text:
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander art
View More:
Michael Riley
06 Jan 1960 - 2004
Language groups
Wiradjuri, Southern Riverine region, Kamilaroi, Northern Riverine region
Artist profile
Michael Riley's career started in 1982, when he enrolled in a photography workshop at the Tin Sheds Gallery, University of Sydney, and later became the photographic technician at the Sydney College of the Arts. Riley's family and friends are his constant inspiration, and his work is characterised by a strong sense of intimacy that inherently challenges the negative portrayal of 'otherness' in historical ethnographic portraiture.
In 1986, Riley was included in the first exhibition of Indigenous photography at the Aboriginal Artists Gallery, Sydney, exhibiting five portraits of black women, one of which – 'Maria', 1985 – seemingly appropriates historical depictions of Truganninni, the woman martyred as the last of the Aboriginal people in Tasmania. In 1986, Riley and nine other Sydney based artists established Boomalli Aboriginal Artists Cooperative. He worked concurrently at Film Australia, where he wrote and directed his first film 'Boomalli: Five Artists', 1988, followed by the highly acclaimed 'Dreamings', 1988, a documentary made for the exhibition of Aboriginal art at the Asia Society Galleries, New York.
Riley continued to celebrate Aboriginal women in 'Portraits by a Window', 1990 and the 1991 series 'A Common Place Portraits of Moree Murris'. From 1993 Riley's work focused on self-abuse as a symptom of colonisation, represented in 'Sacrifice', 1993, a series of images of icons, such as Aboriginal hands displaying stigmata. He was commissioned by the Museum of Sydney in 1996 to create Eora, a permanent video display dedicated to the people of Sydney. In this work, he presented a subversive juxtaposition of traditional and contemporary Aboriginal culture.
Riley surveyed the environmental destruction of his country as a metaphor for the encroachment on Aboriginal culture in his film 'Empire', 1997, and the photographic series 'Fly Blown', 1998. These works juxtaposed images of Christianity and roadkill with the parched Australian environment, and were shown as a satellite exhibition of the 1999 Venice Biennale. Riley returned to community portraits in 1999, with the series 'Yarns from Talbragar', depicting members of his father's Wiradjuri community in Dubbo and echoing his 1991 Moree series, centred on his mother's Gamilaroi family first digital series, 'Cloud', 2000 was included in Photograhica Australis at ARCO in Spain, the Fourth Asia-Pacific Triennial of Contemporary Art at the Queensland Art Gallery, Brisbane, and the 2003 Festival of Sydney. Isolated against an emblematic blue Australian sky, a cow, a bible and a boomerang each symbolise pastoralism, religion a Aboriginality – questioning who belongs within Australia.
Jonathan Jones in 'Tradition today: Indigenous art in Australia', Art Gallery of New South Wales, Sydney, 2004
© Art Gallery of New South Wales
Other Titles
Portrait of Maria
Place where the work was made
Media category
Materials used
gelatin silver photograph
45.5 x 47.9 cm image; 60.0 x 49.8 cm sight; 63.2 x 62.9 x 1.4 cm frame
Signature & date
Signed and dated l.l., black marker "M.Riley 1985".
Mollie Gowing Acquisition Fund for Contemporary Aboriginal Art 1999
Not on display
Accession number
© Michael Riley Foundation. Licensed by Copyright Agency
Where the work was made
Shown in 7 exhibitions
Exhibition history
Signature works, Australian Centre for Photography, Paddington, 27 May 1999–04 Jul 1999
Another Country, Art Gallery of New South Wales, Sydney, 04 Jul 1999–02 Apr 2000
Title Deeds: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Works from the Collection, Art Gallery of New South Wales, Sydney, 05 Jul 2000–05 Nov 2000
unknown, Art Gallery of New South Wales, Sydney, 22 Aug 2007–28 Oct 2007
Boomalli: 20 years on, Art Gallery of New South Wales, Sydney, 01 Sep 2007–28 Oct 2007
Half light: portraits from black Australia, Art Gallery of New South Wales, Sydney, 21 Nov 2008–22 Feb 2009
The photograph and Australia:
- Art Gallery of New South Wales, Sydney 21 Mar 2015–08 Jun 2015
- Queensland Art Gallery, South Brisbane 04 Jul 2015–11 Oct 2015
Referenced in 9 publications
Judy Annear, The photograph and Australia, Sydney, Jun 2015, 109 (colour illus.).
Edmund Capon AM, OBE, Art Gallery of New South Wales: highlights from the collection, Sydney, 2008, 46 (colour illus.).
Brenda L. Croft, One sun one moon: Aboriginal art in Australia, 'To be young (at heart), gifted and blak: The cultural and political renaissance in Indigenous art in Australia', pg. 285-293, Sydney, 2007, 284 (colour illus.).
Jonathan Jones, Tradition today: Indigenous art in Australia, 'Michael Riley', pg. 126, Sydney, 2004, 127 (illus.).
Lawson's (Editor), Lawson's Aboriginal art, works on paper and Contemporary paintings, Sydney, Dec 1998, 3. cat.no. 54
Hetti Perkins, Look, 'One sun one moon', pg. 22-27, Sydney, Jun 2007, 25 (illus.).
Hetti Perkins, Art + soul: a journey into the world of Aboriginal art, 'Bitter + Sweet', pg. 174-239, Carlton, 2010, 218-219 (illus.), 220, 281. NOTE: The artist is photographed infront of the work on page 218.
Hetti Perkins and Jonathan Jones (Editors), Half light: Portraits from black Australia, 'Michael Riley', pg. 110-119, Sydney, 2008, 113 (colour illus.).
Sandra Phillips (Editor), Racism, representation and photography, Stanmore, 1994, 145 (illus.). titled 'Polly'.


text:
After publishing my post on the first day of NATP's National Conference in Baltimore I realized that I forgot to include my pet peeve with NATP (although NATP is certainly not the only offender – it is a common complaint) when announcing the lodging facilities of conference, workshops, and seminars.
NATP, and just about every other provider, will tell you in its publicity that the event or activity will be held at the High End Hotel in Hottown, and that the special event or activity room rate is, let's say, $149 per night.
This is a lie! You will not pay $149 per night for your room. After adding in various state and local taxes and other charges, different for each location, you will actually pay over $170 per night. Plus, if you drive, as was an option for me for the Baltimore location, you will pay perhaps an additional $10-$18 for parking at the hotel.
Please, please, please – when announcing the "special room rate" give the true rate, with all taxes and additional charges included.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Han Xin wrote:I'll killed James prior to June 2002 so SoSZ would not have started in the first place. Nothing bring me more joy than to see you guys suffer the pain of debating with mineless people from SOC and 3K.net
Well I dunno, I've been wanting to buy an Apple iPod for a while. I just needed someone to post an ad on the forums' world history section so I could see what prices they're available at...
On a more serious note, this is actually a tough question for me. In perspective of the rest of history, I really think things are alright now. Being Chinese, I often wonder what would've happened if a more patriotic and responsible person than Yuan Shikai led the Chinese republic in its infancy.


text:
Ummm….it's hard to argue with this. Go forth, True Believers and spend. Excelsior and all that jazz.
Alex Mansfield was raised on a steady diet of cereal, cartoons and comics. Despite this, he did manage to raise himself up off the couch just enough to become a functioning member of society. Not a day goes by that a scene from The Simpsons won't run through his mind, oftentimes when walking his dog named Pants. His love of comics has only grown through the years as the medium continues to find innovative ways to tell stories, whether they're about cape-wearing modern day myths serving justice or slice of life tales steeped in familiar experiences. You can find his chirpings regarding the awesomeness of comics, craft beer, and why The Big Lebowski should have won every award ever on Twitter @Focusedtotality


text:
A settlement with the U.S. Navy over costs associated with the toxic plumes endangering Bethpage water is imminent, with ratepayers to be spared from a "plume tax," elected officials said Thursday.
The Navy is to reimburse the $14 million the Bethpage Water District bonded for a wellhead treatment facility to ensure its water is safe to drink, officials said. It also will cover 30 years' worth of operating costs, or about $5 million, officials said.
The deal needs approval from the U.S. Department of Justice, which should come within a month, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said at a news conference with water district officials.
Bethpage residents Sal and Noel Greco, who hosted the conference at their home and celebrated the settlement with a toast of tap water in champagne glasses, said the deal will save them $300 a year.
"That's a big hit for the next 20 to 30 years," said Sal Greco, 74, a water district consultant. "It's not going to affect just us; it's going to affect our children and the next generations."
The Grecos are among 9,000 district customers who are to see relief from water-purification costs associated with two toxic plumes emanating from a former Bethpage military manufacturing facility used in the 1930s and '40s by the Navy and what was known as Grumman Corp. The plumes have chemicals classified as carcinogens.
Thursday marked the third anniversary of negotiations with the Navy, water district attorney Anthony J. Sabino said.
A note to our community:
As a public service, this article is available for all. Newsday readers support our strong local journalism by subscribing. Please show you value this important work by becoming a subscriber now.SUBSCRIBE
Cancel anytime
Navy spokesman Thomas Kreidel Thursday said the agency is "in discussion with Bethpage officials," but said he could not comment on details until they are finalized.
"Without this settlement, ratepayers would have been paying for a mess they didn't create," Schumer said. "So now the district can pay back the bond holders, protect the ratepayers and continue to provide safe, clean, lovely drinking water."
He said he also is working to obtain financial relief for cleanup in Massapequa, which is in the path of the plumes.
"The Navy and the contractors made this mess, they should clean it up," he said.
The Navy is responsible for cleanup outside the base and Grumman for cleanup within it, according to an agreement between the two parties, Schumer said.
But Bethpage Water District board of commissioners chairman William Ellinger Thursday said the district plans on taking Grumman to court for $20 million in cleanup costs.
Bethpage water is treated and very carefully monitored, he said.
It is safe to drink, he said."Hopefully, it's almost over but we don't know that for sure," he said of dealing with pollutants. "Our engineers and scientists keep checking the water to make sure it's in good shape before we send it to the people."
A note to our community:
As a public service, this article is available for all. Newsday readers support our strong local journalism by subscribing. Please show you value this important work by becoming a subscriber now.SUBSCRIBE
Cancel anytime


text:
Discipline: Literacy
Grade(s): PreK - 6
Program Type: Core
Delivery Method: Print
Device: Computer
Operating System: Windows
If you teach with Reading Street Common Core, you'll teach with confidence. Every lesson focuses on Common Core State Standards, moving children toward higher-order thinking and college and career readiness. Reading Street Common Core is more personalized, more interactive, and more responsive. It's the first English language arts program to offer 100% compliance with the Common Core in print and digital formats.
Reading Street Common Core is built for performance and manageability. Weekly target skills and strategies perfectly align to the new grade-level standards.
World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment
WIDA is a consortium of states dedicated to the design and implementation of high standards and equitable educational opportunities for English language learners.
WIDA educational products and services fall into three main categories: standards and assessments, professional development for educators, and research.WIDA
Results to make you happy
The bottom line is the bottom line. Does it work? Reading Street not only works—it works phenomenally.
Savvas authors lead the way to the Common Core. Our close association with key authors and architects of the Common Core State Standards ensures that the spirit and pedagogical approach of the initiative is embodied in our program.


