text:
Present address: Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, 06466 Gatersleben, Germany.
This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
To achieve the food and energy security of an increasing World population likely to exceed nine billion by 2050 represents a major challenge for plant breeding. Our ability to measure traits under field conditions has improved little over the last decades and currently constitutes a major bottleneck in crop improvement. This work describes the development of a tractor-pulled multi-sensor phenotyping platform for small grain cereals with a focus on the technological development of the system. Various optical sensors like light curtain imaging, 3D Time-of-Flight cameras, laser distance sensors, hyperspectral imaging as well as color imaging are integrated into the system to collect spectral and morphological information of the plants. The study specifies: the mechanical design, the system architecture for data collection and data processing, the phenotyping procedure of the integrated system, results from field trials for data quality evaluation, as well as calibration results for plant height determination as a quantified example for a platform application. Repeated measurements were taken at three developmental stages of the plants in the years 2011 and 2012 employing triticale (×
The constantly increasing World population, likely to exceed nine billion by 2050, has led to a growing demand for agricultural products [
Several attempts have been made based on single sensors to measure plant parameters using laser distance sensors, laser and ultrasonic rangefinders, light curtains, spectrometers, digital cameras or radar. For example laser distance sensors were used to determine plant height and crop density [
For measurements under field conditions, the combined use of light curtains, CMOS-cameras, triangulation and ultrasonic as well as pressure sensors have been used for plant/weed detection [
The focus of this paper is on the technological development of a multi-senor phenotyping platform for small grain cereals that delivers a robust basis for non-destructive measurements of diverse traits. In detail, the objectives of this study were: (1) to develop a mobile multi-sensor phenotyping platform for small grain cereals under field conditions, including the mechanical construction and the hard- and software development for multi-sensor data collection; (2) to implement an applicable phenotyping procedure for data collection and analysis and (3), to evaluate the data quality generated with the phenotyping platform.
The mechanical design of the phenotyping platform is illustrated in
The system has its own uninterrupted power supply integrated in front of the trailer. It consists of a generator with 230 V alternating current with a maximum power output of 0.8 kW driving an AC/DC battery charger (12 V, 50 A) which is connected to an Absorbent Glass Mat (AGM) battery (12 V, 240 Ah). Different power supply units connected to the battery deliver different voltage levels (5 V, 8 V, 12 V and 24 V) to supply the sensor systems and electronic devices with electric energy.
The non-destructive, simultaneous determination of different crop parameters like plant height, plant moisture content, tiller density and dry biomass yield based on data collected from a single pass of the field plots requires multiple and different types of sensors. Whereas plant height can be measured with a single sensor, for example with a laser distance sensor measuring from top view into the plants or with a vertical light curtain penetrating the canopy, more complex traits like for example dry biomass yield require multi-sensor fusion concepts to achieve accurate results [
All sensor systems for the phenotyping process are integrated into the sensor module (
The system architecture for data collection is a challenging and important part in the development of multi-sensor phenotyping platforms. The data collection system has to fulfill three major requirements. It has to facilitate: (1) the recording of multiple sensor data with different frame rates, interfaces and data types with the highest possible resolution (2), in a way which offers the opportunity to superpose the datasets in sensor fusion models during the offline data processing process and (3), in addition the system has to be modular to enable the extension of the platform with novel sensors.
The central component of the data collection system is an industrial PC, the so-called phenotyping server, which incorporates a MySQL database server for data storage and a graphical user interface to control the platform. Except for the integration of the colour camera, GPS and webcam which was done by USB 2.0, a gigabit ethernet was chosen as main communication bus between the phenotyping server and the peripherals. To adopt the different communication interfaces of the sensors to ethernet, every sensor is connected to its own microcontroller. Beside this gateway function, the microcontrollers assign a global time (resolution 1 ms) and position (resolution 1 mm) stamp of the beginning and end of the individual data fetch to every measurement value before transmitting it to the phenotyping server. These transmitted datasets are stored in separate database tables for every sensor with the highest possible sensor specific frame rate. This concept ensures a data collection method exploiting the maximum performance of all types of sensors. In addition, the concept allows an extension of the platform with novel sensors without affecting the frame rates of the already integrated systems. However, due to the assigned time and position stamps to the single measurement values and the known offsets between the sensors, it offers the opportunity for sensor-fusion in an offline data analysis procedure which would not be possible with data individually collected for each sensor separately. To ensure precise time information the clocks of all peripherals are synchronized by a NTP-Server that runs on the phenotyping server. To generate position information with adequate spatial resolution, an incremental rotary encoder is mounted at the wheel of the trailer. It has a resolution of 1 mm and sends the actual position stamp via ethernet to all peripherals in the network. Due to high data rates of the HSI system (10 MB/s), the data is stored in an extra MySQL database on a laptop to reduce network traffic in the subnet of the phenotyping server. The global time and position stamp is also transferred to the HSI subnet and is being attached to each HSI dataset directly on the laptop. The databases of the phenotyping server and the HSI laptop can be exported via an eSata interface into a single MySQL database running on a stationary workstation. Data analysis is being performed offline on the workstation using algorithms developed with the software package MATLAB® (The MathWorks®, Natick, MA, USA).
Since the collected raw data has no selectivity to any plant parameter itself, offline plant and trait specific data processing strategies are important for a successful phenotyping procedure. Trait specific algorithms are applied to the raw data of the different types of sensors to calculate single parameters for each plot with selectivity to a certain trait or part of the trait. There are two different options to analyze the raw data and to calculate parameters with selectivity to certain plant traits. Sensor models for data reduction may use statistical or image analysis based methods. As an example for statistical data processing methods, the following algorithms were developed focusing on data generation with selectivity to plant biomass of small grain cereals.
Data of the LCs were used to determine: (1) coverage density as percentage of interrupted light barriers of the lower LC, and (2) plant height by determining the average of the 1% highest interrupted light-barriers in combination with the laser distance sensor at the bottom edge of the lower LC which measured the distance of the LC to the ground. A possible influence of low parts of the plants during distance measurements to the ground was excluded by calculating the average of the 3% maximum distances of the collected data. To get more than one average distance value for each plot, the data of every plot was segmented into increments with a length of 10 cm and the average distance to the ground was estimated for each increment.
Data of the laser distance sensors were used to extract information on: (1) plant height as the difference between the average of the 3% maximum distances and the average of 3% minimum distances monitored with the laser distance sensor measuring from top; (2) penetration-depth from top as the difference between the average of all values and the average of the 3% minimum distances of the laser distance sensor measuring from top, and (3), penetration-depth from the side as average of the values measured with the laser distance sensor from the side.
Information monitored with the 3D ToF cameras was used to extract: (1) plant height as the difference between the average of the 3% maximum distances and the average of the 3% minimum distances of all pixels and pictures of a plot from 3D ToF camera measuring from top; (2) penetration-depth from top as the difference between the average of all distances and the average of the 3% minimum distances of all pixels and pictures of a plot, and (3) penetration-depth from the side as the mean distance of all pixels and pictures from 3D ToF camera measuring from the side.
The spatial resolution of the hyperspectral imaging system, enabling plant-soil segmentation, is the basis for precise trait determination based on spectral reflectance data. A first algorithm for plant-soil segmentation based on the spectral angle mapper method was implemented and the coverage density as percentage of detected plants was calculated. All algorithms were developed with the software package MATLAB®.
