Nine Thousand Words of Novel Project

Status
Not open for further replies.

I_Voyager

User is Invalid
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
42
Location
I've no purpose beside that which I determine thro
I'm working on a two-novel story. I have been working on thesis arguments, synopsis' and character development up 'til now while reading broadly. It's a coalescence of wide-viewed education and reflection over many years on many social-political topics. Although it is a science fiction taking place between 2015 and 2080, I think of it less from a "sci-fi" perspective as from a broadly academic perspective. The main areas of my learning have been: philosophy, neuroscience/psychology, history, physical science and modern political/economic theory. This work seems to be a 'coming together' of long divided thoughts in my subconscious.

The main theme is entropy, moving into order, moving into entropy. Everything begins in a state of entropy. Matter seems to aggregate into order. Its ordered form is more powerfully impulsive and by interacting in greater degrees with its environment generates more entropy. This increase of entropy always leads to greater order and greater entropy. This is true for atoms in a closed space, biological evolution, the evolution of society by spreading technology, the evolution of political systems by spreading ideologies, the evolution of combat by improving military tactics, the flow of conversations by making incomplete but ever advancing arguments and the neural interplay of chemicals, electrons, synapses and neurons in a human mind.

Anyways, here's the beginning. I try to make unbaised, incomplete, imperfect arguments. But at the end, the last paragraph is an attempt to depict the whole theme perfectly in a descriptive paragraph. The few paragraphs before that but after the videos end are less complete. Finally, I have the setting in San Fransisco and later mention snow. I intend to fix that eventally!

Sorry for the long pre-description... This is the first time in my life I've been able to focus on a single project long enough and with enough clarity to do this much work (on top of the 17'000 words in synopsis' and such).

Ten minutes and forty-three seconds into the live video stream four guest speakers are seated in elaborate chairs around a machine. A wide-angle lens captures all four of them and the machine that has been the videos focus up to this point. It is a 3D printer and it stands five feet tall from the ground up, an elegant box of carbon-plastic rods vertically supporting a system of other horizontal rods. Those rods ferry self-propelled step-motors which shudder smoothly, if not soundlessly for as little as a half-millimetre in one direction or another. The motors work together to move the three most important parts of the machine: two plastic extruders – six year old technology - and something new. It was referred to by its inventor as a low-cost carbon nano-compressor and extruder, written down in shorthand as an LCC-NCE and it allowed the printer to use a powerful alternative to plastic: open sourced carbon nano-tubes.

Open Sourced, guest speaker Tiedemann Murray explained, only meant that the design had been constructed by peers who met through the internet while agreeing to, after the point design, release the plans and work material onto his Port Share network to be reproduced digitally and freely as opposed to patenting the designs as proprietary intellectual property.

The printer is busily laying down the final carbon-plastic layers on an object, the making of which has been this printer’s life’s purpose for the last six hours. The three piece symbol stands tall and bold: the figures ‘3’, ‘X’ and ‘I’ as very real black capital letters six inch tall, two inch thick and shimmering with white light. The stylized font is familiar to millions across the world. 3xI is an abbreviation for the name of a popular technology conference called “Invention, Innovation and Information.”

For the first ten minutes of this particular presentation Tiedemann Murray had explained in quick terms the technical detail of the printer he had named the Opensync. The horizontal rods, upon which the printer’s super-heated extruders glided, separated and pivoted from their base into new horizontal connection points. This allowed for a great depth of movement synchronizing all three printer heads in one printing effort. Custom software made use of this depth by co-ordinating three different print-order scripts from the installed template files which he and online peers had designed code-up. The whole thing was built and programmed on ten thousand dollars paid to them from seventy four backers off a website called openfunding.com. After the point of design they received another hundred thousand in enthusiastic donations from another two hundred and fifty individuals. Everything was synchronized by open source software, hence the name.

His invention was laying down thin layers of carbon nano-tubes at defined places in the larger structure of the 3xI. The nanotubes were being made into supports spiking into the glow-white, negative-black, glow-white and again negative-black plastic base. The supports were “T” shaped pillars two centimetres in diameter rising from the bottom to the top. They were compressed tightly against other wider simpler plastic structures, and finally the complex structures were sealed, hidden behind the guise of flat glowing black letters and numbers. The compressed black-on-white was finely dispersed and barely visible, each layer only a millimetre thin on the exterior. The black-light glow met traditional white light in competing wave-fronts vibrating against each other on the visual spectrum and the human eye had sensitivity enough only to process the black data. The white data was pushed aside and appeared not to exist despite itself - but the glow effect remained. Visually there was a black acronym which glowed white, and at other angles would appear to be white glowing black for a moment before flashing back to black again.

Tiedemann began his informal lecture with: “I’ll avoid plucking at the ******** psychological heartstrings as the co-ordinators suggested. I’ll leave time for questions at the end instead.” His curse word was censored by a gap in the audio; his voice was thick with Swedish accent. There were screens behind him three times as big as he and they displayed his mathematical notes and blueprints. There were no other visual aids. He made good on his promise though and after ten minutes concluded despite having sixteen minute of allotted presentation time. Immediately after concluding he moved to sit down in the furthest seat to the right with other three esteemed guests who all seemed very much less important than he.

A camera is now close focused on the left of Tiedemann’s narrow bearded face as he sits down. He is thanked by the nameless voice of the hall PA speakers. His face is dead-pan granite and silhouetted by dirty-brown hair hanging in a pony-tail over his back. His lips are obscured by overgrowth but his goatee is short and wispy off the chin. He sits, drinks out of the glass of water on a table next to him, puts the cup down and folds his arms. The view shifts to a camera zoomed close and fixed parallel to a woman sitting next to him. She is introduced as Senator Audrey Ross. She is plump with the straight back of practiced military posture. She looks intently at Tiedemann with round blue eyes embedded proportionately in her round Caucasian face. Next to her is Doctor Mei-Lien Mingzhu. Her black skirt is to her knees and her short-sleeved overcoat is to her torso, partially covering her dress shirt. She is squirming in her seat trying to find a relaxed spot and failing. A few feet over on the other side of the printer Cameron Rutherford is introduced, his hair well styled, clothes fine, collar out and smiling. He plays the camera angles intelligently and absent minded, angling his face in case this or that shot may be on him at this or that time. His good side is mostly always covered.

Doctor Mingzhu is the first to speak following the introductions. “I think this is just amazing,” she gestures at the machine, Cameron nodding thoughtfully full-body in the picture next to her, “I mean it’s not easy getting the funding we need to get right equipment to conduct our research. Some very important devices can be scaled down into simple three-material tools thanks to this printer. With the carbon compressor I can produce a whole variety of high-resistance, high-sensitivity, conductive devices on a lower budget. It’ll save us time, it’ll save us money. It’ll let us think outside the box in terms of, well, just what we have access to for future projects.”

“I like it, I like it” chimes Rutherford, speaking quickly, “It’s functional and it’s the right price. I’m thinking a few of my factories need to be outfitted with the upscaled industrial models, when you come out with them in a few years.”

Murray shrugs. “I’m not, I’m done with it.”

“You’re done building printers?” Rutherford asks incredulously.

“I’m done with the Opensync,” Tiedemann makes a mocking gesture with his eyebrows as he shifts forward, leaning his left elbow into the dome chairs arm rest “I’m not scaling it up. I’m done with it. It’s good enough. I’m moving onto better things.”

“You’re crazy.” Rutherford states flatly, hands rising in frustration, visibly dumbstruck despite his well-practiced high-brow gaze, “You’ve got a million dollar idea with infinite market potential. You’re going to give it up.”