text:
My Shop
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Gayle Littlejohn on Pumpkins & Squash
- Sian on A Garden Redesigned
- Whitney Heavey on A Garden Redesigned
- Helen on An Unplanned Hiatus
- BettyM on Seville Orange Marmalade
- ►2016
- ►2015
- ►2014
- ►2013
- ►2012
Monthly Archives: September 2016
The Kitchen Borders
So…. after the mother of all hiatuses, I'm back! 2016 has been full of distractions which have been both exciting and exhausting for us, but have also meant that certain things have had to give: the blog being one of them. Against a … Continue reading
Posted in Gardens, My Place, Uncategorized Tagged alchemilla mollis, aquilegia, aster x frikartii monch, bowl of beauty, centaurea jordy, china town, flaming spring green, knautia macedonica, nepeta walkers low, paeonia, peony, queen of the night, sarah bernhardt, sisyrinchium striatum, tulips, verbena bonariensis Leave a comment


text:
Privacy and Security
MyPharmStoreOnline respects your privacy. We will never share your personal information with anyone other than your veterinarian. We request your email address and personal information for the purpose of communicating directly with you regarding the status of an order or when it is time to reorder medication. Your personal information is also used to ensure proper billing and shipping.
We treat your credit card and personal information with the highest standards of confidentiality and safety. Our Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) encryption software is the industry standard and among the best software available today for secure commerce transactions. It encrypts all of your personal information, including credit card number, name, and address, so that it cannot be read over the internet.
The MyPharmStoreOnline policies are subject to change at any time without notification.
Updated - August 27, 2015


text:
Privacy Policy
Herbalife Australasia Privacy Policy for use in its Australian Operations
Herbalife Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN 42 008 003 030) ("Herbalife Australasia", "we" or "us") recognises the importance of the personal information we hold about individuals and the trust they place in us.
By explaining our Privacy Policy to you, we hope that you will better understand how we keep personal information private and secure while using it to provide services and products.
This Privacy Policy applies to the Australian operations of Herbalife Australasia unless specifically stated otherwise. For these purposes, the Herbalife Australasia Group includes Herbalife Australasia Pty Ltd ABN 42 008 003 030 and any of its, affiliates or subsidiaries, being any company controlled by, controlling or under common control with Herbalife Ltd.
We are committed to safeguarding your personal information in accordance with the requirements of the Australian Privacy Principles contained in the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (the Privacy Act).
In general, we will not use or disclose personal information collected about you otherwise than for the purposes set out in this Privacy Policy, for a purpose you would reasonably expect, a purpose required or permitted by law, or a purpose otherwise disclosed to, or authorised by you.
We may, in connection with particular services we offer or provide to you, make other privacy disclosures to you or seek your authority to use your personal information in ways which are different from or more specific than those stated in this Privacy Policy. In the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of this Privacy Policy and those additional materials, the provisions of the additional materials will prevail.
What is Personal Information?
Personal Information is information or an opinion about an identified individual, or an individual who is reasonably identifiable:
- whether the information or opinion is true or not; and
- whether the information or opinion is recorded in a material form or not.
Kinds of Personal Information we collect and hold
The kind of Personal Information we may collect about you generally includes (but is not limited to):
- name;
- address;
- date of birth;
- gender;
- nationality;
- residency status;
- telephone number;
- e-mail address;
- financial information;
- tax file number (if you are an employee);
- employment history;
- education history;
- photographs and/or video footage which contains your image;
- information contained in an identity document, such as a passport number and driver's licence number;
- information necessary to make or receive payments to or from you or necessary to effect security transactions on your behalf; and
- any testimonials and feedback you may provide to us.
In certain circumstances, we may also collect Personal Information which is sensitive. This may include information about your:
- health; and
- membership of professional or trade associations.
How we collect Personal Information
We will collect Personal Information directly from you when you:
- order products;
- sign-up up or subscribe to receive Herbalife Australasia newsletters or other marketing offers such as competitions, surveys and promotions;
- apply to become an Herbalife Distributor or Member;
- update your Personal Information or another person's Personal Information held by us;
- contact us or deal with us over the telephone or in person;
- send us a letter or email;
- visit the My Herbalife Australia website or any other webpage that we may own and manage, such as our official social media pages on Facebook and Twitter; or
- for the basis of your employment.
Unless the collection of sensitive information is required or permitted by or under law, we will obtain your consent prior to its collection.
Other issues regarding our collection of Personal Information
If at any time you provide us with Personal Information about another person, you acknowledge that you will ensure that the person has been notified of all relevant matters required under the Privacy Act relating to our collection of such information and has consented to the collection, use and disclosure of their Personal Information by us as set out in this Privacy Policy.
From time to time, you may be able to deal with us anonymously or by pseudonym. However, please be aware that, if we are not provided with certain Personal Information, we may not be able to provide some or all of our services.
In certain circumstances, we may be required or authorised to collect Personal Information under certain laws that apply to Herbalife Australasia including, to the extent applicable, the Anti‑Money Laundering and Counter‑Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth).
How we hold Personal Information
Your Personal Information may be held within our (or our service providers'):
- premises in paper records;
- computer systems including email, servers, hard drives and applications;
- data storage systems;
- in video recordings; and
- in certain circumstances, in sound recordings of your telephone discussions with Herbalife Australasia.
Security of Personal Information
Herbalife Australasia will take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to protect the Personal Information it holds from interference, misuse and loss and from unauthorised use, access, modification or disclosure. In line with our internal authorisation and access policies, employees only have access to information on a need to know basis.
To the extent permitted by law, Herbalife Australasia will take reasonable steps to destroy or permanently de-identify Personal Information if it is no longer needed for any purpose for which the information may be used and disclosed under this Privacy Policy except in circumstances where Herbalife Australasia is required or authorised to retain such Personal Information (including as a result of the operation of tax, financial services or other applicable law).
Purposes for which we collect, hold, use and disclose Personal Information
Personal Information may be collected, held, used or disclosed for the purpose of undertaking Herbalife Australasia's obligations and providing services and products or for any of the following purposes:
- fulfilling orders for products;
- managing distributorships and servicing you globally (including providing rewards and recognition);
- carrying out or facilitating the Distributor instructions or responding to the queries or requests;
- performing our administrative operations, including accounting, record keeping, archiving, systems development and testing and staff training;
- enhancing operational, technology, finance, compliance and other support function efficiencies;
- enforcing the obligations of Distributor including collection of outstanding amounts;
- managing our rights and obligations in relation to external payments systems;
- handling complaints and managing legal matters and litigation;
- conducting market or customer satisfaction research;
- (unless you ask us not to) informing you about other products and services we offer;
- (unless you ask us not to) inviting you to other events that may interest you or offering you the opportunity to participate in competitions or promotional activities;
- assessing and processing employment applications and conducting due diligence as part of pre-employment screening;
- when considered necessary by Herbalife Australasia to comply with any law, regulation, court order or requirement of a regulatory or self-regulatory body, tax authority or industry bodies; and
- any other purpose relating to or in connection with the business or dealings of Herbalife Australasia.
Disclosure of Personal Information
We may disclose your Personal Information to the following parties:
- employees, agents, third party logistics, subcontractors, insurers, consultants, repositories, clearing houses, affiliated or unaffiliated
- providers of outsourced or other services in connection with provision of services or products or otherwise in connection with the operation of Herbalife Australasia's business. Examples include couriers, banks and payment processors;
- professional advisers of Herbalife Australasia (such as accountants, lawyers or tax advisors);
- governmental, regulatory, supervisory, law enforcement or similar authority (including tax authority) or industry body in any jurisdiction, as required or authorised by law;
- banks or similar facilities or institutions (and related third party service providers), whether pursuant to legislation, regulation, supervisory directive or otherwise;
- any court of competent jurisdiction in defence of claims or enforcement of rights;
- auditors of Herbalife Australasia;
- an assignee or a proposed assignee of any of Herbalife Australasia's rights or obligations;
- debt collection agencies (in the event of default) (except for information of referees and third parties other than debtors and guarantors); and any person to the extent necessary, in our view, in order to carry out the instructions you give to us.
Personal information collected by any member of the Herbalife Australasia Group may be disclosed and shared between other members of the Herbalife Australasia Group (including those members that are located overseas as referred to below) and may (unless you tell us not to) be used for the respective marketing purposes of the members of the Herbalife Australasia Group.
We May Need to Disclose your Personal Information to Overseas Recipients
Herbalife Australasia is part of the Herbalife Australasia Group, a global organisation that operates in and provides services and products to Distributors through, and with the support from, its affiliates and subsidiaries located in multiple jurisdictions, including but not limited to Herbalife New Zealand Limited. As part of a global organisation, Herbalife Australasia may centralise (within one or more of its affiliated companies or unaffiliated service providers) certain activities relating to distributorships and relevant services and products.
In some cases, we may need to disclose your Personal Information to related companies, affiliates, agents or contractors located outside Australia. The countries in which these recipients may be located will vary from time to time, but may include Brazil, Canada, China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore, United Kingdom, United States and other countries where Herbalife has a presence or uses contractors. For a list of locations in which the Herbalife Australasia Group has a presence visit our website:
Please note that countries outside Australian may not have the same or similar privacy laws as Australia.
In all cases, by providing your Personal Information to us or using our services, you consent to the disclosure of your Personal Information outside Australia as set out in this Privacy Policy, and acknowledge and accept that:
- Herbalife Australasia will not be accountable under the Privacy Act for any breach of your privacy by the overseas recipient; and
- You will not be able to seek redress under the Privacy Act against Herbalife Australasia for any breach by an overseas recipient.
However, where practicable in the circumstances, Herbalife Australasia will take reasonable steps to ensure that overseas recipients use and disclose such Personal Information in a manner consistent with this Privacy Policy.
Herbalife Australasia's internet website
Our compliance with the Australian Privacy Principles also extends to when you transact business via our website. Our website terms and conditions and any privacy notices are posted on the website.
When you use a link from the Herbalife Australasia website to the websites of third parties, those websites are not subject to Herbalife Australasia's privacy standards and are outside our control. Those third parties are responsible for informing you of their own privacy policies. We are not responsible for the security or privacy of any information collected by third-party websites or other services.
For statistical purposes, we may collect information on website activity (such as the number of users who visit the web site, their country, the date and time of visits, the number of pages viewed, navigation patterns and the operating systems and browsers used to access the site). This information on its own does not identify an individual but it does provide us with statistics that we can use to analyse and improve our website.
When you use our website, we may send you a temporary cookie. A 'cookie' is a packet of information that allows the server to identify and interact more effectively with your computer that gives you a unique identification number. This identification number is sent each time you use our web site. Cookies do not identify individual users, although they do identify a user's browser type and your Internet Service Provider. You can configure your browser to accept all cookies, reject all cookies, or notify you when a cookie is sent. However, if you do not accept cookies, you may not be able to make full use of the Herbalife Australasia website. At the end of your interaction with our web site, the cookie no longer exists and it cannot be used for further identification or access to your computer.
Complaints and Contact Details
If you have any privacy concerns or questions or wish to make a complaint about the way your personal information is managed and used by us, or are concerned that Australian Privacy Principles or Privacy laws have been breached, please feel free to contact our Privacy Officer using the contact details below.
Herbalife takes seriously its compliance with privacy obligations. We will ensure that your complaint is registered with us, and may request that you provide the complaint to us in writing. The Privacy Officer will ensure that the complaint is referred to the right people within the organisation to investigate and respond to the complaint. We will make every effort to resolve your complaint internally within a reasonable time after the complaint is received. Any response or action will be notified to you as soon as practicable.
If we do not resolve your complaint to your satisfaction, you may contact the Privacy Commissioner by phone on 1300 363 992; in writing to GPO Box 5212 Sydney NSW 2001 or by email to email@example.com
The contact details of the Herbalife Australasia Privacy Officer are as follows:
Email address: email@example.com
Business address: The Privacy Officer
Herbalife Australasia Pty. Ltd
PO BOX 61, Marleston, South Australia, 5033
Telephone number: +61 2 5104 3355
Access and Corrections to your Personal Information
You are entitled to request access to or the correction of the Personal Information we may collect and/or hold about you.
We take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to ensure that your Personal Information is accurate, complete and up to date. This includes correcting Personal Information we identify as being incorrect or where you are able to demonstrate that the Personal Information we hold about you is incorrect.
If at any time, you wish to access your Personal Information or you find that the Personal Information we hold about you is inaccurate, incomplete, out-of-date, irrelevant or misleading, please advise your Herbalife Australasia contact or our Privacy Officer immediately using the contact details above.
Once we receive a request for access or correction, we will endeavour to respond to this request within a reasonable time after the request is received.
If you request access to or a correction of, the Personal Information we hold about you and we consider that we are not able to correct the Personal Information in the manner you have requested or an exception specified by law allows us to refuse the request, then we will inform you of the reason(s) for our refusal, unless it is unreasonable to provide these reasons..
Direct marketing
We may use your personal details, including your address, to provide you with newsletters and information about products, services, promotional offers or other events that may be of interest to you.
If at any time you do not wish to receive such marketing information, you have the option to ask us not to send you any further marketing or promotional material. You may do so by writing to your Herbalife Australasia contact or our Privacy Officer using the contact details above and informing us that you wish to opt out.
Further, if at any time you would like to unsubscribe from receiving any future marketing emails from us, you may do so by clicking the "unsubscribe" link at the bottom of each email.
Acceptance of this Privacy Policy
By providing your information to us and/or by using any of our services, you confirm your acceptance of the terms of this Privacy Policy and consent to the collection, use and disclosure of your Personal Information in the manner set out in this Privacy Policy. If you do not agree with the terms of this Privacy Policy, please do not provide us with your Personal information.
Changes to this Privacy Policy
Please note that this Privacy Policy may change from time to time. You may at any time request a current copy from your Herbalife Australasia business contact or access it from the Herbalife Australasia website (http://www.herbalife.com.au). We encourage you to review our Privacy Policy periodically for any changes.
Need more information?
If you have a query concerning how your Personal Information is collected and used or in relation to Herbalife Australasia's Privacy Policy, please contact our Privacy Officer using the contact details above. Additional information, including the Australian Privacy Principles, may be found on the Privacy Commissioner's website.
Last Updated: 20 November 2014


