pleiadians are the hippies entering the field disguised as cows, trying to convince the other cows that grass is greener on the other side.

In reality, they BOTH interfere, because humanity does need a helping hand in this day and age. But HOW you help humanity, is of major importance. The Greys have decided for us, to make us, “not us”. And that’s unacceptable, EVEN if they might have had our best interests in mind, and EVEN if it might work just fine at the end, by replacing homo sapiens with a more logical version. Someone said once that the definition of evil is “removal of free will”. The Greys are doing just that, both on a local level (abductions), and on a worldwide level (forced evolutionary steps to replace homo sapiens). The Pleiadians on the other hand, do not remove free will. They interfere only up to the point of offering a choice. Free will stays intact in that case.

This is my personal opinion on the whole alien agenda thing. I try to offer a practical view on why this is happening NOW and not thousands of years ago (that’s the key to understand what they’re doing and why, IMHO). It’s simply because it’s NOW that humanity is in the crossroads. It’s only NOW that such interventions make sense in our history.

And that’s why the US government can NOT (and should NOT) disclose the truth about alien activity. It’s not about “humans aren’t ready to accept aliens”, because humans have been ready for it for over 50 years! What humans are NOT ready to accept is that level of helpless interference, or even the idea of being owned. THAT is the stingy point in the whole story, not merely that “aliens exist”. Because of that, I SUPPORT the US government decision to NOT disclose anything about aliens to the public. Let homo sapiens go, in peace, and without any brouhaha. Why make a mess about it? Especially if we can’t change anything?

Of the two philosophies and points of view (Pleiadian and Greys), who’s going to win at the end? Of course the Greys will win. They’re methodical, and they have immediate results. If humans were wise to accept the Pleiadian offer, they wouldn’t need the Greys’ intervention in the first place because they’d be peaceful on their own. The very fact that we need such intervention, points to the adoption of the fastest solution: and that’s the one that the Greys are offering. The Pleiadian solution of (essentially boiling down to) “if you sit down and meditate 5 hours a day you become more spiritual”, just doesn’t play well with most humans. Not more than 5% of humans would do that, even if their life depended on it (and it does!). The rest 95% of people, the people who don’t want to change their ways, “democratically” dictate the action that needs to be taken: their replacement. The Greys are hired for just that. And frankly, they do an awesome job at it.

Don’t get confused from the above btw, as to if I support the Pleiadians or the Greys. IMHO, after eons of existence, we all go back to becoming One. How we get there, one way or another way, the end result is always the same. So who cares who wins this time? If the whole thing makes you too sad, then it’s only because you don’t manage to get hold of the even bigger picture. In other words, even if the Greys win this time around, to get the bigger picture and get freed from that cycle of interference, you’d need to adopt the Pleiadian way anyway. So there’s always time to do that, in a few thousands years from now. When even that new “logical” human hybrid era will come to an end too, and a new way of thinking will naturally (or unnaturally) emerge.

That’s why, the only thing you can do today, and you should do, is live your life. Be happy.


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2017-01-24 03:36:52 in the "Software" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

Some would be quick to say that the time to innovate in the social media industry has passed. It’s true that the operating system doors closed in 1995 when Microsoft released Windows 95, but I really believe that there is just one more step forward before we can say the same about social media.

Here’s how I imagine a post-instagram app. These features must be implemented from the get-go btw.

– Every text post also contains a picture (up to 2:3 size ratio) or up to 1 minute video, as on Instagram.
– Every post is repostable, like on Twitter or Tumblr — unless if it’s marked as private. Very important for artists, so friends of friends can then follow the original poster.
– All posts can be viewed under the Recent tab, or categorized, like on Pinterest.
– 1-1 chat, live video, and group chat abilities like on FB/Hangouts/Snapchat.
– Follow people, like posts, follow tags, view automatically curated tags.
– Some of the tags must be completed automatically via AI.
– To bring more people in: make it also a game: let people mark places based on GPS with provided graphics. The more places are marked, the more points a user gets, and the more his posts are exposed in curated lists, which gets him more followers.
– Individual posts can be marked private, shared with specific people or lists, and can be set as “artistic nudity” or not. Don’t flag a whole account as mature or not, but specific posts only. These posts should still show up, just blurred until clicked. Fully mature posts would still need to be removed.
– Tools to manage traffic, which guarantees more celebrity support (very important to get users).
– Each post can be a sellable product. 10% commission if payment is done via the app’s system, or a $3 flat fee if the shopping page is an external page. Like on fancy.com.
– To get users immediately, various OpenID systems can be used as additional email credentials. Login requires a cellphone number for extra security.
– Primarily a fast, sexy app, but also a web front end.