“Cameron,” Senator Ross interrupts gracefully, her hand raised to claim a chance to speak, “This is the land of the free and the home of the brave. Doesn’t our friend have the right to conduct business with his product in the free global market however he’d like to?”

“Thanks to Creative-Commons rights I suppose so,” Rutherford replies quickly, “You’re right, you’re right, I get it, this is 3xI. I’ll leave politics for the after-party debate.”

“Then I agree, Mr. Rutherford,” follows Ross, turning her gaze back to Tiedemann “It really is a wonderful machine. I’d like to have had a thing like this when I had come out of the army. My productive potential would have been much higher. As it was, just by using the earlier model of 3D plastic printers I was able to provide some of the basic asset needs of many of the impoverished neighbourhoods in my home riding. With this I could have done some real good, built some real lasting infrastructure for those people. If you are done with the Opensync then, Mr. Murray, what are your next plans?”

“I’ll show you in twenty-two minutes,” Tiedemann replies, “my new tablet’s installing the custom operating system script my team and I wrote.”

 
It's already 630 in the morning! Bah, I've spent the past four hours getting to the point where I've got enough posts to be worth posting. It took that long because I wanted my posts to have value. I can't put up with further sleep deprivation in order to justify this forums rules. Either it can make an exception this time or not.
 
I've edited down the original thread and removed the extra post - sorry, we make no exceptions - we allow 1500 for a reason, and it applies to everyone. :)

As to this piece - I actually like it. The attention to technical detail is interesting, and we see this elsewhere in the publishing world.

The main reservation is: isn't this just backstory? From the section removed it was made clear all of this - and a couple of thousand words more - was just something a POV character was watching online.

Also, you've made a lot of use of us viewing this through a camera - so how are we aware of the internal workings of the machine? What POV are you using? To be fair, I've seen Tom Clancy do similar in Red October, but I want to know whether you actually know what the focus is here - are you writing something just because you can, or is all this of incredible importance and significance? I presume it must be, but I also wonder if you cannot adjust the focus a little more so that it's not all so detached. Even - do we need to see all this conversation in such detail? You plainly want to use a POV character after this section, so have you considered having her sum it up? I am left generally uncertain whether you understand technical issues of POV, though, again, with Tom Clancy as an example, it doesn't always matter!

There's also a problem in that some of the word use is overly done, which actually makes it look like you're not entirely comfortable with what you're writing. For example, later on you don't simply tell us that she opens a new tab in her broswer - you have to tell us exactly how she does this, as if no one reading it will know how to do it. It's over writing. Another example is the end of the above piece:

custom operating system script
Few people would ever call any OS a script - you're mixing up your designations IMO, but this is something you do repeatedly. I see it when you talk about internet use, because I'm familiar with that, which makes me wonder if you're also over writing it in the previous technical description of the 3D printer.

There are a couple of places where the text could have been tidied for grammar, but these are only minor and common issues.

It's more the above points I'd be curious whether you've considered.

Hope that helps!
 
Why all in italics?
Ten minutes and forty-three seconds (relevant?) into the live video stream,(comma, or it could read video stream four) four guest speakers are seated in elaborate(?) chairs around a machine. A wide-angle lens captures all four of them and (the machine that has been the video's focus up to this point). < hard to decipher sentence w/out the possessive apostrophe.

It is a 3D printer and it stands five feet tall from the ground up (is there another way?) an elegant box of carbon-plastic rods vertically supporting a system of other horizontal rods.
The italics are too much for me by this point. 1500 wds. is far more than enough for critiquing.:)
 
Be warned; this sounds very different from what I usually read, so take this with a pinch of salt. Also, I'm picky.


Ten minutes and forty-three seconds into the live video stream four guest speakers are seated in elaborate chairs around a machineas an opening sentence, I'm not keen on its ambiguity; the way its written it sounds like they have taken their seats at 10.43 into the speech, whereas I think they have been seated there from the beginning and its now 10.43 into the speech. I think it needs clarification. . A wide-angle lens captures all four of them and the machine that has been the videosvideo's focus up to this point. It is a 3D printer and it stands five feet tall from the ground up, an elegant box of carbon-plastic rods vertically supporting a system of other horizontal rods. Those rods ferry self-propelled step-motors which shudder smoothly, if not soundlessly for as little as a half-millimetre in one direction or another. The motors work together to move the three most important parts of the machine: two plastic extruders – six year old technology - and something new. It was referred to by its inventor as a low-cost carbon nano-compressor and extruder, written down in shorthand as an LCC-NCE and it allowed the printer to use a powerful alternative to plastic: open sourced carbon nano-tubes. It's a bit of an info dump, and it's one that's told to us. Could we see it working or something. I think it will be interesting to see what the hard sci-fi guys make of this, for me, with the softer, more character-focused interests, this does nothing for me.

Open Sourced, guest speaker Tiedemann Murray explained, only meant that the design had been constructed by peers who met through the internet while agreeing to, after the point design, release the plans and work material onto his Port Share network to be reproduced digitally and freely as opposed to patenting the designs as proprietary intellectual property.Pet hate; dialogue not being written out, but described. Have you thought about doing this from his point of view?

Tiedermann Murphy pointed at the machine. "Open Sourced," he explained, "only means it's been constructed by peers, who met through the internet..."

The printer is busily laying down the final carbon-plastic layers on an object, the making of which has been this printer’s life’s purpose for the last six hours. The three piece symbol stands tall and bold: the figures ‘3’, ‘X’ and ‘I’ as very real black capital letters six inch tall, two inch thick and shimmering with white light. The stylized font is familiar to millions across the world. 3xI is an abbreviation for the name of a popular technology conference called “Invention, Innovation and Information.” I'm quite cool with this, but with the amount 3d printers have been in the news recently, I wonder if it will be seen as sci fiey enough. It's just that this is being presented as a hard sci fi book (introducing the tech first, even at the risk of an info-dump, not focusing on the characters), and that means a lot of the appeal of the book will lie on the tech presented, and the innovation of it.

For the first ten minutes of this particular presentation Tiedemann Murray why his full name again had explained in quick terms the technical detail of the printer he had named the Opensync. The horizontal rods, upon which the printer’s super-heated extruders glided, separated and pivoted from their base into new horizontal connection points. This allowed for a great depth of movement synchronizing all three printer heads in one printing effort. Custom software made use of this depth by co-ordinating three different print-order scripts from the installed template files which he and online peers had designed code-up. The whole thing was built and programmed on ten thousand dollars paid to them from seventy four backers off a website called openfunding.com. After the point of design they received another hundred thousand in enthusiastic donations from another two hundred and fifty individuals. Everything was synchronized by open source software, hence the name. At this point, sorry, I'd stop reading. But I lasted even less time with Peter F. Hamilton, so that's a taste thing. For me, though -- it's all info dumping. It's telling me nothing about what the story is going to be, or why I'd want to keep reading. I don't mind if it's not about the characters (though it would probably convince me the book wasn't for me) but I'd want some clear guidance what, exactly, the tech was going to become in the story. Is it a weapon? Is it going to cure cancer? Why do you want me to suspend my disbelief for two books and read about it? I'd really need an answer to some of these questions -- or a belief that the answer was going to come -- to decide to keep going.