text:
Efficient tools for creative editing
Create high quality visual and editorial effects directly within the editing timeline. Generate slow motion and other time remapping effects with precise keyframe control and real time feedback. Add color correction, lighting and other effects, audio filters, and more with fast, flexible, built in tools. Edit footage from multicam shoots with ease and precision...
Comprehensive video format compatibility
Work with the formats you want. Edit all standard or high definition formats, from DV and HDV to HD and beyond (some formats may require additional hardware).
Broad range of supporting hardware and software for Mac and Windows
Choose from a wide range of Mac and Windows workstations and capture cards to build the editing system that meets your needs and budget. Enhance your system with additional plug ins, including many from Adobe After Effects software.
DVD and Blu ray Disc output with included Adobe Encore CS3
Create DVD and Blu ray Discs with Adobe Encore CS3 software, now included with Adobe Premiere Pro CS3. Work with the same Adobe Encore authoring interface and features used to create standard definition DVDs. Author once, deliver to three formats: automatically convert your high definition Blu ray Disc projects into standard definition DVDs and interactive versions for the web.
Superior integration with other Adobe applications
Make the leading still and motion graphics applications, Adobe Photoshop and After Effects, part of an efficient post production workflow. Import and animate Photoshop layers. Automatically create Photoshop files that match the current projectâ s frame size and aspect ratio. Drag and drop or copy and paste clips and timelines between Adobe Premiere Pro CS3 and After Effects CS3 Professional.
Direct to disk recording with included Adobe OnLocation CS3
Save tape and time by eliminating capture from your production process. Record SD and HD video directly to hard disk using Adobe OnLocationâ"¢ CS3 software, included with Adobe Premiere Pro CS3. Instantly review each shot without shuttling tape. Adobe OnLocation automatically detects and flags problems to provide the best results.
Professional on set monitoring with Adobe OnLocation CS3
Maximize camera image quality during shoots by using Adobe OnLocation CS3 to quickly calibrate your camera, check levels, and monitor your signal. Use simple tools that function like their hardware equivalents to get results quickly and easily. The virtual reference monitor, waveform monitor, vectorscope, and audio spectrum analyzer help you avoid problems and improve quality when shooting.
Delivery to the web and mobile devices
Make your video viewable on the delivery platforms of today and tomorrow. Export as SWF FLV files. Easily convert DVD projects complete with menus to SWF for web playback. Encode for delivery to cell phones and other mobile devices, and emulate playback on those devices to check playback quality.
Improved Editing Efficiency
Work faster with powerful and flexible editing tools. Play video with nested audio sequences in real time without rendering. Replace any clip in the timeline with a new clip while preserving the replaced clipâ s editing attributes and settings. Use shortcuts to switch between workspace panels and save time.
Accelerated client review and approval with Adobe Clip Notes
Expedite review cycles and avoid miscommunication with Adobe Clip Notes. Embed video into a PDF file, e mail the file to your client to review and add timecode specific comments, and then view comments mapped to the Adobe Premiere Pro CS3 timeline.
Download :


text:
My favorite is post 10. Looks like a Christmas present!
My favorite is post 10. Looks like a Christmas present!
Live fully. Laugh deeply. Love widely.
BMW MOA Ambassador Emeritus / FOM / Roving Forum Moderator/
Selected Friends of Wile E Coyote/ A Million 100 thousand BMW sMiles
Thanks, RM.
I agree. A trade-off might be to try the same at dusk or early evening. The additional light would allow for a much shorter exposure.
I could have experimented a bit more with depth of field. I wasnt concerned about that because the shots looked quite clear in the 1.5 monitor I knew that the lights would bloom with the longer exposure, but it can be a little too much when added to a short depth of field.
I did consider photoshopping the shot with the clock. I had bracketed the exposure, and picked that one because it showed the bike (the subject) must clearly. The shots which showed the face properly were much too dark to see the bike. By combining both shots, one could show the best of both, but I didnÔÇÖt like the shot enough to warrant 2+ hours of photoshop time, so I deleted the darker ones.
I rather liked the shallow depth of field--perhaps because it's more unusual in a night shot. The exposures are blown out though. That's the latitude of the image sensor. Because Alex exposed for the bike (and rightfully so) the much brighter lights on the tree/clock tend to be overexposed. One way to deal with this is fill flash (or if a longish exposure, a secondary light shining on the bike).
Your photos are generating discussion. That's always a good thing.
I enjoy the discussion... I've been learning quite a bit.
Additional lighting would certainly do the trick. Either natural light from earlier in the day, or some well placed reflected lights (harder to bring with you on the bike, and IÔÇÖd probably need a permit from the town )
Photoshop two exposures into one
+ =
(not my best photoshop image, but it shows the point...)
Fill flash
Yup, now that you mention it, it is the fact they are blown out more than simply out of focus. I noted that in the one above the slats and some of the lights were slightly out of focus but the exposure was such that I assumed it had some fill light and thus the lights are not blown out since it would have been shot with a faster shutter speed. Without them being blown out they are not so dominate in the photograph and are thus not so distracting. I should have considered that as I have just been doing some night shots that included strong lighting and have encountered that very aspect of night-time lighting trying to put together my series for the current challenge, which I am so far still struggling with! The third shot is still eluding me!