In truth, these aren’t so difficult that Instagram itself can’t implement, but the fact that they don’t already support re-posting is troubling.


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2017-01-18 17:46:27 in the "General" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

This is my own theory, and it only works IF we accept that the Great Pyramid of Khufu was not built by humans, but by aliens. Yes, that’s a big stretch, because the pyramid was (most likely) built by humans, but in the case that all these crazy conspiracy theorists are correct, then I could think of a different theory of why it was built.

I base my theory on the simplest answer of what the pyramid is. The simplest answer is usually the correct one. So, if you ask a child “what’s the Great Pyramid”, their answer would be: “it’s a big, big building”.

The only reason why an alien race would build a humongous building on Earth at a time when only huts existed, in my opinion, is that so it can be seen from space. There are not many spacious rooms inside the pyramid (so it wasn’t grain storage), it wasn’t a temple, and we already know that they weren’t tombs. What it is though is just that: a huge building, visible from space, with basic equipment.

Picture this: humans transition from hunter-gatherers to organized societies around the same time. When you have a young race evolving to become something more than animals, that could raise some alien eyebrows. And so they erect… a sign to all other alien races: “KEEP OFF”. Passerbys are much more likely to enter a wild field and claim it their own or just mess with it, than entering one that has a sign to keep off.

Building a large building visible from space is a much smarter way to accomplish this than simply putting a satellite on orbit. The satellite would need servicing, it can go bad at any time, and it would transmit at a frequency or digital format that another alien race might not understand. These problems don’t exist if you just erect a big-a$$ building though, one that it shows high mathematics in its various elements/ratios/location etc. Math is a universal language, and one that would be respected by another alien race that has already mastered interstellar travel.

On top of that, the pyramid shape and construction is earthquake-proof, so it can stay erected for thousands of years, as it has. I don’t know if the Bauval/Hancock theory that the pyramids are older is correct, but it’s of a little consequence if my theory is correct.

Now, as to the pyramids placement point to Sirius or not, I don’t know. But it is possible to fathom that the builder alien race did leave a clue about “please inquire at the XYZ starsystem for access”, just like one would potentially put a telephone number on a Keep Off sign. But I don’t think that’s necessary.

As to why any alien race would care to “protect” this new human race by leaving them alone to develop in peace and erecting big “keep off” signs, I think that protective (or even possibly ownership) tendencies exist in all biological creatures. I don’t think that these aliens would be much different than us in basic behaviors if they have a biological base in this universe like we do. As above, so below.

Of course, as I mentioned in the beginning, this theory makes sense only if aliens built the pyramids. Which probably they didn’t. But it’s nice to spend the afternoon theorizing, if they did.


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2017-01-01 20:54:49 in the "Filmmaking" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

Contrary to popular belief, “Midnight Special” is a spiritual movie, turned sci-fi, turned spiritual again.

Some Q&A, and ***SPOILERS***:

1. Where did Alton come from?

– Alton was conceived & born normally by his parents, as any human has. The fact that he could reach to other dimensions was a product of evolution. His father exhibits the same abilities (as shown at the very end when his eyes shine), but to a much smaller degree. The evolution of human kind to another state of being is teased.

2. Where did the alien structures come from?

– They were not “alien” in the traditional meaning. They were on a parallel Earth (or another dimension), an Earth that had a different evolutionary path than ours. Parallel dimensions are hidden from our awareness under normal circumstances, but the biological evolutionary step mentioned above made it possible for Alton.

3. What were these beings?

– These were light beings. That’s where the spiritual part comes in: “light beings” are considered in spiritual circles to be very advanced entities. It’s been teased by the movie that that’s where humanity’s future lies too. Also telling is that Alton is reborn by the sun (the light that gives life to everything in our planet).

4. What was the point of the movie?

– Alton is a messianic figure, just not in the traditional terms. The cult thought that he was literally a religious figure, while Alton is messianic in a more subtle way: he reluctantly gives a preview to humanity of what lies ahead for them. The movie is about humanity’s “first glimpse” of how expansive the Cosmos is. Not just in terms of aliens travelling from planet A to planet B (in the same universe) as all traditional sci-fi movies have been for so long, but also in parallel, and also up and down and inner and outer (in other words, the Cosmos is a web in all directions of different universes and dimensional existences). That’s next-level sci-fi. That’s the border between sci-fi and New Age spirituality (without the negative baggage that usually accompanies it in the minds of most people).

