Nils wrote on Saturday, 15. August 2009 at 14:56:

Hell - no one else does!
According to Kate Micucci it took the artist $1,301.37 on printer ink.

Jessica wrote on Saturday, 15. August 2009 at 16:21:

Well, you know how much I appreciate precise information like twitter's offering...

First it seemed to be very expensive... I just calculated 152 seconds with 25 prints each makes 3800 prints. Some say one print would cost 0,01 to 0,50€ (B/W only). This makes in best case 38€ (about 54$), in worst case 1900€ (2698$). Heck, why didn't he buy a better printer then?

Michael wrote on Sunday, 16. August 2009 at 03:41:

Quote of today: "you know how much I appreciate precise information like twitter's offering..."
ANd about pretty chaep printing stuff... refilling the cartrideges with 'alternativeinks' isn't THAT expensive. And then, there are offices too... And juggling and boasting with big numbers (seems to be quite common among human males - believe me, I know what I'm talking about (my number is bigger than your's !))
And about the video: liked it ! The video, not the song/sound, but the idea is nice. I saw something resembling this video on vimeo, made with a 3D programm. And why do I see so much pixilatio these days ? Commercials, mostly...

Jessica wrote on Sunday, 16. August 2009 at 08:21:

Hi Michael!

It's great that you mention pixilation because I've got a small collection of videos I'd like to share with you later.

Hope you're alright?

Nils wrote on Sunday, 16. August 2009 at 18:09:

You question the figures? Common - it's the internet!!

But I think you are right - the number is too hight. Although I think your calculation does not fit: There are some scenes with parallel copies and there is this funny thing about animation and film making: you get lots of trash.

Jessica wrote on Sunday, 16. August 2009 at 18:13:

Hm, I think that's why you'd plan as much as possible...