text:
- For Attendees
- Co-Located Events
- Computer Animation Festival
- Courses
- Exhibition
- Exhibitor Tech Talks & Sessions
- General Information
- Featured Speakers
- Reception
- Registration
- Special Sessions
- Technical Papers
- Technical Sketches & Posters
- Travel & Housing
- Bookstore
- Jobs
- SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 e-Newsletter
- For Presenters
- For Volunteers
- Seoul
- For Exhibitors & Sponsors
- Registration
- For the Media
Technical Papers
The SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 Technical Papers program will continue the tradition of excellence in computer graphics and interactive techniques that SIGGRAPH and SIGGRAPH Asia are known for. We invite submission of high-quality papers that will set the standard in the field and stimulate future trends. Accepted papers will be presented at SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 and published as a special issue of ACM Transactions on Graphics.
We encourage submissions in the core topics of modeling, animation, rendering, and imaging. We also welcome submissions from closely related areas, in particular human-computer interaction and scientific/information visualization. Submissions in other fields, such as computer vision, computer-aided design, audio, and robotics, may also be appropriate if they are relevant to graphics or interactive techniques. We also encourage application-oriented submissions in areas such as film special effects and computer games. This list is not exhaustive. As always, excellence of the scientific ideas and their potential for future impact are the predominant acceptance criteria.
The SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 Technical Papers review process is similar to previous SIGGRAPH and SIGGRAPH Asia conferences. The high standards of both conferences are the same. Previously published work may not be submitted, nor may the same work be submitted to any other conference or journal during the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 Technical Papers review period. Any paper that has substantial overlap with a co-submitted or previously published paper will be rejected without review. More details about what constitutes a prior publication or a dual submission can be found in the Frequently Asked Questions and Prior Art & Public Disclosure.
For papers from related areas such as those listed above, authors should consider how their work will interest a computer graphics and interactive techniques audience before deciding whether to submit.
The submission deadline is 11 May 2010, 23:59 UTC/GMT. A detailed description of the timeline and the process can be found in Evaluation.
George Drettakis
REVES/INRIA Sophia-Antipolis
Technical Papers Chair
Please use the Technical Papers Online Submission Form to submit your paper before the submission deadline (11 May 2010, 23:59 UTC/GMT).
General Information
1. Submissions will be administratively rejected without review if it is found that:
a. The submission violates the ACM Policy and Procedures on Plagiarism.
b. The submission is a dual submission; that is, if the submission is simultaneously under review for any other conference or publication. For more details, see the Policy on Previous Publication and the Double Submissions section of the Frequently Asked Questions.
c. Electronic files have been submitted that include side effects other than presenting the submitted work to reviewers and committee members (for example, a "phone home" script).
2. All fields on the submission form except for the final file upload must be completed by 11 May 2010. When you begin the form, your submission will be assigned a unique paper_ID. A paper_ID is required for each submission. You must include the paper_ID at the top of the first page of your submitted paper, so you should complete the submission form prior to finalizing and uploading your paper. NO PAPER_IDs WILL BE ISSUED after 11 May 2010, 23:59 UTC/GMT. See Important Dates.
3. See Publication Requirements and the Other Questions About Submissions section of Frequently Asked Questions for information on preparing documents and supplemental materials (including information on anonymity, length, etc.). See the Deadlines section of Frequently Asked Questions for more details about submission deadlines.
Information for Submission of Papers and Electronic Supplemental Materials
1. As stated above, all fields on the online submission form must be completed by 11 May 2010, 23:59 UTC/GMT. See Important Dates.
2. You must upload a PDF file of your paper and all supplemental files by 11 May 2010, 23:59 UTC/GMT. See Important Dates. If you find that uploading is slow and you are concerned about meeting the deadline, you may first upload MD5 checksums for your files (by 11 May, 23:59 UTC/GMT) and then upload the files that match this checksum by 12 May 2010, 23:59 UTC/GMT. To ensure that MD5 checksums can be uploaded prior to the deadline, uploading of papers and supplemental files may be disabled during the hours immediately before the deadline. Please be prepared to upload checksums during this period. Papers or materials emailed to the Papers Chair or Papers Advisory committee are not considered to have been submitted; you must use the online submission system.
English Review Service
Non-native English speakers may use the English Review Service to help with the text of submissions. Please note that this takes time, so your submission should be sent to the English Review Service well before the final Technical Papers deadline. There is no guarantee on turnaround time for this service.
Why is the abstract due by the 11 May 2010 deadline?
The "paper sort" process of assigning papers to committee members begins immediately after the 11 May 2010 deadline. It is useful to have the abstract, as well as the other submission form details, at this time, so that material for the paper sort can be prepared. Your paper will be assigned to committee members based on the abstract and the keywords you select.
What is the deal with MD5 checksums?
If you upload all of your files by 11 May 2010, 23:59 UTC/GMT, you can ignore the MD5 checksums. The system will, however, compute and report the MD5 checksum for any file you upload, once the uploaded file has been completely received by the submissions server. You may find this useful if you want to check that your file has been uploaded without corruption. Just compare the MD5 checksum you compute for your file with the checksum computed by the submission system.
If you are uploading in the last couple of days before the deadline, server response may be slow. To be sure of meeting the deadline, you may initially upload just the MD5 checksum for each of your files. If the MD5 checksum for a file is received by 11 May 2010, 23:59 UTC/GMT, you will have 24 hours to complete the upload of that (unchanged, and therefore identical) file. That is, you will have until 12 May 2010, 23:59 UTC/GMT, to upload files for which MD5 checksums have been entered. Visit the MD5 Homepage (unofficial) for pointers to various MD5 implementations. To calculate a checksum, you must use an MD5 calculator. We have tested the following MD5 calculators:
Linux: md5sum command
Windows98\Me\NT\2000\XP: FastSum v1.3
Mac OS/X: "md5" command in Terminal.
Physical Submission of Supplemental Materials
We encourage electronic submission of videos and other supplementary materials, since they are easier to distribute to reviewers than physical media. However, if you believe reviewers of your paper need to see physical supplementary materials, you may mail or ship six copies, to arrive by (not be postmarked or sent by) 11 May 2010, 23:59 UTC/GMT at this address:
George Drettakis
SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 Technical Papers Chair
Koelnmesse Pte Ltd
152 Beach Road
#25-05 Gateway East
Singapore 189721
All complete submissions received by the deadline will be acknowledged by email. For this purpose, a submission is complete if a paper_ID has been assigned and a PDF file of the paper has been successfully uploaded. Such submissions will be reviewed unless they are withdrawn by the author.
New requirement: All submitters must complete the Submission and Authorization Agreement (formerly the Acceptance Agreement) before the submission deadline. Incomplete submissions will not be reviewed or accepted.
Technical Papers Review Process
The Technical Papers Committee and a set of external reviewers, both consisting of recognized experts, will review submitted papers. Then, at their meeting (23-24 July 2010, in Los Angeles), the committee will select those papers to be presented at SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 and published in a special issue of ACM Transactions on Graphics.
SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 is an ACM SIGGRAPH conference. It is distinct from the long and ongoing series of SIGGRAPH conferences that have been held in the United States, but the process is very closely patterned on the review processes of previous SIGGRAPH conferences.
The Technical Papers Committee
The Technical Papers review process will be conducted by (1) the Technical Papers Chair, George Drettakis, who was chosen by the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 Conference Chair and approved by the ACM SIGGRAPH Executive Committee and its SIGGRAPH Asia Conference Advisory Group; (2) the Technical Papers Advisory Board, selected by the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 Technical Papers Chair, which consists of John Hughes, Holly Rushmeier, Eugene Fiume, Michael Cohen, Nelson Max (SIGGRAPH Asia 2009 Technical Papers Chair) and Tony DeRose (SIGGRAPH 2010 Technical Papers Chair); and 3) the Technical Papers Committee, chosen by the Technical Papers Chair with the assistance of the members of the Technical Papers Advisory Board, and consisting of about 35 people whose expertise spans the entire field.
The Review Process
1. On the weekend following the submission deadline, the Technical Papers Chair and several other volunteers chosen by the chair will conduct the papers sort. During this meeting, they will assign papers to the two senior reviewers, called the primary and secondary reviewers, who are members of the Technical Papers Committee. The Technical Papers Chair does not review papers. Papers that are inappropriate may be rejected during this assignment process, without being sent to any senior reviewers. Papers will normally be rejected at this stage only if they are clearly off-topic for SIGGRAPH Asia 2010, or if they are discovered to have been published previously or to have been submitted simultaneously to another conference or journal. For more details, see Prior Art & Public Disclosure and the Double Submissions section of Frequently Asked Questions.
2. The two assigned senior reviewers may, upon conferring with each other and the Technical Papers Chair, recommend that a paper be rejected without additional review. A paper will normally be rejected at this stage only if it falls into one of the categories listed in phase one, but this fact was not detected during the papers sort. It is possible, although unlikely, that a paper may also be rejected at this stage if it solves a problem that is known to be already solved; or if it does not cite (and the authors seem unaware of) important prior work on the same problem and doesn't address how it is different; or if it has no evaluation via proof, experiment, or analysis; or if it is solving a problem sufficiently minor that the senior reviewers do not believe that it belongs in the program.
3. Each paper is distributed to three or more additional experts, called tertiary reviewers. Two of them are selected by the primary senior reviewer of that paper, and the third is selected by the secondary senior reviewer. The primary, secondary, and tertiary reviewers all write full reviews. A copy of the review form can be found here and reviewer instructions here. Thus, at least five reviews are written for each paper that has not been rejected during phases one and two. The senior reviewers know the identities of the authors of the papers, but the tertiary reviewers do not. In unusual cases, such as when a tertiary reviewer fails to deliver a review on time, papers may receive only four reviews. For more details, see the Review Process section of Frequently Asked Questions.
