So today I’m dealing with support issues like call forwarding, email and twitter. For some reason my smart phone forgot how to send email from my business account. What’s worse, is it was pretending to. I thought I was responding to clients who were getting nothing.
I finally got that fixed and went to head out to the post office and found my office phone wouldn’t forward. It seems that AT&T decided to “improve” my service by deleting that feature. After 45 minutes on line and on the phone I am told that it will take 24-48 hours for the service to be restored.
I am old enough to remember when an answering machine you could access remotely was a luxury. Now people expect responses real-time. For the self employed and small business this is problem made far worse by fritzy service providers.
So I am taking bets on what will get screwed up adding the call forwarding back in.
Anyway with that I’m going dark for awhile and heading to the post office.
Until Later
Charles
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Thursday, August 18, 2011
The Value of a Product is in the Execution
I like doing research and inventing new products is fun. But the job of actually commercializing them is, …well… work. It’s a reality I think most people don’t realize. In fact I can’t tell you how many people I’ve met who think the idea alone is worth the lion’s share of the profit. T’aint true.
Without the knowledge to actually take a vague concept and make it real, the idea is essentially worthless. And more importantly the financial rewards follow the financial risk. And it is a lot of work to actually bring a product to market. Very few ideas start a stampede of marketers and investors.
This is all very real to me as I am now starting to get the first orders for the new forensic products launched last week. John pointed out that we’ve been working on this launch for more or less two years.
Granted we were not doing it full time. We both have had to support ourselves. And we’ve both been working on multiple products. In fact, I’m involved in the launch of thirty-one products this summer. That’s everything from product design, to setting up production, to strategizing marketing and arranging product fulfillment. And this has been while working on six pieces of raw research and running my regular consulting practice.
But all of this brings me up to sales, the piece I enjoy the least. But when I look at everything that has gone into these first sales, I have to say, the “Idea” may have been a good one, but it’s the execution that adds the value.
Until Later
Charles
Without the knowledge to actually take a vague concept and make it real, the idea is essentially worthless. And more importantly the financial rewards follow the financial risk. And it is a lot of work to actually bring a product to market. Very few ideas start a stampede of marketers and investors.
This is all very real to me as I am now starting to get the first orders for the new forensic products launched last week. John pointed out that we’ve been working on this launch for more or less two years.
Granted we were not doing it full time. We both have had to support ourselves. And we’ve both been working on multiple products. In fact, I’m involved in the launch of thirty-one products this summer. That’s everything from product design, to setting up production, to strategizing marketing and arranging product fulfillment. And this has been while working on six pieces of raw research and running my regular consulting practice.
But all of this brings me up to sales, the piece I enjoy the least. But when I look at everything that has gone into these first sales, I have to say, the “Idea” may have been a good one, but it’s the execution that adds the value.
Until Later
Charles
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Art and Science
Two years ago I was at an art fair in the park. One of the booths was from shop calling itself “fine art.” And not to say that the painting sin the tent were unpleasant, but I couldn’t tell what the painter was trying to say. So I asked.
The painter (and I’ll avoid the term artist) She said that she likes to let the viewer find their own meaning. This is not art. It may be a pretty image. But art needs something to say. It has to emote, or tell. Fine art, conveys a idea that the viewer understands; the better the artist the clearer the telling.
I see this as a common element in society. Would be writers string random words together, add some vulgarity and call it poetry. We went from the little engine that “thought it could” to “I want to be so I am.” And with it we loose meaning. Art, science, law, morality are all victims to this decline of meaning.
Consider the “true arte,” swordsmanship. Not a fine art to be sure, but a skill that requires training and deliberacy of intent. One cannot be a good swordsman without active training and skill. The same is true of painting, writing, sculpture … and the list goes on.
And before one gets the impression that fine art is trivial, therefore it doesn’t matter if it looses meaning and significance, I would ask that the impact of the artist’s eye be considered. Which brings me to the tie in to this blog.
In the course of my scientific career I have had the opportunity to work with some great product designers, researchers and criminalists. On the surface, it is tempting to say that the crossover is in the aesthetic. But it goes beyond that. Art and science are both about definition. They seek, among other things to answer the question what. And it is here that they cross over. And it is here that the sloppy impression of “fine art” is hurting the whole of society.