The phenotyping process is composed of two procedures: A trait calibration and a trait determination procedure with three steps each, illustrated in
The second step of both procedures is the offline raw data processing on a stationary workstation. An algorithm based on data of the LCs divides the raw data of every row into sections corresponding to the single plots of the row. For each detected plot the algorithm determines the time and position for every start and end of the plot and stores the information in a separate database table. This generated information enables a plot-wise accessibility of the sensor raw data as graphically depicted for a single plot in
Data processing algorithms applied on the raw data lead to different single values for each detected plot which are stored in the so called MySQL result-database. These obtained values can either be used to generate new species and trait specific calibration models or to determine phenotypic values (step 3). Regardless of whether the measurement was performed for trait determination or trait calibration, in both cases steps one and two are identical and only step 3 is different. Whereas the obtained data processing results are used in combination with the conventionally measured traits for trait calibration (step 3A in the trait calibration procedure), trait determination requires data processing results and existing calibration models to calculate the phenotypic trait of interest (step 3B in the trait determination procedure).
The phenotyping procedure is a complex process which contains several steps between the data collection process and the output of calculated phenotypic values. From a practical point of view it is essential to combine all single steps into an integrated phenotyping system to achieve a user friendly operation, even for non-expert users. In line with this requirement, integrated software tools with graphical user interface for data collection and data analysis have been developed.
The data collection software provides all important information of the platform and delivers an interface to control the system. For example, it gives information about the status of every sensor, the actual CPU load of the system and remaining free disk space on the phenotyping server. It also provides visualization of the actual sensor values, control buttons to start and stop the measurements, as well as mechanisms to load pre-defined field plans for optimized measurement scheduling. The software for data analysis, running on a stationary workstation in the lab, combines all required steps of the data analysis procedure and was developed with the MATLAB® software package. It automatically detects new measurements in the raw-database as well as missing data processing results caused by an interrupted previous data analysis or new data processing algorithms. It performs all necessary calculations and stores the results in the result-database. New calibrations can be defined and the results of trait determination are stored in Microsoft Excel® files. The software can be extended by adding Excel® files with new calibrations or new algorithms for data processing which are dynamically integrated into the data analysis procedure. This flexible structure enables the adaption of the platform to new traits and different species without changing the entire data analysis structure.
Due to the graphical user interface for data collection, the common file format to interact with the data analysis software and the automated data processing structure, the phenotyping platform is prepared to be used even by non-expert users in the plant breeding industry.
Field experiments for data quality evaluation of the phenotyping platform were conducted in Stuttgart, Germany, in the years 2011 and 2012 and were based on 25 diverse genotypes of triticale (×
Data was collected with the phenotyping platform in both years at all above mentioned growth stages of the plants. During the measurements the platform was pulled by a tractor with a constant speed of 0.5 ms−1 enabling the measurement of up to 2,000 plots per day. Every plot in 2011 and 2012 was recorded twice within a repetition time of less than 10 minutes except for the third growth stage of the year 2011, where the period of time between the repeated measurements was about 90 minutes. The phenotyping of the plots was performed during daytime and under dry weather conditions. In addition, traits like plant height, fresh weight density, moisture content, growth stage, tiller density and nitrogen content of all plots were measured by conventional methods to generate reference data for sensor calibrations.
The quality of the phenotyping procedure depends on the robustness of raw data collection, the ability to map the row-wise collected raw data to the corresponding plots within the rows and the quality of the data processing algorithms. To quantify the performance of the integrated sensor systems and the developed phenotyping procedure in its field of application, the "technical repeatability" of data processing results across repeated measurements of the years 2011 and 2012 was analyzed. The technical repeatability, not to be mixed up with repeated genotypes in field trials for heritability estimation, is an important parameter to characterize the robustness of the sensors itself, as well as, the quality of the data collection and data processing system. The following statistics were applied to describe the technical repeatability of every parameter calculated during the data processing procedure: Mean relative error of repetition:
The robustness of mapping the raw data to the corresponding plots has been quantified by determining the repeatability of plot length measurements. Therefore, the output of the plot detecting algorithm was used to estimate the length of the plots as the distance from detected start position to the end position. This way MREw of repeated plot length measurements from 2011 and 2012 was calculated. The result, summarized in
The second important part to achieve calibrations with high accuracy is the quality of collected raw data and performed data processing results. Therefore, besides the selectivity of the developed algorithms for data processing to the traits of interest, the precision of the different types of reduced data is important. The results of performance evaluation based on data of the years 2011 and 2012, as summarized in
The repeatability of all data processing results of every sensor is high (Rw2 > 0.6), except for parameter penetration-depth from the side derived from data of the laser distance sensor and data of the 3D ToF camera, both measuring from the side view, for growth stage BBCH 70-79. This decrease in repeatability can be explained by a change of the data collection procedure during harvest 3 in the year 2011. The second repetition of data collection during this measurement was performed in the opposite direction. Due to this change in moving direction of the platform, the sensors measuring from the side view collected data of the left two rows of the plots during repetition 1 and of the right two plant rows of the plots during repetition 2. Disregarding this slight decrease in repeatability, the system delivers high precision phenotypic data which is the basis for the development and calibration of high quality sensor fusion models.
Besides the precision of the data collection system and the data processing algorithms, of course the selectivity of the developed data processing algorithms and sensor fusion models to the phenotypic traits of interest are of high importance. The integrated sensor systems deliver image and non-image based information about morphological and spectral properties of the plants. Thus, non-destructive determination of plant and plant stand parameters like plant height, tiller density, grain yield, moisture content, leaf colour, lodging and dry biomass yield become feasible but require plant and trait specific calibrations.
A first calibration and validation of plant height based on data of the LCs was established. The determined height was related to the reference values by linear regression analysis according to the model:
The measured plant height shows a strong correlation to the reference values with
The development of improved crop varieties is based on multi-locational field trials with thousands of genotypically distinct lines [
Due to multi-sensor integration and the time- and position-specific data collection method, measurements of multiple traits like plant height, plant moisture content, tiller density and dry biomass yield become feasible with the platform based on the data collected from a single pass of the field plots. The platform enables the screening of about 250 plots per hour which results in a phenotyping capacity of multiple traits of more than 2,000 plots per day. This performance will result in a significant decrease of labor and time consumption compared to available phenotyping methods while at the same time providing more accurate and objective measurements of complex traits. Due to the non-destructiveness the phenotyping platform will open the opportunity to measure the dynamic reactions of crops in response to abiotic or biotic stress, traits that nowadays are routinely assessed only by static examinations at single time points. In addition, the different types of sensors with varying selectivities and especially the modular system architecture, allowing a flexible integration of new sensor technologies, constitute the basis for a non-destructive measurement of traits that from a technical point of view are complex to measure and not yet determinable under field conditions. Thus, more detailed information about the habitus of the plants (e.g., the angle and the size of the spikes or detailed morphological information of the leaves) or even primary and secondary metabolites may be assessed with the actual or an extended platform in routine plant breeding trials in the future opening up new avenues to crop improvement.
The results of our study underline the high suitability and robustness of the developed platform for phenotyping in plant breeding trials. The system delivers high precision multi-sensor data with high spatial and temporal resolution and, due to its flexibility, provides the basis for further sensor and sensor fusion model developments for non-destructive measurements of further, even more complex agronomic traits of small grain cereals.
The modular system architecture for data collection allows a comfortable extension of the system with surplus sensor technologies like ultrasonic rangefinders, infrared thermography cameras or laser scanners. By extending the bandwidth of the main communication bus between the sensor gateways and the phenotyping server, the number of sensors can even be extended.
The first application of the platform was the non-invasive measurement of relevant traits of yield trial plots of small grain cereals, in particular triticale. Due to the modular system architecture, the platform can be adapted to different species by adapting the algorithms for data processing and the calibrations. The system architecture for data collection and processing itself can be reused without the need of any change.