His invention was laying down thin layers of carbon nano-tubes at defined places in the larger structure of the 3xI. The nanotubes were being made into supports spiking into the glow-white, negative-black, glow-white and again negative-black plastic base. The supports were “T” shaped pillars two centimetres in diameter rising from the bottom to the top. They were compressed tightly against other wider simpler plastic structures, and finally the complex structures were sealed, hidden behind the guise of flat glowing black letters and numbers. The compressed black-on-white was finely dispersed and barely visible, each layer only a millimetre thin on the exterior. The black-light glow met traditional white light in competing wave-fronts vibrating against each other on the visual spectrum and the human eye had sensitivity enough only to process the black data. The white data was pushed aside and appeared not to exist despite itself - but the glow effect remained. Visually there was a black acronym which glowed white, and at other angles would appear to be white glowing black for a moment before flashing back to black again.I did read on, though. I also think your description is so exact, it's leaving nothing for the reader to form in their own mind. That mightn't sound logical, but I'm having to stop my creation of your scene in my mind (which might look very different from yours, but might be equally valid) to concentrate on your detail. Is it critical we know exactly what this machine looks like? If not, I'd consider dropping a lot of this description.

Tiedemann began his informal lecture withBut I thought he was ten minutes into it? I'm confused now: “I’ll avoid plucking at the ******** psychological heartstrings as the co-ordinators suggested. I’ll leave time for questions at the end instead.” His curse word was censored by a gap in the audio; his voice was thick with Swedish accent. There were screens behind him three times as big as he and they displayed his mathematical notes and blueprints. There were no other visual aids. He made good on his promise though and after ten minutes concluded despite having sixteen minute of allotted presentation time. Immediately after concluding he moved to sit down in the furthest seat to the right with other three esteemed guests who all seemed very much less important than he.So we started the scene as he concluded, then went over what had happened during the ten minutes before until he concluded? Or am I hopelessly lost? Why not just start at the start of his talk and take us through it all? To keep it active, a few descriptions of the machine, the listeners, him, a few thoughts? It might be a hookier start?

A camera is now close focused on the left of Tiedemann’s narrow bearded face as he sits down. He is thanked by the nameless voice of the hall PA speakers. His face is dead-pan granite and silhouetted by dirty-brown hair hanging in a pony-tail over his back. His lips are obscured by overgrowth but his goatee is short and wispy off the chin. He sits, drinks out of the glass of water on a table next to him, puts the cup down and folds his arms. Yes, but how does he feel? I don't much care how he looks, or what he does, but I'd love to know how he feels. Is this presentation important to him? does anything hang on it? Why do we care? Why does he care?The view shifts to a camera zoomed close and fixed parallel to a woman sitting next to him. She is introduced as Senator Audrey Ross. She is plump with the straight back of practiced military posture. She looks intently at Tiedemann with round blue eyes embedded proportionately in her round Caucasian face. Next to her is Doctor Mei-Lien Mingzhu. Her black skirt is to her knees and her short-sleeved overcoat is to her torso, partially covering her dress shirt. She is squirming in her seat trying to find a relaxed spot and failing. A few feet over on the other side of the printer Cameron Rutherford is introduced, his hair well styled, clothes fine, collar out and smiling. He plays the camera angles intelligently and absent minded, angling his face in case this or that shot may be on him at this or that time. His good side is mostly always covered.

Doctor Mingzhu is the first to speak following the introductions. “I think this is just amazing,.She she gestures at the machine, Cameron nodding thoughtfully full-body in the picture next to her,. “I mean it’s not easy getting the funding we need to get right equipment to conduct our research. Some very important devices can be scaled down into simple three-material tools thanks to this printer. With the carbon compressor I can produce a whole variety of high-resistance, high-sensitivity, conductive devices on a lower budget. It’ll save us time, it’ll save us money. It’ll let us think outside the box in terms of, well, just what we have access to for future projects.”Okay, this is more engaging and it's giving me some reason to see the application of the machine.

“I like it, I like it,” chimes Rutherford, speaking quickly,. “It’s functional and it’s the right price. I’m thinking a few of my factories need to be outfitted with the upscaled industrial models, when you come out with them in a few years.”

Murray shrugs. “I’m not, I’m done with it.”

“You’re done building printers?” Rutherford asks incredulously.

“I’m done with the Opensync,.” Tiedemann makes a mocking gesture with his eyebrows as he shifts forward, leaning his left elbow into the dome chairs arm rest. “I’m not scaling it up. I’m done with it. It’s good enough. I’m moving onto better things.”

Dialogue punctuation isn't quite right.

comma before a dialogue tag (he said, asks)

full stop before an action tag (he got up, he made a mocking gesture)

There is more stuff in the toolbox thread, so below becomes

"You're crazy," Rutherford states flatly (because states is a dialogue tag) or it could have been:

"You're crazy." Rutherford's hands rise in frustration.... (because the hands rising is an action)...


“You’re crazy.” Rutherford states flatly, hands rising in frustration, visibly dumbstruck despite his well-practiced high-brow gaze, “You’ve got a million dollar idea with infinite market potential. You’re going to give it up.”

“Cameron,” Senator Ross interrupts gracefully, her hand raised to claim a chance to speak,full stop* “This is the land of the free and the home of the brave. Doesn’t our friend have the right to conduct business with his product in the free global market however he’d like to?”

*without the fullstop, if you take out everything in the middle, you have:

"Cameron, This is the land of the free..."

I find that a useful way of checking; if it doesn't read right without the speech marks, then the punctuation is a little out.

“Thanks to Creative-Commons rights I suppose so,” Rutherford replies quickly, “You’re right, you’re right, I get it, this is 3xI. I’ll leave politics for the after-party debate.”

“Then I agree, Mr. Rutherford,” follows Ross, turning her gaze back to Tiedemann “It really is a wonderful machine. I’d like to have had a thing like this when I had come out of the army. My productive potential would have been much higher. As it was, just by using the earlier model of 3D plastic printers I was able to provide some of the basic asset needs of many of the impoverished neighbourhoods in my home riding. With this I could have done some real good, built some real lasting infrastructure for those people. If you are done with the Opensync then, Mr. Murray, what are your next plans?”

“I’ll show you in twenty-two minutes,” Tiedemann replies, “my new tablet’s installing the custom operating system script my team and I wrote.”

[/QUOTE]

Okay, for me it got much better when you moved it into the action and dialogue between them. I wonder how essential all the information before is, and I think it would be better without any of it until they are talking between themselves. See what others think, though.
 
I read it all the way through, partly because I was curious to see whether all of the fine detail you included in the post was going to be relevant. There's no doubt you've done your research and no one is going to be left wondering how the printer works... but in the end that's what several paragraphs of it was. Describing to us how a printer worked. It's not exactly gripping content (sorry if that sounds harsh!)

I'm guessing that the printer is going to somehow be further developed in this story, somehow be crucial to it, but even so, it might seem less 'info dump' if, as Springs mentioned, it is simply described working. If, in future chapters you slip in little details about the technical stuff, it'd be more digestible.

It was a relief when they started talking, and the character descriptions were concise enough that it wasn't difficult to remember who was who, which was a plus, but I didn't feel particularly drawn to any of them. In the end, the vast amount of technical detail in it left me feeling the same way I do after focusing on a science journal article - it felt like work.
 
I've edited down the original thread and removed the extra post - sorry, we make no exceptions - we allow 1500 for a reason, and it applies to everyone. :)

As to this piece - I actually like it. The attention to technical detail is interesting, and we see this elsewhere in the publishing world.

The main reservation is: isn't this just backstory? From the section removed it was made clear all of this - and a couple of thousand words more - was just something a POV character was watching online.

Also, you've made a lot of use of us viewing this through a camera - so how are we aware of the internal workings of the machine? What POV are you using? To be fair, I've seen Tom Clancy do similar in Red October, but I want to know whether you actually know what the focus is here - are you writing something just because you can, or is all this of incredible importance and significance? I presume it must be, but I also wonder if you cannot adjust the focus a little more so that it's not all so detached. Even - do we need to see all this conversation in such detail? You plainly want to use a POV character after this section, so have you considered having her sum it up? I am left generally uncertain whether you understand technical issues of POV, though, again, with Tom Clancy as an example, it doesn't always matter!