4. After all reviews are complete, the review system allows the authors access to the reviews and scores for their papers. The authors have five days, from 7 July 2010 through 11 July 2010, to enter rebuttals if they feel that the reviewers have made substantive errors, or to answer specific questions posed by the reviewers. The rebuttal is confined to 2,000 words in length. The rebuttal period is for addressing factual errors in the reviews, not for getting revised text or new results into the review process. Any such novel material will be ignored by the senior reviewers. For more details see the Rebuttal Process section of Frequently Asked Questionss.
5. After the rebuttal is submitted, or beginning on 11 July if no rebuttal was received, the senior reviewers will read the author rebuttals, confer intensively about the paper, and prepare by 17 July a recommendation for the committee meeting. The three tertiary reviewers will see the author rebuttals and will participate in the discussion of the paper. Since the three tertiary reviewers do not know the names of the authors, the authors should maintain anonymity in their rebuttals. In addition, the tertiary reviewers don't know each other's identities, so they too must maintain anonymity during the discussion. The preliminary recommendation agreed on at this stage will be either accept, reject, or refer to ACM Transactions on Graphics. If an agreement on the recommendation cannot be reached, a fourth option is to table the paper, for further review and discussion.
6. If a paper is tabled, the senior reviewers will select one or more other members of the papers committee to write extra reviews of the paper, and be prepared to discuss it in detail at the meeting. The extra reviews will be written during the week before the committee meeting. If consensus still cannot be reached, it is possible that extra reviews will be assigned during the meeting itself. Any extra reviews will be returned to the authors after the meeting.
7. The full Technical Papers Committee meets on 23-24 July 2010 to determine acceptance or rejection of each paper. In cases where a consensus on a paper was not reached during the pre-meeting discussion phase, additional committee members may read the paper, and their evaluations will be taken into account in the decision.
Although the senior reviewers of a paper know the identities of its authors, they normally do not disclose these identities during the meeting. In advance of the paper sort, the papers committee members specify with which paper authors they have conflicts of interest, due to institutional, professional or student/teacher relationships. They leave the room when papers for which they have conflicts are discussed. Papers are judged solely on their merit, as determined by the reviews. Although the acceptance rate of SIGGRAPH papers has remained nearly constant in the range of 15% to 25%, there is no quota for the number of papers that should be accepted by the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 Technical Papers committee; this number will arise organically from the actions of the committee.
Possible Outcomes for a Paper
Email notifications of the papers committee's decisions should be sent by 23:59 UTC/GMT on 26 July 2010. The notifications will place each paper in one of the following three categories:
1. Rejected
2. Conditionally accepted for presentation at SIGGRAPH Asia 2010. Conditionally accepted papers undergo a second reviewing process, in which a referee (a member of the Technical Papers Committee) verifies that the final version of the paper is acceptable (that any required changes have been made, and that other changes made by the authors, perhaps in response to reviewer comments, have not compromised the paper in any way). This second and final stage determines the final acceptance status of all papers. The referees' decisions are final. Papers that do not satisfy the referees in the second stage of reviewing and/or that are not uploaded in final form by the final deadline of 12 September 2010, together with the original or revised versions of the submitted supplementary material, will be rejected. Accepted papers will appear in the conference proceedings, which will continue to be published as a special issue of ACM Transactions on Graphics. One author of the paper must commit to presenting the paper in person.
3. Conditionally accepted for publication in ACM Transactions on Graphics, pending major revisions. At the authors' discretion, these papers undergo a second reviewing process, in which an Associate Editor of ACM Transactions on Graphics works with the authors to produce an acceptable final version of their papers. The TOG reviewers will have access to the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 reviews, and to the extent possible, the paper will be assigned to the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 reviewers, so that there is consistency in the requested changes. Accepted papers will be published in regular issues of ACM Transactions on Graphics and may be presented at a later SIGGRAPH or SIGGRAPH Asia conference.
Upon First-Stage Acceptance for SIGGRAPH Asia 2010
Authors of papers conditionally accepted by the committee must prepare an electronic, camera-ready version of their papers in ACM-standard format for the second reviewing process, and then for eventual publication in a special issue of ACM Transactions on Graphics. SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 will also produce a DVD-ROM of all the accepted papers. For detailed instructions for preparation of papers, see ACM SIGGRAPH paper preparation guidelines.
By 26 July 2010 (23:59 UTC/GMT), notification of conditional acceptances and rejections will be sent to authors, along with any extra reviews and perhaps a list of required changes. Members of the Technical Papers committee, typically the primary and secondary reviewers, will be assigned as referees for the revision cycle.
A few days after notification, any changes to the paper title, list of authors, or 30-word paper summary will be due back to your referee. Changes to the paper title must be approved by your referee. Also, if you wish to substantially change the length of your paper, or if you wish to add any pages to the length of your paper, you must first obtain permission from your referee. Extensions of more than one page are unlikely to be granted.
The revised version of your paper is due on 4 September 2010. The final PDF file is due on 12 September 2010. During the week between these two dates, the reviewers and authors will communicate via the SIS bulletin board process about the adequacy of the changes in the revisions. Sometimes, changes are not initially considered adequate, or introduce new problems, so further revision may be required. If the initial revised version is submitted earlier than 4 September, this will provide even more time for iterated revisions. It is hoped that all provisionally accepted papers will be accepted by the end of this process, but this is not guaranteed.
When writing successive revisions, the reviewers' jobs are easier if you use a different color for the added or revised text in each new version. (But please remember to remove these colors in the final version.) It also helps to describe the changes in the bulletin-board post to which you attach the revision.
Session Presentation, Room Set-Up, and Equipment
A complete summary of the resources available for presentation of your paper. Arrangements for equipment outside the standard set-up are the sole responsibility of the paper presenter. One author must commit to present the paper in person at SIGGRAPH Asia 2010.
Presenter Recognition
Information on how SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 will support your participation if your work is accepted.
Authorization for Use
Any material that supports a paper's acceptance for publication must be available as part of the final publication. Thus, all material uploaded for review in the "public materials that are considered part of the submission" section of the submission form, including supplementary text, images, and videos, will become ACM-copyrighted material upon acceptance, and the required permission forms must be sent to ACM with the submission. If it subsequently becomes apparent that the necessary permissions cannot be given for publication of material that is substantially similar to that submitted for review, acceptance of the paper will be withdrawn. The submitted supplementary material will be reproduced on the conference DVD-ROM and will also be available to subscribers to the ACM Digital Library via the web page associated with your ACM Transactions on Graphics paper. You must, for every non-publicly available supplementary file originally uploaded in the "public materials" category, upload either copies of the originally submitted material or updated versions of this material to the online submission system's final-versions page by the 12 September deadline.
A Papers Preview section of the Electronic Theater will be prepared from selected parts of the submitted videos. If a section of your video is selected, you may be asked to provide that section in 1080p resolution for maximum projection quality, but if that is not possible for you, the version you submitted will be used. If you submit video, please keep your software and input data files available, in case you are asked to re-render a video segment at higher resolution. The Papers Preview video may also be used to publicize the Technical Papers program elsewhere inside and outside the conference.
Double Submissions
Prior Art and Public Disclosure
Other Questions About Submissions
Review Process
Rebuttal Process
Getting a Paper Accepted
Patents and Confidentiality
Volunteering for the Technical Papers Program
I would like to submit my paper to conference X or journal Y as well as to SIGGRAPH Asia 2010.
You must submit to just SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 and await our response before submitting elsewhere (should your work not be accepted by SIGGRAPH Asia 2010). You will have a chance to see the reviews and scores during the rebuttal period starting on 7 July, 2010, and may withdraw your paper at that time (or at any other time) if you choose to do so. If you submit your paper to another conference or journal simultaneously, we will reject your paper without review. We will be in contact with the editors of several graphics journals, and chairs of other graphics-related conferences, swapping information. Several double submissions to SIGGRAPH have been found in recent years.
I would like to submit my paper to conference X. Their submission deadline is after SIGGRAPH Asia 2010's program committee meeting, but they require abstracts to be submitted before SIGGRAPH Asia 2010's program committee meeting. May I submit the abstract?
Yes. The prohibition against dual submission kicks in when a full paper substantially equivalent to your SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 paper is submitted elsewhere. For conferences that require extended abstracts or other formats, you should ask the Papers Chair before submitting, to avoid the possibility that your paper will be rejected by SIGGRAPH Asia 2010.
But I want my paper to be in SIGGRAPH Asia 2010. I promise that if it's accepted by SIGGRAPH Asia 2010, I'll withdraw it from the other conference or journal.
We appreciate your eagerness to have your paper published by SIGGRAPH Asia 2010. There is only one route to having this happen (see the previous paragraphs).
We've submitted a paper about a pilot study to conference X, and now we'd like to submit a paper about the full-blown user study to SIGGRAPH Asia 2010. How should we go about that to avoid the perception that it is a dual submission?
Cite the submitted paper in your SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submission with a note to the reviewers that either it will be accepted by conference X, or you will publish it as a tech report and make it freely available on the web. Send in an anonymous version with your SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submission. Then when you write the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 paper, treat the pilot study as already published. Don't repeat text or figures from that paper in the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 version.
I sent in a paper to workshop X with the understanding that it was for review purposes only, and the workshop would have no published proceedings. Now, four months later, they tell me that they're going to publish the proceedings and include it in the digital library. Unfortunately there is significant overlap between that paper and my submitted SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 paper. How should I handle this?
We realize that you didn't intend to do anything against the SIGGRAPH rules, but now that the workshop rules have changed, you should either withdraw the workshop paper from the proceedings or withdraw your SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submission.
