Ghana’s Black Stars are the only teamrepresenting the continent in the quarterfinal round of the first 2010 FifaWorld Cup on African soil(Image: www.souzavto-sts.ru)MEDIA CONTACTS• Wolfgang Eichler, Fifa Media Officer+27 11 567 2010 or +27 83 2010 firstname.lastname@example.org• Delia Fischer, Fifa Media Officer+27 11 567 2010 or +27 567 email@example.com• Jermaine Craig, Media Manager2010 Fifa World CupLocal Organising Committee+27 11 567 2010 or +27 83 201 firstname.lastname@example.orgNosimilo RamelaAfricans are pinning all hopes on Ghana – the only country on the continent to make it through to the quarter-finals of the 2010 Fifa World Cup.“We are so proud of Ghana, they’ve played really well and have kept Africans’ hopes alive in our first African World Cup,” said Thabiso Malesa from Tembisa, east of Johannesburg.The team, popularly known as the Black Stars, sent Africans into fits of excitement on Saturday 26 June when striker Asamoah Gyan scored the winning goal three minutes into injury time, defeating the US 2-1.“In 2006 we made the second round, now we have gone a step further. We have made Ghana proud and the whole of Africa proud. I am the happiest man in the world,” said Gyan.Samuel Musah, also from Ghana, shares his sentiments: “This is just amazing. These boys have represented this continent with such heart, have made us so proud and given us hope for Africa.”Musah was one of the 34 976 fans who attended the game at the Royal Bafokeng Stadium in Rustenburg, in South Africa’s North West province. “The energy was fantastic at the stadium. I think our support, singing, screaming, dancing, praying and blowing the African horn motivated the guys. They knew the whole of Africa was behind them and they played their hearts out for their country and the entire continent,” he said.Speaking after the game, Ghanaian midfielder Andre Ayew said: “We did it for Africa. We knew we had the whole continent behind us and we did not want to disappoint. It gave us more energy to beat the US.”Carrying Africa’s hopesSouth Africa, Algeria, Nigeria, Cote d’Ivoire and Cameroon were all eliminated in the first round of the tournament, leaving the Black Stars as the only team in the tournament to represent the continent.“It’s amazing to have the whole of Africa behind us,” said fellow midfielder Sulley Muntari in a post-match interview with Fifa.com. “Football means so much to Africans. Having the World Cup here is just incredible. It would have been nice if more African sides had reached the last 16, but we’re very proud to carry their hopes.”Former South African President Thabo Mbeki has congratulated Ghana for advancing to the quarter-finals, saying their victory is a positive indication of Africa’s ability to perform.He said the team has always been known as Ghana’s Black Stars, but they should consider changing their name to Africa’s Black Stars because they have represented the entire continent and made it proud with their performance.“I wish Ghana to proceed to the semi-finals and hope the whole continent, not only South Africans, will support the team,” said Mbeki.South Africa’s ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC), has also said the Ghanaian team has made Africa proud.The party’s Jackson Mthembu said they are fully behind Ghana. “We are, as the ANC, calling on all South Africans and all people who come from the length and breadth of Africa to be behind the Ghanaians. In fact, they are no longer Ghanaian stars, they are African stars.”When Ghana first qualified to play in a Fifa World Cup in 2006, the team got through to the second round, before being knocked out by Brazil. They are the third African team to reach the quarter-finals, after Cameroon and Senegal did so in 1990 and 2002 respectively.“We’ve created history,” said right back John Pantsil. “It’s the first time that Ghana has reached the quarter-finals and it’s incredible.”Musah says that when Ghana faces two-time World Cup winners Uruguay on Friday 2 July at Soccer City Stadium, “the whole of Africa will be behind the team. I believe their commitment and our support will carry them to the next round”.
Although the idea does have a certain appeal, for most of us it would be impractical to tour all of the approximately 40 completed or in-progress Passivhaus projects in New York. But a one-day symposium focused on a selection of these projects would be easily manageable and, it turns out, is already on the calendar.On Saturday, June 23, New York Passive House, a nonprofit based in New York City, will play host to the 2012 Passive House Symposium – a detailed look at nine retrofit projects and nine new-building projects. While some of these projects are in the city (a hotbed of Passivhaus retrofit activity), the locations of others range from Long Island to upstate New York. The configurations include row houses, multifamily projects, and commercial and institutional buildings.The presenters offer an impressive level of expertise – most are architects, many are builders and certified Passive House consultants. All have extensive experience applying the Passivhaus standard in New York’s climate zones.Symposium detailsThe event is scheduled for 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. at Sciame Auditorium, 141 Convent Avenue, at the City College of New York’s Bernard and Anne Spitzer School of Architecture. Doors open at 8:30 a.m. (click here to register). The admission fee – $40 for the public, $20 for NYPH members, $50 at the door – includes lunch and beverages. Building professionals licensed in New York State can earn 5.5 hours of professional education credits by attending the symposium.NYPH has summarized the schedule of events as follows:MORNING SESSIONSPassive House: a global standard: Tomas O’Leary, founder and director of Brooklyn-based Passive House Academy, will describe the latest developments at the Passive House Institute and Passivhaus activities generally in Europe, and how New York fits in in the emergence of the standard.Certified Passive House: Architect Bill Ryall (Ryall Porter Sheridan Architects) and Passive House consultant David White (Right Environments) will present their completed project, Orient Point, a new building on Long Island recently certified by PHI.Project roundtable: Architects Andreas Benzing, Julie Torres Moskovitz, Jeremy Shannon, and Chris Benedict will each explore different aspects of working toward the Passivhaus standard in a variety of projects.Lunch, which will include a showing of Passive Passion, a 20-minute documentary on Passive House, by Brooklyn-based documentary producer-editor Charlie Hoxie. The documentary features (See the trailer here.)AFTERNOON SESSIONSCertified Passive House: Architect Stephanie Bassler (North River Architecture + Planning) will present details about Omega Institute, an upstate institutional new-construction/addition that was certified in fall of 2011.Project Slam: Four PechaKucha 20×20 presentations: Stas Zakrzewski (Z+H Architects): “PH in France, and what construction there can show us here”; Wendy Ing (certified Passivhaus consultant): “Facing thermal bridges in an upstate home”; Ken Levenson (475 High Performance Building Supply): “Row house, multifamily, and country house”; and Chris Steffens (Lightmill Design): “Data collection in PH buildings.”Project roundtable: Architect Sam Bargetz (Loadingdock 5): “Brooklyn projects: variations”; builder Gennaro Brooks-Church (Eco Brooklyn): “Radical sustainability”; and engineer Jordan Goldman (ZeroEnergy Design): “New England PH: commonalities and differences.”PH going forward – projects on the boards: Architect Paul Castrucci (Red Industries) on “ABC NoRio: PH, a tight urban site”; Brooklyn-based Architect Greg Duncan on “Commercial PH in Brooklyn: concerns beyond residential buildings”; and engineer Lois Arena (Steven Winter Associates), who will discuss “The process of PH enclosure assembly in upstate housing.”
