Mathew Farrell

I loved it. Elswit made some great choices. Archival rarely blends well with modern footage, but here they get away with it due to the context that it is supposed to be footage. I'm not normally fond of live zooms, but it works well with to highlight the mix of chaos and focus in a newsroom. Generally Period appropriate tv lighting too. There were a distracting number of clearly out of focus shots though. A bit surprising they made the cut.

I'd tend to not mix them, unless you don't enough roles and you feel you need to pad things out a bit. The exception to having just projects on your resumé is showing off pertinent experience or skills. Or to put it another way, a producer doesn't need to hear about all the cafés you've waited tables at, but they might be interested to know that you've had extensive customer service experience. In my case, I've done lots of remote climbing expeditions and guiding. Listing these jobs and trips will probably be meaningless to most film industry folks reading my Cinematography CV, but if I include a list of skills such as first aid, guiding, running remote area expeditions, roped access, it's hopefully more pertinent and digestible for them. Depends on the job you're applying for. An extension to this idea, and an extension of AJ's comment, is that as you get more CV line items racked up, consider omitting the less relevant ones.

Good input, thank you guys Daniel, good question RE my post count. Maybe this one doesn't count - or at least it didn't when I started posting it... Very good points about permissions and contractual ability to share. I've never gone to the trouble of including it in a contract (I will from now on), but also never run into resistance. Not after the client has aired the campaign, anyway. Bruce, the mix down "long trailer" is a great idea. My first thought when watching yours were that they were too long, but then I remembered that I wasn't watching a film trailer, but a Reader's Digest condensed version so I could judge your work without tracking down the film and spending 2 hours watching it. A very natural next step after folks have been wowed by your reel and are now doing more of a due diligence and style check. I love it. You've got a great, polished look, too. Well suited to the material. Cool Impossible Camera shot through the window on Me You He She. I guess I'm leaning more towards posting my own clips, rather than sharing their links. Setting aside the issue of being able to tweak the cut or grade - By re-uploading, a video is linked to your Vimeo or YT page (keeping people watching your content, rather than moving on to someone else's). The one flipside I can see is that sometimes the context of a client is valuable. For example, I recently shot a TVC campaign for a state tourism board. By sharing the client's link, you can see the scope of the campaign (online magazine, videos, etc), which lends gravitas to the project. In that case, I'm (hopefully) communicating that I have been entrusted with bigger projects. A client potentially has more views and like and all that guff, but I'm not sure how pertinent that is to someone already watching it.

Hey folks, what do people feel is the best practice for sharing their published work online? I guess this is mostly applicable to web spots and TVCs. For instance, if a client publishes a piece you shot and you want to point to it as a shining example of your impeccable work, would you add a link to that on your website, Facebook, etc, or would you prefer to re-upload the same content to your own Vimeo page, then link that. Other options? Of course, this all hinges on appropriate permissions from clients. Has anyone run into issues surrounding that? How about director's cuts versus client cuts, and whether clients ever take exception to an alternate cut being unleashed on the world.