I am thinking about submitting a paper to SIGGRAPH Asia 2010, and I'm uncertain about the requirements. Specifically: "Your paper cannot have been previously published in an equivalent or similar form. A paper is considered published if it has appeared in a peer-reviewed
journal or in published meeting proceedings that are commercially available afterward to non-attendees, regardless of the language of that publication." Does this include abstract-reviewed published meeting proceedings (for example, SPIE proceedings)? Does your restriction apply to papers accepted for journal publication?
If the meeting proceedings are published in a form that is visibly, reliably, and permanently available afterward in print or electronic format to non-attendees (as in the case of SPIE proceedings), then it is not appropriate to submit a paper that has been so published to SIGGRAPH Asia 2010. If your work has been accepted for journal publication (or even submitted), it is not appropriate for submission to SIGGRAPH Asia 2010. For more details, see Prior Art & Public Disclosure.
How do I reference an ACM SIGGRAPH Sketch on the same topic as the paper that I am writing?
Depending on the year of presentation, the Sketch might appear in the ACM Digital Library. If it does, you should use the ACM Digital Library as a reference. If it is not archived, you may refer to the oral presentation at the conference or the abstract, if it appeared in one of the conference publications. If you were the author of a Sketch whose full text is no longer available to the public, then citation is not strictly necessary because presentation of a Sketch does not preclude publication of a full paper. If you were not the author of the Sketch, then you should cite the Sketch to respect the author's ideas. If the authors have published a subsequent paper, thesis, or tech report about their work, you should cite that instead of the Sketch because it will be a more useful pointer for your readers.
A month after submitting our paper, we obtained much better results. Can we withdraw our paper from review and submit it elsewhere (or wait until next year)?
SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submissions can be withdrawn at any time. However, authors should remember that the program chair and the senior reviewers on their paper know who they are, and may have already spent considerable effort reviewing their paper. Withdrawing a paper won't help your reputation with these reviewers. You will have a chance to see the reviews and scores during the rebuttal period starting on 7 July 2010, and if you withdraw your paper at that time to submit it elsewhere, the reviewers will probably not be upset. Your paper must be judged by your results at the time of submission, but if it is provisionally accepted, you will be able to replace results with your new results in the final publication version, subject to approval by the senior reviewers.
How do I include a reference to myself without identifying myself?
The general rule is to use the third person. For example, if Fred Brooks were to write a paper, he might say in his "related work" section: "Brooks et al. [12] discuss a system in which molecular visualizations are ... Our work builds on some of the ideas presented there, and on the ideas of Smith et al. [14] and the interaction techniques described by Wolford [18]." He would NOT say: "The authors, in prior work [12], discussed a system in which molecular visualization ... " The only case in which anonymous references are appropriate are unpublished manuscripts, in which case he might write: "The authors have also developed closely related techniques for molecular manipulation [15], but that work is outside the scope of this paper." Reference 15 would then read: "[15] Anonymous Authors. Molecular manipulations through computer graphics, submitted to CACM."
If there is any danger that reference [15] might be considered a dual submission, then you should submit it as supplemental material with your SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submission, along with a cover letter (also submitted as supplemental material) briefly explaining the differences between it and your SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submission. You do not need to anonymize the cover letter, and you do not necessarily need to anonymize the supplemental manuscript either.
However, if you believe it is important that all reviewers see that manuscript (for example, because it explains background concepts they might need in order to judge your SIGGRAPH Asia submission), then send in an anonymous version with your SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submission. This will allow it to be sent to tertiary reviewers. Be aware that even if you do not think the reference is important to the reviewers, some reviewers may want to see it, necessitating complicated efforts by the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 reviewers to help them obtain it anonymously. So please consider uploading anonymous versions of any anonymous references.
Please submit these supplementary materials (and any cover letter) electronically. The submission form provides separate areas for submitting supplementary materials intended to go to all reviewers versus supplementary materials intended to go only to the primary and secondary reviewer. Non-anonymized materials that would identify you as the author, including any cover letter, should go in the second area.
My SIGGRAPH Asia submission needs to cite a tech report or thesis that might be hard for reviewers to find. What should I do?
You are encouraged to submit that report or thesis as supplemental material. Cite it in the third person in your SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submission, even if you are one of its authors. This avoids the necessity of anonymizing it.
My SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submission needs to cite one of our own web pages, which can't easily be anonymized. Now what should I do?
If you can reasonably cite the web page in the third person, go ahead. Remember, however, that reviewers may be reluctant to visit cited web pages, since doing so could compromise their anonymity.
If for some reason you can't cite a web page in the third person, or if doing so would compromise your anonymity (for example, the same pictures appear in your submission and on the web page, or the web page includes a link to a paper by you that is cited in your SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submission as Anonymous Authors), then don't cite it; find another solution. If in this unusual case you're worried about a reviewer thinking that you've appropriated other people's work without proper citation, then submit as supplemental material a letter explaining the situation. You do not need to anonymize this letter. Of course, you can also upload as supplementary material your web page .html source, and any other files it points to.
My SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submission needs to cite another, concurrent SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submission by our group. Now what should I do?
Cite it as [16] Anonymous Authors, A grand unified theory of computer graphics, submitted to SIGGRAPH Asia 2010, and submit as supplemental material a letter telling us which paper_id you are referring to. As described above, it is a good idea to upload this anonymous reference as supplementary material, in case reviewers want to see it.
I know I am supposed to remove my name, company name, etc. from the document, but should I also remove names from the acknowledgements? If the paper is accepted, should I send another copy to you with this additional material?
You should not include an "acknowledgements" section in the submission. If your paper is accepted, you will submit a revised version that identifies you and your co-authors, your affiliations, and any acknowledgements that are appropriate (so consider the extra space that this will require when stating how may pages the paper will occupy).
Other Questions About Submissions
Where can I find a list of the Computing Reviews categories? Also, are we restricted to using keywords specified on the web site?
Yes, select one Computing Reviews primary topic area and one or more secondary topic areas that best describe your paper. These topic areas will help the paper sorters select appropriate senior reviewers for your paper. See ACM's Computing Classification System to determine the selection of keywords to describe your paper.
The Publication Requirements page says pages should be numbered, but the document preparation instructions say that page numbers should not be included. Which is correct?
You should number the pages. For the final version, if your paper is accepted, we'll ask that you not number the pages, but please number them for the submission. The sample documents in Document Preparation for Conference Proceedings all include page numbering.
I have video material I need to submit. May I submit it on a VHS tape or DVD-ROM?
The recommended procedure is to upload as supplementary material animations and videos in digital video files that can be easily downloaded and viewed by reviewers, rather than in physical media that are harder to handle and distribute. If you believe that the higher quality or resolution, or larger file size, allowed by a physical medium is necessary to evaluate your paper, you may use the shipping process described in the next answer below.
I have a hologram, a cloth sample, a page printed with non-standard inks, an auto-stereogram, or some other physical material that I need the reviewers to see, that I cannot supply electronically. What should I do?
You may mail or ship six copies of such supplementary materials to the Technical Papers Chair:
George Drettakis
SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 Technical Papers Chair
Koelnmesse Pte Ltd
152 Beach Road
#25-05 Gateway East
Singapore 189721
Even if you ship physical versions of your paper itself, you must still upload a PDF version to the online submission system. In order to be considered for reviewing, all such supplementary material must arrive by the 11 May deadline. If your shipped material does not arrive by 11 May, and you upload a PDF paper by then, your submitted paper will be reviewed without the shipped material.
The details in my imagery are very subtle: I am concerned that the reviewers will not print my paper on a suitable printer or view my video with an appropriate codec.
You still need to submit your paper as a PDF file. Please be aware that the reader of your final version, if accepted, may have the same problem, and plan your figures accordingly. In particular, make sure line weights on diagrams and text labels and axis numbering on graphs have not been reduced to an illegible size. (Colored lines and text will suffer more in this regard than black and white.)
For images, you are encouraged to include enlargements of selected sections to show details. You may include larger images in supplementary materials, and/or add in your submitted PDF paper a note to reviewers to look at enlarged versions of certain figures on their monitors, but this is not appropriate for the final version, so please prepare a paper that can be appreciated in print.
You may also ship physical versions of the paper or of selected images, as described in the previous answer, but this is not encouraged for material that will be printed in the proceedings with the normal printing process. You may also ship your video on physical media if necessary.
Does the video submitted by 11 May have to be final quality? Or will people whose papers are accepted have the opportunity to prepare a more polished video?
You'll have the opportunity to prepare a more polished video. Of course, the better the submitted video looks, the more likely reviewers will be able to see the strength of your work, so early polishing is a good investment of time and energy. (But note the five-minute duration limit and 100 MB total file size limitations for supplementary material in the Publication Requirements).
If your paper is accepted, you must submit your video or its revised version via the final upload page in the online submssion system, for inclusion in the conference DVD-ROM and the ACM Digital Library. Any such submitted videos will also be considered for inclusion in a Papers Preview section of the Electronic Theater program. If a specific section of your video is selected, you will be encouraged to produce a 1080p version of that section for this purpose, but if you do not, whatever version you have uploaded will be used.
Do we have to prepare the paper in the final format?
Yes, please do so. Seeing a paper in final format lets us verify the page count and allows us to compare it to other papers.
What is the page limit for papers?
There is no arbitrary maximum length imposed on papers. Rather, reviewers will be instructed to weigh the contribution of a paper relative to its length. Typical research papers are eight pages long. However, in any given year, it is common for papers to be accepted with as few as four pages and as many as 12 pages. See Publication Requirements for more details.
My submission is a revision of a paper I submitted to an earlier SIGGRAPH conference. Will the reviewers get to see the earlier reviews?
Not unless you authorize them to. There are two ways you can do this. You can submit the previous reviews yourself, by uploading them as supplementary material. In this case, it is a good idea to upload the previous submission also, so the reviews and your revisions in response to them can be placed in context.
