Photographing felt with a compact camera Last updated:29 October 2010

I wrote an article about photographing felt a little while ago, but it occurred to me that it assumed quite a lot of expensive photographic gear, so here’s how I got on trying the same thing with just a compact camera.

Volvos in films Last updated:17 June 2024

OK, I’ve just been writing some more serious stuff about dealing with people, so as an antidote for myself, here’s something really trivial that’s been bugging me for a while. Is it me, or are there a disproportionately high number of appearances of Volvos in films. Here’s a list of ones I’ve noticed (so far).

  • School of Rock – This is a true Volvofest. The car park at the school where Jack Black works has, at various points at least two XC70s, an S80 in the background, a V70, and a V40. One of the fathers drives an XC90. When Jack arrives for the parents evening the first five cars he drives past are Volvos. Right at the end a V70 drops a child off for the new school. You’d think it was filmed in Sweden…
  • Freaky Friday – Jamie Lee Curtis drives an S60
  • Garfield – his owner drives another S60
  • Two Weeks Notice – Sandra Bullock drives an S80
  • Cheaper By The Dozen 2 – Steve Martin’s daughter drives what looks like a V70, although you don’t see much of it
  • The Fly – Jeff Goldblum’s girlfriend drives a 200 series estate.
  • The West Wing – CJ’s Dad has an old 200 estate when she visits him in series 4
  • The Sure Thing – John Cusack initially gets a lift from Tim Robbins in an Amazon estate
  • Mrs Doubtfire – Sally Field drives a red 850 saloon
  • New Moon – Robert Pattinson drives an XC60. Even vampires drive Volvos…
  • Twilight – …and change them quite regularly it seems, as in the first film he drives a silver C30.
  • Eclipse – my daughter tells me there’s a different one in this as well. Currently unconfirmed.
  • Back To The Future – Near the start, where Michael J Fox and his girlfriend are in the town square, you can see a 240 in the background
  • Son of The Mask – Again near the start, there’s a big explosion at a party, and two 240s get turned over. There might be some more Volvos in the film, but frankly, I couldn’t take more than a few moments of this one…
  • Must Love Dogs – Diane Lane’s boyfriend drives a gold C70
  • Music And Lyrics – Hugh Grant’s agent drives an S60
  • Sydney White – at the hustings for class president (or whatever it is) there’s a black XC60 prominently behind Amanda Bynes
  • The Shaggy Dog – I literally only saw 30 seconds of this, honest, but the dog was being driven around in an XC90…
  • Something’s Gotta Give – Diane Keaton drives a C70
  • Marley And Me – Owen Wilson drives a navy blue S80
  • Never Been Kissed – Drew Barrymore’s friend drives a 240 estate
  • 27 Dresses – Katherine Heigl drives a 240

This list also gives a slightly embarrassing indication of the sorts of films I watch, doesn’t it? I cite a 1311 year old daughter as partial defence, m’lud. Street cred improved slightly by New Moon, I think, but then Son of The Mask messes that up a bit.

The answer, no doubt, is that those clever Volvo marketing types are placing their product squarely in front of their target market – parents. People like me, in fact.

Relations with suppliers Last updated:5 October 2011

Some little time ago I came across a job ad looking for a project manager (and I quote) “to bludgeon the supplier into submission”. I’m not quite sure whether the agency thought that this was a good way to attract high class candidates, or what. The sad thing is I suspect it wasn’t a joke.

Subsequent reflection on this got me thinking about really productive working relationships I have had with different suppliers. One common characteristic of these successful relationships has been the old fashioned virtue of trust. However, I’ve never trusted the supplier. I have trusted the people who work for the supplier. I’ve trusted them to bring their specific expertise to the project and I’ve trusted them when they’ve told me that things are impossible, and I’ve trusted their judgement when we’ve discussed problems. I flatter myself that, again in the most productive relationships, the trust has been mutual. The supplier project manager has trusted me to manage things at my end, believed me when I said some elements are essential however difficult they might be, and so on. These have been relationships of equals, not assailant and victim. There has been a remarkably small amount of bludgeoning.

So how did I get to this position of trust? I had been conscious for quite a while, having worked with suppliers on many different projects, that the situations which I felt to be most useful were face to face meetings with people. No big suprise there. But actually I realised it was a bit more specific than that – in many cases the most productive discussions were actually the informal ones. The circumstances varied from sitting next to a developer and chatting about an issue, talking with a supplier project manager over lunch during a more formal meeting, even chatting to potential suppliers during a coffee break during a tender presentation. My experience of projects is that it’s usually a few people who are in tune with each other who are critical to the success of a project. And it’s the informal contact that builds this set of people who are in sync, and who trust each other, just as much as the formal contact. None of this is to say you don’t need formal meetings – of course you do. But don’t neglect the opportunity to build the relationship through the informal contact.

I am not normally one for reading learned articles on project methodologies – but there’s one I came across called “Characterizing people as non-linear, first-order components in software development” written by US methodology guru Alistair Cockburn in 1999. Normally the title of this alone would have been enough to put me off, but in fact the more I read, the more I found myself in tune with its substance. Cockburn notes that a commonly quoted factor in successful projects is that “a few good people stepped in at key moments and did whatever was needed to get the job done”. Additionally, he concludes that the most effective way to communicate is to have two people standing at a whiteboard, and that the further you get away from this situation the less effective the communication. He doesn’t make this specific distinction, but this implies to me an informal meeting rather than a formal presentation.