There's also a problem in that some of the word use is overly done, which actually makes it look like you're not entirely comfortable with what you're writing. For example, later on you don't simply tell us that she opens a new tab in her broswer - you have to tell us exactly how she does this, as if no one reading it will know how to do it. It's over writing. Another example is the end of the above piece:

Few people would ever call any OS a script - you're mixing up your designations IMO, but this is something you do repeatedly. I see it when you talk about internet use, because I'm familiar with that, which makes me wonder if you're also over writing it in the previous technical description of the 3D printer.

There are a couple of places where the text could have been tidied for grammar, but these are only minor and common issues.

It's more the above points I'd be curious whether you've considered.

Hope that helps!

Thank you SO much for doing this for me. I became a little overwhelmed by the idea of cutting this down at 6 in the morning and expected it to be deleted. So for you to trim this down for me is compromise enough!

The reason why I'm using a video-watching POV is to express the importance of the technological medium in our development. I get that the shift from "he said" to "they're saying" is a bit trippy. Part of why I didn't allow myself to tell the printers technical detail in dialogue was because I didn't trust myself to express the same information conversationally. That may be where you get my 'lack of comfort'.

The conversation which comes sums up the thesis I had wrote before. At the heart of my story is a conversation on intellectual property and how laws revolving around it effect society when intellectual property has no physical value. So this conversation sets the tone for the rest of the story, which progresses from social events into later wars and schisms. So it is very important to the story. It's important to the character as well who is less so 'coming to a conclusion' through all of this so much as experiencing things which will, as she develops, effect her subconscious and later conscious awakening.

The POV when in the video is third person, but I can't say "omnipotent". I want the video part to be entirely descriptive and objective, not interpreted by the characters mental process, because she doesn't entirely understand (nor must she, she need only remember for later). But it will shift out at times from this POV to third person character oriented (I can't remember all the POV terms, literature jargon was never my specialty. Sometimes quantum physics makes more sense!)

All your more technical criticism all seems apt. Below a few of these grammar issues are pointed out and I intend to make those fixes ASAP. Thank you so much for your generous effort.
 
Why all in italics?
Ten minutes and forty-three seconds (relevant?) into the live video stream,(comma, or it could read video stream four) four guest speakers are seated in elaborate(?) chairs around a machine. A wide-angle lens captures all four of them and (the machine that has been the video's focus up to this point). < hard to decipher sentence w/out the possessive apostrophe.

It is a 3D printer and it stands five feet tall from the ground up (is there another way?) an elegant box of carbon-plastic rods vertically supporting a system of other horizontal rods.
The italics are too much for me by this point. 1500 wds. is far more than enough for critiquing.:)

There will be two different POV perspectives and they're divided, one in italics and the other not. For the sake of this post I guess the italics aren't very important since you only get the one POV. But at least now you know the over-all reasoning.

The punctuation comments are all good fixes.

I don't think commercial 3D printers are as big as this one, nor do they 'stand from the ground'. They are small enough that they can be placed on tables.
 
There will be two different POV perspectives and they're divided, one in italics and the other not. For the sake of this post I guess the italics aren't very important since you only get the one POV. But at least now you know the over-all reasoning.

The punctuation comments are all good fixes.

I don't think commercial 3D printers are as big as this one, nor do they 'stand from the ground'. They are small enough that they can be placed on tables.

Most publishers, btw, aren't keen on more than a few hundred words in italics as it's so hard to read. Other ways to do this include perhaps labelling the chapter/scene with the pov character's name.

The other thing, sorry - here on a forum you have room to tell us your thinking and explain what you're doing and why. If this goes out to agents/publishers you don't have that luxury. You have 250 words to sell your story. That's it... (Based on agents' feedback and how far they read before going next! if not engaged).

So, if it doesn't stand up without the intro and explanations, are you damaging your chances of selling it? Same applies for self-pubbed, btw, only the readers make the choice then.
 
Last edited:
Be warned; this sounds very different from what I usually read, so take this with a pinch of salt. Also, I'm picky.


It's a bit of an info dump, and it's one that's told to us. Could we see it working or something. I think it will be interesting to see what the hard sci-fi guys make of this, for me, with the softer, more character-focused interests, this does nothing for me.

Pet hate; dialogue not being written out, but described. Have you thought about doing this from his point of view?

Tiedermann Murphy pointed at the machine. "Open Sourced," he explained, "only means it's been constructed by peers, who met through the internet..."


You make a good point. My main worry was that I couldn't do a technical explanation justice in dialogue. Also, I worried that (as you pointed out below) that the technical detail needed to be summed up in a few paragraphs so I could get into the meat n' potatoes dialogue about intellectual property rights revolving around this device. The character runs a Pirate Bay-like service and the people he's with, though enthusiastic about his invention, are not enthusiastic about his ideology, nor is he of theirs.

I'm quite cool with this, but with the amount 3d printers have been in the news recently, I wonder if it will be seen as sci fiey enough. It's just that this is being presented as a hard sci fi book (introducing the tech first, even at the risk of an info-dump, not focusing on the characters), and that means a lot of the appeal of the book will lie on the tech presented, and the innovation of it.

This device allows other people to invent other devices, which help other people invent other devices, which help other people invent other devices. And as these devices are being invented, we'll go from something so realistic to not be sci-fi to quantum-state materials, creative visual-digital overlays, organizing algorithms, nano tech, etc... And as with this printer, I'm going to try to be as technical as possible. I just want to do 'realism' justice. I just feel if I want to make social/philosophical arguments, my technological excuses should be equal in value.

why his full name again ... At this point, sorry, I'd stop reading. But I lasted even less time with Peter F. Hamilton, so that's a taste thing. For me, though -- it's all info dumping. It's telling me nothing about what the story is going to be, or why I'd want to keep reading. I don't mind if it's not about the characters (though it would probably convince me the book wasn't for me) but I'd want some clear guidance what, exactly, the tech was going to become in the story. Is it a weapon? Is it going to cure cancer? Why do you want me to suspend my disbelief for two books and read about it? I'd really need an answer to some of these questions -- or a belief that the answer was going to come -- to decide to keep going.

It is a bit info-dumpy. I am going to consider a shorter, dialogue-based description so we can move into the political arguments to come quicker.

I did read on, though. I also think your description is so exact, it's leaving nothing for the reader to form in their own mind. That mightn't sound logical, but I'm having to stop my creation of your scene in my mind (which might look very different from yours, but might be equally valid) to concentrate on your detail. Is it critical we know exactly what this machine looks like? If not, I'd consider dropping a lot of this description.

So we started the scene as he concluded, then went over what had happened during the ten minutes before until he concluded? Or am I hopelessly lost? Why not just start at the start of his talk and take us through it all? To keep it active, a few descriptions of the machine, the listeners, him, a few thoughts? It might be a hookier start?

Again, it was mistrust in my ability to start the scene opening in dialogue instead of concluding the technical explanation to move into the main dialogue. But I wanted to resolve having a device which was sensible and realistic, rather than 'magical'.

Yes, but how does he feel? I don't much care how he looks, or what he does, but I'd love to know how he feels. Is this presentation important to him? does anything hang on it? Why do we care? Why does he care?