You may also identify the previous paper on the submission form and authorize that the (anonymized) reviews, the previously submitted materials, and the BBS discussions, be transmitted to reviewers from the submission database for your previous submission. In this case, the previous reviewers' names will be transmitted to the paper sorters and the senior reviewers of your new submission. In this case, there is a good chance that the previous reviewers can be reassigned to your paper. See Publication Requirements for more details.
Hey, I know your REAL email address. Can I use that?
No, use the Technical Papers Email Contact Form. Why? First, I might be unavailable for several days. Second, during parts of the submission and review process, I will be buried in email. If you use the contact form, your email will go to the Technical Papers Chair and selected administrators. One of them may be able to answer your question, and they will often do so surprisingly promptly. If you have a question of extreme delicacy, or a question on which the Technical Papers Chair or a member of the Technical Papers Advisory Board might be conflicted, please contact the Technical Papers administrative support team via the contact form. Neither the Technical Papers Chair nor reviewers will receive such emails.
Can I submit after the deadline?
No. The deadline is absolute.
But I had a major life event (birth, death, divorce ...) just two days ago!
The deadline is absolute. You may, of course, submit the work in its current form by the deadline, even if it's not the paper that you'd like it to be.
But my fancy color printer stopped working at 4 pm, and the FedEx deadline is looming!
The deadline is absolute; plan accordingly and submit early. Equipment failures are common, and SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 cannot adapt its schedule to accommodate them. If you upload a PDF file by the deadline, your paper will be considered without the specially printed supplementary material you had hoped to ship.
I was unable to upload my submission on time. The system was overloaded, and halfway through uploading my submission the deadline passed.
The deadline is absolute. Submissions that are in progress when the 12 May delayed deadline passes, even if it's because our server has slowed down due to high load, will not be accepted. You should allow enough lead time to avoid this kind of problem. Please see the How to Submit for explanations of the MD5 checksum process and the meaning of the 11 May deadline and the 12 May delayed deadline.
Unfortunately, in our rush to meet the deadline, we incorrectly set our gamma during taping, so we sent a fairly poor-quality video. I have since corrected the problem. May I substitute new videos for the ones I submitted? The video is identical, except for the gamma correction.
No. The submission deadline is absolute. All materials must be submitted by the deadline. If your paper is accepted, you will have the opportunity to replace the video.
I'm using the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 English Review Service, and they didn't get back to me soon enough, so it's SIGGRAPH Asia 2010's fault that my paper isn't ready. Can I submit late?
The deadline is absolute. The English Review Service makes no guarantees about turnaround, and it's up to you to make contingency plans.
I'm not in Asia, and Customs can hold up submissions, so I have to send my physical supplemental materials off two weeks earlier than Asian researchers would. Can I send it by the deadline instead, and you'll receive it about two weeks late, after Customs has had a chance to process it?
The deadline is absolute. If your supplemental materials must pass through various hurdles to get here, you must plan in advance how to submit it early enough to ensure arrival on time. If the PDF file is uploaded by the deadline, we will review your paper without any shipped material that arrived late.
I gave my supplemental materials to Federal Express, and I have a receipt to prove that they promised delivery before the deadline, but there was a typhoon in Singapore, and Federal Express couldn't meet their promise.
If you can provide the receipt (and we'll ask for it), then we'll accept the materials whenever Federal Express delivers them, but cannot guarantee that they will reach reviewers in time to influence their reviews.
I am submitting a paper on topic X, which I know is an area of expertise for committee member Y. Can I ask that Y be a senior reviewer of my paper?
Am I allowed to ask for my paper to not be reviewed by someone from whom I do not expect a fair review?
It is our belief that the vast majority of reviewers in the SIGGRAPH community perform fair reviews. In addition, outlier reviews are always closely examined by the committee and discarded if appropriate. Nonetheless, if you have a specific and exceptional reason to believe that a specific person may not be in a position to judge your work fairly, you will have the ability to add a note to the chair and the advisory board with your submission explaining the reasons for this request. We will examine such requests, which we expect to be very rare, and decide whether to take them into consideration during the assignment of reviewers.
Isn't the committee more likely to accept papers by committee members and other insiders? How do you prevent a conflict of interest?
Any paper on which a committee member has a conflict of interest will not be discussed while that committee member is in the room. While each committee member has a list of papers and the committee members who reviewed them, these lists are customized so that the names of the members who reviewed papers on which he have a conflict of interest will not be shown on my list. In general, the acceptance rate for papers by committee members has been slightly higher than the acceptance rate for those in the overall submission pool. But the acceptance rate for these same people has also been higher in years when they were not on the committee; they're invited to be on the committee, in part, because of their expertise in the field.
I'm a Technical Papers reviewer, and I'd like to show this paper to one of my students, who frankly knows more about the topic of this paper than I do. May I?
Yes. You may show a paper under review to a small number of people, normally one or two, providing that you: 1. List their name(s), title(s) (for example, "my PhD student"), and affiliation(s) in the private section of the review form, which goes only to the papers committee. 2. Clearly instruct them on the rules of confidentiality of the SIGGRAPH review process.
However, it is not appropriate for others to write the review for you. If this is your intention, then you must discuss it with the senior reviewer who assigned you the paper. At their discretion, they may officially reassign the paper to your student. In this case, you lose a free mug, and the student gains one!
Reviewer #4 clearly didn't read my paper carefully enough. Either that or this reviewer doesn't know anything about the field! How should I respond during the rebuttal period?
We've all received SIGGRAPH reviews that made us mad, particularly on first reading. The rebuttal period is short and doesn't allow for the cooling-off period that authors have before they write a response to a journal review. As a result, authors need to be particularly careful to address only factual errors or reviewer questions in the rebuttals rather than letting their emotions show through. Please don't say: "If reviewer #4 had just taken the time to read my paper carefully, she would have realized that our algorithm was rotation invariant." Instead say: "Unfortunately, Section 4 must not have been as clear as we had hoped because Reviewer #4 didn't understand that our algorithm was rotation invariant and he was therefore skeptical about the general applicability of our approach. Here is a revised version of the second paragraph in Section 4, which should clear up this confusion."
Remember that your rebuttal gets sent to all the reviewers; you don't want to offend them. In particular, you want the two senior reviewers to come out of the rebuttal process sufficiently enthused about your paper to champion it at the committee meeting, and if the paper is accepted and needs revision, then you want them to feel sufficiently comfortable with you as an author that they are willing to "shepherd" the paper through the revision process.
Now that I've read the reviews of my paper, I see much better how to organize it so it will be clear to the reader. Can I do this reorganization and upload the new version during the rebuttal period?
No. The rebuttal period is for addressing factual errors in the reviews, not for getting revised text into the review process. The committee members will have only a short time in which to read and act on your rebuttal, and it must be short and to the point. Hence, it will be limited to 2,000 words. You will have the opportunity to reorganize it for publication if it is accepted, subject to referree approval.
Between May and late July, we've gotten some really cool new results for our paper. Can I upload those results during the rebuttal period? I'm sure that they will make the reviewers realize the importance of our approach.
No. The rebuttal period is for addressing factual errors in the reviews, not for getting new results into the review process.
Reviewer #2 says that our collision-detection algorithm won't work on concave objects. But it will, as we just demonstrated with the lid of the teapot. Can we upload a movie showing this new result?
No. Time is very precious at this stage in the review process, and you must keep your rebuttal short, or the reviewers and committee members will not have time to read it. No supplementary material may be uploaded during the rebuttal period, only 2,000 words of text.
I answered all reviewer criticisms during the rebuttal period, but no one responded, and now my paper is rejected. How can I be sure the reviewers received and actually read my rebuttal?
The reviewers and committee members will have only a short time in which to read and act on your rebuttal. You will not receive a response to your rebuttal. If you can view your rebuttal comments in the online review system, so can your reviewers. Rest assured that rebuttal information is considered and can be very helpful in the selection process.
Are papers merely published in print, or is there a presentation as well?
There is a presentation, of about 20 minutes length, followed by five minutes of discussion and questions. One of the authors of the paper must commit to making this presentation, in Seoul at SIGGRAPH Asia 2010, for the paper to be accepted. Also, in addition to the print format, the paper will be available in electronic format in the ACM Digital Library and as part of the conference DVD-ROM.
Where can I get the ACM Copyright Form on the web? I need to show it to my employers before I submit.
ACM Copyright Form (PDF)
My paper was just accepted to SIGGRAPH Asia 2010, and I'm thrilled. But now my boss points out that I can't use Mickey Mouse as the example in my paper because I don't have the rights to use him. What do I do now?
The Permissions and Copyrights section of the Publication Requirements page explicitly states that you must have permissions for all the images in your paper and the footage on your videotape, CD-ROM, or DVD-ROM at the time of submission. You should immediately tell the Technical Papers Chair what you propose to use as a replacement. If the new images or footage are not substantially similar to that submitted for review in the judgment of the Chair and the Technical Papers Advisory Board, then acceptance of your paper will be rescinded. The archival record (Proceedings, DVD-ROM, and ACM Digital Library) must contain material that is equivalent to what the reviewers saw at the time of review.
Getting a Paper Accepted
What follows is not "official" SIGGRAPH policy, but rather the idiosyncratic impressions of former Technical Papers Chairs, based on many years of service on the Technical Papers Committee.
Is it important to submit a video with my paper?
There is a very strong correlation between submitting a video and getting accepted if the scientific content of the paper justifies this. An animation paper without a video is almost certain to be rejected.
Why are good papers rejected?
Check out this article by Jim Kajiya, the Papers Chair for SIGGRAPH 93, for many excellent reasons. Although some of the details are dated, the general wisdom is timeless.
My paper was recommended for consideration with major revisions in a subsequent issue of ACM Transactions on Graphics. Does it have to appear there or can I submit it somewhere else?
SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 submissions can be withdrawn at any time. The offer to publish a revised version of the paper in an upcoming TOG issue is completely at the discretion of the author.