As a scientist, I have been able to hold my own with the top minds in many fields. I am by no means claiming the same skill or knowledge as men and women with decades more training and experience. But, I could understand what they did and how they did it well enough to follow or reproduce what they did.
Some of them follow an Aristotelian approach to definition. Others took a more conciliate approach. And some just compare to what they already know. But there is another way to define a scene.
One criminalist’s approach was different. He looked at a crime scene aesthetically. What should or should not be there was the discriminating factor in how he searched. Unlike most of his peers, he was an artist not a scientist, a Flemish Realist painter. And I came to believe that his approach was much more indicative, of his painting than an outward in definition.
More importantly, unlike most of the experts I had worked with over the years, I could not reproduce what he did. So, I decided to try and learn to think like a painter, add this to my tool box.
So, I have been trying to teach myself to paint. Start with the outline, build the shadow, then add the detail layer by layer. So of the detail in one layer will be hidden by subsequent layers, but they are still important as in some way they will shape and shade the final image.
This way of defining is different from my normal analytical approach. As a scientist, I think from general to specific and this was going from specific to general. But it in building an image this way, I found that I was getting as sense of what should be there. And by extrapolation, what should not.
I may never be a good painter, but the exercise has taught me a new perspective and isn’t that kinda the point?
Peace
Charles
p.s. If you want to see some of the paintings: http://www.prestons-world.com/abouttheauthor/artgallery.html
The painter (and I’ll avoid the term artist) She said that she likes to let the viewer find their own meaning. This is not art. It may be a pretty image. But art needs something to say. It has to emote, or tell. Fine art, conveys a idea that the viewer understands; the better the artist the clearer the telling.
I see this as a common element in society. Would be writers string random words together, add some vulgarity and call it poetry. We went from the little engine that “thought it could” to “I want to be so I am.” And with it we loose meaning. Art, science, law, morality are all victims to this decline of meaning.
Consider the “true arte,” swordsmanship. Not a fine art to be sure, but a skill that requires training and deliberacy of intent. One cannot be a good swordsman without active training and skill. The same is true of painting, writing, sculpture … and the list goes on.
And before one gets the impression that fine art is trivial, therefore it doesn’t matter if it looses meaning and significance, I would ask that the impact of the artist’s eye be considered. Which brings me to the tie in to this blog.
In the course of my scientific career I have had the opportunity to work with some great product designers, researchers and criminalists. On the surface, it is tempting to say that the crossover is in the aesthetic. But it goes beyond that. Art and science are both about definition. They seek, among other things to answer the question what. And it is here that they cross over. And it is here that the sloppy impression of “fine art” is hurting the whole of society.
As a scientist, I have been able to hold my own with the top minds in many fields. I am by no means claiming the same skill or knowledge as men and women with decades more training and experience. But, I could understand what they did and how they did it well enough to follow or reproduce what they did.
Some of them follow an Aristotelian approach to definition. Others took a more conciliate approach. And some just compare to what they already know. But there is another way to define a scene.
One criminalist’s approach was different. He looked at a crime scene aesthetically. What should or should not be there was the discriminating factor in how he searched. Unlike most of his peers, he was an artist not a scientist, a Flemish Realist painter. And I came to believe that his approach was much more indicative, of his painting than an outward in definition.
More importantly, unlike most of the experts I had worked with over the years, I could not reproduce what he did. So, I decided to try and learn to think like a painter, add this to my tool box.
So, I have been trying to teach myself to paint. Start with the outline, build the shadow, then add the detail layer by layer. So of the detail in one layer will be hidden by subsequent layers, but they are still important as in some way they will shape and shade the final image.
This way of defining is different from my normal analytical approach. As a scientist, I think from general to specific and this was going from specific to general. But it in building an image this way, I found that I was getting as sense of what should be there. And by extrapolation, what should not.
I may never be a good painter, but the exercise has taught me a new perspective and isn’t that kinda the point?