text:
Welcome to the SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #75
July 2, 2004
Read this issue online
Elsevier's new postprint archiving policy, continued
Last month I praised and thanked Elsevier for adopting its new policy permitting postprint archiving. I've been hearing about it ever since.
A quick look at my mail would suggest that OA proponents are dividing on the helpfulness and significance of the new policy. But a slower read suggests that there are fewer disagreements here than meet the eye, even though when all is said and clarified, there are still some disagreements. Let me try to untangle some of the controversies.
(1) Is Elsevier providing open access?
No. It's letting authors provide OA. (This is assuming that the new policy lets authors provide full OA, not just near-OA. More on this in section 8 below.) Elsevier is letting authors have OA if they want it, but authors have to take the next step. Elsevier is only providing the opportunity.
The bad news is that authors have been slow to seize existing archiving opportunities. The good news is that if authors do act, then they can have OA even if no one else lifts a finger.
For recent evidence that it's hard to persuade authors to deposit their work in institutional archives, even when the archives exist and the permissions have been cleared, see Andrea Foster's article in the June 25, 2004, Chronicle of Higher Education.
For more on the primacy of author-actions for achieving OA, see my article from last month's issue, abridged and edited for the Nature OA debate.
Because Elsevier didn't previously provide the same wide-open door for authors, we're a lot further along than we were before. But because authors need to be stirred to action, we still have a long way to go.
(2) Is it really necessary to get publisher permission for postprint archiving?
Yes and no. It depends on whether the author has already transferred copyright to the publisher. If so, then postprint archiving requires the publisher's permission; if not, then the author's own permission suffices.
The author never needs the publisher's permission if the author retains copyright (or the right of postprint archiving). The same is true if the author is willing to archive the preprint and the corrigenda (the differences between the preprint and the postprint) rather than the actual postprint. Thinking of the preprint+corrigenda method, I've often said myself that authors can achieve OA to their own writings without anyone else's permission or cooperation. So I'm not surprised that some readers were thinking of it when they said that authors don't need Elsevier's permission for archiving the postprints of their Elsevier articles. The rub is that preprint+corrigenda archiving is not the same as "postprint archiving", even if it's a close second. It's much less convenient for both authors and readers. We can disagree about how much true postprint archiving is worth, compared to the next best thing, but we should agree that it requires the consent of the copyright holder.
Should authors of research articles transfer copyright to publishers, making it necessary to get their publishers' permission to archive their own articles? No, but that's another story for another day.
If you are an Elsevier author, then you will have transferred copyright to Elsevier. If you want to provide OA to your postprint, and not just OA to the preprint+corrigenda, then you'll need Elsevier's permission. Starting now, you'll have it, and you'll know that you have it when you submit your work to an Elsevier journal.
Adding Elsevier's 1800 journals to those that already permitted postprint archiving brings the percentage of journals with this policy up to 83%. This is according to Stevan Harnad's journal-level supplement to Project SHERPA's publisher-level data on copyright and archiving policies.
(3) Why praise Elsevier for acting in self-interest?
I stand by my analysis last month that Elsevier gains from adopting its new policy. This is not a cynical interpretation; on the contrary, it acknowledges that OA really has benefits to offer even subscription-based publishers. Elsevier journals are now more attractive to authors than journals that don't preauthorize postprint archiving. Until all publishers adopt the same policy, every publisher who follows suit will reap the same advantage in attracting submissions.
When I said that Elsevier deserves our thanks, I didn't mean "thanks for making a sacrifice for our sakes". I meant "thanks for seeing that this was in your interest" or "thanks for finally acting on your interest" or "thanks for seeing that, in the tug of interests pro and con, this policy deserved a try" or simply "thanks for helping OA even if you're also helping yourself".
Let's not hold a double standard. It's in the interest of BioMed Central and the Public Library of Science to offer OA, yet we praise them for doing so. Elsevier took a step in the same direction and deserves a measure of praise. Let's not adopt the theory that OA has to be a sacrifice for the provider before we praise it.
Some of my correspondents overlooked the fact that my praise was highly qualified. Preauthorized postprint archiving is good for authors who want OA, and to that extent good for OA. It doesn't live up to the public definitions of "open access" (more below). It doesn't help libraries that want OA as relief from exorbitantly priced journals. It doesn't necessarily trump other reasons authors might have for shunning Elsevier journals.
One question I received in several forms was this: What if this admittedly welcome step helps Elsevier's economic health and academic reputation? Couldn't that be a net loss for the coalition of stakeholders working for OA? Yes, it could. But praising one policy is entirely compatible with criticizing other policies. Let's be vigilant and aggressive about Elsevier's pricing policies, bundling terms, and negotiating tactics. But at the same time, let's be accurate and honest about what helps OA.
(4) If postprint archiving becomes widespread, what's left to do?
I didn't address this last month, but I've seen disagreements swirling around the question. Let's suppose that most other publishers adopt a similar policy and that most authors seize the opportunity. What if 80-90% of authors start providing OA to their postprints? Will we have reached our goal?
It depends on your goal. If you want OA to the literature, then we'll essentially have reached the goal. We'll only have to tweak 80% into 100%.
If you want the kind of OA that helps libraries, not just the kind that helps authors and readers, then we either have to wait for a compliance rate very close to 100% or we have to shift our attention (which shouldn't have lagged) to OA journals. Widespread postprint archiving probably isn't enough to justify libraries in cancelling the expensive subscriptions that are breaking their budgets.
We don't know what widespread postprint archiving will do to subscription-based journals. It has not killed them in physics, but we don't know yet whether this kind of coexistence will transfer from physics to other fields. We do know that widespread archiving will not "kill journals" without qualification, because it will not kill OA journals. Hence we do not have to worry that the success of the OA vehicle that doesn't perform peer review (the OA archive) will kill the OA vehicle that does perform peer review (the OA journal). However, let's assume that widespread postprint archiving will harm some subscription-based journals and not others. In that case, we'll have a reason to continue our campaign for OA journals.
In short, we'll have at least two reasons to continue to work for OA journals even in a world of widespread OA archiving: first, to help libraries solve the pricing crisis, and second, to ensure the survival of peer-review providers. (BTW, this is compatible with the view that in the continuing evolution of scholarly communication peer review needn't be provided by "journals".)
(5) Is the new Elsevier policy a big step or a small one?
Compared to what? If we compare the new Elsevier policy to what authors need to provide OA to their own work, then it's a big step. It's just about everything authors need. (If there's an exception, see section 8 below.) If we compare it to what libraries need to cancel expensive journals, or what the entire range of stakeholders need to reform scholarly communication, then it's small.
If we compare it to Elsevier's previous policy, then it's somewhere in the middle. Previously Elsevier required case-by-case requests for postprint archiving, but it routinely granted them. If we put the accent on the elimination of the permission barrier, then the step is large. If we put the accent on the "yea rate", then it's smaller.
We may agree on all three of these judgments --that from these three standpoints the policy-change is large, small, and middling. But we might still disagree on the preferred standard of comparison because we disagree in our goals. Any step that is large for authors but small for libraries will bring out these differences.
(6) Is the glass half-empty or half-full?
Some OA proponents acknowledge that Elsevier's policy is helpful as far as it goes, but they want to focus on what this policy doesn't do, what remains to be done, or other Elsevier policies that are clearly harmful. OK. This is a matter of accent again. We can agree on all the facts.
I have no objection if someone wants to acknowledge the benefits of this step for authors and then focus attention and energy elsewhere, wants to question or dispute these benefits, or wants to disregard the whole set of issues. But I do object if someone acknowledges the benefits but wants us to deny them in the name of strategy. I have a very different picture of strategy. I think it's good strategy to show that we are just as willing to acknowledge positive steps as negative ones. It's good strategy to show that we welcome positive steps, and do not merely demand them as our right. It's good strategy to mean what we say and to say what we mean.
(7) Is the apparent helpfulness of the policy a deceptive appearance?
Some say "yes". Some who say "yes" seem to assert this line of reasoning: "This policy seems good but must really be bad, since it comes from a bad company." This an odd line to take in the face of a change of policy that seems to be for the good. Do you judge the policy by the company or the company by the policy?
Some assert a slightly different line of reasoning: "This company has been bad in the past and continues to be bad on other fronts. Therefore what looks like a good step might really be bad. We have to be careful here and look very closely." If the conclusion is that we should be suspicious, I can accept that. The question is whether we use suspicion as shorthand for dismissal or as a goad to look more closely. If we look more closely, then the question is what we find when we look.
I've corresponded with several readers who called for suspicion. But I haven't yet found anyone who is ready to say that the new policy is really harmful to OA and only appears to be helpful. If you think it is really harmful, I'd like to hear your thoughts, either privately or through our forum.
SPARC Open Access Forum
(8) Is this full OA or just an approximation?
Elsevier allows deposit in some OA archives but not in others, for example, in your institutional repository but not in a disciplinary archive. Yet one part of every public definition of OA is the freedom to make and distribute copies. Can readers of a properly archived copy of an Elsevier postprint make a copy and deposit it where Elsevier doesn't want it to go? Can readers make copies at all?
I pointed out these problems in my article last month and don't disagree with anyone who wants to withhold the label of "open access" from this policy. At least the policy permits postprint archiving. While I want to save the term "open access" from dilution, I also want to acknowledge forward steps when they occur, even if they stop short of full OA (which for me is the BOAI definition).
In any case, any final decision about whether Elsevier's policy permits full OA depends on how Elsevier clarifies the policy. For this, see the next section.
(9) How should we interpret the new policy? What does it actually permit?
Elsevier still hasn't posted an official version of the new policy. When it does, I hope it will clarify the following points.
* Karen Hunter's May 27 email on the new policy said that authors could post the final version of the text in a "Word or Tex file, not a PDF or HTML downloaded from ScienceDirect". Everyone understands that authors won't be allowed to post the Elsevier-published PDF or HTML. But I've seen some listserv postings and journalists say that authors will be restricted to Word or Tex files. My reading is that authors could use any format, even PDF or HTML, provided they don't use copies of Elsevier's own files. Which reading is right?
* Elsevier's June 3 press release said that the author's archived postprint may not be "used for commercial purposes -- such as systematic distribution...." What does this mean? It's clear enough that authors cannot sell access to their postprints (not that they would want to) and that other publishers may not sell access to copies of the postprints. But depositing the postprint in an institutional repository, which the policy specifically allows, is already a kind of "systematic distribution". What kind of systematic distribution is the policy trying to disallow?
Note that if the criterion here is so vague that authors can't apply it themselves, then they'll have to check with Elsevier case by case, negating the benefit of permitting postprint archiving in advance.
* The same press release said that the archived postprints could not be "used for commercial purposes -- such as...creating links for commercial customers to articles." What does this mean? One journalist has said that it bars all links to the archived postprint. Another says it only bars links from "centralized databases". A third says it only bars links from commercial sources. If the policy trying to bar some kinds of links, then what kinds exactly? Does Elsevier want to bar authors from linking to their own postprints (say) from their home pages or listserv messages? Does it want to bar people beyond the author's control from linking to the author's copy of the postprint? Does it want to bar search engines from crawling archives and offering links on their hit pages?
* Elsevier's "Practical Guide" to how authors may use their Elsevier articles (undated except as 2004) says that authors may put their postprints "on pre-print servers and the authors' personal or institutional Web sites." By including pre-print servers, this version of the policy embraces archives like arXiv and CogPrints, not just institutional repositories. This would be a welcome addition, but will it make the next cut? It seems inconsistent with the Karen Hunter email, which limited the permission to institutional repositories and personal web sites.
* Some have read the Elsevier language about the "final version of the text" as excluding charts, images, and other non-textual elements. I read it to include everything in the final edition of the article, and merely to exclude the Elsevier-produced file with its special look and feel. Which reading is correct?
My praise for the new policy rests on some guesswork about how these questions will be resolved. If I misunderstood the policy, or if it's clarified in the wrong direction, I promise to curb my enthusiasm.
Elsevier permits postprint archiving, my article from SOAN for 6/2/04
Elsevier's page on rights retained by authors
Not yet updated to reflect the new policy. Checked July 2, 2004.
Elsevier's page on electronic preprints
Not yet updated to reflect the new policy. Checked July 2, 2004.
Karen Hunter's May 27 email first disclosing the new policy
Elsevier's June 3 press release on the new policy
Elsevier's document, Ways to Use Journal Articles Published by Elsevier: A Practical Guide (2004)
See esp. Section 2 on "how authors can reuse their own articles"
* Postscript. One point I made last month was that Elsevier doesn't have, and needn't have, the same position on OA archiving that it has on OA journals. While Elsevier was receiving wide press coverage for its new support for OA archiving, CEO Crispin Davis reiterated the company's position on OA journals for the company's in-house newsletter. His critique was summarized by Richard Wray in the June 30 issue of The Guardian.
Richard Wray, Open access jeopardises academic publishers, Reed chief warns, The Guardian, June 30, 2004.
("The rise of open access publishing of scientific research could jeopardise the entire academic publishing industry, according to the chief executive of Reed Elsevier....Sir Crispin Davis warned that [OA journals] 'could jeopardise the stable, scalable and affordable system of publishing that currently exists.' ")
It's no contradiction for Elsevier to permit OA archiving and oppose OA journals, just as OA archiving might take off first in physics and OA journals take off first in biomedicine. While archives and journals can both provide genuine OA, they offer different sets of benefits that appeal to different constituencies in different ways. Sometimes this is a disadvantage: the success of OA archiving in physics is slow to translate to other disciplines. But sometimes it's an advantage: Elsevier's opposition to OA journals doesn't stop it from supporting OA archiving.
The problem is not inconsistency, but the deplorably weak arguments Elsevier uses to attack OA journals. The best compendium of these arguments, and the best answers to them, is by BMC.
However, the Davis argument summarized by Wray on June 30 contains a point of interest that may be new in Elsevier's rhetoric. It is starting to acknowledge that one of Elsevier's objections to OA journals is based on the company's economic interest and survival. This is credible. It's only when Elsevier praises its own service as "stable, scalable, and affordable", or pretends to represent the interests of science, that its arguments conspicuously miss the target. Could it be that Elsevier is starting to make the argument that its own survival as a company is in the interest of science? If so, then it would be easy to answer. Certain services, like peer review, are indispensable, but no particular publisher is indispensable. We don't need Elsevier for science any more than we need Disney for entertainment or Microsoft for software.
The differences between OA archiving and OA journals mean that Elsevier's helpful new policy on the former needn't moderate any of its arguments against the latter. But it would be a shame if the good will that Elsevier created or could create with its archiving policy were squandered through overblown denunciations of OA journals that are daily proving their viability, quality, and impact.
No more "best of the blog"
I'm trying something new with this issue. Instead of two long sections summarizing the OA-related news and bibliography from the previous month, I'm writing one section that is much more selective.
There were several problems with the old way of doing things. The "best of the blog" sections --new developments and new bibliography-- were so long that few people read them through. The sections did succeed in including just about everything OA-related from the previous month, but they did little to isolate or highlight the more important developments. Finally, they added little to the blog archives, which are online, open to all, organized chronologically, browseable and searchable.
My new experiment is to identify about five developments from the previous month and give them special attention. In some months I'll pick more and in others I'll pick fewer. (This month I've picked six.) For each of the developments, I'll write a few sentences and link to a good number of pertinent examples, news stories, or related sites. As before, I'll link both to original sources and to the blog postings about them, so that you can see both.
I haven't forgotten that in the February 2004 issue I conducted a reader survey about the length of SOAN. The result was that 100% of those responding urged me to cut nothing. When I reported these results in March, I explained that, despite the support for SOAN's comprehensiveness, "I may have to shorten it anyway". The time has come to try a new approach, partly to shorten each issue and partly to give a more useful appraisal of recent OA-related news.