The integration of the sensors into a separate module allows the adoption of the sensor systems to different carrier vehicles. The next step will be the adoption of the sensor module to mechanical interfaces of machines like high-clearance tractors which will enhance the economic value of the platform by using standard machines. In addition to a tractor pulled solution or the adoption to self-driven vehicles, even the integration into autonomous robots is possible and might be an application scenario for the future.
The authors acknowledge the financial support of the project by the German Federal Ministry of Research and Education (Project No. 0315414).
Sensor platform during outdoor measurements in the field.
System architecture for data collection and analysis.
Trait calibration and trait determination procedure, each incorporating the three steps of the developed phenotyping process: Data collection on the field (step 1), data processing on a stationary workstation in the lab (step 2) and trait specific calibration/determination in the lab (step 3A/B).
Information gathered per plot for (
General design of the field trials and moving direction of the platform, the interspaces between the plots and the dimensions of one single yield trial plot. All dimensions are specified in mm,
Detailed technical information of the different types of integrated sensor systems for the phenotyping platform (LDS: laser distance sensor; LC: light curtain; ToF: Time-of-Flight; HIS: hyperspectral imaging).
|LC imaging
|Infrascan 5000
|3D ToF camera
|Effector 3D
|50 × 64 × 1 Float
|Helios Core
|320 × 252 × 1 Byte
|Colour camera
|Eos 1000D
|3.888 × 2.592 × 4 Byte compressed
|Rotary encoder
Repeatability of processing results by light curtains (LC), laser distance sensors (LDS-1, LDS-2), 3D-Time-of-Flight cameras (3D-1, 3D-2) and hyperspectral imaging (HSI) for three different development stages of the plants from the years 2011 and 2012 based on two repetitions of 400 samples for every development stage.
|Coverage density
|Penetration-depth from top
|Penetration-depth from side
|Penetration-depth from top
|Penetration-depth from side
|Coverage density


text:
by Anti-Racist Parent columnist Tiffany Pridgen
Lately I've been thinking about what it means to "raise black children," specifically when the children in question are multiracial. Apparently because they are part black they have to be treated with special consideration as they'll face special prejudices.
It's not a subject I typically devote a lot of brain energy to because I tend to see things in black and white (no pun intended), however recent conversations on the message board of a mother's group I belong to had me scratching my head. I avoid discourse about race when the audience listening is mostly black because I catch a lot of shit about my inability to fully relate because I'm of the high yellow persuasion. You know the deal – my fairness has afforded me opportunities not presented to my browner sisters. Yeah. I'm not convinced.
How can people who have uniracial children [black] portend how my multiracial child's social experiences will play out? I don't need to be told that we should gird our loins and prepare our children for a lifetime of injustice and prejudice. I especially dislike being told that not addressing it on the hope that they'll not encounter any guff out in the real world is naive. I'm fully aware that years from now if/when my son brings home a white girl who hasn't been prepared for the fact that, tada, he has a black mom, chances are good her eyes will go all wide and she'll need to reboot her brain to overcome the shock that my boy ain't pure.
What the hell do people expect us to do? Should I start telling my son early on not to trust white people and that he'll have to work X% harder than his peers? What if I had been the white parent? If I were to discuss this topic with my husband right now he would look at me as if I had shit for brains. Why would we tell our child to be wary of how people will treat him and then plop him on his white grandparents' sofa each holiday with the expectation that he'll find them to be exceptions to the rule?
As of right now our plan is to inform him that jackassery is an equal-opportunity personality trait–that he should hope for the best in people and if they turn out to be turds, oh well.
I know I had to work harder to be taken seriously and to not continuously have my intelligence questioned. Even in college I had a suspicion that my professors (including the black ones) thought I was there because the school needed to fill a quota. I didn't have that suspicion because the dark-skinned grandmother who raised me had warned me about this sort of treatment, but because I had a good knowledge of history (and geography as I live in a formerly Confederate state) and the common sense to apply it where necessary.
I just can't imagine that there should be any formal curriculum in place for parents to go by to prepare their multiracial children for social prejudice. Although, if you'd like we can work on one here. Hmm, let's see — in Kindergarten parents should start telling their part-black children that they're "black" and not pink/yellow/beige/tan when working with them on colors and trying to find a Crayola that matches their own hue when drawing themselves (no shit – I was having my hair done several weeks ago and another client was helping the stylist's daughter color. When she asked her what color she should make herself [trick question] the little girl [age 4] said "brown." Rightfully so. The woman then went on to explain, "Oh, no, no, no, you're black." The little girl scratched her head in confusion and the client went on to explain "Your skin is brown, but your race is black." Um, okay. What was the point of that conversation, then? Did she really feel an itching need to put that in the girl's head as if she didn't have any self-awareness whatsoever?). In first grade they should continue the one-drop-rule lesson and explain that only Zebras can be both black and white simultaneously when looking at pictures of zoo animals. Etc.
I really feel like parents do more harm than good emphasizing their children's perpetual exclusion from the mainstream. I just can't fathom sitting my son down for a serious discussion and saying, "Son, I hate to tell you this, but because your mom is black, you'll need to prepare yourself for a life of social injustice and constant discrimination." I would be just as successful saying, "Listen, kid. Some people are assholes–don't take it personally." Being non-white isn't a handicap we have to make special accommodations for. Everyone, with the exception of wealthy white men, will meet some form of discrimination in varying degrees. Some people have to be better fighters than others.
Some folks contend that it's not about that — that black-multiracial children should be aware of their culture. I say what culture? Are we supposed to be celebrating the blackness that is the entire continent of Africa as I don't know what tribes my ancestors specifically originated from? I would imagine that to be rather disrespectful from the perspective of an actual African just as it would be for someone to suggest that all Asians are Chinese and should enjoy shrimp fried rice. Is it African-American culture we're supposed to be indoctrinating him in? I don't know what that is, either. I wear pastel shorts with Sperrys and have problems swaying, clapping, and singing simultaneously on beat (the church youth choir was happy to see me go, I'm sure).
We're going to raise our son to be a polite, respectful, Southern gentleman. We're not going to feed him warnings about what he may potentially face because I truly believe we'd be setting him up to living a fearful life. We'll let him discover on his own which personal lessons to commit to memory and if he wants to talk about it, we'll be ready to help him parse through it all.
Tiffany Pridgen is the mistress of snarkymomma.com: a blog where she recounts daily the joys and frustrations of being a modern momma. She lives in Durham, NC with her son and husband.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Want to sign-up for other e-communications from ALCS? Do so here.
Through the Members' area of the website you can manage your account online. Log-in or sign-up.
In the light of the recent Finch Report, academic and philosopher Nigel Warburton examines the feasibility of expanding access to research publications.
The latest on four crucial parliamentary reviews relevant to the interests of ALCS Members.
Writer and campaigner Katharine Quarmby on why publishing her work under Creative Commons is against her principles
In the October edition of ALCS News we provided an update on the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (ERR) Bill, focusing on the new powers to reform exceptions to copyright (NB: formerly scheduled as Clause 57, currently scheduled as Clause 66).
We are delighted to announce the shortlist for the 2012 Educational Writers' Award, which this year focuses on non-fiction books aimed at young readers aged between 11 and 18 years. Here are the four shortlisted titles, along with what our judges said about them:
A round-up of what we've been up to over the last month:
November 2012
© The Authors' Licensing and Collecting Society. All rights reserved


text:
I've been very bad about my makeup shopping recently. But how could anyone blame me when they see all of these NARS boxes?
It's even more exciting when the boxes are opened!
Now for the swatches!
The Single Eyeshadows:
Outremer and Tropic are soooo stunning! Keep an eye out for some upcoming EOTDs!