Since FCPX shook up the post-production world a few years ago, many editors have been heavily focused on the ‘NLE Wars’, trying to choose the best software for their needs. Now that the dust has settled, let’s look at some fundamental editing techniques that are relevant no matter what system you’re editing on.Picking the right takes and creating a basic assembly edit is an art of it’s own, undoubtably. But when it comes time to actually create a presentable rough cut or fine cut of your film, small nuances in the editorial process can hugely change the perception of your film by the viewer. For instance if there is a slight continuity error between two shots, the viewer may not notice that error outright, but they will feel it. Assuming that particular edit was clunky and obvious, the viewer will subconsciously be removed from the film as they start to see the edits.1. Edit Between Camera MovesThis first point specifically applies to scenes comprised of moving footage – whether it be handheld, Steadicam, jib, etc. You need to be really careful when editing between two shots or takes in a scene that have any sort of camera movement to them, as choosing the wrong edit point can result in some pretty nasty results. To illustrate this example, imagine a scenario where you cut from a handheld shot that was panning from right to left to a different handheld shot (from another angle) that is tilting up. In most circumstances, this edit would look very jarring and would be unpleasant to watch. There may be some scenarios where it could work or where you are going for a more disconnected type of aesthetic, but in most cases it just wouldn’t look good.The better option would be to cut from the right/left panning shot to another right/left shot that then slows down and tilts up (continuity of camera movement). If you don’t have the footage to do this with, you might be able to at least sit on the first shot a little bit longer until there is some sort of vertical movement (even if it’s a camera shake) and then cut into the up/down vertical pan then. A difference of a single frame or two could make or break the smoothness of the edit when dealing with moving footage, so always be very cognizant of that and try to find some sort of commonality between the moving shots that you are intercutting.2. Look For Physical Movement In The FramePicking up from the first point above, it is equally important to find fluidity in movement, even when cutting between two static (tripod) shots. No two shots are ever going to match perfectly, unless you are editing footage that was shot in a multi-camera environment, so the key to matching static shots is looking for the movement that the audience is going to be watching. For example, if you are cutting from a closeup to a wide shot and the actor reaches up to brush her hair, you will likely want to make your cut as her hand is reaching through the frame and up to her head. By doing this it will hide any continuity issues or inconsistencies in other parts of the frame. Cut on the action.Let’s say there was someone walking in the background on the tight angle, but they aren’t there on the wide, that won’t be nearly as noticeable when you are cutting on the actor’s physical action as the audience is watching her, not the background. It also goes without saying that you need to be very careful about matching the exact frame where the movement of her arm in one shot is nearly identical to the other, because if you don’t match them perfectly it can feel like a jump cut.3. Use Diverse CoverageOften times on larger scale productions there is a lot of coverage (different angles) being shot of any given scene. This is great for you as an editor because it opens up all sorts of possibilities for crafting the scene in the editing room, but it also needs to be approached with caution as there may be so much coverage that it can lead to strange edits between similar looking shots.A basic setup consists of a wide master shot and closeups for coverage, but in many cases the director and DP may decide to get additional footage by shooting various angles of the closeups and wide shots. This needs to be approached with caution in the editing room as edits typically look most natural and fluid when two shots are cut together that contrast each other well. For instance, a wide shot and closeup are going to look very different from each other and should cut together naturally, whereas a closeup and another closeup from a slightly different angle will not cut as well.A few thoughts:You can cut between two closeups of the same character, but you need the shot to be significantly different.If you cut between a head-on close up and a profile close up, that could work, but if you cut between two closeup angles that are very similar, the shots will not be diverse enough to create a dynamic edit.If you need to get from one closeup to another (and they are taken from a similar angle), try first cutting away to the wide, or a reaction shot from the other character in the scene, and then cut to the new close up.I can not overstate the importance of creating smooth and fluid editing points as a means to connect with your viewer in the most effective way possible. Crafting a story in the edit is obviously critical, but without smooth edits in place the story will never be served well, and the viewer will be taken out of the film and miss many of the story beats that you have worked so hard to integrate into the film.By simply paying attention to each and every edit point that you create, making sure they are all purposeful and smooth, you will be well on your way to creating a polished cut. Always look for movement to cut on between shots (whether it be a camera move, or a physical movement in the frame),never cut between two really similar shots, unless you are going for a veryspecific type of effect.