It's an experiment and I welcome your feedback. If it's not serving you well, then I can make further changes or even switch back to the original format.
For the first installment, see the next section.
Major OA developments in June 2004
This is a selection of open-access developments since the last issue of the newsletter, taken from the Open Access News blog, which I write with other contributors and update daily. I give both the item URL and blog posting URL so that you can read the original story as well as what I or another blog contributor had to say about it. For other developments, the blog archive is browseable and searchable.
Here are the major stories from June:* Elsevier allows postprint archiving.
* The DOAJ offers article-level searching.
* The European Commission launched a study of the journal publishing system for European research.
* There is a growing call for OA to drug-trial data.
* Google and Yahoo continue to index scholarly literature wherever it may be found.
* Southampton research is confirming that OA increases impact.
* Elsevier allows postprint archiving. This story broke in May, and I wrote about it in the June issue of SOAN. But it continued to attract attention from researchers, libraries, and the press. For my thoughts on some of the responses, see the lead story above. Here are the major news stories about it from the last month:
Richard Wray, Reed allows academics free web access, The Guardian, June 3, 2004.
Elsevier press release, June 3
Lucy Sherriff, Reed says yes to science on the Web, The Register, June 3, 2004.
Saeed Shah, Reed Elsevier gives in on free research, Independent, June 4, 2004.
Robin Peek, Elsevier Allows Open Access Self-Archiving, Information Today, June 7, 2004.
Mark Chillingworth, Elsevier allows article publishing on personal and institutional sites, Information World Review, June 8, 2004.
Beyond capitalism? An unsigned editorial in The Economist, June 10, 2004
Anon., Elsevier Articles Can Be Posted On Personal/Institutional Sites, Library Journal, June 25, 2004.
Beyond Elsevier, a major journal and a major publisher also took the step of preauthorizing postprint archiving, at least in some circumstances. These two decisions were not related to the Elsevier decision, although I expect to see some Elsevier competitors match Elsevier's new policy very soon. If they don't, authors who care about OA and who can't find an OA journal in their research niche will favor Elsevier over publishers that do not allow postprint archiving.
The California Law Review now allows postprint archiving. It's one of the first law reviews to do so. Interestingly, it continues to hold the Ingelfinger rule (or to block preprint archiving). Unlike Elsevier, which lets authors put up the final version of the text as long as it isn't Elsevier's own PDF, the CLR insists that the OA edition be its own PDF.
The California Law Review changed its postprint archiving policy in response to a November 2003 open letter from Dan Hunter of the Wharton School.
The Johns Hopkins University Press now allows postprint archiving as well. The OA postprint can appear on the author's personal or departmental web site. It may only appear in the institutional repository if that repository doesn't "directly compete" with JHUP or Project Muse. The distinction between personal, departmental, and institutional sites is tenuous at best. JH presumably wants to judge for itself whether an institutional repository "directly competes" with JH, requiring authors to return to case-by-case requests for institutional archiving and negating the benefit of advanced permission.
* The DOAJ offers article-level searching.
Until now the DOAJ only allowed searching on journal titles. Now it supports full-text searching on the article level for participating journals. Not all DOAJ-listed journals participate yet, but the number grows every day.
This is the first time that we've been able to search open-access journals at the article level, across multiple publishers, and limit our searches to open-access journals. Previously we've been able to search the OA journals of a single publisher, search across publishers but without limiting ourselves to OA journals, and search across OA repositories rather than OA journals.
All the articles in DOAJ-indexed journals are already open-access and already searchable. But making them searchable from the same box, and omitting all other content, creates efficiencies that will benefit and attract researchers. This enhances their visibility of these articles in two ways --by making them easier to find and by bringing more researchers to a place where they are to be found.
DOAJ press release, June 3, 2004.
Stephen Pincock, Tool allows open-access search, The Scientist, June 7, 2004.
In the Stephen Pincock article (above) I was quoted as saying that the DOAJ article-level searching is useful in part for making OA articles even more visible than they were before. I said that OA was "closer to the minimum than the maximum of what we should expect in the digital age." Thinking that this might puzzle or alarm some readers, I wrote an elaboration for SOAF.
Katie Mantell, Finding open access articles becomes easier, SciDev.Net, June 10, 2004.
Alexei Koudinov, editor of the OA journal, Neurobiology of Lipids (NoL), has shown the flexibility of the new DOAJ service by adding a DOAJ article-level search box to the NoL web site. It defaults to searching NoL but also enables users to search any other OA journal participating in the DOAJ article-level search program.
The DOAJ news tended to overshadow a very closely related development. Eric Lease Morgan wrote his own article-level search engine for DOAJ-indexed journals. He calls it DOAJI Search ("DOAJI" is for "DOAJ Index"). Launched in May, it was named "nice web site" of the month by the June issue of Internet Resources Newsletter.
DOAJI Search
DOAJI Search named nice web site of the month by the June issue of Internet Resources Newsletter. http://www.hw.ac.uk/libwww/irn/irn117/irn117.html#nice
I see no problem with multiple search engines indexing the same body of content. On the contrary. It serves users better by introducing competition, by increasing the odds that one of them will be around when you need it, and perhaps by differentiating and offering unique services to users with different needs.
* The European Commission launched a study of the journal publishing system for European research.
Like the inquiry launched by the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee earlier in the year, the European inquiry focuses on dysfunctions in the journal publishing system. OA comes up only secondarily as one among many possible solutions. But this is a very good way to focus the inquiry. Researchers may want OA primarily to increase their impact as authors and to accelerate their research as readers. But universities, libraries, funding agencies, and governments want it for other reasons, in part to solve the journal pricing crisis, in part to increase the return on their investment in research, and in part to provide public access to publicly-funded research.
Will the EC inquiry take oral and written testimony, as the UK inquiry did? Will it be more susceptible to lobbying by the gigantic European publishers? Will it increase pressure on other governments to launch their own inquiries?
Right now the majority of science journals are published by European companies, but the majority of science articles are written by U.S. scientists. Will the inquiry transcend regional issues and see that opening up access to scientific literature has worldwide benefits? Or if it adds a regional thread to the inquiry, will it nevertheless see benefits to non-European scientists as a net advantage of OA?
EC press release, June 15, 2004
Richard Wray, EC inquiry puts pressure on Reed, The Guardian, June 18, 2004.
Anon., Commission launches review Europe's scientific publications system, Cordis News, June 16, 2004.
On June 17, Credit Suisse First Boston released a report (not online) analyzing the effect of the new European inquiry on Reed Elsevier. From Elsevier's point of view, the good news is that the inquiry is part of a larger plan to double EU spending on scientific research (from 5 to 10 billion Euros/year), which will result in many more research articles. Increasing the number of articles published is a venerable justification for journal price increases. The bad news is that the EU already seems to accept that libraries face a pricing crisis, that academics face an access crisis, and that OA is part of the solution. If so, this could endanger Elsevier's 35% profit margins on STM journals. While the EU may not have the power to change the structure of journal publishing in the member countries, the reports from the UK and EU inquiries may stimulate policy changes in the way research is funded in the US, which comprises more than 50% of the STM journal market.
In a related development, the June 16 draft text of the EU constitution calls for "a European research area in which researchers, scientific knowledge and technology circulate freely".
* There is a growing call for OA to drug-trial data.
The basic idea is to protect public health by making negative results as easy to find as positive results. Company advertising and peer-reviewed journals both currently emphasize the positive, often to the detriment of patients. The idea of an OA data registry has been endorsed by the American Medical Association and by two major drug companies, Merck and GlaxoSmithKline.
This is a winner. The medical associations, the patient-advocacy groups, and the drug companies are championing one of our causes. While they build industry support for the OA data registry, they are building support for the principle that public health requires public access to medical research.
Barry Meier, Medicine's Data Gap: Selective Disclosure; Two Studies, Two Results, And a Debate Over a Drug, New York Times, June 3, 2004.
Barry Meier, Medical Journals Weigh Plan for Full Drug-Trial Disclosure, New York Times, June 15, 2004.
Barry Meier, A.M.A. Urges Disclosure on Drug Trials, New York Times, June 16, 2004.
Barry Meier, Merck Backs U.S. Database to Track Drug Trials, New York Times, June 18, 2004
GlaxoSmithKline has agreed to provide open access to its drug trial data.
Laura Landro, How to find the latest results of clinical trials, San Francisco Chronicle, June 17, 2004. (Originally in the Wall Street Journal.)
Brian Gorman, Clinical Trials Controversy, Fool.com, June 21, 2004.
Rick Whiting, Drugmakers Respond To Calls For Public Database Of Trials, Information Week, June 25, 2004.
Victoria Stagg Elliott, Drug controversies prompt call for clinical trial registry, American Medical News, July 5, 2004.
* Google and Yahoo continue to index scholarly literature wherever it may be found.
This too is an older story, but it continued to make news in June. Mainstream (non-academic), for-profit search engines see the need to index scholarly literature. It is very useful content, it attracts a new class of users, and it thereby increases traffic and advertising profits. Google and Yahoo lead the field in seizing this opportunity. They are striking deals to index scholarly content whether it's OA or priced, whether it's OAI-complaint or not, and whether it's in the deep internet or on the surface. When they index priced literature, they offer free full-text searching (or they try). When a priced article appears among the search returns, non-subscribers cannot click through to full-text, though they can often click through to a pay-per-view form. In these ways, Google and Yahoo are improving the visibility of both OA and priced scholarly literature.
Robin Peek, Googling DSpace, Information Today, June 2004 (not online).
P�ter Jasc� reviews the CrossRef Search Pilot in his column, P�ter's Digital Reference Shelf, Thomson Gale, June 2004.
Also see Jasc�'s supplement to this review, presenting "some findings of [his] research about the significant differences between searching the publishers' archives through their native search engines and through Google's special index".
Paula Hane, The Latest on Factiva, Ingenta, Google, and More, Information Today, June 3, 2004.
Barbara Quint, Ingenta Beta Tests New Interface, Information Today, June 7, 2004.
(PS: All ingenta journals will participate in Google indexing except those that opt out. Barbara Quint reports that the only ones to opt out are the eight journals from E. Schweizerbart Science Publishers. Can anyone explain Schweizerbart's thinking?)
Anon., Yahoo's collaboration with OAIster, Research Information, June 2004.
Anon., Google's collaboration with CrossRef, Research Information, June 2004.
Dave Gershman, U-M [University of Michigan] wises up to Google, Yahoo, Mlive.com, June 20, 2004.
Katie Hafner, Old Search Engine, the Library, Tries to Fit Into a Google World, New York Times, June 21, 2004.
* Southampton research is confirming that OA increases impact.
Tim Brody is a doctoral student at Southampton University who has been doing some very exciting research on the impact of OA articles, under the guidance of his research supervisors Les Carr and Stevan Harnad. As soon as the results started to come clear, Les, Stevan and others urged Tim to get them ready for publication. Tim presented a version of the results orally in Lund, Sweden, in late April, and Stevan linked to a PPT slide summarizing them in his May 17 article for the Nature OA debate. But the fuller, published versions didn't arrive until June.
While ISI has compared the citation impact of articles in select OA journals with articles in select non-OA journals, Harnad and Brody's study in D-Lib compared the citation impact of articles in non-OA journals that had been self-archived by their authors with the citation impact of articles from the same journals that had not been self-archived. The data for physics are already analyzed and show that the OA-archived articles are cited 2.5 to 5.5 times more often than the non-archived articles published in the same journals in the same year. These results for physics are only part of a larger study across all the disciplines using a 10-year sample of 14 million articles. The results for other disciplines will be reported as they become available.
This is important work. It's the first major study since the famous Lawrence paper documenting the proposition that OA increases impact. It's also the first to go beyond Lawrence in scope and method in order to answer doubts raised about his thesis. By confirming that OA increases impact, it gives authors the best of reasons to provide OA to their own work.
Stevan Harnad and Tim Brody, Comparing the Impact of Open Access (OA) vs. Non-OA Articles in the Same Journals, D-Lib Magazine, June 2004.
Sara Kjellberg, What is Digitometrics? An interview with Tim Brody, ScieCom Info, June 7, 2004.
Stevan Harnad and eight co-authors, The green and the gold roads to Open Access, Nature, May 17, 2004.
Coming up later this month
Here are some important OA-related events coming up in July.
* July 1, 2004, is the deadline for publicly-funded libraries to have filters. The deadline was postponed by a court for one year from the original deadline. This is the start of the enforcement of the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA).
Here's how two libraries prepared for compliance.
CIPA, which takes effect on July 1, must be distinguished from COPA (Child Online Protection Act), which the Supreme Court ruled probably unconstitutional on June 29, upholding an injunction on its enforcement and sending it back to a lower court for a full trial.
* July 12, 2004, INASP with 15 allies like BIREME, BMJ, and the WHO, will launch the "Health Information Review, 1995-2015: Access to Health Information".
The review will be based in part on the WHO draft World Report on Knowledge for Better Health
For more details, see the INASP page on the review.
Also see the program for the launch meeting in London, "Can we achieve 'Health Information for All by 2015'?"
* In mid-July 2004, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee is expected to issue the report on its recent inquiry into journal prices and availability.
* Notable conferences this month
How to Evaluate Journals as Potential Open Access Candidates (sponsored by ALPSP)
London, July 1-2, 2004
The future of scholarship in the digital age; JISC/CNI meeting 2004 (topics include instutional repositories)
Brighton, July 8-9, 2004
Health Information Forum: Launch of Global Review on Access to Health Information
London, July 12, 2004
Museums, Libraries, and Archives: Summer Institute for Knowledge Sharing
Boston, July 12-15, 2004
Pan-European Portals Conference 2004
Nottingham, July 18-20, 2004
2004 E.Journal Summit (sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences and PNAS) (by invitation only) (open access is among the topics)
[no web site yet]
Washington, D.C., July 20, 2004
The Virtual Chase: In Hot Pursuit of Electronic Solutions (WiLSWorld Conference 2004) (OA is among the topics)
Madison, July 27-28, 2004
INDEST-NCSI Training Workshop on Institutional Repositories
Bangalore, July 27-29, 2004
* Other OA-related conferences
In the June issue, I attributed a CIBER report to ALPSP. I actually cited, or mis-cited, the report twice in that issue, once in the article on Elsevier's postprint archiving policy and once in the article on the primacy of authors. Here's the correct citation:
Ian Rowlands, Dave Nicholas, and Paul Huntingdon, "Scholarly Communication in the Digital Environment: What Do Authors Want? Findings of an international survey of author opinion: project report," CIBER, March 18, 2004.
CIBER stands for Centre for Information Behaviour and the Evaluation of Research.
* I've added 18 new conferences to the conference page since the last issue. In the next few days I'll delete the second asterisk marking them and the new entries will blend into the rest of the collection.
* The Earlham server that hosts the Open Access News blog and the archive of this newsletter was down several times during the past month. I apologize for the interruptions of service. If you visited any of my OA-related pages and got an error message, please come back! The pages are still online and still at their old addresses.
* I've had more reader complaints about Bloglet, the service that generates email versions of the postings to the Open Access News blog. I don't run Bloglet and I would use another blog-to-email service if I could find one. I recommend that readers having trouble with the Bloglet service read the blog on the web or through the blog's RSS feed.
Open Access News blog, web edition
RSS feed for the OAN blog
If you're frustrated with Bloglet but intimidated by RSS, here's a good introduction to RSS.
* I put my "Open Access Overview" online on June 21. I've been concerned that our recent progress has brought the concept of OA to the attention of many new people, most of whom have no place to turn for a brief, accurate introduction. Either they find mere lists of links or essay-length analyses that don't start at the beginning. Now that the overview is online I'll keep revising it and adding useful links. I've also linked to it from the blog sidebar to make it easy to find. I welcome your comments and suggestions.
Please don't use my Guide to the Open Access Movement to introduce the concept of OA to newcomers. It's much too long. Besides, it's very much out of date and I don't anticipate getting the time to update it. Even if I could, it is intended to be more of an encyclopedia than a primer.
This is the SPARC Open Access Newsletter (ISSN 1546-7821), written by Peter Suber and published by SPARC. The views I express in this newsletter are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of SPARC.
To unsubscribe, send any message to <email@example.com>.
Please feel free to forward any issue of the newsletter to interested colleagues. If you are reading a forwarded copy of this issue, see the instructions for subscribing at either of the first two sites below.
SPARC home page for the Open Access Newsletter and Open Access Forum
Peter Suber's page of related information, including the newsletter editorial position
Newsletter, archived back issues
Forum, archived postings
Conferences Related to the Open Access Movement
Timeline of the Open Access Movement
Open Access Overview
Sources for the newsletter and blog
Open Access News blog
Peter Suber
SOAN is an open-access publication under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. Users may freely copy, distribute, and display its contents, but must give credit to the author. To read the full license, visit
Return to the Newsletter archive