The Duo Eyeshadows:
One looks a little light and the other looks a little dark, but give it a moment.
The swatches for the polishes can be found here and here.
Disclosure: I purchased these items using my Pro Artist discount.


text:
Nissan's Chief Operating Officer Toshiyuki Shiga provided details on the automaker's environmental commitments under the Nissan Green Program 2016 at a press briefing in Yokohama. Nissan gave an update on its eco-targets, highlighting cuts in CO2 emissions and a plan to add 15 hybrid models by 2016.
"Thanks to environmentally friendly technology and new products, we are completely in line with our targets for the reduction of C02 in the usage of vehicles, " said Shiga. Nissan estimates that new electric vehicles and 15 hybrids will build on an estimated 19% rise in average fuel economy since 2005 in major markets, which Nissan intends to improve even further.
"We've made most progress in raising fuel economy," said Hiromi Asahi, deputy general manager of Nissan's Environmental Planning Group. "We've introduced five cars globally, including the Altima in the U.S., which have top-level fuel efficiency."
|« Previous
|Next »


text:
Don and Gee Nicholl
Q: Who are Don and Gee Nicholl?
A: Don Nicholl was a British writer who was invited by Norman Lear to join the staff of the groundbreaking television series "All in the Family" early in its run. Don went on to produce "The Jeffersons" and then, leaving the Lear family, he became an executive producer of "Three's Company" and its spin-offs. He died in 1980 with his name gracing hundreds of TV episodes.
Don's widow, Gee, remembering the tough times they had endured at the beginning of their careers, established the Nicholl Fellowships in his memory, initially at Stanford University and then at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. She and Don had often spoken about helping other writers, and she hoped that the fellowship would make the struggle a little easier for those just starting out.
Sadly, Gee Nicholl died unexpectedly in January 2009. All of us connected with the Nicholl Fellowships in Screenwriting miss her tremendously.
Q. How do you pronounce 'Nicholl'?
A: It's pronounced the same as "nickel."
The Basics
Q: What do I need to do to enter the competition?
A: You need to submit an original feature film screenplay in PDF format, a completed online application form and, depending upon when you enter, a US$35, US$50 or US$65 entry fee.
Q. When are the application forms available?
A: The online application typically becomes available in late January. The application period traditionally closes on May 1.
Q. When is the regular entry deadline?
A: In 2014, the deadline is 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time on April 10. The late and final deadline is 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time on May 1.
Q. How do I enter the competition?
A: By accessing the Academy Nicholl Fellowships application materials online. Once you establish an account, you can complete an application form, upload a PDF version of your script and pay the entry fee.
Entrants from the previous year's competition are contacted by e-mail with a link to the Nicholl page when the competition opens (usually in January).
Q. Can I enter by mail by submitting a paper copy of my script and a printed application form?
A. No, you can only enter the competition online. We no longer provide printed application forms, nor do we accept screenplays by mail.
Q: If I created a Nicholl online account in a previous year, can I use that same account to enter this year?
A: Yes. Once you create an online account, you can continue to use it in subsequent competitions; there is no need to create a new account.
Q: Can I enter more than one script into the Academy Nicholl competition?
A: Yes, but each entrant is limited to three scripts in the current competition. Each entry requires a separate online application form and entry fee. Under no circumstances may an entrant submit different versions or multiple copies of the same script. Doing so may result in all versions of the script being disqualified. Each writer, whether a sole author or member of a collaborative writing team, may enter no more than three scripts.
In other words, if Jane and John enter one script they wrote as a team, each of them may be connected to two more scripts, individually or as a team.
Q: How can I pay the entry fee?
A: Entry fees can only be paid online with a credit or debit card.
Q: Where does the entry fee money go?
A: Generally speaking, the entry fees go into a pool of funds to cover contest costs – administration, network and database expenses, printing – but one could look at it as covering first-round reading costs.
Q: What are the prizes?
A: Up to five $35,000 fellowships are awarded to new screenwriters each year. From 1986 through 2013, 133 fellowships totaling $3,600,000 has been awarded.
Q: Some people say all competitions are a scam of one sort or another, considering all the money they take in from entry fees. Is it true?
A: In 2013, the Academy Nicholl Fellowships program received about $380,000 in entry fees. The program distributed $175,000 to the fellows and spent over $300,000 judging the entries. Considering administrative and other costs, it's clear that the Nicholl program is not remotely close to being a moneymaking operation.
Online Application Process
Q: Why can't I find out my script's status in the competition online?
A: The only information current entrants can see is whether their script has been received by the Academy Nicholl Fellowships. Information about advancing or not advancing to the next round is sent to entrants by e-mail only.
Q: Do you have any tips regarding the online process?
A: Be ready prior to starting. Prepare a log line (a brief synopsis limited to 300 characters, including spaces) for your script before commencing. If you are part of a collaborative team, fill out the form jointly or make sure that whoever is filling out the form has the correct phone number and e-mail address for the partner. Once the entry fee is paid, the partner will receive a confirmation e-mail that requires him or her to verify the collaboration. The verification may be submitted after the entry deadline, but the entry will not be processed into the competition until this step is complete.
Read the rules before filling out the form. Follow the instructions. Please don't type in all caps or all lower case. Watch for typos. An error in your mailing address or e-mail address could cause our official correspondence to be misrouted or lost. Add email@example.com to your e-mail address book. Be sure to print out and keep a copy of the application for your records at the end of the application process. If you did not, log back into your account, select the title on the left and then click the "Print" button.
Finally, try to apply early. On deadline days such as April 10 our system experiences the heaviest online traffic and has the greatest chance of system slowdowns.
Q: I just created an online account. Why can't I find the application?
A: It's probably because you've created that account between June and January, when Nicholl application forms are not available.
The Nicholl application is typically available from late January through the close of the competition. During that period, those with an online account can access a "Create Application" link upon log-in.
Q: What do I need to upload a script to the Nicholl competition?
A: An online account (if you have not already created one), a script in PDF format, and a credit or debit card to pay the entry fee.
Q: Can I mail in a check or money order and then upload my script online?
A: No, you may not. Entrants must pay the entry fee by credit card or debit card through their online account at the Nicholl website, or the application will be considered incomplete.
The Nicholl online system will also accept some gift cards, which are typically purchased at banks, supermarkets and other establishments. An entrant could also use a friend's credit card (with permission, of course) to pay the entry fee.
Q: I don't have a credit card, is there another way for me to pay?
A: The only way to enter is by filling out the online application and paying online, which requires a credit or debit card.
- If you have a debit card through your bank, try using that.
- Borrow a friend's credit card and repay them.
Q: I paid by credit card but then couldn't find an Academy Nicholl Fellowships charge in my account? Was my credit card payment not processed properly?
A. The Nicholl payment will appear in your credit card account as "AMPAS NICHOLL SCITECH" in the amount of $35.00 or $50.00 or $65.00, depending upon when you enter. The Copy for Your Records page in your Academy Nicholl account will also display the entry fee that you paid.
Q: How do I turn my script into a PDF file?
A: If you are using screenwriting software such as Final Draft or Movie Magic Screenwriter, you should be able to save your script as a PDF file. If you have written your script in Microsoft Word 2007 or 2010, you also have the option to save your script as a PDF file. If your word processing or screenwriting program does not offer a "Save as PDF" option, you may be able to convert your script to a PDF document at various free PDF conversion sites on the Web. See below for additional information about PDF files and conversions.
Q: Why can't I just use a scanner to convert my script into a PDF file?