How do I decide whether to submit my work as a paper, a sketch, or a poster?
The Technical Papers program is the most competitive of these three. Technical Papers also give you a chance to work out your ideas at greater length. Finally, Technical Papers represent a citable archive, which is stored in the ACM Digital Library and elsewhere; beginning in 2008, SIGGRAPH and SIGGRAPH Asia Sketches and Posters will not appear in the ACM Digital Library, and are therefore not citable as prior work by other papers.
Technical Sketches and Posters have a later submission date, 30 August 2010, allowing you to submit more recent work than the Technical Papers Program does. If you believe your work is sufficiently mature to be a paper, then submit it to the Technical Papers program.
How soon will my paper accepted with major revisions be published in ACM Transactions on Graphics?
The revisions will be verified by the original SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 reviewers, which greatly accelerates the refereeing process. If the revisions are made in a couple of months and found acceptable, the paper would likely appear in the April or October issue, which may give you the opportunity to present the paper at SIGGRAPH Asia 2011.
My paper was accepted with major revisions to ACM Transactions on Graphics. Great, but I want to submit it to another workshop, symposium, or conference first.
The offer to retain the original SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 reviewers evaporates the moment the paper is submitted anywhere else. The paper can always be submitted to TOG later, but it will be reviewed through the ordinary refereeing process, which may, but probably will not, include any of the original SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 reviewers.
What about patents and confidentiality? Are the two senior reviewers and the three tertiary reviewers under a confidentiality agreement not to disclose the contents of the paper to others? Some organizations like IEEE have all reviewers sign a confidentiality agreement. It's very important that I know for sure, since my employer may want to apply for a patent, and it affects when I may submit the paper to the SIGGRAPH Asia conference. Can I, for example, get a written guarantee of confidentiality?
Reviewers are asked to keep confidential all materials sent to them for review, but they do not sign a confidentiality agreement. In general, there is wide respect for the confidentiality of submissions, but we cannot promise anything, or provide a written, legally valid guarantee.
It would not be wise for SIGGRAPH to give you legal counsel on the matter of patents and publication; we urge you to seek independent legal advice. The main issue is that in different jurisdictions (such as Europe), prior public disclosure could invalidate a patent application. The situation is different in North America, where you have one year after public disclosure (for example, publication) to file a patent. It is a common practice for authors to prepare a patent filing coincidentally with their SIGGRAPH publication. The publication date of the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 proceedings issue of ACM Transactions on Graphics will be 1 December 2010.
When will my paper be publicly available?
Technical Papers accepted for presentation at SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 will be published in ACM Transactions on Graphics 29(5), a special fifth issue available in print and electronic format, on 1 December 2010. Brief descriptions of accepted papers will be published on the SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 web site in September 2010.
Volunteering for the Technical Papers Program
I've volunteered to be on the committee for three years now, and I've never been chosen. What's up with that?
It may be that others are better qualified, that we already have committee members with expertise in your area, that the chairs do not feel that you've been in the field long enough to be an effective committee member, or any number of other reasons. The committee composition does change from year to year, though. Please keep offering your services.
Just what sort of workload is involved in being on the Technical Papers Committee?
You must review about 20 papers by early July. For about 10 papers, you must find two additional reviewers, and for the remaining papers you must find one additional reviewer. You must attend a Technical Papers Committee meeting in Los Angeles, 23-24 July 2010 (Friday and Saturday at the beginning of SIGGRAPH 2010), during which time you'll discuss papers, possibly be called on to provide additional reviews of a couple of papers, and be expected to listen carefully to a lot of discussion that has little to do with you.
Starting on 11 July, you must work with the other senior reviewers to come to a consensus recommendation for acceptance or rejection. If this consensus is not possible, the paper will be tabled, and you will need to select one or more other members of the Technical Papers Committee to review it. Thus you yourself may be asked to write a few extra reviews during the week before the meeting.
You may also be asked to act as a referee for a paper that's been conditionally accepted, to verify that the final version meets the requirements set for it. For papers that are not accepted for the conference, but recommended for ACM Transactions on Graphics, you may be asked to remain as a reviewer during the TOG review process.
Finally, you may be asked to chair a Technical Papers session at SIGGRAPH Asia 2010. See Evaluation for more details.
What do I get for all the work that I'll be doing as a committee member? In material terms, you get a 50% discount when registering for SIGGRAPH Asia 2010. You also receive the recognition of your colleagues, the gratitude of authors, and the sense of satisfaction that comes from knowing you've given something back to the organization that helps disseminate research in graphics.
All deadlines are 23:59 UTC/GMT.
11 May 2010
Submission deadline
7 July 2010
Reviews available
11 July 2010
Rebuttals due
26 July 2010
Decisions announced
4 September 2010
Revisions due
12 September 2010
Final version deadline
1 December 2010
Publication date
15-18 December 2010
SIGGRAPH Asia 2010


text:
Your Search Results
Company Equity, Onsite Gym, Tuition Reimbursement, Disability Insurance, Family Medical Leave, Team owned deliverables, Highly diverse management team, Team workouts, Mentorship program, 1-100K amount, 201 - 500 employees, 500K-1M amount
0 Companies
Ah shucks, we have no results for your search.
Try using less filters. Here's some helpful links to help too.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
COVID-19 updates
Quality CareFind out why Mayo Clinic is the right place for your health care. Make an appointment.
Meet the StaffFind a directory of doctors and departments at all Mayo Clinic campuses. Visit now.
Research and Clinical TrialsSee how Mayo Clinic research and clinical trials advance the science of medicine and improve patient care. Explore now.
Visit Our SchoolsEducators at Mayo Clinic train tomorrow's leaders to deliver compassionate, high-value, safe patient care. Choose a degree.
Professional ServicesExplore Mayo Clinic's many resources and see jobs available for medical professionals. Get updates.
Philanthropy at Mayo ClinicYour support accelerates powerful innovations in patient care, research and education. Give today.
Mayo Clinic offers appointments in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota and at Mayo Clinic Health System locations.
The trained staff in the Memory Disorder Clinic at Mayo Clinic in Florida provides comprehensive care to people with Alzheimer's disease, frontotemporal dementia, Lewy body dementia, mild cognitive impairment and other memory disorders.
Mayo Clinic doctors trained in brain and nervous system conditions (neurologists), mental health specialists (psychiatrists), social workers and others work together as an integrated team to evaluate your condition and coordinate your care.
The Memory Disorder Clinic is one of 15 designated memory disorder clinics in Florida, 13 of which are partly supported by the Florida Department of Elder Affairs. The clinics conduct research and evaluate and treat Florida residents with Alzheimer's disease or related dementias.
Read more about Alzheimer's disease and dementia.
Mayo Clinic accepts appointments in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota and at Mayo Clinic Health System sites.
Any use of this site constitutes your agreement to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy linked below.
Mayo Clinic is a nonprofit organization and proceeds from Web advertising help support our mission. Mayo Clinic does not endorse any of the third party products and services advertised.
A single copy of these materials may be reprinted for noncommercial personal use only. "Mayo," "Mayo Clinic," "MayoClinic.org," "Mayo Clinic Healthy Living," and the triple-shield Mayo Clinic logo are trademarks of Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research.


text:
Frederick Weston
Above: Untitled; 1998; 11x17"
|All images are the property of the artist and may not be copied or reproduced without the express written permission of the artist and Visual AIDS.
Frederick Weston
Home: New York, N.Y.
Age: "35-65 (My inner child is 13-17)"
Diagnosed: March 1995
Frederick Weston
Click for More Art from African-American Artists
It's a lesson he learned at his mama's knee. Born in Memphis, Tenn., and raised in Detroit, Mich., Weston grew up with adults who viewed the domestic arts as both business and pleasure: His mother was a gifted decorator and seamstress; his grandmother could make "anything she put her hands to better"; and his grandfather was a highly inventive tinker.
A self-described "African-American man living an alternative lifestyle," Weston ultimately left the Midwest behind to seek out the bright lights in Manhattan, where he says he's "spent all his adult life working and playing." He went to school and entered the working world, but only to pay the bills: Art has always called to him, no matter what else he may have been doing. "I have never 'found' the time to do my art," he says. "I 'make' the time. I 'take' the time."
Weston helped found the guerrilla artist group Underground Railroad, which produced street art and outdoor installations in the mid-1990s, as well as during the difficult period New York City lived through after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. "My art is my activism -- it exposes me as a person," he says.
Weston's artwork tends to address crises of culture -- the commercial male image, fashion, consumerism, conservation and recycling. And, he adds, "I am sure if you look long and hard enough, you may see some references to the virus." However, although some of his paintings deal with his HIV-positive status, Weston says HIV doesn't overwhelm his work -- or his life. "It is just another coin in the pouch," he explains. "Sometime it comes out heads; it's a blessing. Sometimes it comes out tails; it's a curse. There are a lot of coins in my pouch."
It's the idea of his "blackness" that resonates most profoundly throughout his work, Weston says. "The one thing I have never been able to get around is being black and male in this world," he says. "It colors my every dream."
As it happens, Weston's mom at first dissuaded him from art "because I wouldn't make any money," Weston recalls. "I don't know that I can make a living as an artist," Weston admits, "but I do know that if I am not creating art, I am not living. Being able to create is real power."
Click here to e-mail Frederick Weston.


text:
About AWF:
Established in 1988, AWF is the largest supplier of blue collar staff in New Zealand. Every day up to 3,500 people work through AWF in jobs supporting predominantly the construction, infrastructure development, manufacturing, food processing, timber processing and waste management sectors.
As the largest staffing provider in NZ, with a geographic spread almost double that of our nearest competitor, you can be confident you're talking to the experts. With branches from Kaitaia to Invercargill, there are up to 3,500 people working through AWF every day - a fact that we are very proud of, and this number is only growing.