Part of why I'm describing how they look and not how they feel is to establish the 'video' perspective without invalidating it with non-video data. The majority of my story won't be in a video-setting and will describe feeling before visual information except when important. An example:

"Wind gently swept snow off the dull cement and into a coiling sea of white-yellow light. Icy crystals in their millions curved down around her feet and up over her head arching into a great circle ever bigger and bigger. The porch light bore down upon it with a pale beam and as the snow spiralled it took the light, broke it, reflected it and scattered it around in brief intensity. The great arch was then caught by the unseen forces of pressure escaping from her open door and became divided, vents of warm once-trapped air moving the diamond snow in all directions, up above so as below. It fell upon the glinting flat ocean lawn and far into the darkness well beyond her sight. She read that every snow flake was a uniquely white-watery star, more to her like an outstretched palm reaching for permanence from its temporary form. When she flung her own outstretched palm into the flowing current of snow they stuck to her skin and melted together, all those tiny beautiful snow-flakes coming to rest on her rosy hands. They found their permanence by melting, becoming uninteresting puddles of water which merged together bit by bit through the perpetual warmth that was her living form; where they lay they remained unchanged until they evaporated silently back into the cold night. The glinting snow flowed on anyway and if anything harder now disturbed, the ceaseless spirals transforming hurriedly into erratic explosions for moments before fading off into the black and light and incomprehensible size around her, an endless entropy always coming and always going in finite ways and in finite forms."

Although visual, this expresses the overall theme and the characters feeling in-experience.

Okay, this is more engaging and it's giving me some reason to see the application of the machine.

Okay, for me it got much better when you moved it into the action and dialogue between them. I wonder how essential all the information before is, and I think it would be better without any of it until they are talking between themselves. See what others think, though.


I'm glad you like the dialogue. It's where I put my greater effort (although I poured over those first few paragraphs in detail).

Also, all your more technical corrections seem effective in making my piece clearer. I'll likely go through soon and fix it all up.
 
Hmmm... Custom OS scripts certainly existed in MS-DOS (remember that?) and probably exist in Linux and Unix - which probably means they do in Apple Mac's OS as well which (AFAIK) is heavily based on Unix.
 
Most publishers, btw, aren't keen on more than a few hundred words in italics as it's so hard to read. Other ways to do this include perhaps labelling the chapter/scene with the pov character's name.

The other thing, sorry - here on a forum you have room to tell us your thinking and explain what you're doing and why. If this goes out to agents/publishers you don't have that luxury. You have 250 words to sell your story. That's it... (Based on agents' feedback and how far they read before going next! if not engaged).

So, if it doesn't stand up without the intro and explanations, are you damaging your chances of selling it? Same applies for self-pubbed, btw, only the readers make the choice then.

Your point is also agreed on by Ivanya. I could have my cake and eat it too if I opened the story with the dialogue and then, after establishing the conversation dynamic, go back to the past to explain the printer. If I did this, would it be too jumpy? Would I still be inflicting an 'info dump'? In your opinion, what's the least important part of the technical detail?
 
I made a few changes so that our poor sighted member doesn't have to squint at this piece and wonder what's going on.

Ten minutes and forty-three seconds into the live video stream four guest speakers are seated in elaborate chairs around a machine. A wide-angle lens captures all four of them and the machine that has been the videos focus up to this point. It is a 3D printer and it stands five feet tall from the ground up, an elegant box of carbon-plastic rods vertically supporting a system of other horizontal rods. Those rods ferry self-propelled step-motors which shudder smoothly, if not soundlessly for as little as a half-millimetre in one direction or another. The motors work together to move the three most important parts of the machine: two plastic extruders – six year old technology - and something new. It was referred to by its inventor as a low-cost carbon nano-compressor and extruder, written down in shorthand as an LCC-NCE and it allowed the printer to use a powerful alternative to plastic: open sourced carbon nano-tubes.


"Open Sourced" ,guest speaker Tiedemann Murray explained, "...only meant that the design had been constructed by peers who met through the internet while agreeing to, after the point design, release the plans and work material onto his Port Share network to be reproduced digitally and freely as opposed to patenting the designs as proprietary intellectual property."

The printer is busily laying down the final carbon-plastic layers on an object, the making of which has been this printer’s life’s purpose for the last six hours. The three piece symbol stands tall and bold: the figures ‘3’, ‘X’ and ‘I’ as very real black capital letters six inch tall, two inch thick and shimmering with white light. The stylized font is familiar to millions across the world. 3xI is an abbreviation for the name of a popular technology conference called: “Invention, Innovation and Information.”

For the first ten minutes of this particular presentation Tiedemann Murray had explained in quick terms the technical detail of the printer he had named: "the Opensync."

The horizontal rods, upon which the printer’s super-heated extruders glided, separated and pivoted from their base into new horizontal connection points. This allowed for a great depth of movement synchronizing all three printer heads in one printing effort. Custom software made use of this depth by co-ordinating three different print-order scripts from the installed template files which he and online peers had designed code-up.

The whole thing was built and programmed on ten thousand dollars paid to them from seventy four backers off a website called openfunding.com. After the point of design they received another hundred thousand in enthusiastic donations from another two hundred and fifty individuals. Everything was synchronized by open source software, hence the name.

His invention was laying down thin layers of carbon nano-tubes at defined places in the larger structure of the 3xI. The nanotubes were being made into supports spiking into the glow-white, negative-black, glow-white and again negative-black plastic base. The supports were “T” shaped pillars two centimetres in diameter rising from the bottom to the top.

They were compressed tightly against other wider simpler plastic structures, and finally the complex structures were sealed, hidden behind the guise of flat glowing black letters and numbers. The compressed black-on-white was finely dispersed and barely visible, each layer only a millimetre thin on the exterior.

The black-light glow met traditional white light in competing wave-fronts vibrating against each other on the visual spectrum and the human eye had sensitivity enough only to process the black data.

The white data was pushed aside and appeared not to exist despite itself - but the glow effect remained. Visually there was a black acronym which glowed white, and at other angles would appear to be white glowing black for a moment before flashing back to black again.

Tiedemann began his informal lecture with: “I’ll avoid plucking at the ******** psychological heartstrings as the co-ordinators suggested. I’ll leave time for questions at the end instead.” His curse word was censored by a gap in the audio; his voice was thick with Swedish accent. There were screens behind him three times as big as he and they displayed his mathematical notes and blueprints. There were no other visual aids. He made good on his promise though and after ten minutes concluded despite having sixteen minute of allotted presentation time. Immediately after concluding he moved to sit down in the furthest seat to the right with other three esteemed guests who all seemed very much less important than he.

A camera is now close focused on the left of Tiedemann’s narrow bearded face as he sits down. He is thanked by the nameless voice of the hall PA speakers. His face is dead-pan granite and silhouetted by dirty-brown hair hanging in a pony-tail over his back. His lips are obscured by overgrowth but his goatee is short and wispy off the chin. He sits, drinks out of the glass of water on a table next to him, puts the cup down and folds his arms.

The view shifts to a camera zoomed close and fixed parallel to a woman sitting next to him. She is introduced as Senator Audrey Ross. She is plump with the straight back of practiced military posture. She looks intently at Tiedemann with round blue eyes embedded proportionately in her round Caucasian face. Next to her is Doctor Mei-Lien Mingzhu. Her black skirt is to her knees and her short-sleeved overcoat is to her torso, partially covering her dress shirt. She is squirming in her seat trying to find a relaxed spot and failing. A few feet over on the other side of the printer Cameron Rutherford is introduced, his hair well styled, clothes fine, collar out and smiling. He plays the camera angles intelligently and absent minded, angling his face in case this or that shot may be on him at this or that time. His good side is mostly always covered.

Doctor Mingzhu is the first to speak following the introductions. “I think this is just amazing,” she gestures at the machine, Cameron nodding thoughtfully full-body in the picture next to her, “I mean it’s not easy getting the funding we need to get right equipment to conduct our research. Some very important devices can be scaled down into simple three-material tools thanks to this printer. With the carbon compressor I can produce a whole variety of high-resistance, high-sensitivity, conductive devices on a lower budget. It’ll save us time, it’ll save us money. It’ll let us think outside the box in terms of, well, just what we have access to for future projects.”