text:
Lisa Edelstein and Callie Throne have landed guest-starring roles on CBS' Sherlock Holmes adaptation Elementary, TVGuide.com has confirmed.
As first reported by TV Line , the House alum will play Heather Vanowen, the CEO of a high-end PR consulting firm who crosses paths with Holmes (Jonny Lee Miller) after her company was apparently the target of a bombing.
How Elementary won't go there with Sherlock and Watson
Meanwhile, Necessary Roughness star Thorne will play Terry D'Amico, the former partner of Captain Gregson (Aidan Quinn) who may have helped him imprison the wrong man years ago. TVLine.com first reported Thorne's casting as well.
Elementary debuted last week to 13.2 million viewers and a 3.1 in the adults-18-to-49 demographic, winning the 10 p.m. hour in both measures.
Elementary airs Thursdays at 10/9c on CBS.


text:
This question may qualify as a duplicate or be a candidate for closure so please notify and I am happy to delete it.
There is a plethora of information on networking in c++. Similar questions aimed where I am headed with this question are Is there a beginner's book for C++ socket programming? and Networking with C++ for starters.
I am struggling to filter this information and determine a specific focus. What should I be doing? I program c++ on Windows so am I a candidate for only learning winsock? If not, then what should I learn and focus on? If a library, such as boost::asio, why? I have created a client/server application in Java but have never done so in c++.
My end-goal from the beginning of this question is to determine what I should learn as someone new to networking in c++ and wanting to get on the right path from the beginning. I desire the current and best programming practice in use by professional programmers today.
If the questions above have suitable answers to draw draw, please point them out or append new ones.