A: While we prefer the smaller file sizes associated with program-converted scripts, we will accept scanned scripts so long as the resulting PDF file is no larger than 1.0 MB. Be aware that office copiers and scanners often create PDF files in the 2.5 to 5.0 MB range.
Q: Can I fill out an application form online and then mail a printed copy of my script?
A: No, you may not. Mailed paper copies will be sent to recycling unread.
Q: If I submit my script online and then later have a revised version or need to make a correction, can I substitute the new draft?
A: No. Once you have submitted your script, you are not allowed to substitute a new draft of that script. Entrants are also not allowed to submit different versions of a script in the same competition year. Make sure to review the PDF of your script to ensure that you have the correct draft before you upload it. If you make an error, the system will allow you to re-upload your script only if you have not yet paid the entry fee.
Q: I used the online application form in a prior year, but I can't seem to log in to my account. Any suggestions?
A: Try using the e-mail address that you used in prior years to log in. In 2011, we switched to a new online system, so if your password was shorter than six or longer than 12 characters, you must create a new password. To do so, click "Forgot Password." You will be prompted to log in again to change your password. If you continue to have problems, e-mail us at email@example.com, and we'll figure out a solution with you.
Q: What should I do if I'm having trouble with the online application?
A: We have found that the Nicholl application seems to be friendlier with different browsers on different days. If you're having trouble with Internet Explorer, try using Firefox or Google Chrome. If you're on a Mac and having trouble with Safari, try using Firefox or Chrome. Or vice versa.
Internet Explorer users will need version 7 or better for the online application to work properly. If the website appears to have stopped responding or you get an error message, close your browser window. Then open a new one and return to https://nicholl.oscars.org. Log in to your account, click on "Current Applications" and select the script title to pick up where you left off. Try checking our Facebook page for information regarding the status of the competition and the online application system: www.facebook.com/NichollFellowships. You could also try waiting a half hour or longer before logging back in to your account.
Do not wait until the last minute to submit your entry. We cannot guarantee you will be able to get through to the online application during the last six hours before the competition closes, when submission traffic is the heaviest.
Q: How do I know you've received my script and application?
A: Once you reach the "Print Copy for your Records" page of the application, the script has been submitted to us for processing. To double-check this, log in to your Nicholl account and look on the left column under "Current Applications." Under the title of your script, it should read "submitted" (which means it's been received and awaits processing) or "confirmed" (it's been received and has been processed into the competition). If you do not see your entry, send an e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.com as soon as possible.
PDF Basics
Q: How do I convert my screenplay into a PDF document?
A: This depends on the software you have:
In FD 8 go to File>Save as PDF. Visit Final Draft's website or contact their technical support for detailed instructions.
If you are using FD 7.0, you need to upgrade to FD 7.1 or later. FD 7.0 creates extremely large PDF files that exceed the Nicholl 1.0 MB limit. You can also add a PDF printer driver as described below in the Microsoft Word section. These drivers work with almost any program and do work with FD.
In Movie Magic Screenwriter 6 or better, go to File>Print. Select Create PDF and then the OK button.
Microsoft WORD
If you are using Word 2007 or 2010, you can select Save As: PDF. If you do not see this option, download and install the free add-in "Save as PDF" from Microsoft.
If you are using Word 2003 or earlier, you can download and install a free PDF printer driver such as PDF995 or CutePDF.
- After the printer driver installation, you open your script in Word.
- Click File>Print
- In Printer Name, select PDF995 (or whatever PDF driver you have installed) and click OK.
If you are using a word processing program such as Pages 09 or better, go to File>Print and select PDF, select Save As. If you are having difficulty generating a small PDF file with Final Draft 7.0, go to File>Print and select PDF, select Save As.
Eligibility, Adaptations and Collaborations
Q: Who can enter the competition?
A: Writers who write in English and who have not earned more than $25,000 writing fictional work for film and/or television in their lifetimes are eligible. Payments received for work-for-hire, sales and options apply toward that limit.
The $25,000 limit is cumulative over a writer's lifetime. For example, if a writer received a $15,000 option for a screenplay and $12,500 for polishing a shooting script, that writer would not be eligible for the Nicholl competition.
Q: What about the sale of movie rights to a book or play?
A: If a writer received more than $25,000 for the sale or option of the movie rights for a novel, short story, nonfiction book, play, etc., that writer would not be eligible for the Nicholl competition.
Q: Does prize money from a screenwriting competition count towards the $25,000 limit?
A. When the competition is sponsored by or directly affiliated with a production company or studio such as Disney, Nickelodeon or Amazon Studios, prize money would be considered earnings, and awards greater than $25,000 would cause a writer to be ineligible for the Nicholl competition. In addition, if accepting the competition prize money attached a production company or producer to the winning script or to any new scripts written by the winning writer, then the award could also make the writer ineligible if the total exceeded $25,000. For example, if a company hosting the competition awarded $30,000 to the winning writer with expectations of developing the script for production, then that writer would not be eligible for the Nicholl competition.
Most competitions, however, offer prize money without any production or development strings and so would not affect a writer's Nicholl eligibility.
Q: Can I win an Amazon Studios contest and still enter the Academy Nicholl Fellowships competition?
A: Winning more than $25,000 in various of the Amazon screenplay and screen story competitions makes the writer ineligible for the Nicholl competition. Amazon Studios is essentially a production company. Its business plan includes seeking and developing movie projects through different contests. We consider any money received from Amazon Studios to be earnings (no matter how Amazon defines options, sales, writing for hire, etc.).
Q. I have earned more than $25,000 as a novelist. Am I eligible for the competition?
A. As long as the movie rights to your novels (or to any produced or published work) have not been sold or optioned, you would remain eligible. Only film and television writing earnings count toward the $25,000 limit.
Q: Can collaborative teams enter the competition?
A: Yes, if the team consists of exactly two writers who are equal partners in all aspects of the creation of the script. This means that collaborators must develop the story and write the screenplay together as equal partners from beginning to end.
When applying online, collaborators must follow the instructions for adding a collaborator to an entry. Once the entry fee is paid, the writing partner will receive a confirmation e-mail that requires the partner to verify the collaboration. The verification may be submitted after the entry deadline, but the entry will not be processed into the competition until this step is complete.
Q: Do collaborative teams pay two entry fees?
A: No. The entry fee is $35 per script if submitted by February 28, $50 if submitted by April 10, and $65 if submitted by May 1 whether the script is written by one writer or two.
Q: When would a script written by two collaborators not be eligible for the competition?
A: The script would not be eligible if the collaborators do not share equally in its creation. For example, if one collaborator contributes the story and the other executes the screenplay, the resulting script would not be eligible. Likewise, if one collaborator is the author of a novel and both collaborators write a screenplay based on it, the script would not be eligible. The contributions must be equal in every aspect.
Q: Why are adaptations not eligible?
A: Adaptations of any work (other than your own) are not eligible. The intent of the program is to identify talented new screenwriters. One of the difficulties of evaluating adaptations in general is determining the screenwriter's contribution, especially if the source material is unfamiliar. As an extreme example, if the characters, dialogue, story and plot are taken in their entirety directly from a novel, the screenwriter's contribution may be little beyond formatting. Given the thousands of entries that we receive each year, it is simply not possible to compare the talent exhibited in a well-executed adaptation versus a well-executed original script. Even in a separate competition exclusively for adaptations, it would be difficult to evaluate entries, given the fact that the pool of source material is virtually unlimited.
Q: What about an adaptation of the Bible or a fairy tale or a work that is in the public domain?
A: Adaptations of any work (other than your own) are not eligible.
Q: Can I enter a totally original screenplay featuring Sherlock Holmes or James Bond, or write a new "Star Trek" or Indiana Jones adventure?