5. Ugh, so New Age hogwash was the point of the movie?

– No. What people today call “spirituality” is really science that hasn’t been understood yet. And since science can’t explain it yet, some “faith” might be required in the meantime for those who had direct experience with it. This is why it was so important for Lucas to say “I believe”, because after he had his direct experiences with Alton, he made the leap to faith. But belief is to be transcended by hard data, otherwise it becomes dogma, which keeps humanity down. This is what the movie is going for too: the leap from unbelief, to belief, to hard data, and not to dogma (that the organized religion/cult had fallen victim of).

The most telling scene on this interpretation, is at the very end, when Durst is cutting her hair. You can interpret that scene as simply trying to get away from FBI, so she needs to change her appearance. Another, deeper explanation would be though, that Durst’s character now is free from religion and dogma. You see, her braids were the same as the women in the cult. Even if she had left the cult, she was still bound by their beliefs for years after. By cutting down the braids, she’s now free from such beliefs and dogma, she understands that the cosmos is more expansive, and that said expansiveness is not necessarily “religious” in nature, but rather, “just is”.

This was for me the best movie of 2016. The most forward-looking, and the most “edgy” sci-fi movie of them all, by literally moving the needle of sci-fi from caricature super-heroes, monsters, and A-to-B aliens, to a more expansive terrain that’s more rich in potential. As an ex-filmmaker myself, that’s the kind of sci-fi I always wanted to make too (I’m a meta-psychedelic visual artist now).

6. So why didn’t so many people get it?

– It’s because most people aren’t indoctrinated in such cosmological ideas. Even if Alton did explain it at some point, about a “world on top of ours”, that still didn’t register with most people. Most viewers needed a way more spoon-fed explanation to get it (and maybe they should have received it, that’s a failure of the movie production companies involved to not insist that the director gives it to them).

Additionally, the press’ comparison of this movie to the ’80s Spielberg movies didn’t help at all, because this movie had absolutely nothing to do with these older movies (people went to the cinema expecting something specific and recognizable, and they got something completely different instead). So they found the movie a boring dud, as if without significance, and with a WTF ending. But there is significance in the movie, it tells of a larger world that we will eventually reach one way or another, but that we must have faith until that day comes, when that faith transforms from belief to hard scientific data.

This is not different than if the year was 1870, Jules Verne trying to convince people that one day we will have technology to reach for the stars, or the deeps of the sea, and instead, he gets people thinking he was crazy, or just a “fantasy story without significance”. All it needed was some faith in the natural process of technological and/or biological evolution. That’s what the filmmaker is asking of you today too.


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2016-12-11 09:58:52 in the "Collage" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

Well, to make money from art you gotta sell. There are three steps to making money online with art (and not via the old way of galleries and shows):

1. You must create easily-digestible “pop” art. More on this here.

2. You must market yourself. And you do that by getting A LOT of Instagram followers. Instagram has 10x the purchasing power than any other social media. Back in the day, Tumblr was big, and later was Facebook. Today, only Instagram is worth your time. So, make sure your instagram posts are very tidy, you use the right tags each time, and when you get blog articles about your art, ask them to also link to your instagram account. From there, each time you want to mention your shop or a sale you have, an instagram post will do you wonders.

3. You must sell at the right shops, using the right products on each. Don’t try uploading everything on all your shops. You have to be selective, depending on the profit provided. The last thing you want, is to start selling your most popular artwork for a profit of $1.20, that is stationary cards. Be smart. And here’s how to be smart:

A. Sell your own prints. That’s where you will make as much as 80% profit. I wrote a blog post about how to do that here. Use TicTail the way I do: you sell your own prints there, but you also link to products on third party shops. Consider your own signed prints shop your studio & gallery.

