I really like Dan Harmon’s advice to young writers in the sidebar to THR’s showrunner feature:
Entertain yourself. Luck comes just as often (and just as rarely) to every writer. Don’t be the writer that got lucky doing something they hate.
I really like Dan Harmon’s advice to young writers in the sidebar to THR’s showrunner feature:
Entertain yourself. Luck comes just as often (and just as rarely) to every writer. Don’t be the writer that got lucky doing something they hate.
Every day, I check to see how many apps we sold the day before. Every day, I’m surprised.
Week-to-week, we tend to sell about the same number of apps, but the variability day-to-day is higher than I would have expected, and doesn’t seem to follow obvious cycles. Highland rises and falls without much relationship to the day of the week.
Weekend Read has an in-app purchase allowing for an unlimited library. People aren’t buying it just for the weekend.
Stranger still, the sales of Highland and Final Draft seem entwined.
Why did both apps suddenly climb last week? For Highland, it might be because of my recent blog post, but why would Final Draft have matched its ascent? (Still, it’s nice to see Highland overtaking Final Draft at times.)
As I said at the beginning: week-to-week, it tends to average out. And a statistician would probably be able to look at the p-value and explain that it all falls within an expected range of variability. But I still wonder why it each day is so different.
Last week, I wondered aloud how I could check creator codes on a folder full of PDFs without checking them one-by-one.
Zoë Blade wrote in with a Terminal command, but it turns out I could do it in Automator very easily. Here’s the workflow.
Why didn’t I try Automator first? Past experience.
Over the years, I’ve tried doing a dozen things in Automator, only to run into obstacles where it can’t do quite what I need. Often, the breakdown is conditional logic, or the need to transfer a value from one section to the next.1
This is the rare case where Automator does almost exactly what I want. I’ve saved this workflow as an application so I can periodically test batches of files.
Follow Up, Fountain, Geek Alert, Highland, Screenwriting Software
We had 57 entries for the Three Page Challenge we’re conducting on May 15th.
I wondered which apps these screenwriters were using, so I checked the metadata for each file.1
App | # of Entries | % of Total |
---|---|---|
Final Draft 8 | 18 | 32% |
(unclear)2 | 7 | 12% |
Fade In | 7 | 12% |
Final Draft (Windows) | 6 | 11% |
Slugline | 5 | 9% |
Final Draft 9 | 4 | 7% |
Screenwriter | 3 | 5% |
Celtx | 2 | 4% |
Final Draft 7 | 2 | 4% |
Highland | 1 | 2% |
TextEdit | 1 | 2% |
Word | 1 | 2% |
Total | 57 | 100% |
Adding up its various incarnations, we find that Final Draft created just over half the entries. That’s about what I would have expected.
But I find it interesting that so many users have stuck with Final Draft 8, rather than version 9. There are still holdouts with version 7 as well.
I was happy to see six dedicated screenwriting apps (Final Draft, Fade In, Slugline, Screenwriter, Celtx and Highland) among the entrants. I didn’t find any Adobe Story or WriterDuet scripts.3
Writers submitting to the Three Page Challenge are, almost by definition, listeners to the Scriptnotes podcast, in which we’ve discussed Final Draft, Fade In, Slugline and Highland among other apps. I wonder to what degree that has influenced their choices.
Three Page Challengers are also generally aspiring screenwriters, rather than working pros. To me, that makes entrants more likely have recently purchased software (or web-based subscription services) than established writers, who tend to stick with what they know.
The online submission for Three Page Challenges worked well enough that we’ll keep using some version of it. In the next incarnation, we’ll ask upon submission which app the writer used.