A: No. Scripts featuring established fictional characters would be adaptations, and would therefore not be eligible.
Q: Are historical screenplays or scripts based on actual events eligible?
A: Yes, as long as the script is not derived from a single source – a book, an article, a diary, etc. Here's a simple rule of thumb: Scripts based on research drawn from multiple sources are eligible; those based on a single source are not.
Q: I understand that adaptations are not eligible for the competition, but can I adapt my own novel or play?
A: Yes. Adaptations of a writer's own work are allowed.
Q: Why are adaptations of a writer's own work treated differently?
A: Because those scripts are the work of one writer. The characters, the dialogue, the action, the story – all have been created by the writer and translated by him or her into a different form.
Q: Are citizens of countries other than the United States eligible?
A: Yes. Any writer who writes in English and who meets the other eligibility requirements can enter a script into the Nicholl competition.
Be aware that translated scripts are not eligible. To be eligible, scripts must have been written originally in English.
Q: Could a member of the Writers Guild of America enter a script into the Nicholl competition?
A: Yes, if the WGA member has not earned more than $25,000 writing fictional work for film or television. The WGA member would remain eligible if he or she had earned more than $25,000 as a newswriter or documentarian.
Format and Presentation
Q: What is the script format standard to the United States motion picture industry?
A: While there is no precise format common to all scripts written by professional screenwriters working within the U.S. motion picture industry, there are certainly general standards. A script written by one professional writer will visually resemble that written by another professional writer. Producers, agents, development executives and readers recognize scripts written by professional writers as falling within an acceptable range of formatting conventions, despite slight variations in detail.
If you follow the format described in any number of screenwriting guides and textbooks, you should be in good shape. You may also find our screenplay format guide (http://www.oscars.org/awards/nicholl/resources.html) helpful.
In any event, scripts submitted to the Nicholl competition should be written in master scenes without shot designations. The scripts should not include scene numbers, which are typically found on shooting scripts.
Q: Do you have any suggestions regarding the proper format?
A: Courier (12-point, 10-pitch, nonproportional) is the industry standard font ("pica" on a typewriter). Do not type your script in italics or use proportional or other stylized fonts. Do not vary font sizes. The goal is a clean, legible submission.
Watch out for typos as well as spelling, punctuation and grammatical errors. Proofread your script once, then proof it again. It might be a good idea to have another person proof your script as well.
Make certain that your pages are properly numbered and in the correct order. Check your PDF after conversion to confirm that every page of your screenplay was converted to PDF. It's hard to judge a script fairly when it's missing ten pages (or even one).
If you upload an incomplete script or the wrong script and pay the entry fee, you may not be able to submit a correct copy later nor will you receive a refund of your entry fee. So make sure your PDF file is complete and correct BEFORE submitting it.
Q: I noticed that entry scripts should be "approximately 90-120 pages." Does that mean that an 85- or 125-page script will be disqualified?
A: No. We include the word "approximately" in the competition rules to allow some leeway on script length. The shortest script to earn its writer an Academy Nicholl Fellowship was 80 pages long; the longest was 153 pages.
Be aware, however, that short and long scripts could prejudice a reader. This applies especially to long scripts, which readers tend to approach with some resistance.
Q: Living in Europe, I only have access to paper that is longer than standard American paper. Is it acceptable to submit a script formatted for European (A4) paper?
A: No, it is not. Your script should be formatted for American (8.5" x 11") paper.
Q: Since the rules state that the name of the writer should not be included anywhere on an entry script, would a script be disqualified if it does?
A: It could be. You should submit a PDF version of your script without your name or other identifying information appearing on any page.
Q: How do you track my script if my name can't be anywhere on the script?
A: When scripts are initially received and processed electronically, we assign a number to each entry. Essentially, the assigned number replaces the entrant's name and appears on any form or score sheet connected to the script.
Q: Why do you need a log line? Who sees it? Will it be used to judge my script?
A: No, the log line – a brief synopsis – is not used in judging. Readers and judges do not see the log line anytime in the judging process. Those of us working in the Nicholl office use the log lines to match scripts with our readers' interests and tastes. For instance, some readers enjoy romantic scripts but do not want to read gruesome violence. The log line often helps us distinguish these sorts of elements.
The log line also gives us a simple, direct means of distinguishing scripts without having to rely solely on the title. For instance, the title "Washington" could indicate a script about the first U.S. president, one that is set in the state or city, or one that makes a different connection altogether. The log line gives us the story line.
Be aware that a script will be disqualified if no log line is included on the application form. In other words, do not write just one word in the log line field.
For the first time in 2013, with the writer's permission, we included log lines in the contact lists we distributed to industry at the end of the competition.
Q: I have trouble writing log lines. Is there a magic formula?
A: Some resources have suggested various simple formulas, but the essential goal is to encapsulate the story in a single sentence. A log line will include the protagonist, antagonist and a significant conflict. It may also indicate setting, time period and overall tone (e.g., violent, romantic, comedic, horrific, etc.). Since you will have already included your script's title and genre on the application form, there is no need to repeat that information in a Nicholl application log line.
As examples, here are log lines from three produced Academy Nicholl-winning scripts:
Some years after his FBI agent wife was killed in a Ruby Ridge-like confrontation, a terrorist expert college professor finds himself drawn into a conspiracy orchestrated by his seemingly innocuous next door neighbors. ("Arlington Road")
After finding a reclusive famous novelist, a young African-American prodigy in writing and basketball struggles to develop his talents as a scholarship student at a prestigious NYC academy while encouraging the older man to rejoin the world. ("Finding Forrester")
In the midst of her parents' bitter estrangement, a talented high school poet seeks encouragement and possibly more from her apparently accomplished English teacher. ("Blue Car")
Here are log lines for two movie classics:
After his partner is murdered, a San Francisco private eye teams with a mysterious woman against international thieves in a desperate search for a legendary bejeweled falcon.
Just prior to WWII, a daredevil archaeologist must locate the biblical Ark of the Covenant to prevent the Nazis from unleashing its supernatural powers upon the world.
Q: What happens to scripts that aren't formatted correctly?
A: We read them. We evaluate thousands of entries in a typical year, and correctly formatted scripts not only make a better initial impression, they are actually easier to read.
Q: Format won't disqualify a writer, then, but does it affect a script's chances at a full read?
A: Yes. Some degree of professionalism is expected. A grossly out-of-format script will almost certainly not be read cover to cover. Furthermore, if a manuscript looks and reads like a stage play rather than a screenplay, it's not going to fare very well, because the Nicholl competition is not a playwriting contest.
There are undoubtedly talented people oblivious to formatting issues who take a stab at screenwriting and turn out terrific scripts. But a reader who picks up an entry that looks nothing like a script does not anticipate one of these exceptional reads, but rather one that will be tedious and even painful. That initial resistance is almost impossible for a script to overcome.
Competition Process and Timetable
Q: Could you offer a timetable as to when things happen in the Nicholl competition?
A: Here it is:
early January – Text for the new year's application form is finalized.
late January – The online application process is opened to entrants. The application may only be accessed online at www.oscars.org/nicholl.
January to May 1 – Entries are accepted. In 2014, entries must be received electronically by 5:00 p.m. on May 1.
about a week after entering – Entrants will be able to see that their entries have been processed by accessing their online accounts (look for "confirmed" under the title).
January to mid-July – The first round of judging is in progress.
late July / early August – All entrants are notified by e-mail as to whether their script advanced to the quarterfinal round.
late August – Semifinalists are notified by e-mail.
late September to early October – Finalists are notified and asked to submit supporting materials.
late October – Fellowship recipients are notified and announced.
early November – Nicholl fellows are honored at the Nicholl Awards Dinner.