B. On Society6 you must have a three-tier system: your most popular artworks gets uploaded ONLY as art prints, framed prints, canvas, and metal prints. These are the only products that allow you to set your own profit. Set a high enough profit that is both accessible for consumers, but also gets you some good earnings. For the second tier artworks, also export and enable other products too, just make sure they’re of the expensive kind (e.g. shower curtains). This way, these products do exist for those who want them, but they don’t compete with your prints in terms of pricing (because they’d be in equal footing price-wise). And the third tier, the least popular artworks (don’t upload at all the ones that aren’t at least a bit popular btw), you export for everything. Personally, I still avoid some products completely due to their too low price that only makes artists a dollar-something: stationary cards, ipod skins, hand towels, and also apparel (I only use all-over-prints, which look way better). Consider Society6 your mall shop. PROS: lots of shoppers CONS: crippled by software bugs, doesn’t allow custom pricing for everything.

C. RedBubble allows you to set your own prices for all products, which is a huge advantage. Set a good profit for all products in your settings. The problem with RedBubble is that not as many people use it for art as they are for Society6. Therefore, at RedBubble upload only the artworks that look good on products, e.g. apparel, or clocks. Make sure you have a very high profit margin for photo-prints and posters, because these will eat away your art prints if they’re too cheap. I also always disable stationary cards and stickers there. Consider RedBubble your retail shop around the corner. PROS: custom pricing for everything. CONS: a bit more difficult to be found there.

D. Curioos is a beautiful shop (the most beautiful of all), but you only make a 10% there for art prints/canvas and metal prints. You can make there a 16% if you upload an artwork ONLY there (not a great idea). However, there is a trick, to get that 16%, by only enabling acrylic and disk prints (and die-cuts, if some of your artworks are eligible). You don’t enable prints/frames/canvas/metals at all. Because no other shop carries these three kinds of prints (acrylic, disk, die-cuts), you can select the 16% exclusive edition option. Even with 16% though, you won’t make much money there (I recently sold 16 acrylic and disk prints there and made only $200, while for the same prints on paper I’d make $900 at my own Tictail shop). That’s why it’s best to only upload on Curioos your second half of your artworks in terms of popularity. You don’t want these exotic types of prints to cannibalize your own print sales. Consider Curioos your boutique. PROS: Beautiful, functional. CONS: low profit.

E. Zazzle, LiveHeroes, DesignedbyHumans, Fab.com, Fancy.com and a few others: this is up to you if you want shops there too or not. If you are going to open shops there, again, don’t upload your most popular artworks there, because you won’t make much. For example, fab.com only pays 6%, fancy.com is a pain in the butt to upload new artworks up, liveheroes and DesignedbyHumans don’t pay much at all, and zazzle.com is ok (allows up to 99% custom profit over the base price), but it’s a really messy web site. Consider these shops like a remote gas station shop where you mostly enter just to take a piss after a long drive, but sometimes you feel obligated to buy a bag of beef jerky because the cashier is looking at you funny.


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2016-12-09 19:30:32 in the "Collage" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

Being in the art business for almost 5 years now it has given me a good instinct about what sells and what doesn’t. Basically, what sells are artworks that are:

1. Easily comprehended visually with a single look that doesn’t take more than 0.3 seconds. This usually means: a main element right in the center of the artwork.

2. Depiction of something super-easy to understand that the viewer identifies with: e.g. eating, sleeping, taking a bath, driving, playing with a cat, being next to flowers.

3. The next step is to make these mundane, everyday depictions surreal: e.g. sleeping on top of Saturn, driving on a road to a nebula, sitting under giant flowers. Basically, take people’s bored existence and make it more interesting. In this case, the art functions as a get-away drug.

4. The most successful kind of art today, and the simplest of all, is substitution. For example, instead of the ear piece on old style landline phones, you replace it with a banana. Or, instead of bombs, you get the airplane to drop candy. The human brain immediately lights up in such substitutions because it takes less than a second for the individual to “get it”, and so it rewards itself the same way it gets rewarded when playing Tetris. Again, art functions here as a drug, not as an intellectual discourse.

Example of things people absolutely love:



Examples of more serious art that people don’t bother to look at because they’re either too visually complex, or their brain hurts too much to think about what it’s depicted:


(this one has a full blown explanation too)


Overall, I’m a successful artist, I can’t complain about that. But it bothers me that I’m selling easily digestible crap, instead of more interesting, often abstract art (called “dada” in collage circles). Only 1% of what I sell overall is serious art (and yes, I have created a number of these, it’s just that people don’t prefer them). I want to be remembered having created something worthwhile, not (essentially) memes that provide the odd smile for half a second to most people, before they move on to the next item on their Instagram feed.

