• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Geek Alert

Celtx screenwriting application shows promise

February 22, 2005 Formatting, Geek Alert

[](http://celtx.com)[Steve](http://johnaugust.com/archives/2004/new-css-template-for-screenplay-formatting#comments) wrote in to point out a new-ish screenwriting application under development called [Celtx](http://celtx.com), which seems to incorporate a lot of features I’ve [been clamoring for](http://johnaugust.com/archives/2004/screenwriting-software-survey-results-are-in) in terms of leveraging new technology. It’s certainly not a [Final Draft](http://finaldraft.com) killer yet, but it’s worthy of a look.

In many ways, this seems to be the screenwriting program I yearned to write. It’s open source, standards-based and well thought out. If I’d known I could get what I want by sitting on my ass and doing nothing, I would have not-done it sooner.

Celtx uses the Mozilla Application Framework, the same underlying technology as [Firefox](http://mozilla.org). That goes a long way towards making it platform independent, since Mozilla can run under Windows, Linux and Mac OS X. It’s a two-edged sword, naturally: for sake of compatibility, it can’t use some only-on-Mac features and eye-candy.

[](http://johnaugust.com/Assets/celtx-full.png)
Unlike Final Draft, which strives to keep the screen matching up exactly to the printed output, Celtx takes a more relaxed approach. All the standard formatting blocks are there (Scene Header, Action, Character, Dialogue, Transition), but there are no rulers or page breaks. That’s a reasonable choice; you shouldn’t worry about every (more) and (cont’d) as you write. The program generates .pdfs, rather than trying to print directly — again, a smart call. However, I suspect many writers will find they need more control when it comes time to print.

One of the biggest psychological hurdles with Celtx is how it handles screenplay files. Currently, they seem to reside on Celtx’s server, rather than staying local on a writer’s individual computer. (I say “seem” because each project shows a URL, and you’re not prompted where you’d like to save your file.) This client/server model makes a lot of sense for collaboration, but would make a lot of writers nervous, both in terms of access and security.

**Update:** The developer wrote in to say that files are indeed kept locally on your computer, unless published to the server. A “Save As…” feature is in progress, according to the support forum.

You can import an existing script from Final Draft or other screenwriting applications, but only by saving it first as a formatted text file. (Final Draft uses a proprietary file format; if any reader out there has figured out how to decode it, please write in.) My import test was a mixed bag. Most of the formatting came through intact, but it lost all of the character names at the head of dialogue blocks. I suspect that’s an easily-addressable problem, however.

More impressive than its importing function is Celtx’s ability to export. It generates .pdfs and HTML, which, if you look through the source code, is actually properly formatted with CSS, as opposed to Final Draft’s ridiculous wrapped text file.

I haven’t fully examined Celtx’s outline and resource capabilities, but you can flag elements such as characters and props, which can be useful for generating reports. (Not that I ever use this feature in Final Draft.)

Celtx is currently in beta. Right now, it doesn’t offer enough to get me to switch from Final Draft. But I’m certainly fascinated by it, and would encourage any interested reader to give it a try.

Update on Firefox numbers

February 20, 2005 Geek Alert

After my recent post wondering why so many readers still use Internet Explorer, I’m happy to report the numbers have shifted in favor of Firefox.

Before January 25, 2004:


26% Internet Explorer
22% Firefox
5% Safari
3% Opera

For the week ending February 20, 2004:


23% Firefox
19% Internet Explorer
4% Safari
3% Opera

(Numbers don’t total 100% because bots and RSS readers are excluded.)

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Courier

February 10, 2005 Formatting, Geek Alert

[Geek Alert]I originally posted this as a reply in a screenwriting forum, but it’s pretty relevant here.

When I bought my first LaserWriter printer (probably 1993), I freaked out because Courier was suddenly ghastly thin. On my old StyleWriter inkjet, it had looked properly typewriter-like, but coming out of the laser printer, it was a shadow of its former self.

It bothered me enough that I used Fontographer to pull the Type 1 Courier outlines from the printer, then chunk-ify them a bit and save them as a Type 3 font, which I called Dorphic. (I have no idea why I picked that name, but it seemed to fit.)

So for many years, I happily used Dorphic on all my scripts. GO, for example, was in Dorphic. I would probably still be using that face, but the shift to OS X made Type 3 fonts impossible. I scoured the net for new options, and settled on [Courier Ragged](http://www.typeart.com/family.asp?FID=43&SID=0&CID=1), which I used for a year or two.

But a new problem came up. Up until about 2003, when I needed to turn in a script to a producer or studio executive, I would print it out and call for a messenger. I could be certain the script would look right, because I was printing it myself. But once executives (and their assistants) became more internet-savvy, it made a lot more sense to turn in scripts in .pdf form. So, while I could use Courier Ragged, there was no guarantee it would look right when they printed it out.

All of which leads me back full-circle to plain old Courier. Of the natural alternatives (Courier New, or Courier Final Draft), it’s the best-looking to me, both on-screen and printed.

A side-note: Before I became a screenwriter, I made a meager living in graphic design. So the cruelest irony is that I’ve now spent a decade using nothing but 12-pt Courier, or its imitators.

Finding the RSS feeds

January 27, 2005 Geek Alert

[Stephen](http://batflattery.blogspot.com) wrote in to say that the RSS feeds were acting up. I think I’ve addressed the problem, particularly with Firefox’s “live bookmarks” pointing in the wrong directions. (If you’re having an issue where “Live Bookmark failed to load,” delete the bookmark and make a new one.)

You can always find the right links for the RSS and Atom feeds in the cleverly-named “Feeds” section on the right. But for your convenience, here they are as well.

**For Atom:** http://johnaugust.com/feeds/atom
**For RSS 2:** http://johnaugust.com/feeds/rss2
**For RSS .92:** http://johnaugust.com/feeds/rss

Copy and paste these URLs into your newsreader of choice. Or, if you’re using Firefox, just click on the tiny orange button in the bottom-right corner of the window, and select your preferred version of the feed.

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Newsletter

Inneresting Logo A Quote-Unquote Newsletter about Writing
Read Now

Explore

Projects

  • Aladdin (1)
  • Arlo Finch (27)
  • Big Fish (88)
  • Birdigo (2)
  • Charlie (39)
  • Charlie's Angels (16)
  • Chosen (2)
  • Corpse Bride (9)
  • Dead Projects (18)
  • Frankenweenie (10)
  • Go (30)
  • Karateka (4)
  • Monsterpocalypse (3)
  • One Hit Kill (6)
  • Ops (6)
  • Preacher (2)
  • Prince of Persia (13)
  • Shazam (6)
  • Snake People (6)
  • Tarzan (5)
  • The Nines (118)
  • The Remnants (12)
  • The Variant (22)

Apps

  • Bronson (14)
  • FDX Reader (11)
  • Fountain (32)
  • Highland (73)
  • Less IMDb (4)
  • Weekend Read (64)

Recommended Reading

  • First Person (88)
  • Geek Alert (151)
  • WGA (162)
  • Workspace (19)

Screenwriting Q&A

  • Adaptation (66)
  • Directors (90)
  • Education (49)
  • Film Industry (492)
  • Formatting (130)
  • Genres (90)
  • Glossary (6)
  • Pitches (29)
  • Producers (59)
  • Psych 101 (119)
  • Rights and Copyright (96)
  • So-Called Experts (47)
  • Story and Plot (170)
  • Television (165)
  • Treatments (21)
  • Words on the page (238)
  • Writing Process (178)

More screenwriting Q&A at screenwriting.io

© 2025 John August — All Rights Reserved.