From assisting local businesses to the country's largest companies and iconic brands, we are proud to be such a large part of what keeps New Zealand working.
We are part of AWF Madison Group, a NZX listed company and the largest supplier of staff in New Zealand.
Job duties will include but are not limited to:
- Reading blueprints and being able to determine the scope of the job and material required (including the type and size of metal required)
- Marking out and cutting metal using various measuring interments such as power shears, guillotines and drills
- Shaping and forming metal stock into products using folding and bending machines, rollers, presses and hammers
- Fitting, welding, riveting, soldering, brazing and otherwise joining
- Polishing, filing, sanding and cleaning assembled products
- Repairing damaged sheet metal products and components
In return AWF are able to offer:
- Competitive pay rates
- Weekly wages
- 8% annual leave, kiwi saver and other contractual entitlements
- On-going and consistent work
- Excellent industry exposure and experience
You must have at least three years of proven experience with a good track record and contactable references, any qualifications or trade certificates will be advantageous to your application.
If this sounds like you, click apply now or call our team on (09) 526 8777 for more information.
AWF. Keeping NZ Working.


text:
Upcoming Events
No events currently scheduled. Please check back for late spring / summer events.
About the Book
Everything many of us know about figure skating, we learned from the man who's been called the "Voice of Figure Skating." Now Dick Button, the Emmy Award-winning skating commentator famous for his precise, passionate, opinionated rinkside analyses and for his historic career as a two-time Olympic gold medalist, five-time World Champion, and seven-time U.S. Champion (plus being the inadvertent inventor of the flying camel, the first to successfully land a double Axel in competition, and the first ever to do a triple jump) demystifies this art and sport beloved by millions.
In Push Dick's Button, you'll learn about the difference between a Lutz and a Salchow . . . performance highs and lows . . . memorable entrances, exits, and falls (including his own) . . . costume delights and disasters . . . the new judging rules . . . and nuggets of skating training and history, PLUS stories about Katarina Witt, Peggy Fleming, Johnny Weir, Brian Boitano, Dorothy Hamill, and more, including today's champions, such as Evgeni Plushenko, Davis and White, and the latest sensations. Droll, dishy, dramatic, and dead-on, this book is like a one-on-one conversation with the man whose unsurpassed knowledge, experience, and love of figure skating have influenced generations.
About the Author
Dick Button is widely considered one of the premier male figure skaters of all time. He dominated the world of figure skating for a seven-year period, winning two Olympic gold medals (1948 and 1952), five consecutive World Championships, and seven U.S. National titles. Button has since had a long and illustrious broadcasting career, and he became the first winner of an Emmy Award for "Outstanding Sports Personality – Analyst" in 1981. Button is a member of the World Figure Skating Hall of Fame and Olympic Hall of Fame. He is a graduate of Harvard College, Harvard Law School, and is a frequent garden lecturer. He has two children, Edward and Emily.


text:
Two British thespians join Chris Evans on board a post-apocalyptic train in Snow Piercer. Ti West's low-budget space movie The Side Effect finds its star. Plus tons of hints for Supernatural, True Blood, The Walking Dead Chuck, Grimm, and more!
Spoilers from here on out!
Top image from Prometheus.
A newspaper profile of Scottish actress Kate Dickie, who plays First Officer Mudow, says the character lasts only 28 minutes into the film "before an alien eats her." Dickie reportedly dyed her hair blonde for the film, and the profile gives these additional details on her role:
Kate plays a tough first officer called Mudow, who needs to help her fellow crew members become acclimatised to their removal from cryo-sleep after a long space journey which ends on an apparently barren planet. With their muscles wasted from five years without use, she helps them to get fit – only for them to fall victims to horrible creatures that begin stalking them for food.
It's not at all clear where this information is coming from - indeed, the article itself mentions that Dickie and the rest of the cast are under strict orders to reveal nothing about the movie, so it's unlikely that she revealed these things herself. As such, it's probably best to take all this with a cautious grain of salt. [Bleeding Cool]
Guy Pearce revealed that his role in Ridley Scott's Alien prequel will be similar to his role in The Hurt Locker, at least in the sense that it will be very, very short:
"I'm only [in the film] for a minute, but it was a real honor to work with Ridley [Scott], to see what was going on. I think Michael Fassbender, Noomi Rapace and Charlize Theron and everybody will do a really spectacular job."
It's not clear what a one-minute cameo might comprise. It's possible that Pearce just shows up to give the characters their mission and send them on their way — sort of like Harrison Ford in Apocalypse Now, I guess — or he might show up and immediately get killed, which is very in keeping with what Ridley Scott with the name actors in the cast of Alien. Again, if his character here is anything like his role in The Hurt Locker, my money has to be on the latter. [MTV Movies Blog]
The Hobbit
Gollum actor and second unit director Andy Serkis talks about the movie's big villain, the dragon Smaug, who apparently is still pretty much top secret:
"Oh I can't give any secrets away. Because its still under wraps, it's still a secret character that is closely safe-guarded and is still in the design process. With an actor like Benedict Cumberbatch playing him, it will be extraordinary."
Snow Piercer
Michael Clayton and Burn After Reading's Tilda Swinton and Adventures of Tin-Tin star Jamie Bell will reportedly join Chris Evans in the post-apocalyptic train movie Snow Piercer, directed by The Host's Park Chan-wook as an adaptation of the French graphic novel Le Transperceneige. [Variety]
Here's a clip from the found footage movie about teens who develop superpowers.
Major Matt Mason
Justified showrunner Graham Yost discusses his script for this lunar colony film that he's writing for Robert Zemeckis and Tom Hanks:
Who knows what's going to happen with that, because Tom is very busy now acting in a bunch of things. I think he's doing "Cloud Atlas" now over in Europe. And then there's the -‑ I think probably going into the Maersk Alabama ("Captain Phillips") thing. So we'll see if it happens. I hope it does, because we both love lunar exploration. The story is set on the moon, near future, and it's a team of people on a base on the moon, on the south pole of the moon. And of course everything goes wrong. There's no bad guys. There's no aliens. Nothing like that. It's just, can you survive? It's really fun, and it's just been a blast working with Tom on that. We had such a good time on "From Earth to the Moon" that it's sort of like, "We've got to go back to the moon. Some way, somehow, let's go back to the moon.
The Side Effect
The House of the Devil director Ti West's low budget film is apparently moving ahead, as Lord of the Rings and Super actress Liv Tyler has reportedly signed on to play Catherine Rigby, who is described as "a woman who spends several months alone in space as an experimental subject for a global pharmaceutical company, and finds herself inexplicably pregnant... paranoia and hysteria reign as the truth behind conception grows more elusive and she remains stranded in space." [Deadline]
The Woman in Black
Here's a pair of featurettes for Daniel Radcliffe's supernatural Victorian thriller.
Elizabeth Banks discusses the plans for a live-action spin on the Peter Pan character Tinkerbell:
It's a live action Tinkerbell movie sort of in the vein of Elf in which I would play Tinkerbell. Tinkerbell gets thrown out of Never Never Land, and it's about where she goes and who she meets and the adventures she has.Tinkerbell is one of the greatest characters because she's mischievous and snarky and fun and sexy and jealous and vengeful. We're in script stage and everybody is really excited and blah, blah, doesn't mean anything. You might as well not even write it down because who knows, it might not even happen.
The script is currently being worked on by Fright Night's Marti Nixon. [Moviehole]
Doctor Who
Steven Moffat says there will be "at least fourteen episodes" in season seven, including the 2012 Christmas special:
"It'll be returning in the autumn. I won't say when exactly, but it'll be back in the autumn for a long run. I will just say, it will be at least 14 episodes. We always do 14, because we do the Christmas special as well. So being in the autumn, the Christmas special will be part of it as well."
That would seem to confirm the speculation that the Christmas special would air in the middle of the season, which might be set to begin in late 2012 and run to early 2013. He also had this to say about the fiftieth anniversary year in 2013:
"There will never be a better time to be a Doctor Who fan. Oh dear God. I think, knowing a certain amount of what's coming, there will never be a better time, I promise you, and I am just saying this as a Doctor Who fan myself. I promise you, for so many reasons I can't talk about."
Here are some behind-the-scenes photos. [Give Me My Remote]
And here are some set photos. You can also check out a set video here. [SpoilerTV]
Game of Thrones
George R.R. Martin talks up season two:
There are considerable more [risks] — no one is safe in this show, anyone can die at any time. The people who have read the books know there are some huge deaths and betrayals and reversals are coming. Nobody is quite as they seem.
How close will Season 2 stick to what transpires in the book?
They're sticking fairly close. So far, showrunners David Benioff and D.B. Weiss seem very much committed to making my story in a different medium rather than making a different story, which I'm a little in favor of. (Laughs.)
[Live Feeddx]
Here's a pair of set videos. You can also check out an overview of the Icelandic filming here.
True Blood
Genre TV mainstay Christopher Heyerdahl, whose credits include Supernatural, Sanctuary, Caprica, and Hell on Wheels, has reportedly been cast as a vampire for the fifth season. Specifically, he will play Dieter Braun, "an ancient, powerful vampire who plays a large part in the intelligence of the Authority and especially enjoys enhanced interrogation." [Deadline]
Costar Janina Gavankar reveals that "a major thing happens to Luna early in the season, and it's going to change her life forever", while Ryan Kwanten says Jason's romance with Jessica may be more than the character can handle. Joe Manganiello also reveals where Alcide is headed this season:
"As you saw at the end of Season 4, he's not taking anyone's s—- anymore. Now you're going to see an Alcide who's going to slam you up against the wall and do his thing. Who doesn't like being slammed up against the wall, right?...[On whether "slam" is a euphemism] It could be a fun slam. And it could be an angry slam. You never know? Alcide is single."