The relationship with your supplier becomes more important when problems occur – and things always go wrong during projects. Coming back to the start of this article, bludgeoning the supplier into submission isn’t very likely to help. I’ve never seen a project fixed by people shouting – and I’ve seen a fair amount of shouting. I’ve seen projects fixed by sitting down and talking about them. I’ve seen projects not fixed by either approach. I’ve certainly seen shouting make suppliers less co-operative. In my experience, sitting down and talking calmly about the problem is usually the best approach, and certainly the one adopted by all the most impressive project managers I’ve worked with. The better your relationship with the supplier, the easier this sort of meeting is likely to be, another benefit of getting to know the people you’re dealing with better.

Looking at this from the point of view of less successful relationships I have had, they support the same conclusion. In a few cases I have not had what I’d call positive relations with suppliers. These have pretty much coincided with situations where I haven’t been able to establish good relations at a person to person level – either because of geographical separation, or in some cases, cultural differences.

In conclusion, remembering that the people you are dealing with are just that, people, and taking every opportunity to build relationships with those people, is a significant success factor in projects. The fringe benefit, of course, is that it might actually make the project more enjoyable as well as more productive. And that’s got be a good thing.

Cross-browser consistency Last updated:29 October 2010

Once upon a time there was a business that wanted a very simple website. So I built one as a small project. It had a few pictures and some text. I looked at it in IE7 and it looked OK. It was a first step into the web world for the business. The client was happy.

A year passed. The website started looking a bit tired. It needed some more pictures. So I rebuilt it, added more pages and a lot more pictures. I looked at it in IE7. It looked OK. I looked at it in Firefox as well. It looked OK. It didn’t look quite the same as it did in IE7. I found that if I used tables in the design, some (but not all) of the differences between IE7 and Firefox 3 went away. (Don’t start shouting until you’ve read the rest of this page….) I decided I could live with the differences. I didn’t understand why Firefox was getting it wrong though. The new website went live about 2 months ago. The client was happy. So were his customers.

For other purposes, for another website, I’d been learning a bit about “Cascading Style Sheets” – css to the initiated.

I happened to show the website to someone I was working with. Having previously been quite proud of it, I was a bit embarrassed – the site navigation looked a bit naff. So I made the navigation look like buttons. It was quite easy to do this using the css I’d learnt. So I extracted all the style into a separate css file. The page looked quite a bit better with the buttons. The client was happy. It still didn’t look quite the same in IE7 as it did in Firefox 3. I decided I couldn’t live with this any longer. I spent hours trying to understand this. As a result of this I learnt a lot about css. Every time I looked at the html or css I spotted something that could be done better, so I changed it. This became a fascinating journey into the world of modern web applications, or as my wife called it, an obsession. Where I could get it to work, I got rid of the tables I’d used. I got rid of some of the differences between IE7 and Firefox. I started to realise it was IE7 that was doing the unexpected things, not Firefox. I started viewing what I built in Firefox first not IE7 first.

I made the mistake of posting a question on a discussion board. In line with all website discussion boards everywhere, I didn’t quite get the answer to the question I asked, but I did get some comments about how the website was built, using lots of absolute positioning. I rebuilt the website using some suggested code off the discussion board to use floats and margins instead. It still looked pretty much the same to the untrained eye…..(not someone comparing using a pixel ruler).

Getting curious, I had a look at the website in Chrome as well. It looked the same as in Firefox. Hurrah. Then I looked in Opera. Boo.  All the text was cut off on the right (EDIT: which I now realise was this problem, and nothing to do with margins at all). I took all the floats and margins back out. It looked OK in Opera then. I went to bed…..

In the morning I started again. I got rid of all the absolute positioning again. I did it in a slightly different way and it seemed a lot easier. I got rid of an extra line showing up in IE that was at the top of every page. The Home page looked identical in IE7, Firefox, Chrome and Opera. It was wrong in IE6 however. I fixed that. Now it looked the same in all of them. I centred the page and put a nice swirly background on. I looked through all the rest of the site. I noticed that the spacing around the horizontal lines was different in IE than all the rest. I fixed that as well. To do this I had to write a “hack” in the css so that IE would read one bit of css and everything else would read the rest.

Then I had a look at the page in IE5.5. Why? Because from the logs I could see one user using IE5.5. This turned out to be the client….. What a mess in IE5.5. Font sizes all too big. Like being shouted at. I found another hack that fixed this.

Finally, had a look at the site through Safari. And it looked…….fine! So, the site looked the same in all the likely browsers, and the unlikely ones as well. (I know, I haven’t tried IE8 yet.)

OK, here’s the moral of this story. The client likes the new swirly borders, although he won’t see them using IE5.5 and a screen resolution of 800 by 600. Otherwise the site looks pretty much the same as it did 2 months ago despite being completely rewritten. Nobody but me has looked at the site in Chrome or Opera. It’s probably still got some issues I haven’t understood yet. I know a LOT more about css and html. The web pages have still got some tables on them, which are debatably holding tabular data.

The client is still happy…

If you’re looking for some hints and tips on browser consistency then I’ve pulled together some more details on this page.