“I like it, I like it” chimes Rutherford, speaking quickly, “It’s functional and it’s the right price. I’m thinking a few of my factories need to be outfitted with the upscaled industrial models, when you come out with them in a few years.”

Murray shrugs. “I’m not, I’m done with it.”

“You’re done building printers?” Rutherford asks incredulously.

“I’m done with the Opensync,” Tiedemann makes a mocking gesture with his eyebrows as he shifts forward, leaning his left elbow into the dome chairs arm rest “I’m not scaling it up. I’m done with it. It’s good enough. I’m moving onto better things.”

“You’re crazy.” Rutherford states flatly, hands rising in frustration, visibly dumbstruck despite his well-practiced high-brow gaze, “You’ve got a million dollar idea with infinite market potential. You’re going to give it up.”

“Cameron,” Senator Ross interrupts gracefully, her hand raised to claim a chance to speak, “This is the land of the free and the home of the brave. Doesn’t our friend have the right to conduct business with his product in the free global market however he’d like to?”

“Thanks to Creative-Commons rights I suppose so,” Rutherford replies quickly, “You’re right, you’re right, I get it, this is 3xI. I’ll leave politics for the after-party debate.”

“Then I agree, Mr. Rutherford,” follows Ross, turning her gaze back to Tiedemann “It really is a wonderful machine. I’d like to have had a thing like this when I had come out of the army. My productive potential would have been much higher. As it was, just by using the earlier model of 3D plastic printers I was able to provide some of the basic asset needs of many of the impoverished neighbourhoods in my home riding. With this I could have done some real good, built some real lasting infrastructure for those people. If you are done with the Opensync then, Mr. Murray, what are your next plans?”

“I’ll show you in twenty-two minutes,” Tiedemann replies, “my new tablet’s installing the custom operating system script my team and I wrote.”

The problem is that this piece quite boring and hard to read; as the writer flies between two tenses to tell his story. And when you finally get to the past tense, you'll start seeing present tense sentences popping up like mushrooms in the rain.

Another thing is that most of the beginning doesn't serve much to a large audience. and I really doubt most of the readers wants to know about details of how machine works straight at the beginning of the story. It simply doesn't work as a hook.

Well, maybe not to everyone, and even if you're an engineer you might want scan past the details until you hit the dialogue at the bottom. So, I_Voyager, take what has been said above by me and others with a hint of salt, as your piece is aimed at quite niche market.
 
I'm commenting on the #14 version because it's easier to read.

Ten minutes and forty-three seconds into the live video stream four guest speakers are seated in elaborate chairs around a machine. This isn't the most hooky opening sentence I've come across. A wide-angle lens captures all four of them and the machine that has been the videos focus up to this point. It is a 3D printer and it stands five feet tall from the ground up, an elegant box of carbon-plastic rods vertically supporting a system of other horizontal rods. Those rods ferry self-propelled step-motors which shudder smoothly, if not soundlessly for as little as a half-millimetre in one direction or another. The motors work together to move the three most important parts of the machine: two plastic extruders – six year old technology - and something new. It was referred to by its inventor as a low-cost carbon nano-compressor and extruder, written down in shorthand as an LCC-NCE and it allowed the printer to use a powerful alternative to plastic: open sourced carbon nano-tubes. OK, it's a 3D printer - I've seen them on TV and I've seen them written up in my computer magazine. And it prints with carbon nano-tubes. That's plenty detail for me; I don't need the rest. And there are no characters in this story yet.


"Open Sourced" ,guest speaker Tiedemann Murray No detail about this guy? explained, "...only meant that the design had been constructed by peers who met through the internet while agreeing to, after the point design, release the plans and work material onto his Port Share network to be reproduced digitally and freely as opposed to patenting the designs as proprietary intellectual property." What does that mean in plain English? That the design is open-source?

The printer is busily laying down the final carbon-plastic layers on an object, the making of which has been this printer’s life’s purpose for the last six hours. The three piece symbol stands tall and bold: the figures ‘3’, ‘X’ and ‘I’ as very real black capital letters six inch tall, two inch thick and shimmering with white light. The stylized font is familiar to millions across the world. 3xI is an abbreviation for the name of a popular technology conference called: “Invention, Innovation and Information.” That's reasonably clear, but you could probably describe it more simply.

For the first ten minutes of this particular presentation Tiedemann Murray had explained in quick terms the technical detail of the printer he had named: "the Opensync." Is it important that we know this? - asides from the name?

The horizontal rods, upon which the printer’s super-heated extruders glided, separated and pivoted from their base into new horizontal connection points. This allowed for a great depth of movement synchronizing all three printer heads in one printing effort. Custom software made use of this depth by co-ordinating three different print-order scripts from the installed template files which he and online peers had designed code-up. I don't understand this paragraph.

The whole thing was built and programmed on ten thousand dollars paid to them from seventy four backers off a website called openfunding.com. After the point of design they received another hundred thousand in enthusiastic donations from another two hundred and fifty individuals. Everything was synchronized by open source software, hence the name. In plainer English, the project was crowdfunded, and uses open sourced software.

His invention was laying down thin layers of carbon nano-tubes at defined places in the larger structure of the 3xI. The nanotubes were being made into supports spiking into the glow-white, negative-black, glow-white and again negative-black plastic base. The supports were “T” shaped pillars two centimetres in diameter rising from the bottom to the top. I think this means it was printing the embossed letters in black and white bands.

They were compressed tightly against other wider simpler plastic structures, and finally the complex structures were sealed, hidden behind the guise of flat glowing black letters and numbers. The compressed black-on-white was finely dispersed and barely visible, each layer only a millimetre thin on the exterior. I don't understand this paragraph.

The black-light glow met traditional white light in competing wave-fronts vibrating against each other on the visual spectrum and the human eye had sensitivity enough only to process the black data. I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

The white data was pushed aside and appeared not to exist despite itself - but the glow effect remained. Visually there was a black acronym which glowed white, and at other angles would appear to be white glowing black for a moment before flashing back to black again. I'm not sure what you mean other than that the object looked weird like a hologram or something like that.

Tiedemann began his informal lecture with: “I’ll avoid plucking at the ******** Swear word seems unnecessary here. psychological heartstrings as the co-ordinators suggested. I’ll leave time for questions at the end instead.” His curse word was censored by a gap in the audio; his voice was thick with Swedish accent. There were screens behind him three times as big as he and they displayed his mathematical notes and blueprints. There were no other visual aids. He made good on his promise though and after ten minutes concluded despite having sixteen minute of allotted presentation time. Immediately after concluding he moved to sit down in the furthest seat to the right with other three esteemed guests who all seemed very much less important than he. So he made an 'informal' technical presentation.

A camera is now close focused on the left of Tiedemann’s narrow bearded face as he sits down. He is thanked by the nameless voice of the hall PA speakers. His face is dead-pan granite and silhouetted by dirty-brown hair hanging in a pony-tail over his back. His lips are obscured by overgrowth but his goatee is short and wispy off the chin. He sits, drinks out of the glass of water on a table next to him, puts the cup down and folds his arms. That's a fair character description.

The view shifts to a camera zoomed close and fixed parallel to a woman sitting next to him. She is introduced as Senator Audrey Ross. She is plump with the straight back of practiced military posture. She looks intently at Tiedemann with round blue eyes embedded proportionately in her round Caucasian face. Next to her is Doctor Mei-Lien Mingzhu. Her black skirt is to her knees and her short-sleeved overcoat is to her torso, partially covering her dress shirt. She is squirming in her seat trying to find a relaxed spot and failing. A few feet over on the other side of the printer Cameron Rutherford is introduced, his hair well styled, clothes fine, collar out and smiling. He plays the camera angles intelligently and absent minded, angling his face in case this or that shot may be on him at this or that time. His good side is mostly always covered. This is more interesting. Are these the four guests mentioned at the start?