[TV Line]
The Walking Dead
Mildly acknowledging some of the criticisms of the pacing of the first half of season two, executive producer Glenn Mazzara suggests second half of season two will be an improvement:
"If there were episodes that felt as if they were stalling or if it felt that they weren't under threat, that perhaps the farm felt too safe and the threats were outside off the farm, a lot of that changes in the back part of the season. I think that things pick up. I think it just becomes more, I don't know what the word is, accelerated. The stakes are higher, more action packed, more interesting."
Fellow executive producer Gale Anne Hurd offered this preview of the second half of the season:
"I'm excited that we're going to begin to expand beyond Hershel's farm. We're going to encounter new survivors and what does that mean to the group? In addition to the conflict over the leadership of Team Rick vs. Team Shame and the triangle between Lori, Rick and Shane. We're going to encounter people who are survivors that... are they a new threat? Can they offer some sort of salvation?"
While comics creator Robert Kirkman also discussed the two characters spotted in a recently released sneak peek, and how they fit into the story:
"I don't want to reveal too much but I would say that it would be fairly unusual for those two people to be out there alone. Anyone who's familiar with the comic book series knows that while the zombies are threatening and terrifying and do represent a tremendous amount of danger for our characters, nothing compares to the danger that humans hold for each other. That's a big theme that we deal with in the comic book series and that's something that we're moving towards in the show as well. The capacity for humans to hurt each other is just infinite. As we explore this world in a broader sense and kind of open things up outside the farm in these episodes coming up, we're going to see that there are some tremendous threats out there and they're human in nature, not zombie."
There's plenty more at the link. [Bloody Disgusting]
Here's Zachary Levi's summation of the two-hour series finale:
"The first hour is super-intense drama and action and some tears are shed. And the second half also has some drama, but there's a lot of comedy, too."
[TV Line]
Theo Rossi, who plays SAMCRO tech specialist Juan Carlos "Juice" Ortiz on Sons of Anarchy, will play one of the time-displaced Alcatraz convicts named Sonny, "a business man with a dark side, who became ultra-violent during his stint 50 years ago at the infamous prison." [EW]
Executive producer Jack Bender says an upcoming episode will deal with the fact that Alcatraz was a segregated prison:
"All of the black prisoners were not allowed to mingle, eat with [the rest of the inmates]. This was 1963, so we're starting to deal with those issues."
[TV Line]
Once Upon a Time
Here's a sneak peek at this Sunday's episode, "7:15 AM."
It's looking decently likely that Prince Charming and Snow White's alter egos David and Mary Margaret are headed for romance, if this item is anything to go by:
David (Josh Dallas) is about to make a big decision regarding his love life that should make David and Mary Margaret (Ginnifer Goodwin) very happy.
The next episode, "Of Mouse and Man", will reportedly see a mild-mannered man named Marty, played by Fred Koehler, unleash his angry side after years of abuse. One of his victims will apparently be Silas Weir Mitchell's Monroe, as you can see in a sneak peek clip over here.
Executive producer David Greenwalt addresses whether Nick is still planning to propose to Juliet:
"Nick did buy the ring, but his newfound Grimm abilities have interrupted his romantic plans - and his life in general. Nick and Juliette's relationship will be tested this season as Nick continues to hide his new abilities - yet Juliette's suspicions keep rising after she finds something of Nick's…and also finds herself in danger."
[TV Line]
The show is currently casting a pair of actors to play drug-addicted, lizard-like monsters called Skalengecks. [E! Online]
Here's a profile on David Mazouz's Jake, who is the mute, autistic, possibly supernaturally gifted son of Keifer Sutherland's character.
Star Jared Padalecki discusses Misha Collins's return as Castiel:
"He doesn't come back as Castiel per say. When he and the boys see each other, it's not like, 'Oh, Sam and Dean!' 'Oh, Castiel!' It's amnesia of sorts. He's still got great powers and we seek him out because we have an inkling that something's going on. I think Castiel, like Bobby (Jim Beaver), they can't come back as the good ol' Castiel and the good ol' Bobby because the audience starts to not take seriously what's going on."
And here are some set photos. [Socialite Life]
The Vampire Diaries
Klaus actor Joseph Morgan discusses the character's plans to hold a dinner party, which probably won't end well:
"There's always a little bit of violence involved in anything Klaus does - even if it starts as a sit down meal, it's all going to end in violence. There will be some things which aren't strictly within dinner party etiquette. Also, it's incredibly charged. Imagine having this powerful hybrid hosting a little dinner party. Who will be his guests? And what will the conversation be? And what will he serve for dinner? What will his table etiquette be? It's a really interesting idea. We've seen so much of him in physical confrontation with people, it's interesting to see a little bit more of his cultured side, his charm and his elegance there at the dinner table."
[TV Line]
And here's another interview with Joseph Morgan.
Here's a promo poster. [SpoilerTV]
The Secret Circle
Here's a promo for the next episode, "Witness." You can also check out a sneak peek for the episode here.
The CW has reportedly ordered this pilot for an adaptation of DC Comics's Green Arrow (along with a modern update of Beauty and the Beast, because why not?), and now a director has been lined up. David Nutter, whose previous credits include the pilots for Supernatural, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, and Smallville, will reportedly handle directing duties. For more info on the pilot, check out our original report. [KSiteTV]
Lost Girl
Here's the official description for the fifteenth episode of season two, "Table for Fae":
What Bo uncovers while investigating the mysterious disappearance of human backpackers threatens her own fine physique. Meanwhile, the new man in Bo's life sets events in motion that force Kenzi to make a desperate choice.
Additional reporting by Gordon Jackson and Charlie Jane Anders.


text:
Jennifer has lived in care for most of her life. Finally...
Hugs, drugs and lies118921
- by princess_gemmz
- Rating:
- Published: 17 Jul 2014
- Updated: 18 Nov 2014
- Status: In Progress
Tasha is a drug addict and Tony is an alcoholic. Brought together by chance, feelings start to develop between the two. The only thing that stands in the way of their happiness is Tony's relationship status. But he's unwilling to step out of his comfort zone and tell both girls the truth. After all, you can't date two girls at the same time, can you?
Join MovellasFind out what all the buzz is about. Join now to start sharing your creativity and passion
Loading ...


text:
After dancing amidst champagne showers in Arizona's visiting clubhouse, the Dodgers jogged out to right field and Chase Field's pool. Adrian Gonzalez led the charge, and Nick Punto plunged into the water with a cannonball. "We're a veteran ballclub," Gonzalez said, on the occasion of Los Angeles returning to the postseason for the first time since 2009. "We understand it's not how you start, it's how you finish."
The Red Sox were restrained, saving the celebrations for the division title. Handshakes and hugs and a quiet, upbeat clubhouse preparing, too, for its first playoff appearance in four years. "We've still got some other goals ahead of us," John Lackey said. "Hopefully, here in the next night or two we can get a party going."
It's nothing short of incredible that, 390 days after one of the most star-driven, expensive, and controversial trades in baseball history, the two teams involved would be their leagues' first to clinch playoff spots. Sometimes, a deal works out for both sides.
The Dodgers' gratification was delayed. Gonzalez struggled and Beckett scuffed and Crawford rehabbed as a 2012 playoff berth slipped away, and even as late as the first day of summer, when L.A. was 30-42, manager Don Mattingly seemed a loss away from being fired. But a 45-10 run, over which the team led the majors in both batting average and ERA, and here we are.
The Red Sox's plan to return to competitiveness proceeded ahead of schedule. They picked up a pair of decent prospects in Allen Webster and Rubby De La Rosa, but the real gain was the financial flexibility to rebuild the team in GM Ben Cherington's image. Boston was able to sign Shane Victorino, (a Dodger whose presence was made superfluous by the arrival of Crawford) Ryan Dempster, Mike Napoli, Jonny Gomes, Stephen Drew, and Koji Uehara, productive players all. They were able to ink Dustin Pedroia—one of only five Red Sox still around from the 2009 playoff team—to a long-term extension. Perhaps most importantly of all, they were able to powerwash the clubhouse of the lingering psychic stenches of chicken, beer, and Bobby Valentine.
"It's not fair to blame Adrian, Carl, and Josh, because it wasn't their fault by any means," catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia said. "But we needed to make changes. It was a rough year for everybody and something had to be done."
Think of it: a salary dump to address character issues, and both teams' chemistries improved. Has there ever been a trade this big that so immediately paid dividends for both sides?
Of the two, the Red Sox might be best equipped to go forward. Of the nine players they acquired this winter, only Victorino is signed for more than two years. And the Dodgers—perhaps unnecessarily—allowed the Red Sox to cover just $11 million of the $276 million they traded away. Future flexibility is on Boston's side; the Dodgers went over the luxury tax threshold, and penalties will only increase. But both teams will be playing into October, riding horses provided by the other, and that's just about the only practical outcome that matters.


text:
|System: PC, PS3, Xbox 360
|Dev: Relic
|Pub: THQ
|Release: September 6, 2011
|Players: 1-16
|Screen Resolution: 480p-1080p
by Amanda L. Kondolojy
Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine has a promising single-player campaign. With an interesting far-future story, plenty of deep lore for the Warhammer fans, and tons of action-packed gameplay, this will be one of this fall's more memorable sci-fi titles. However, in addition to the game's six-to-nine hour campaign mode, the game will also feature an expansive multiplayer mode that pits marine against marine in brutal 8-on-8 matches. We recently got a chance to test-drive the multiplayer mode in Space Marine, and for the most part, we came away impressed.