text:
SEABROOK — Aaron Desjardins, the Epping man accused of murdering his ex-wife, Amanda Warf, was ordered held without bail at his arraignment Wednesday.
Aaron Desjardins exits a Seabrook courtroom after being arraigned on a first-degree murder charge on Wednesday, March 13. Desjardins, of Epping, is accused of killing his ex-wife. (Ryan McBride/Democrat staff photo)
SEABROOK — Aaron Desjardins, the Epping man accused of murdering his ex-wife, Amanda Warf, was ordered held without bail at his arraignment Wednesday.
Desjardins did not speak during a hearing that lasted about five minutes in Seabrook Circuit Court, nor did he enter a plea. He was arraigned on a single first-degree murder charge in connection with Warf's death shortly after 1 p.m.
Warf's body was found inside an abandoned concrete plant in Exeter on Thursday, March 7. Firefighters found her remains on the second floor of the building after it caught fire in the morning.
An autopsy conducted last week revealed Warf died from "incised wounds" to her neck, according to the state's chief medical examiner, who has ruled the death a homicide.
Senior Assistant Attorney General Susan Morrell, the prosecutor overseeing the homicide investigation, said Wednesday it would be fair to characterize the fatal wound as a "horizontal cut" across Warf's neck.
Desjardins appeared to emerge as an early suspect. Homicide investigators searched his home Sunday evening and again on Monday. Authorities from the state fire marshal's office were also present at the scene.
In an interview with Foster's Sunday, Desjardins claimed he had nothing to do with his ex-wife's murder. He was then arrested on Tuesday.
Amanda Warf's mother has been named to the list of potential witnesses in the case, Morrell said during Wednesday's hearing. Desjardins has been ordered to have no contact with her as a result. His current wife, Sarah, and his sister have also been named as potential witnesses.
Desjardins is next scheduled to appear in court in Brentwood for a probable cause hearing on March 22 at 10 a.m.