Q: What happens to the thousands of entries? How does the competition unfold?
A: The first round of the Academy Nicholl competition begins with the receipt of the initial entries in January or February, continues over the next five to six months and concludes by late July. As entries are received, application information is confirmed in our database, and each script and application form are assigned matching numbers. Scripts are then distributed electronically to readers in small "stacks" for evaluation. Every few days, those readers exchange their completed stacks for new ones. During the peak reading period – from March through July – 600 to 700 scripts are judged each week.
Let's use the most recent competition as an example. In 2013, 7,251 scripts were entered in the competition. All of those scripts were read twice. Over 850 scripts received three reads. After the third read, each script's best two scores were tallied, and the 369 scripts with the highest scores advanced to the quarterfinal round.
Q: If my script advances to the quarterfinals, can I submit a new version of that script?
A: No. Scripts are sent forward to judges before writers are notified of their status, and there simply isn't enough time in the schedule to allow several hundred writers the opportunity to submit new versions.
Q: What happens to scripts that do not advance to the quarterfinal round?
A: PDF scripts submitted online are eventually deleted from the file server.
Q: Who reads in the quarterfinal round?
A: Selected industry professionals read the scripts that make the quarterfinal round, three reads by three different judges for each script.
Q: Who reads in the semifinal round?
A: Academy members read the scripts that reach the semifinal round. The judges are drawn from a number of Academy branches, covering all aspects of the creative and production process. In 2013, 35 of the Academy member semifinal round judges had either won or been nominated for an Academy Award during their careers.
In 2013, 146 scripts advanced to the semifinal round, and each script was read by four Academy members. Ultimately, ten scores from the first, quarterfinal and semifinal rounds were compiled to determine the ten scripts that advanced to the finals.
Q: How many finalists are there?
A: We typically select 10 finalists, occasionally fewer, and twice we've selected 11. It's a matter of making a determination based on the judges' scores and comments.
Given our judging process, at least eight different people have to like a particular script for it to advance to the finals. How many times do eight people agree that a particular movie, let alone a screenplay, is wonderful? Not very often.
Q: Once finalists have been identified, how are winners determined?
A: The scripts are forwarded to the Academy Nicholl Committee, which in 2013 consisted of 14 members: Gale Anne Hurd, chair, John Bailey, Naomi Foner, Ron Mardigian, Dan Petrie Jr., Tom Rickman, Eric Roth, Eva Marie Saint, Peter Samuelson, Vicki Sanchez, Robert Shapiro, Buffy Shutt, Dana Stevens and Robin Swicord. After reading the scripts and the supporting letters, the committee members gather for an often spirited two-to-three-hour meeting to discuss the merits of each script, and then cast their votes to select the fellowship recipients.
Readers, Judges and Judging Criteria
Q: Does the Academy hire readers to evaluate the scripts?
A: The first-round readers and quarterfinal-round judges are paid. Although the pay is modest, it's enough to use up most of the money collected in entry fees.
Q: Who are the first-round readers?
A: First-round readers and quarterfinal-round judges are all involved in the industry, but none of them are Academy members. We assemble a good mix of people. While a majority are writers, some of whom read to pay their bills, we also get a number of producers and development execs as well as those who work in other areas of development or production. The key attributes we look for are skill and experience in reading and evaluating scripts.
Actually, in terms of their age range and backgrounds (excluding industry connections), readers resemble Nicholl entrants.
Q: What are these readers looking for in scripts?
A: We tell the readers that we're looking for the best scripts. The best stories. The best craft. We want them to identify screenwriters who can tell a good story and can tell it well.
We also let the readers know that budget and market potential are not relevant for our purposes. If a script suggested special effects that would push production costs over the $300 million mark and require a Steven Spielberg or James Cameron at the helm, so be it. If a script were darker than "12 Years a Slave," that's all right too. Commercial considerations of any sort should not affect the reader's assessment.
By the way, throughout the competition, the scripts are read without any identifying information, so the judges are unaware of the writers' names and hometowns.
Q: Why is personal information removed from the entry scripts?
A: In part, to eliminate any possibility of that knowledge influencing a judge's score. For instance, one judge might assume that a script from a Los Angeles writer is tainted by proximity to the industry while a script from Minnesota will be fresh and original. Another might have an opposite reaction – the Minnesota script will be unprofessional and the L.A. script will be sharply written. Even if such thoughts cross judges' minds for only an instant, it could affect their scoring. We are trying to ensure that only the scripts themselves are considered.
Q. I understand that the Academy Nicholl competition is only seeking dramas. Is that true?
A. No, it is not true. The goal of the Academy Nicholl Fellowships is to identify and encourage talented new writers, and it doesn't matter whether the writers submit comedies, thrillers, science fiction, horror or drama. See the list of genres of "Winning Scripts" below for confirmation.
The reason more dramas appear on various lists of Academy Nicholl entrants is that more dramas are entered into the competition each and every year.
Q: In the competition, do good scripts get passed over?
A: Not intentionally, but there's no way around it. The whole reading enterprise is incredibly subjective. That's why every script is read at least twice in the first round. If the first reader just doesn't connect with a script, the second read gives the script another chance to find a champion. We hope that our readers aren't swayed by their personal tastes, but they're human, too.
Throughout the competition we direct scripts to readers who might have an affinity for them. We ask our readers about their genre likes and dislikes. If one says, "I love horror and science fiction," that reader will receive relatively more scripts in those genres. If another says, "I hate horror and science fiction but love historical dramas," that reader will receive more historical dramas and as few horror and science fiction scripts as possible.
By adding a second read for every script during the first round, we have eliminated the possibility of a good script being knocked out by a single reader.
Winning Scripts
Q: What are the genres of the scripts that have won their writers Academy Nicholl Fellowships?
A: Genres of Nicholl Fellows' Entry Scripts (1989–2013)
action-adventure – 10
animated comedy – 1
comedy – 8
romantic comedy – 5
comedy-drama – 10
coming-of-age drama – 9
drama – 38
romantic drama-fantasy – 2
horror – 3
science fiction – 2
thriller / crime / caper – 20
war / terrorism – 12
Western – 3
Q: If you were a writer about to start a new script that you wanted to enter in the Academy Nicholl competition, what stories would you consider?
A: In a way, story is everything, and at the same time the choice of a particular story doesn't really make a difference. There's a Graham Parker song title that probably applies here – "Passion Is No Ordinary Word." Beginning writers have to be passionate about their stories and their characters.
It doesn't matter whether you're writing about a disaster at sea, alien hunters, cops investigating a murder in 1950s L.A., or a uniquely personal tale drawn from your own experience. Love your story, know it inside and out, and be passionate about your characters and their problems. When you're connected to your material in this way, your energy and emotion will likely shine through to the reader. And that's the person you have to grab – whether in a contest or in an agent's office or in a big studio. If you really care about your story, maybe a reader will too.
Q: How many Academy Nicholl Fellowship-winning scripts have been produced?
A: Of the 133 scripts that have earned their writers fellowships from 1986 to 2013, 17 have been produced. Warren Taylor's "In the Dark" as "In the Eyes of a Stranger" (CBS-TV), Radha Bharadwaj's "Closet Land," Jim McGlynn's "Traveller," Mark Lowenthal's "Where the Elephant Sits," Myron Goble's "Down in the Delta," Ehren Kruger's "Arlington Road," Mike Rich's "Finding Forrester," Karen Moncrieff's "Blue Car," Deborah Pryor's "Briar Patch" (aka "Plain Dirty"), Jacob Estes's "Mean Creek," Dawn O'Leary's "Island of Brilliance" (as "Admissions"), Doug Atchison's "Akeelah and the Bee," Robert Edwards's "Land of the Blind," James Mottern's "Trucker," Bragi Schut's "Season of the Witch" and Jason Micallef's "Butter," and Destin Cretton's "Short Term 12."