For most intents and purposes, Space Marine's multiplayer is a lot like what you've seen before. You play as a nameless Space Marine who either fights on the side of good or the side of Chaos. When we started up the match, we were immediately taken to a deep customization area where we had access to tons of different armor, emblems, and accessories. You can store several armor presets for both regular marines and Chaos marines, and while you won't have too much overlap—we still have to be able to tell good guys from bad guys—you can really pull out all the stops in terms of customization. While I tried to go with a traditional black and white look for my guy, one of the people playing with me went all-out with a sassy hot pink number on their space marine. Of course, that made that player that much more of a target. But hey, I'm not one to judge.
Once we were done customizing our look, we were able to get a taste of the loadouts. The loadouts come in two varieties: weapon-based perks and character enhancements. As you progress in the multiplayer game, you'll get access to better customizations, perks, and even weapons. Once we were able to get everything unlocked, the amount of loudouts we saw was pretty impressive. Sticking with the multiplayer in Space Marine will definitely be a rewarding experience, which is certainly encouraging. And with a level cap of 41, players will have plenty of work to do before getting access to all of Space Marines' goodies.
Less encouraging, though, is the format of the multiplayer. We were only able to play through two different modes: Annihilation and Seize Ground. The first was basically a team deathmatch mode that awarded points for kills and awarded victory to the first team that reached a specific point threshold. Seize Ground, on the other hand, challenges you to capture and defend specific points on the map. (Think King of the Hill). Both of these modes were fun to play through, but I can't help but hope that there will be a little bit more mode variety in the future.
Though I wasn't initially impressed by the mode variety, I have to admit that the actual gameplay is quite fun. No matter what side you're on, you can play as three different marine classes: assault, tactical, and devastator. Assault class is the most balanced of the three classes, allowing you to use the game's signature Chainsword in up-close melee combat and fly around using short-burst jetpacks. The tactical class is more of a weapons-based class, and gives you access to the most weapons. And, as you might expect, the devastator class is the heavy-weapons class that allows you to plant yourself in the middle of the action using your gun as a turret.
The class system and expansive loadouts look like they will give Space Marine most of its staying power. What we've seen of the actual modes seems pretty generic, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but could make this less of an appealing multiplayer choice when compared with this fall's other big games. Still, if you are planning to jump headlong into Space Marine's stellar single-player mode, the multiplayer component will be a nice addition to the package.
Amanda L. Kondolojy
CCC Contributing Writer
Game Features:


text:
There are parts of New Zealand unlike anywhere else in the world. They still remain quiet and untouched; breathtaking and naturally wild.
The shoreline south of Haast is just that - this is the wild West Coast. It's an almost mythical part of our country, with stories of shipwrecks and settlers, wild attempts to bulldoze roads and tales of hidden pounamu boulders that are as big as cars.
Grant MacKinnon started walking the coast years ago, mainly looking for great hidden surf breaks. Grant, who these days operates Fiordland Coast Walks, is a true surfer at heart and when he met me from Wanaka he had his boards - yes, that's more than one - on the roof of his four-wheel drive, tied tightly next to his fishing rods. He managed to keep the surfing spots on the hush, there was no way he would show or even talk to me, the photographer from Auckland, about any of the great spots, for fear of others from Auckland dropping into his wave.
But I wasn't with Grant for the surf anyway, I was there for one of the walks that his guided coastal-walk company runs. After tackling the traffic-less roads through the lush Haast Pass, we headed south for a night at Neils Beach, a feed of the famous West Coast whitebait and a quick planning chat about our walk. It would be an extension of Fiordland Coast Walks' three-day walk option, with a little bit more at the start and the same at the end, which would add an extra day - thank goodness for new boots.
Waking up to the smell of a cooked breakfast is by far one of the best ways to start an epic adventure through one of the least-travelled areas in our beautiful country. A helicopter ride is another. We took a 20-minute flight with Geoff Robson of Greenstone Helicopters up Smooth Water Valley towards the Cascade Plateau, where we got a glimpse of those hidden pounamu boulders the size of small cars.
Hitting the start of the four-day epic, our group was made up of two guides, Dave Williams and Alice Woodward, and three keen adventurous test dummies: Geoff Wilson; Sharon Snaylam, a keen tourist and artist from Britain; and myself.
Setting foot to sand, we moved through coastal terrain that changed quickly between open bays that sometimes seemed to last for ages and areas strewn with boulders that increased in size and difficulty. Some of it was tough going but didn't slow us much, as we stopped plenty of times to recharge with snacks, cups of tea and the odd break to let a seal make its way over the rocks or a waddle of penguins heading to cool off in the Tasman Sea.
We made it to Barn Bay and the private bach of Robin and Gus around late afternoon - an easy 8km. We all headed off on our own explorations of the local area, while Alice took charge of the cooking duties. This was a pattern that we didn't want to change after her first night's amazing meal.
Being an early riser, I crept out from the bach to check out the morning sun, only to remember that we were on the West Coast - better for sunsets. But breakfast was on and so was the coffee, in time for Dave to talk us through the plan for our biggest day.
These things never look far on a map, but I can assure you a 15km hike along the coast - starting with crossing the Hope River at Barn Bay then down to Gorge River - is a very big walk.
We all had our little moments in front, guiding the group and keeping Dave's words of advice in mind: "Just remember to keep the sea to your right if we get separated."
The coast changed through the day from boulders, which didn't seem to slow us as much as on day one, to pebble-covered beaches. Around lunchtime, we headed inland over Sandrock Bluff, marked by an old wooden shipwreck on the northern end. It's a fairly easy route to follow, just follow the old fishing buoys laid out along the path. The small clearing at the top of the hill was a great place to sit and refresh over lunch while enjoying the soft background song from a kereru, the New Zealand wood pigeon.
We descended back on to the coast knowing that our next night's accommodation was only a few hours away and we would be greeted by the Coast's true locals, Robert Long - also known as "Bean Sprout" - and his wife Katherine, both of whom, we find out, are writers and artists.
After reaching Gorge River, we took to a small rowing boat to cross the deep and inviting water before heading into the small, rustic crib that the Longs call home.
The billy was on and a cake had just been pulled from the camp oven. It was well worth walking more than 20km to meet these guys - we all could have spent another day enjoying their company and listening to the Longs' stories. Geoff and Sharon both left with signed copies of Robert Long's book A Life On Gorge River: New Zealand's Remotest Family; I left with stories of the amazing life they have... and the news that BMX rider Sarah Walker got a silver at the London Olympics. The internet is a great thing, even in the middle of nowhere.
Then it was off to the little Department of Conservation hut nearby to spend the night under the star-dappled southern sky.
Ten kilometres from Gorge River and on to the Hacket River. No problem, after another great cooked breakfast and a generous helping of Alice's home-made scroggin.
But the bays seemed steeper as we headed from the Longs' place towards Longridge Point and the most technical crossing of the trip. The tide was in and with the large swells that were battering the cliff face, we decided that a low-tide crossing was not the safest of choices. After a small scramble up the hill we were on to a roughly broken-in track, from where we made it safely to the other side.
From there the bays opened out and were a lot smoother going, the group spread out and moved at an easy pace. Listening to the surf pounding the shoreline and watching its spray slowly climb skywards was hypnotic.
After arriving at the Hacket and setting up our tents around the possum hunters' site, we all went our own ways to find the best spot to watch the sunset on the bush-clad hills of the Malcom Range. Alice made a small campfire, where we shared great tales while enjoying a three-course dinner that included some great - and well-earned - South Island wines.
A great night's rest in my own tent ended when I was woken by the sound of the South Island dawn chorus. We packed away the tents and fuelled up on campfire coffee and - again - slow-cooked eggs before leaving the Hacket and making our way to Big Bay.
The 12km home stretch was by no means an easy one; the boulder-hopping that we'd avoided on day three was back, this time round though we were more than fit for the task. The lunch stop at Awarua Point, where Fiordland Coast Walks' shorter tramp finishes, is amazing - a fine spot at which to end your walk on the coast.
As we rounded the final point, we took in majestic views of the snow-capped Darran Ranges sitting high above the final night's accommodation at Big Bay. This was the first time we had been able to see inland all trip, it gave some scale to what we had achieved and how far we had come.
Leaving the point at low tide, we noticed the road that had been bulldozed during the middle of last century. Huge boulders formed the base of what would have been a basic road and made for quick tracks across the many small bays towards the sandy beach that greeted us at Big Bay.
Nestled among the scattering of private baches in the bay was a well-stocked DoC hut.
After we settled into the warm hut, the cheese and crackers were broken out, while Geoff took to a spot of surf-casting, adding fresh fish to the menu for the evening. Our entree of peppered shark was followed by Mexican wraps and banoffee pie. Not bad at all. A great day was finished with a little walk to the beach to watch a meteor shower in the clear, southern sky.
It was time to say goodbye to the tranquillity of the coast. We had been fortunate enough to access some of the wildest places - and some of the most relaxing - in New Zealand. Our departing flight from Big Bay into Milford Sound took in more spectacular views of the coastline and provided a glimpse of the top of Fiordland National Park. A fitting finish to a wonderful journey.
Air New Zealand flies daily to Queenstown from Auckland.
* Greg Bowker travelled as a guest of Fiordland Coast Walks and was assisted by Air New Zealand and Queenstown Park Boutique Hotel.


text:
I try to run on time as best I can. I understand that traffic/weather/building collapses are not under your control, but I can't set my entire day back to accommodate you, either.
So I appreciate you being willing to reschedule to next week.
And I understand you having to stop in the lobby bathroom after your prolonged stop behind a broken truck/burning bus/crashed blimp.
When you come out of the john, and notice Mary is busy with a drug rep, YOU SHOULD not sneak back to my exam room in hopes of being seen. I'm not that ignorant of my schedule. When Mrs. Jones and I walked from my office over to my exam room, and found you sitting in there claiming that Mary had told you to go back and wait for me, you looked pretty damn stupid.
Especially since you thought that I'd somehow be less likely to toss you out if you put on a paper gown.
Take your clothes out to the lobby bathroom, get dressed, and I'll see you next week.