Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

New project...

Randall Weatherington said:
Going back to sunglasses...
Breaking up the Luxotica monopoly.
Anybody see the "60 Minutes" article?
Now there's a challenging project.
Click to expand...

Sunglasses monopoly? I was shopping in the Sam Walton Church recently and passed a display of $2.50 sunglasses. I'll print that again so you know it wasn't a typo... $2.50.

I bought a pair thinking they would cause a distorted view when I put them on. Surprisingly, they seem fine. Probably no UV protection, but some pairs were even wrap-arounds. The next time I went to Wal-Mart I bought a couple more pairs of the wrap-arounds. Great for wearing when I go out and check on the garden, especially in bright overhead sunlight or dusty wind.

And if I set them down and forget them or scratch the lens, so what?
 
Rakesh Malik said:
Unfortunately, most hunters are trophy hunters who rely on trucks to get them to their prey.

But you're right, the ones who only kill for food want their prey to survive. They practice Leave No Trace ethics, and never shoot unless they're certain of a clean kill. They support environmentalism because part of their joy comes from being in the wilderness.



Cameras are my preferred hunting tools as well. We should save the guns for those who deserve them, i.e. politicians ;)
Click to expand...

Well, paintball guns or Phaser stun guns set to low to remind them they are there to serve the people rather than to self-serve. '-)
 
Jannard said:
..I appreciate everyone's support and belief that we are no longer a scam.

Jim
Click to expand...

Oh...

I was ready for an other of your "SCAM" projects...

Jannard said:
..And at some point we will be calling for deposits on something you know nothing about. :-)

Jim
Click to expand...

And we'll put up that deposit again... :)
 
Elsie N said:
Sunglasses monopoly? I was shopping in the Sam Walton Church recently and passed a display of $2.50 sunglasses. I'll print that again so you know it wasn't a typo... $2.50.

I bought a pair thinking they would cause a distorted view when I put them on. Surprisingly, they seem fine. Probably no UV protection, but some pairs were even wrap-arounds. The next time I went to Wal-Mart I bought a couple more pairs of the wrap-arounds. Great for wearing when I go out and check on the garden, especially in bright overhead sunlight or dusty wind.

And if I set them down and forget them or scratch the lens, so what?
Click to expand...

Some may argue that the benefits we reap of having near-zero cost sunglasses available may also be why we don't have a net zero equation when offsetting pollution to the other side of the world. Not saying I know a better answer or that I'm better than anyone else at this thing. I have both expensive and cheap sunglasses.

The big negative is that there is always a cost associated with something like this, and we don't immediately see or feel the cost because the tangible benefit of a cheap consumer good pacifies us from recoiling at what the hidden costs are.
 
Dan Kanes said:
Some may argue that the benefits we reap of having near-zero cost sunglasses available may also be why we don't have a net zero equation when offsetting pollution to the other side of the world. Not saying I know a better answer or that I'm better than anyone else at this thing. I have both expensive and cheap sunglasses.

The big negative is that there is always a cost associated with something like this, and we don't immediately see or feel the cost because the tangible benefit of a cheap consumer good pacifies us from recoiling at what the hidden costs are.
Click to expand...
I certainly get what you are saying but I think there's more pixels in the bigger picture that are being cropped out... that is, trying to eliminate the chaos that will ensue if 40 or 50 million Chinese (or other country with high population needing employment) are no longer gainfully employed.

Here's something on Yahoo suggesting we will eventually just have to pay people for doing nothing. Considering the unfavorable connection between (some) work and the environment, I can see how this may come to pass.
 
Dan Kanes said:
Some may argue that the benefits we reap of having near-zero cost sunglasses available may also be why we don't have a net zero equation when offsetting pollution to the other side of the world. Not saying I know a better answer or that I'm better than anyone else at this thing. I have both expensive and cheap sunglasses.

The big negative is that there is always a cost associated with something like this, and we don't immediately see or feel the cost because the tangible benefit of a cheap consumer good pacifies us from recoiling at what the hidden costs are.
Click to expand...

For this to be true, demand would have to be in addition to all existing demand, or otherwise put, suppliers would have to increase capacity to produce these goods (rather than transfer capacity). Both of these are suspect assumptions.
 
Jannard said:
What we are working on is truly significant. It will change the way we all do things for sure. It will not save the planet, cure cancer or give one immortality. I wish we could do any of those things.

The RED One did not save the world. But it changed the imaging world forever. This new project will affect everyone in a major way. That is about all we can do...

I appreciate everyone's support and belief that we are no longer a scam. And at some point we will be calling for deposits on something you know nothing about. :-)

Jim
Click to expand...

I'm in ;-)
 
I already told Jarred this, but whatever it is i trust you two enough to but a deposit down now, know that it will pay itself off one way or another in the near future.
 
Jannard said:
What we are working on is truly significant. It will change the way we all do things for sure. It will not save the planet, cure cancer or give one immortality. I wish we could do any of those things.

The RED One did not save the world. But it changed the imaging world forever. This new project will affect everyone in a major way. That is about all we can do...

I appreciate everyone's support and belief that we are no longer a scam. And at some point we will be calling for deposits on something you know nothing about. :-)

Jim
Click to expand...

Jim just make sure the range of the price is given to put a blind DEPOSIT. Blind is fine with RED, You always surpass expectations, but just to make sure we save money for it when Allocation arrives... :)
 
AWF is a great organization and it's good to see folks like Jim tackling the larger issues we are facing. For the past year I've been plucking away on a small film about climate change in the Sierras for PBS. It's been a little disheartening, but there are some really passionate folks doing good work.
We got here by believing one story... I'm hoping we can get claw our way out by telling a different one. Looking forward to a transformative project Jim!
 
as we would say where i grew up....wicked awesome! good luck and count me in...whatever it is.
 
Meryem Ersoz said:
That and mortality. An Elixir of Life
Click to expand...

Good news and bad news.
Bad news: the latter cannot be purchased. Good news: the prior is an illusion.
 
Jannard said:
Also support http://mission-blue.org/

Jim
Click to expand...

Great! I've been shooting underwater since 1981 (Mine was the first company ever to manufacture and market totally self contained - i.e. camera and recorder - underwater video system) and shot Sylvia Earle (of mission-blue.org) and Hugh Downs on two different occasions for ABC - on a reef project and on a visit to the Aquarius underwater habitat.

Save the Sharks has been part of my signature for years. One of my missions is to combat the non-rational fear mongering of sharks that is often promoted in movies and television shows. I get it - it's entertainment - but I also want people to see that they are amazing creatures and being in the water with sharks is just as magnificent as swimming with dolphins. Sharks are an apex predator that is essential to the ocean ecosystem. Statistically humans kill about 100 million sharks a year, while sharks kill about 8 humans on average per year.

Anything you can do to help, Jim (and the rest of Redusers) is greatly appreciated.
 
Jim, I think your speaking the language of a lot of us here, using the power of digital media to promote change. I know we can push it much further - rethink our approach the way we think of conservation itself, and how we use the visual medium. You've got our attention. Can't wait to see what you've got cooking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top