I wouldn’t mind the easier artworks if there was some kind of balance between the two types among consumers. But when people prefer the easy ones 99 times out of 100, there’s a problem. And the problem is not just with me, because the same thing happens with pretty much all serious artworks from other artists (e.g. dada collages). This is why the majority of them can’t make a good buck out of their work to sustain them financially. It’s because their artworks aren’t “pop” enough. Sad, but true.


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2016-10-23 21:12:28 in the "Filmmaking" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

I watched the trailers of The Hobbit at 48fps and Avatar’s at 60fps (as their directors wished), and I really don’t like the smoothness. Originally, in principle, I was a high frame rate advocate for cinema movies (thinking that 24fps is simply a relic of a century old tech requirement), however, now I’m against upgrading the temporal velocity for regular film. The difference between my old opinion and my new one, is that now I know why 48 or 60 fps don’t work as well as 24 fps. I had to become a collage artist to understand why.

The reason is that high frame rate becomes extremely distracting. When there are more frames, it means that there is way more information on the screen. The eye and the brain gets way too tired to follow and analyze it all (it follows it by default, you can’t turn off that natural process). Because of that, the brain runs out of steam to follow the story fully, and so the movie fails because the story doesn’t shine through.

The same is true for color: if you look at Hollywood color grading, except for black & white, only 1 or 2 more color families are actively visible. For example, you will get red, yellow, and that teal color that covers both green and blue. Basically, the fewer color families that are on screen, the less processing the brain has to do, resulting in the viewer dipping into the story more.

It’s the same in collage: the fewer the color families used, the more successful a collage is. Otherwise, it looks like a mess.

Having said all that, there is a future for high frame rate (and more colors), but that’s only in VR, or in futuristic systems where the image is projected directly on the brain. Then, yes, there’s a requirement for “more”, since the whole point of VR is to “fool” the brain about the reality it displays.

But for TV & film, which is projected away from ourselves, and perceivable by only one of our senses (so it must provide less information in order to be processed fast-enough), “less is more”. That’s why 24fps is here to stay for these mediums in particular.


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2016-10-14 22:34:51 in the "Filmmaking" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

I received my Moondog Labs anamorphic lens for mobile devices today, and ran some tests. It is wonderful to be able to have such a wide field of view with a device such as the iPod Touch 6th gen. As you can see in the picture, the image is way wider than shooting in standard 1080p. But do not make the mistake to think that this is all the anamorphic lens’ doing. There are THREE factors that extended the wide field of view that much:

1. Shooting in 3k instead of 1080p (using the ProMovie app), the sensor gives you a completely different field of view. The crop of the sensor is smaller. This is the biggest hack you can do to get a wider field of view (it’s even bigger than the anamorphic lens hack!).

2. The anamorphic lens.

3. Turning off stabilization (which means that you must have some sort of other stabilizer at hand to shoot properly).

ipod-touch-crop

Here’s the test video I shot today:

Here’s how I shot:

1. I used the ProMovie iOS app, which allows me to record at 3k (3200×1800 resolution). I used 100 mbps, at 24 fps. I locked the exposure to 1/48th shutter speed, and then I set the ISO to lock the exposure. I set and locked focus, and white balance. The ProMovie app also has an anamorphic screen view! I set stabilization to OFF (that’s why the video is very shaky). Obviously, when shooting something seriously, use a tripod or a stabilizer/gimbal.

2. When using the Moondog Labs anamorphic lens, and you apply the 1.333 aspect ratio in the project properties and on each clip (I use Sony Vegas), the effective resolution becomes 4267×1800.

3. Then, I color graded this way, plus I added the FlmConvert filter with its “FJ H160 Pro” template, and also tweaked the template’s levels a bit.

4. Then, I exported at exactly 3840×1620, at 100 mbps bitrate (I exported no audio in my case). If using Sony Vegas, you must “disable resample” in all clips in the timeline before you export. Then, I uploaded on youtube. It is very important to export at the exact resolution stated above for 4k anamorphic btw, otherwise, people with ultra-wide monitors will get black bars on all four corners! The above resolution is ultra-wide UHD (3840 px wide).


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2016-10-10 20:01:23 in the "Metaphysics" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

Slept a bit this morning, after my sun-rising walk, and not surprisingly, I got a lucid dream. I was caught in the middle of a game between two factions, taking place in my own house, and I thought I had to take part. Soon, I realized it was just a game and not real adversaries. So, I approached one of the entities (they were not human), and I started asking questions about the reality of everything.