text:
Subj: Re: FW: NAMES OF VEHICLES
Date: Thursday, July 4, 2002 12:11:11 AM
From: Peter Laird
To: Gary Richardson
For the Turtle Phone -- how about the "Shell Cell"?
Subj: Splinter turnaround roughs
Date: Thursday, July 4, 2002 12:16:01 AM
From: Peter Laird
To: Lloyd Goldfine
The Splinter turnaround roughs look pretty good except for one big mistake which actually made me chuckle when I saw it -- the tail coming through the hole in the back of the robe! Splinter's tail should really come out from under the bottom edge of his robe in the back.
Subj: TMNT Episode 7 revised premise and Mouser sketch
Date: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 2:34:23 AM
From: Peter Laird
To: Lloyd Goldfine
I like the revised Mouser sketch more... I think it's pretty close. I'd like to see what it look like from the rear.
The revised premise for Episode 7 -- "The Way of Invisibility" -- is much better but still not quite there. Here are some comments...
1.) I'm glad the "stealing turtles from pet shops as bait" thing is gone, but I'm not totally convinced about the new graffiti angle. Although I think it would be fun to play with that "Raph and Casey egg each other on" thing, the upshot of it is the same as if they had just gone up aboveground looking for some Purple Dragon heads to bash -- they get in a fight, the Purple Dragons delay them until the Foot Tech Ninjas can be called, and they take out Raph and Casey. In which case, I wonder if we even need the whole "bait" angle. I think I'm still bothered by the idea that our heroes -- even goofballs like Raph and Casey -- could take graffiti insults so seriously that they would deliberately walk into an obvious trap as the result of such an obvious and juvenile provocation.
Actually, just as I was typing that, I wondered if it would work if we kept the graffiti angle but tweaked it a bit -- instead of Raph and Casey taking it so seriously, they see it as a stupid, pathetic attempt to get their goat. But Casey gets the idea into his head that to show whoever did it how stupid they think it is, they should "tag" the Purple Dragons' graffiti with their own counter-graffiti, and he goads Raph, who's at first reluctant to go against Splinter's admonitions. Eventually Raph can't take Casey's taunting anymore, and the two of them go up, find an example of the insulting turtle graffiti, and start spraypainting over or near it things like, I don't know, Purple Dragons in tutus or something. THAT'S when the fight as described in this premise could start.
2.) I think we need to establish -- somehow -- that even a crushed Shell Phone can still be used as a source for a tracking signal. It might also help to have a line for Raph which helps to explain why he scoops up the broken Shell Phone and takes it with him.
3.) As is, I don't think this premise makes it clear enough that the reason Don couldn't track Raph's Shell Phone signal is (as we discussed on the phone) because the place he's being held is somehow shielded or constructed in such a way that it blocks the Shell Phone tracking signals. Also, in this premise it says Don can track Raph with a device "... he's cobbled together." That gave me the impression that it's something he just whipped up on the spot, which I think is not right -- he should have made this gizmo some time ago, for this very purpose.
There is also a bit that didn't feel right to me, where Casey shows Don a piece of circuitry from a Foot guy and Don "... gets to work trying to calibrate a scanner to it's frequency". (Huh?) I thought that Casey would just describe what happened and Don would figure out that the Foot are using some kind of cloaking technology, and that the best way to counter that would probably be the heat sensor goggles.
And i was wondering if it might be more fun if when Raph escapes, he doesn't discover that he's on a grungy barge -- but instead some kind of super fancy passenger yacht. We might get some laughs from the reactions of some of the society swells who are partying on this yacht, and it might even be fun to have Saki there in a cool tuxedo (with Japanese design hints) and a couple of hot babes on his arms... and looking like that Raph would pay him no mind, but we could have a great LOOK moment as Saki watches Raph escape... a wicked evil smile playing across his features.
4.) I think it's a bit much that (even with the advantage of Don's heat sensor goggles) the turtles defeat the Tech Ninjas "... with almost comic ease." This should be more of a struggle for them. And I was wondering if it might be cool to emphasize the level of ninja "vanishing" skill that the turtles have -- that while their heat sensor goggles counter the cloaking devices of the Foot Tech Ninjas, their own non-techy ninja skills of concealment, blending in, and disappearing allow them to finally defeat the Tech Ninjas.
5.) I'm unclear how the Foot Tech Ninjas get "... washed away into the river..." Is this the result of one of those regular raging sewer floods?
Talk with you soon!
Subj: new designs
Date: Thursday, July 11, 2002 1:21:11 AM
From: Peter Laird
To: Lloyd Goldfine
I got a bunch of figure designs today, and have a few comments.
1.) Donatello's bo staff should have one set of leather wraps only in the middle of the staff, not two sets (on either end).
2.) The diagonal belt across Leonardo's chest should be flipped, so that instead of running from left waist to right shoulder, it goes from left shoulder to right waist. If we need some kind of release point, I think we can come up with something that looks better. Also, I'm not crazy about the big metal ring in the center of Leo's chest -- I'd lose it. And I'd like to get the leather wrap detail in the scabbards if possible.
3.) Depending on the needs of the scene or story, I think it's fine if we allow Mike and Raph to stick their respective weapons in their belts behind their backs, though for most purposes having the weapons up front will serve us better to identify those two turtles.
That's all for now.
P.S. I got a note from Sarah at 4Kids about a faxing problem (it was an empty cartridge in my machine) with the rough designs for the Purple Dragon Gang from Episode 1, which I do not have as of this writing. But I suppose I'll get them tomorrow.
Subj: recent designs comments
Date: Friday, July 12, 2002 12:39:35 AM
From: Peter Laird
To: Lloyd Goldfine
I got a bunch of faxes of designs today and thought I'd give you a few comments.
1.) Don's staff looks much better.
2.) I like the fact that Leo's cross-chest scabbard belt doesn't have the big metal ring in front, but it's still crossing his chest in the wrong direction. Also, my copy of the revised design still has a comment about "sword harness is a single strap connected to a steel ring in front" -- is it safe to assume that's just a leftover from the previous iteration which should have been erased?
3.) I don't know why this didn't pop out at me earlier, but it did tonight -- looking at the drawings of Saki and the Shredder, they look like they are two different people: One muscular and broad (Shredder) and one significantly less so (Saki). The difference isn't SO radical that we can't make it work in the show, and I'm not suggesting that we redraw either design. However, it did make me wonder -- should we have them actually BE two different (exoskeleton) bodies? Why couldn't our little evil Saki Utrom have both a Saki AND a Shredder body? If we did allow this, I could see it making for some cool eerie scenes -- for example, a big battle between the Shredder and the Turtles ends with him getting his head (or arm, or leg, or whatever) cut off... yet later, his Foot minions see him back in the Foot HQ as Saki -- COMPLETELY UNHARMED! Just a thought.
I haven't read the script for episode 5 yet... hope to do that tomorrow.


text:
One piece pussy/Ashlynn Taylor
JMac and Tony were out and about looking for chicks and food. Whichever came first and lucky for us we know which one we wanted. The boys came across Ashlynn. A Venezuelan-Dominican petite hottie just chilling out. She had just got out of work and sitting around. This was the time to strike and they knew it. Money talks and thats exactly what Ashlynn had in mind. It didnt take too long after the guys flashed some dollars in her face and she was down to have a good ol' time!


text:
This is a short synopsis of my wanderings during the Sea otter 2013 festival, and captures some products that I found interesting, including the WTB Vigilante tire, White Brothers Brototype fork, Bar Fly 2.0 computer mount, Hydrapak Bishop pack, KS LEV Carbon dropper post, Focus Raven 27.5″ bike, QAK Thump headphones and O-Tus speakers.
WTB Vigilante
The new WTB Vigilante is a 2.3″ Enduro tire, that comes in 26″, 650B and 29″ sizes. The All Mountain beef Meister uses an aggressive open block tread design, is TCS (Tubeless Compatible System), and utilizes their Dual DNA compound. It has a special nylon sidewall treatment for extra protection, and weighs around 940 grams and will start at $64.95. The combination of the tough, thick and durable sidewalls and softer tread, should make for an excellent tire for Enduro racing and frequent muddy and rocky infused conditions.
In person, this is one big tire, and the tread has a soft and pliable feel, with tough abrasion-resistant sidewalls. I am looking forward to trying this tire when it comes out this May.
Bar Fly
Tate Labs the bike computer mount company, hasn't rested on its laurels, and from feedback of their Bar Fly 1.0 and 1.1 models, they designed the impressive new Bar Fly 2.0. The made in the USA 2.0 mount, which is meant for the Garmin Edge bike computers, has been lowered to be more inline with the stem, and has dual position slots for more flexibility, retails for $24.99, and the bottom can be integrated with the Shimano Di2 and Campagnolo EPS modules.
I have been testing the 2.0, and it's easy to install the one bolt clamp over the bars, and my Garmin Edge 800 sits in an ideal location for viewing.
White Brothers
According to the Urban dictionary Brototype means "a first or preliminary model of a bro, from which other bros are developed or copied," but in this case it's a just a play on White Brothers and Prototype. White Brothers is jumping full force into the big wheel fork category with the Brototype, and the preliminary plans, though not quite finalized, is to have a 27.5″ fork with 170mm of travel and a 29er with 150mm. The air sprung fork will have 34mm stanchions, adjustable compression and spring ramp, and will come with their QTaper 15mm TA. Some other trick features, which will hopefully make it to production, are a Molybdenum Disulfide coating and internally adjustable travel.
Over on the MRP side of the company, they showed me a new stealth black color for their SRAM compatible Bling Rings.
The prototype Bishop is a top-secret hydration pack from Hydrapak, and they weren't passing along much information. The top of the line pack has a lot of attention to detail, and uses heavier and more durable materials, upgraded zipper pulls, and an outer helmet and armor and apparel pouch. The most interesting aspect was the new molded back panel, that is raised up somewhat, has lots of ventilation ports and nicely padded. This same sort of system is also carried into the shoulder straps and waist belt, although on a much smaller and thinner scale. The inside has some nice additions that I can't go into much, but this should be an excellent evolution to their burgeoning pack lineup. I am looking forward to seeing a more final version of the pack.
Kind Shock
The KS LEV is a superb infinitely adjustable hydraulic seatpost, with a plush and silky-smooth stroke, and it sports an innovative zero cable movement design. The LEV currently comes in two versions, the normal externally actuated LEV and bottom actuated LEV Integra, the latter having the remotes cable coming up inside the seattube. The two models are soon to be joined by the prototype LEV Carbon, which uses a carbon fiber main post. The LEV Carbon is oriented towards x-country racing and shorter travel bikes, and has 65mm of travel, only will come in 30.9mm and 31.6 diameters, and has a preliminary weight of 325 grams, and a rather hefty price close to $600.
The German bike company Focus is jumping into the 27.5 bandwagon with the Raven 650B 1.0, which follows on the heels of its 26″ and 29″ carbon hardtail brethren. The gorgeous frame, has swooping lines, triangulated shaped and bridgeless seatstays, internally routed cabling, and a fully kitted bike will retail for $3,950, and weigh around 24 lbs. The kit includes a Shimano XT build, their own Concept rims with SLX hubs, a Concept cockpit, and RockShox Revelation fork. Refer to a test ride that Kurt took here.
The QAK (Quality Accessories are Key) company is based out of Boulder Colorado, and they had some interesting wireless headphones on display. Their two main products are the Thump Blu (shown) and the Thump P3 wireless headsets. Both systems use a behind-the-head design, with the speakers lightly resting in your ears, and are supposed to allow one to hear ambient queues in your environment and have conversations. With the Thump P3, you load songs into its 1GB or 2GB of memory, $79 and $99 respectively, and you're ready to go. The Thump Blu at $79 uses a Bluetooth connection to wirelessly converse with your mobile device. The Thump Blu works quite nicely, and the sound reproduction was decent. I am testing out the Thump Blu, and after getting used to the unit, I could switch songs using a button on the side of the headset and take calls if required, so it had quite a few features packed into its small package.
The O-tus system takes a different approach to music reproduction while on a ride, and they use mini speakers that attach to your helmet right next to your ears. The O-tus uses a 15 watt near-ear speaker, which retails for $42.00, and definitely allows you to hear ambient background sounds and converse with people. The speakers are small and quiet enough that you're the only one that hears the music. I am looking forward to some long term testing with this system, as it meets my requirements for having music and still letting me hear the world.