Peace
Charles
p.s. If you want to see some of the paintings: http://www.prestons-world.com/abouttheauthor/artgallery.html
Monday, August 15, 2011
Me, William and A Gel Lifter
When I was a kid, my father spent a lot of time with me taking apart and reassembling equipment. I think in many ways it’s why I do what I do. And now that I’m the adult, I get to experience this from the other side, working with my nephews. This weekend Jon and I played with the Green Screen and a stuffed moose [poor poor moose…). And William and I worked on bad weather driving and designing a new forensic product.
In this case, we were working with gel lifters. For those of you who haven’t used them, gel lifters are used to pull up pattern impressions left on some surface. They work well and the ones we were using have such a low level of tack that they pull of only part of the impression. As a result they can separate one layer from another. But the draw-back is the impression is feint, so William and I were working on a contrasting aid that could be added to the lifter to increase resolution.
William told me he prefers proof of concept testing. He was speaking in comparison to the “work” of developing a finished product. And the truth is I couldn’t agree more. As I say often, it’s like day-camp without the adult supervision.
Our first attempt actually melted the lifter, the second washed away the print, but the third shows promise. I won’t say too much about the technology since, we’re just starting with it. And anyway my point today is how cool it was to spend some small time at the bench with my nephew. If you get the chance today, show someone younger the cool parts of what you do for a living. Trust me, their enjoyment is infectious.
But the hubbub of the trade show is behind me and I’m back to business as usual.
Until Later
- Charles
In this case, we were working with gel lifters. For those of you who haven’t used them, gel lifters are used to pull up pattern impressions left on some surface. They work well and the ones we were using have such a low level of tack that they pull of only part of the impression. As a result they can separate one layer from another. But the draw-back is the impression is feint, so William and I were working on a contrasting aid that could be added to the lifter to increase resolution.
William told me he prefers proof of concept testing. He was speaking in comparison to the “work” of developing a finished product. And the truth is I couldn’t agree more. As I say often, it’s like day-camp without the adult supervision.
Our first attempt actually melted the lifter, the second washed away the print, but the third shows promise. I won’t say too much about the technology since, we’re just starting with it. And anyway my point today is how cool it was to spend some small time at the bench with my nephew. If you get the chance today, show someone younger the cool parts of what you do for a living. Trust me, their enjoyment is infectious.
But the hubbub of the trade show is behind me and I’m back to business as usual.
Until Later
- Charles
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Four “New” products released at IAI show
There’s something about trade shows that’s both exhausting and invigorating. You’ve got about 90 seconds to catch someone’s interest, determine if your product is relevant and then explain it to them. But, and the but is important, you have the opportunity to introduce your work to colleagues and strangers.
So, this week I was up at vendor expo at the IAI educational conference in Milwaukee showing off some of the products we’ve been working on. For anyone who might be reading this and is not part of the forensic community, the IAI is the International Association for Identification, a forensic professional society.
Aneval was in a booth with Executive Forensics and Mountain State University because we had all collaborated on some research. So we showed off our research at the University. But mostly we focused on the fuming orange because the co-inventor decided to use it in his graduate work and he needed to get some volunteers. None the less, we showed off four products, each revolutionary in its own way.
The Fuming Orange is a fluorescent cyanoacrylate for torch fuming of finger prints. What makes it special is that it is excited by incident light from 365 nm to 540 nm; a huge range that makes it compatible with almost any commercial light.
Then there was a similar product CN-Yellow Crystals. This is a solid cyanoacrylate that is used in place of the liquid in fingerprinting chambers. It also has a fluorescent glow when excited around 365 nm to 430 nm. Both the CN Yellow and the Fuming Orange should eliminate the need for dye staining. Which will speed up and improve fingerprinting.
What’s interesting about them is that the base technology from which they were developed is from plastics compounding. I talk a lot about cross pollinating in science and industry and these products are a good example.
In fact the last fingerprinting product, the AI Dyes comes from textile printing technology. These products are actually older, but I never really marketed them. The AI dyes, color the background around fingerprints. These are useful because eventually fingerprints fade. With these, the image will remain.
The fourth product, Blue Blood Tracker, is a blood detection chemical, originally developed for hunters. It’s better (in my highly biased opinion) then the fluorescent agents because it works in room light and is a permanent change.