I don’t remember much of the early questions, but the answers didn’t really surprise me, which means that they were in sync with my own cosmic ideas. But towards the end, there was a Q&A that did surprise me.

I asked if there was a chance that our scientists would eventually be able to become aware of their dimension, or other dimensions.

The reply was:

“They already did that in an experiment in Shanghai. Chinese scientists call this ‘The Reflex’.”

Whoah!

What really surprised me wasn’t the fact some scientists might have gone a bit “too far” with their physics experiments. But rather, the fact that they called this a “reflex”, and not an “echo”. You see, the reality I was in during my lucid dream, was very close to our reality. My house was probably about 80% the same as it is in my waking state. So if an experiment was able to identify a similar setting of matter in another operating frequency, they would normally call it an “echo”. Because being the materialist scientists that they probably are, they would prefer to give the explanation that this is simply an echo of our matter in another frequency, rather than a whole dimension in its own right.

But calling it a “reflex”, might mean (my interpretation) that whatever changes here or there, it has a reflective capability to our matter back here or over there. So basically, the two (or more) frequencies of reality are both connected, but also separate, and one can influence the other (if only at quantum level).

If what I was told is true, the scientists already know that there are other “dimensions” of reality, and not just “echoes” of just our own. There is a huge difference between the two! Also, I was not specifically told that there was communication between these scientists and the lifeforms that live there. I don’t think there is any, to be honest.

So yeah, there was that today…


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2016-10-10 06:01:56 in the "Filmmaking" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

It is definitely possible to shoot a movie with a mobile device, just like the Sundance movie ?Tangerine? did. And in fact, today it would look much better than Tangerine looked like (which had pretty bad lighting throughout). Being the bad girl I am, I ordered the Moondog Labs anamorphic lens, with a 52mm filter ring, to add a variable ND filter for outdoor shots and shoot anamorphically for more cinematic shots.

So, I spent $150 to buy FilmConvert today too, only to find out that I could do a better job myself at grading my iPod Touch 6th Gen footage. Click the images below to see the before and after properly (click through again to see them in full resolution).

For this tutorial, you will need the Sony/Magix Vegas video editor.

1. Shoot your movie with either Filmic Pro, or if you have an iPod Touch instead, the ProMovie app. The ProMovie allows up to 100 mbps bitrate, and for certain newer iPods, it can shoot at 3k instead of just 1080p. At the end, you will be exporting again at 1080p (or 2k), but you will have a wider angle and more pixels to work with than shooting in 1080p.

2. Make sure lighting is adequate indoors. If shooting outdoors, always have the sun on your back.

3. Set your app at 24 fps, and lock the shutter speed at 1/48th. Lock white balance to the best value you can, and lock focus. For ISO, observe the exposure meter, and always lock the ISO half a stop below of what the app thinks it’s the best exposure. This is because mobile apps tend to overexpose. This is mostly true for outdoor, or brightly lit scenes.

4. Record (preferably with a tripod or a gimbal), and save the video in your gallery (there’s a small icon to do that). Connect your device, and copy the MOV file(s) over to your PC.

5. In Sony Vegas, it’s very important to set the right project properties to match the clips (right frame rate, tell it it’s progressive, etc).

6. Bring the footage in your timeline. Select all of them in the timeline, right click on any of them, and hit Switches/Disable-Resample. If you don’t do that for ALL your clips in your timeline, you will end up with “ghosting” (blurred images).

ipod-1b

7. Pick a clip in the timeline, and click the little + icon at its far right to add plugins on it. In the new window that opens, click the little + icon again on the right of the window, and add, in this order:
– White Balance: amount 0.100
– Saturation Adjust: pick the preset “Reduce minor color noise”
– Brightness & Contrast: Brightness -0.040, Contrast: 0.075
– Color Corrector: Saturation 0.800
– Gaussian Blur: 0.0003 for both horizontal & vertical ranges

8. For exterior, sunny shots, it’s the same as above, except for a few small changes:
– Brightness -0.040, contrast 0.000
– Color Corrector: Saturation 0.750

No scene is the same as another, so you will slightly need to adjust the above to better match your scenes.

ipod-2b

9. After you color corrected all clips separately, click the + plugin icon on the left of the video timeline (that’s the icon for the global plugins). Add the “Levels” plugin, and select the “Computer RGB to Studio RGB” preset. This will make your footage look “flat”. That’s ok, it won’t look like that when it’s rendered at the end. We need to do this, otherwise all h.264 exports will come out way too contrasty (they will differ from your Vegas working preview, and this plugin prevents this).