Doctor Mingzhu is the first to speak following the introductions. “I think this is just amazing,” she gestures at the machine, Cameron nodding thoughtfully full-body in the picture next to her, “I mean it’s not easy getting the funding we need to get right equipment to conduct our research. Some very important devices can be scaled down into simple three-material tools thanks to this printer. With the carbon compressor I can produce a whole variety of high-resistance, high-sensitivity, conductive devices on a lower budget. It’ll save us time, it’ll save us money. It’ll let us think outside the box in terms of, well, just what we have access to for future projects.” I'd like to know exactly what sort of devices he's talking about. That could be interesting but I'm trying to guess what useful conductive devices have high resistance.

“I like it, I like it” chimes Rutherford, speaking quickly, “It’s functional and it’s the right price. I’m thinking a few of my factories need to be outfitted with the upscaled industrial models, when you come out with them in a few years.” Anybody could say that about any kind of production equipment.

Murray shrugs. “I’m not, I’m done with it.”

“You’re done building printers?” Rutherford asks incredulously.

“I’m done with the Opensync,” Tiedemann makes a mocking gesture with his eyebrows as he shifts forward, leaning his left elbow into the dome chairs arm rest “I’m not scaling it up. I’m done with it. It’s good enough. I’m moving onto better things.” This is interesting.

“You’re crazy.” Rutherford states flatly, hands rising in frustration, visibly dumbstruck despite his well-practiced high-brow gaze, “You’ve got a million dollar idea with infinite market potential. You’re going to give it up.”

“Cameron,” Senator Ross interrupts gracefully, her hand raised to claim a chance to speak, “This is the land of the free and the home of the brave. Doesn’t our friend have the right to conduct business with his product in the free global market however he’d like to?”

“Thanks to Creative-Commons rights I suppose so,” Rutherford replies quickly, “You’re right, you’re right, I get it, this is 3xI. I’ll leave politics for the after-party debate.” This tells me nothing. It would be interesting to know how politics enters into this.

“Then I agree, Mr. Rutherford,” follows Ross, turning her gaze back to Tiedemann “It really is a wonderful machine. I’d like to have had a thing like this when I had come out of the army. My productive potential would have been much higher. As it was, just by using the earlier model of 3D plastic printers I was able to provide some of the basic asset needs of many of the impoverished neighbourhoods in my home riding. With this I could have done some real good, built some real lasting infrastructure for those people. If you are done with the Opensync then, Mr. Murray, what are your next plans?”

“I’ll show you in twenty-two minutes,” Tiedemann replies, “my new tablet’s installing the custom operating system script suggest you delete 'script' my team and I wrote.” You mean he's got something new, with the same hardware and different software? Seems that the real story is just starting here.
I feel that you are writing for a specialized audience with this piece. Most hard-SF fans would prefer a story expressed in simpler language and with more emphasis on the people and the practical impact of the technology, rather than the hardware.

Just for the record, I have a BSc in Mechanical Engineering, and some outdated qualifications in computing, and I used to read a lot of SF. I used to work in the electronics industry.

One story I remember reading was about a team who after great labour produced a machine that could automatically manufacture any object desired. (At the time the story was written, this idea was pie-in-the-sky). The first thing they commanded it to produce was another identical machine that could produce anything ...
 
After considering these critiques I've reorganized the story. I've kept a few things which I've written because I need to for the sake of the arguments which develop later on. Still, I've compressed the technical detail, drastically reduced the POV shift and opened with dialogue action instead of technical detail. There may be some new dialogue tag errors. This is not my strong suit. I'd like to remove the italics this time 'round but I've got literally no more time to work on this post. Sorry ye visually impaired! I'll touch it up after work.



Ten minutes and forty-three seconds into the live video stream three guest speakers are seated in elaborate dome chairs around a machine. A fourth seat is being taken by the speaker who had the floor up to this point: Tiedemann Murray. The camera focuses on the left side his narrow bearded face while he sits. His face is dead-pan granite and silhouetted by dirty-brown hair hanging in a pony-tail over his back. His lips are obscured by overgrowth but his goatee is short and wispy off the chin. “Thank you very much for that spartan presentation,” the nameless voice of the hall PA speakers echoes loudly, “Though you still have six minutes left to your presentation, if you have anything to add.”

Once seated he drinks out of a glass of water on the table next to him, puts the cup down and folds his arms.

“Yeah, I don’t need any more time.” Tiedemann replies, the PA carrying his voice above the crunching machine he invented. “Like I said before, I’m not going to pluck at the ******** heart-strings of these people. Let’s leave room for questions at the end.”

The view shifts to a camera zoomed close and fixed parallel to the woman sitting next to him. She is introduced as Senator Audrey Ross. She is plump with the straight back of practiced military posture. She looks intently at Tiedemann with round blue eyes embedded proportionately in her round Caucasian face. Next to her is Doctor Mei-Lien Mingzhu. Her black skirt is to her knees and her short-sleeved overcoat is to her torso, partially covering her dress shirt. She is squirming in her seat trying to find a relaxed spot and failing. A few feet over on the other side of the printer Cameron Rutherford is introduced, his hair well styled, clothes fine, collar out and smiling. He plays the camera angles intelligently and absent minded, angling his face in case this or that shot may be on him at this or that time. His good side is mostly always covered.

Doctor Mingzhu is the first to speak following the introductions. “I think this is just amazing.” She gestures at the machine, Cameron nodding thoughtfully full-body in the picture next to her, “I mean it’s not easy getting the funding we need to get right equipment to conduct our research. Some very important devices can be scaled down into simple three-material tools thanks to this printer. With the carbon compressor I can produce a whole variety of high-resistance, high-sensitivity, conductive devices on a lower budget. It’ll save us time, it’ll save us money. It’ll let us think outside the box in terms of, well, just what we have access to for future projects.”

Doctor Mingzhu is the first to speak following the introductions. “I think this is just amazing.” She gestures at the machine, Cameron nodding thoughtfully full-body in the picture next to her, “I mean it’s not easy getting the funding we need to get right equipment to conduct our research. Some very important devices can be scaled down into simple three-material tools thanks to this printer. With the carbon compressor I can produce a whole variety of high-resistance, high-sensitivity, conductive devices on a lower budget. It’ll save us time, it’ll save us money. It’ll let us think outside the box in terms of, well, just what we have access to for future projects.”

“I like it, I like it” chimes Rutherford, speaking quickly, “It’s functional and it’s the right price. I’m thinking a few of my factories need to be outfitted with the upscaled industrial models, when you come out with them in a few years.”

A wide-angle lens captures all four of them and the machine which CEO Rutherford is referring to. It is a 3D printer and it stands five feet tall from the ground up, an elegant box of carbon-plastic rods vertically supporting a system of other horizontal rods. For the first ten minutes of this particular presentation Tiedemann had explained the technical detail of the printer he invented. Those rods ferry self-propelled step-motors which shudder smoothly, if not soundlessly for as little as a half-millimetre in one direction or another. The motors work together by pivoting, separating and merging with other rods to move the three most important parts of the machine: two plastic extruders – six year old technology - and something new. It was referred to by its inventor as a low-cost carbon nano-compressor and extruder, written down in shorthand as an LCC-NCE and it allowed the printer to use a powerful alternative to plastic: open sourced carbon nano-tubes.