So on one hand all of the base science is old hat in other industries, these technologies are new to the forensic market. I guess the take away here is it pays to read outside your core field. You never know what ideas you might be able to retask.
But that’s all for now as I have almost a 100 people to follow up with after the show and still need to get some of my own lab work done yet this week.
So, this week I was up at vendor expo at the IAI educational conference in Milwaukee showing off some of the products we’ve been working on. For anyone who might be reading this and is not part of the forensic community, the IAI is the International Association for Identification, a forensic professional society.
Aneval was in a booth with Executive Forensics and Mountain State University because we had all collaborated on some research. So we showed off our research at the University. But mostly we focused on the fuming orange because the co-inventor decided to use it in his graduate work and he needed to get some volunteers. None the less, we showed off four products, each revolutionary in its own way.
The Fuming Orange is a fluorescent cyanoacrylate for torch fuming of finger prints. What makes it special is that it is excited by incident light from 365 nm to 540 nm; a huge range that makes it compatible with almost any commercial light.
Then there was a similar product CN-Yellow Crystals. This is a solid cyanoacrylate that is used in place of the liquid in fingerprinting chambers. It also has a fluorescent glow when excited around 365 nm to 430 nm. Both the CN Yellow and the Fuming Orange should eliminate the need for dye staining. Which will speed up and improve fingerprinting.
What’s interesting about them is that the base technology from which they were developed is from plastics compounding. I talk a lot about cross pollinating in science and industry and these products are a good example.
In fact the last fingerprinting product, the AI Dyes comes from textile printing technology. These products are actually older, but I never really marketed them. The AI dyes, color the background around fingerprints. These are useful because eventually fingerprints fade. With these, the image will remain.
The fourth product, Blue Blood Tracker, is a blood detection chemical, originally developed for hunters. It’s better (in my highly biased opinion) then the fluorescent agents because it works in room light and is a permanent change.
So on one hand all of the base science is old hat in other industries, these technologies are new to the forensic market. I guess the take away here is it pays to read outside your core field. You never know what ideas you might be able to retask.
But that’s all for now as I have almost a 100 people to follow up with after the show and still need to get some of my own lab work done yet this week.
Monday, August 8, 2011
IAI Conference and Show
Today, I’m restarting this blog. It feels funny since there are no readers and I am reasonably sure no one knows it exists. But hopefully that will change. The 96th international educational conferences for the International Association for Identification is being held in Milwaukee this week. It is a forensic conference with associated trade show. And for the first time I will be manning a trade show booth for my own company. That’s right Aneval Inc. if finally selling products on the big stage.
I’m actually very excited about this. I’ve been working for years developing products for many industries, especially forensics. And, now I am finally selling my own (and some other peoples!)
But what I’m really proud of is that the products I’m offering are a legitimate improvement in technology. We have for example: Blue Blood Tracker. This is used to detect blood stains in place of, or augment to luminol.
Blue Blood Tracker, produces a permanent blue color when it comes into contact with blood. So unlike luminol and other products that need to be reapplied, diluting the stain, this is a one shot only. And of course CN-Yellow and Fuming Orange which produce colored latent finger prints with out the need for dye staining. All very exciting.
But I should get to the business of preparing for the show – so check out the virtual lecture hall at www.anevalinc.com. And if you read this and it’s still this week, come visit us at the show booth 540!
I’m actually very excited about this. I’ve been working for years developing products for many industries, especially forensics. And, now I am finally selling my own (and some other peoples!)
But what I’m really proud of is that the products I’m offering are a legitimate improvement in technology. We have for example: Blue Blood Tracker. This is used to detect blood stains in place of, or augment to luminol.
Blue Blood Tracker, produces a permanent blue color when it comes into contact with blood. So unlike luminol and other products that need to be reapplied, diluting the stain, this is a one shot only. And of course CN-Yellow and Fuming Orange which produce colored latent finger prints with out the need for dye staining. All very exciting.
But I should get to the business of preparing for the show – so check out the virtual lecture hall at www.anevalinc.com. And if you read this and it’s still this week, come visit us at the show booth 540!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)