10. Export by clicking File/RenderAs and opening the MainConcept AVC/AAC format. Select the “Internet HD 1080p” template, and click “Customize Template”. Make it look like exactly like this (and give AAC audio 160kbps at the very least). Then, upload to Youtube the resulted .MP4 file if desired.

export

Note: Interior shots might need denoise. You can do that using the Neat plugin (commercial), or by bringing your noisy scenes to Photoshop one by one (use an intermediate codec in that case). I used Photoshop above for the interior shot of my living room.

Note 2: A very interesting Vegas plugin is the LAB Adjust. With it, you can mute the green colors (or too much orange colors), by using the “Channel b” very slightly (bring it towards the left). Some shots might require this plugin. Hollywood movies have strong reds and blues, but greens are rather muted.


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2016-10-10 01:50:47 in the "Filmmaking" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

A little bit of a test this evening: iPod Touch 6th generation, vs the BMPCC camera. Obviously, the BMPCC looks awesome with minimal processing (just a LUT), but the iPod Touch is not too shabby either after some serious work is done on it to clean it up. Click through the image file to view in high res. If I had a newer iPhone model, no noise would be visible, and with sharper results. Basically, yes, it is possible to shoot a movie with FilmicPro on iOS, just like the Sundance movie “Tangerine” did. And in fact, it could look much better than Tangerine looked like (which had pretty bad lighting throughout). And being the bad girl I am, I ordered the Moondog Labs anamorphic lens, with a 52mm filter ring, to add a variable ND filter for outdoor shots and shoot anamorphically for more cinematic shots. I use the ProMovie app instead of Filmic Pro myself, which has additional features for iPod users: shoots in 3k instead of just 1080p, at 100 mbps. Sweet.

cameras


Comments

published by Eugenia on 2016-08-21 17:49:25 in the "General" category
Eugenia Loli-Queru

I had an interesting dream this morning.

In the dream, I was married to a man I don’t know in real life, and he owned a pickup truck, but its engine was on fire. He was trying to fix the problem, but he couldn’t.

Suddenly, a bow, an arrow, and a plastic deer fell right out of the sky. The consensus among everyone in the scene was that God sent these items, for us to somehow to fix the truck. But no one knew how to use these items to actually fix it. It was a bit of puzzle.

Finally, my “husband” felt that he needed to do a sacrifice to God to fix the truck. Instead of using the supplied plastic deer, he caught an alive fox, and he placed it on top of the engine, and then he aimed at her with the bow and arrow. The fox was being tortured, was in pain and was it screaming.

As he was ready to shoot at her, finally, I couldn’t take it anymore. I shouted at him that this is the wrong way to go about it, and that we must not kill the poor animal. I remember clearly telling him that it makes more sense to throw away that truck and buy a new one, instead of killing the fox.

He listened, and the fox was freed and cared for.

Immediately after, I saw my father cutting down a cherry tree. I started shouting at him too, telling him that I need the trees so I can eat their fruit.

Pretty much right after that, I woke up.

I immediately realized what this dream was showing me. This was an intervention, a call, or simply further proof that I need to stop eating animals. My “engine” (my body) is still hurting, years after I went Paleo that freed me from my main problems. But the problems didn’t go away completely, neither I was able to lose weight as other Paleo people have managed to do. Also, only recently I found that given my genetic makeup, I’m more suited for a low-fat/medium-carb diet, rather than a low-carb/high-fat diet.

In the last few months I have tried to minimize animal meat consumption with mixed results (e.g. eat it once or twice a week only), but it’s now time to double down on my efforts. I will not eat muscle meat (or offal) ever again, and after my current batch of wild buffalo bones are done, that would be it for me.

I will still be eating pastured-only eggs, fermented dairy (mostly from goat/sheep which are always pastured), and some seafood (2-3 times a week, mostly shellfish, just to get enough B12 and DHA). But veggies and fruits now become my staple, and the majority of them will have to be raw too. I still call my new diet itself “Pegan” (since it also removes all the things Paleo removes, e.g. grains, sugar, seed oils etc), but I guess, a longer descriptive name would be “High-Raw Paleo-Pesco-Vegetarian diet”. It’s time for me to live the way my direct ancestors did: very little meat (seafood in my case), and lots of veggies & fruits. Minus the grains and sugar.


Comments