“Open Source” guest speaker Tiedemann Murray explained earlier, “only means that the design had been constructed by a team I assembled over the internet We all agreed to share the plans and work material onto my Port Share network so it could be reproduced digitally and freely - as opposed to patenting the designs as proprietary intellectual property. The whole thing was built and programmed on ten thousand dollars paid by users on Open Funding - a crowd funding website, obviously. After the point of design we received another hundred thousand in enthusiastic donations from another two hundred fifty users. Since it’s all synced up by open source programming and open funding, I called it “Opensync”.

The printer is busily laying down the final carbon-plastic layers on an object, the making of which has been this printer’s life’s purpose for the last six hours. The three piece symbol stands tall and bold: ‘3’, ‘x’ and ‘I’, embossed capital letters six inch tall, two inch thick, matt black and shimmering with white light. The stylized 3xI is an abbreviation for the name of a popular technology conference called “Invention, Innovation and Information.” The letters are made of compressed bands of black and glowing-white plastic supported by internal carbon pillars. The black and white shades meet in competing wave-fronts which vibrate against each other on the visual spectrum. The human brain has only enough sensitivity to process the black information being picked up by the eye. As such the white was pushed aside by those brains and appeared not to exist despite indeed being printed in those letters. The glow effect of the white plastic still hovered around it. Visually there was a black acronym which glowed white.

Murray shrugs in response to Rutherford’s comment. “I’m not, I’m done with it.”

“You’re done building printers?” Rutherford asks incredulously.

“I’m done with the Opensync.” Tiedemann makes a mocking gesture with his eyebrows as he shifts forward, leaning his left elbow into the dome chairs arm rest “I’m not scaling it up. I’m done with it. It’s good enough. I’m moving onto better things.”

Rutherford’s hands rise in frustration, visibly dumbstruck despite his practiced high-brow gaze. “You’re crazy,” he states flatly “you’ve got a million dollar idea with infinite market potential. You’re going to give it up.”

“Cameron,” Senator Ross interrupts gracefully, her hand raised to claim a chance to speak. “This is the land of the free and the home of the brave. Doesn’t our friend have the right to conduct business with his product in the free global market however he’d like to?”

“Thanks to Creative-Commons rights I suppose so,” Rutherford replies quickly, “You’re right, you’re right, I get it, this is 3xI. I’ll leave politics for the after-party debate.”

“Then I agree, Mr. Rutherford,” follows Ross, turning her gaze back to Tiedemann “It really is a wonderful machine. I’d like to have had a thing like this when I had come out of the army. My productive potential would have been much higher. As it was, just by using the earlier model of 3D plastic printers I was able to provide some of the basic asset needs of many of the impoverished neighbourhoods in my home riding. With this I could have done some real good, built some real lasting infrastructure for those people. If you are done with the Opensync then, Mr. Murray, what are your next plans?”

“I’ll show you in twenty-two minutes,” Tiedemann replies, “my new tablet’s installing the custom operating system my team and I wrote.”

An aerial camera over the printer looks down upon all four guests. On the table next to Tiedemann is a tablet computer eight inches long, five inches wide and a centimetre wide without identifiable product insignia. White computer script flashes along the black screen as it process its digital instructions.

“I see, you’re developing operations software,” Ross sounds unimpressed, “Forgive me but this seems like the lesser challenge. Don’t you think software is a bit below your potential?”

“Not at all,” he replies, “But the software isn’t the important thing. I designed the whole tablet on a six-hundred dollar computer and printed it off my home Opensync.” He picks the tablet up, gripping the corner with his thumb on and two fingers. He is looking at Ross from the corner of his eyes when he turns, as little as he needs to, and hands the tablet to her.


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Voyager -- I've edited your post, as for some reason the gaps between paragraphs were excessive which made it very difficult to read, and I should hate anyone to be put off critiquing simply because of the formatting. I've also removed the final paragraphs to ensure that it remained within the word count -- please do remember that 1500 is the upper limit, not simply a guide.
 
I can't believe it took that long for me to get this posted- now I have to read the second iteration - sorry.

Hi I Voyager,

I really liked this for a number of reasons which I'll get back to in a moment. What I want to do is start with the hiccups that I notice in this piece. I say hiccups for lack of a better word. First I'm confused about who this piece might be targeting, and here's the reason:

The beginning almost starts out like a scientific article. Maybe slated for a magazine, but then it gets muddied up with the camera point of view and here is why:

The camera point of view immediately begins to sound like stage direction. So is this going to be a play?

Were setting the scene and it's got a lot of technical jargon and visuals that tickle...someones imagination. Again we have to ask who are we targeting. Because it might tickle the techie who reads those scientific articles, but it might just piss them off and heres why:

It's impossible to determine how all of that stage direction moves this story along. Well not totally again if I was the techie I might be able to say oh-ah that's like the 3'D printers we have now, but it has this and this and that that we don't have yet. (Does it? Because I can't tell from this.)

The story itself starts to move along when Tiedemann actually begins the lecture but still it doesn't move anywhere until he makes his announcement.

Since the whole text is no longer here I can't judge clearly when knowing something is now missing, but from what I see the first part needs rework unless you mean to put the reader to sleep in the first page or you are only targeting a small audience who will appreciate all of that. (Again the real question is how important is all that popular science type of reporting to the story?)

Perhaps your might want to start the thing with the conflict that will soon ensue. Something like.
------------------My overworked words------------------------------------------------------
Tiedemann Murray adjusted his tie out of habit not nerves and he looked into the camera with an expression that showed little, and failed to reveal the thoughts that would likely start a firestorm of useless debate when he proclaimed his intent to withdraw from the Opensync project.
---------------------------end overworked words-----------------------------------

Now to what I liked:

Tiedemann rings true in this example. What I mean is that I've met people like him. They are design specialist who have built something useful and its out in the market and they really have this attitude that its a monkey on their back because they want to move on to the next better project which is impossible as long as they are hamstrung by the present product and all the re-engineering the customers are asking for.

It would be nice to just give the finished product to some junior designer to keep up with but no one of those wants to work on someone else elephant when they can be designing their own sleek new beast.

So it's easy to see that the designer might try to divorce himself from the project before everyone can become dependent upon it and him. Plus it looks like he is eager to take his work into the next phase-that's only a guess because we don't get the rest. But experience tells me that with the fast pace of development even today; he has something along the same lines with more elegant performance in mind.

His struggle is with the money people who want some return before they go to the next level. So yeah, I do like what this is already saying, but it took half the page to get there to start giving us this info.
 
I'd appreciate to know what you think of the second iteration. I feel like I've solved the technical issue. I've further made modifications (though the 'edit post' option has disappeared and I don't feel comfortable posting a third version haha) but they are slight modifications or fixes compared to the changes I put down here on the forum.
 
I found grammar errors and I’m no grammar expert - you’ll need to work on and correct.
I thought the dialogue was very un-natural in places.
As to this whole 3D printer thing, I’m sort of wondering what is your point. I’ve no doubt it will change manufacturing and be revolutionary, but how does this link in with your story? I have no plot idea or any thread of a storyline, so why should I read on? I don’t dispute the tech involved in your printer, but I don’t want to know the inner workings, or the inner workings of my car, TV, computer or any other items I own, I just use them. I don’t doubt that you have a great idea for a story or even greater characters waiting in the wings, all this I accept as given. Your story was killed off by too much background detail. Background details should be like a watercolour, more an impression instead of all the inner workings. You’ve given us massive up close and fine detail that to be frank, is not very interesting. Focus on the story, not the background.

Welcome mate, you’ve had a bruising first review. They will get easier but every review stings some, more so maybe when you learn even more. Relax into your writing I’d say, learn to trust the reader as someone as intelligent as you are and write as if your story telling to a peer. So the question being – do I understand this easily – if yes, then assume your reader will too. Anyway, good luck and chin up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top