Newbie Definition Page???
 

My thanks to Chris & crew for this site. My brain is on intake overload!

I have a quick question.

Does this site(s) have an area dedicated to definitions of terms, acronyms spelled out, etc. As a true newbie, I am experiencing some substantial lag times in my learning curve due to posters using terms or acronyms that weren't used in the late 80's when I was studying editing in college (on old equipment at the time!). Let's face it, people that work in the field everyday communicate from where they are in their experience. For me, it is sometimes like reading English with periodic French dispursed throughout the page.

If there isn't a page, what would your thoughts be about creating one? Obviously, the negatives would be who has the time to put one together... AND different people would define certain things differently than others. However, for the truly 'black & white' definitions and acronyms, it would really help a guy like me out. It might also help the many generous people who are answering newbie questions to be able to communicate more efficiently.

At any rate, it's just a thought... or just my .02 (IMO) on NLE's, AE's, DVI's, Raids, REM's, RPG's, KFC's, etc. ;-)

Jeff

We could put one together, but it would only be marginally more helpful than the already available acronym dictionaries (1, 2).

In some cases no acronym dictionary will help you and you'll have to use your wits: a problem encountered substantially on this forum and others is the misuse of acronyms, for example, some folks use HD to refer to a hard drive rather than HDD (hard disk drive). (HD is an acronym for High Definition.) In such cases only context will come to your rescue.

PS
I'm to understand that a rebranding effort by Yum Foods aims to convince us that KFC now stands for Kitchen Fresh Chicken? Nice try, guys. It's still fried in fat.

Well, although this is an excellent idea, it pretty much relates back to our long-established need for individual forum FAQ's (frequently asked questions). I would propose that as containing two things -- stuff that beginners really need to know from the start, and also the more common, more frequently discussed topics. The challenge here has always been finding the core group of members to actually gather, organize and present this info. Most everyone is too busy working... but the need is obviously there, still.

On the bright side, you can always check out about the very many DV faults here:

http://www.ferrario.com/ruether/vid_pict_characts.htm

I have lots of good DV links here:

http://www.dvfreak.com/pana_mx5.htm

And see also our Resources page, especially the link to Adam Wilt's DV FAQ.

The point about the misuse of terms is one reason FOR the existence of such a definition list, I think. Simply because it's not actually "misuse"--it's CONDITIONAL misuse.

The terms change based on the circumstances. For example, when speaking in reference to video issues, as these forums often do (for some strange reason...:) ), it's wrong to say "HD" to refer to a hard drive, and wrong to say "video card" to refer to a computer graphics card. Meanwhile, in the rest of the computer world, "HD" and "video card" are the most common, accepted phrases, and everyone knows what you're talking about. You use "capture card" to speak of what video people might call a "video card". This is how I came into things; I'm a computer nerd first, video guy second, and will never be comfortable with "video card" being wrong.

But, in the interest of speaking the right language, I try my best to stay with the program. I think it should be explained to people, when they first get here, that certain terms change.

Hope that makes some sense to you guys...

Chris, Frank, & Robert K.S....

Thank you for the reference links to go check out. I've already spent some time there... and will probably be camped out at the resource page Chris gave me for a while! Lots to learn... but, as always, you've got to have joy in the journey!

Robert Martens, thanks for your input as well. Feel lucky that you at least were a computer nerd first and a video nerd second. I haven't been either... so I guess I'm that guy that even the nerds don't want to hang out with. Wow... 34 years old and still the odd man out. Ha ha.

Jeff

Chris,

<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Well, although this is an excellent idea, it pretty much relates back to our long-established need for individual forum FAQ's (frequently asked questions). I would propose that as containing two things -- stuff that beginners really need to know from the start, and also the more common, more frequently discussed topics. The challenge here has always been finding the core group of members to actually gather, organize and present this info. Most everyone is too busy working... but the need is obviously there, still. -->>>

Well, here's one approach that might work.

If someone can lay out an initial organization of the FAQ forum, using the legal numbering system, then you could have several folks with permission to add to it as a FAQ topic comes up. You would need to sort the forum by thread subject, not date, by default. For example:

1.0 How to Use this Site

2.0 Common Digital Video Terms

3.0 Equipment Selection

4.0 Non-Linear Editing Software Selection

5.0 Resources on the Internet

6.0 Training Courses

7.0 Colleges and Universities for obtaining degrees in Film Making

8.0 How to Get Started in the Video/Film Business

etc

Now, don't take these as literal suggestions for an organization. This is just an example.

Once you have this established, then allow all of your form admins to post new FAQs to this forum. If at any point you need to reorganize anything, all you have to do is change the section numbers.

It might take a while, but it would eventually get built as the need arises and/or people have time.

Hope this gives you some ideas.

Best Regards,

Jim it looks like a good start.

To communicate or not to communicate?
 

I see a need for new people to have definitions to understand some of the discussions in here, but I dont see a need to be over critical of some "misuse" of acronyms or definitions. If communication happens, thats all that matters. Are we not aware of the concept of saying,"no" when we mean "yes."? I guess all I'm saying is that it's easy to get caught up in technicalities, and it doesn't seem like this is the forum for that.

-on a side note, why am I always being so agro in this place? hmmmmm.....

-on a second side note, pay no attention to the ramblings of a guy drinking in solitary confinement.

Re: To communicate or not to communicate?
 

<<<-- Originally posted by Adam C Bowman : on a side note, why am I always being so agro in this place? hmmmmm.....-->>>

"Agro"...I'm not sure what you mean, could you define that term? :P

I can't speak for anyone else, but my comment regarding "video" and "graphics" cards was motivated by a desire to get on the good side of the tech nerds among us. I say these things all the time: Linux instead of the "correct" GNU/Linux, bandwidth instead of bandpass, stuff like that. I've been corrected by said nerds on many occasions (not here, that I can remember), and now my primary goal on Internet message boards is to make as many of them happy as possible, so I don't get into stupid arguments.

Bottom line, I agree we needn't be over critical of simple misstatements, especially when the meaning is clear.

Of course, I'll still be sure to chime in if someone says "plumber" when they mean "guy from Roto Rooter who clears clogs". ;)