Q: Can I read the Nicholl-winning scripts?
A: All of the Nicholl-winning scripts may be read at the Academy's Margaret Herrick Library, whose core collection includes more than 11,000 feature film screenplays.
Since the Academy does not hold the rights to any of these screenplays, it is not common practice to make them available online. However, with the permission of the writers, several of the Nicholl-winning scripts are available here.
After the Competition
Q: What do the winners win?
A: The winners receive $35,000, spread over a one-year period. It's distributed in five $7,000 checks, paid quarterly – the first installment on day one and the second through fifth at the end of each quarter.
Q: Can a writer win more than one fellowship in a year?
A: Our rules state that you cannot hold another fellowship simultaneously. So if you accepted a Disney fellowship while you were a finalist in our competition, you'd be disqualified. (Having previously received a Disney fellowship would disqualify you on the basis of earnings.)
You also cannot win an Academy Nicholl Fellowship more than once.
Q: What are winning writers required to do during the fellowship year?
A: The intent of the Academy Nicholl Fellowships is to give fledgling writers the ability to take time off from their "day jobs" so that they will have more time to write. We expect fellows to complete one script during their fellowship year, but we don't really care whether they complete one or four – it's important only that they write. That's the goal.
Beyond writing a new script, there are no other requirements. Fellows are not required to move to Los Angeles. They are invited to join other fellows at monthly lunches but attendance is not required.
Q: What happens if a fellow sells a script or is hired to write one during the fellowship year?
A: That has happened on a number of occasions. Current fellows are free to sell scripts. In the case of a writing assignment, the fellow takes a leave of absence from the fellowship and returns only after completing the professional assignment. Fellows have up to three years from receipt of their first fellowship check in which to complete the fellowship requirements.
Q: Could a fellow participate in the Sundance Labs during the fellowship year?
A: Yes.
Q: What would happen if a full-time student was a winner of the competition?
A: That has happened on several occasions. A student winner would simply defer the beginning of the fellowship year until after the completion of his or her educational requirements. For instance, if we awarded a student an Academy Nicholl Fellowship in November, and the student was not slated to graduate until the following June, we would defer the start of the fellowship year until June.
Q: Are the names of those who place in the competition distributed to production companies?
A: Each year, we compile contact lists of quarterfinalists, semifinalists and finalists that include each entrant's name, script title and genre. Additionally, at the discretion of the entrant, a contact phone number, e-mail address, and log line are included. We distribute the lists to producers, executives, agents, managers and others in the development community who know about the competition and contact the Academy to request them. We do not release home addresses – only phone numbers and e-mail addresses.
In 2013, there were 223 names (plus collaborators) on the quarterfinalist list, 136 (plus collaborators) on the semifinalist list and 10 (plus collaborators) on the finalist list, including the winners.
Q: About how many requests for those lists do you get?
A: Each year, we distribute hundreds of copies of the lists, which seem to be passed along within the development community.
Q: Do the lists generate many industry queries?
A: Anecdotal evidence suggests that while some quarterfinalists receive up to a half-dozen contacts, others do not receive a single e-mail. Reaching the semifinals seems to generate more e-mails, and the finalists report considerably more contact. These industry queries come from agents, executives, managers and producers.
Q: Is there an awards ceremony?
A: Yes. Last year's ceremony was held in November at the Academy's Samuel Goldwyn Theater.
Q: Who attends?
A: The winners and their guests, previous fellows, Academy Nicholl Committee members and a number of Academy members who served as judges. Mrs. Nicholl was a fixture at the event until the last two years of her life. Also in the audience are invited members of the industry and press.
Q: What happened to the Awards Dinner?
The awards ceremony was reformatted and moved to the Academy's Samuel Goldwyn Theater for the first time in 2013 so that more people, including the public, could have an opportunity to attend. The event included a live read of portions of each of the fellowship winning scripts by professional actors. For more details about the Academy Nicholl Fellowships Screenwriting Awards & Live Read go here.
Q: Because of the inherent subjectivity of the judging process, do you think it's a good idea to resubmit a script that hasn't advanced in previous years?
A: It's difficult to say "yes, keep sending in your script and your entry fee" when it may be a waste of money. On the other hand, good scripts have been passed over. Given the subjectivity of the process and the fact that we try to direct repeat scripts to different readers, scripts often fare differently in different years. In fact, on several occasions, writers have come back and have done better.
Q: With exactly the same script?
A: Some scripts have been reentered over and over again. One script reached either the quarter- or semifinals four years in a row. (By the way, the writer of that script won a fellowship in 1995 with a different script.) A 1992 semifinalist won a fellowship with the same script in 1993; two previous semifinalists won with the same scripts in 1996.
Three past quarter- or semifinalists became winners in 1997. One of those writers had reached at least the quarterfinals with eight different scripts over the years. From 1998 through 2002, we had three writers reach the finals in consecutive years and win a fellowship the second time around. Two did it with the same script; the third won with a different script. Several writers who had not previously made it past the first round ended up winning in another year. In 2013, two of the fellowship-winning writers were past quarterfinalists with the same scripts, and another was a semifinalist twice with the same script.
So persistence and perseverance sometimes pays off.
Age, Sex and Geography
Q: What is the age range of Academy Nicholl Fellowship winners?
A: The youngest fellow was 21 when she entered the competition; the oldest was 66.
Q: What is the average age of Academy Nicholl winners?
A: Just over 36.
Q: How many women have won Academy Nicholl Fellowships?
A: Thirty-nine of the 144 fellowship winners have been women.
Q: How does that compare with the percentage of female entrants?
A: Since the beginning of the competition, about 29.7 percent of the entries have been submitted by women.
Q: Where did the various Academy Nicholl winners live when they entered the competition?
A: Eighty-six of the 144 winners resided in California; 17 hailed from New York; 5 were from Virginia; 5 from Texas; 3 each from Illinois, Pennsylvania and North Carolina; 2 from Oklahoma; and 1 each from Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah and Washington; as well as 2 from British Columbia and 1 from Ontario, Canada; and 1 each from London, England, Tokyo, Japan, and Laezonia Gauteng, South Africa.
Q: Why so many Californians?
A: Two reasons: first, over the years over 40 percent of all entrants have resided in California; second, talented writers who want to break into the movie industry are apt to relocate to California.
Q: How have foreign entrants fared over the years?
A: Foreign entrants, more from Canada than from any other country, have reached the Nicholl quarterfinals and semifinals a number of times. Six Canadians have reached the finals, and two of them won. An Australian, an Israeli, a British citizen and U.S. citizens residing in Japan and New Zealand have also reached the finals (with the British citizen and the Japan resident becoming fellows). We had our first fellow from South Africa in 2012. About 6.1 percent of all entries have come from countries other than the U.S.; about 5.2 percent of the Academy Nicholl quarterfinalists submitted their entries from a foreign country.
Submitting Scripts to Agents and Producers during the Competition
Q: Is it permissible to submit a script to agents and producers after you've entered it in the Academy Nicholl competition?
A: Yes. Writers should continue any and all modes of marketing their script without regard to their status in the competition.
Q: What would happen if a writer were to sell a script during the competition?
A: If a writer were paid more than $25,000 during the competition, that writer would become ineligible. Given the typical slow pace of contract negotiations and writer payments, it would be possible for a writer to reach the Academy Nicholl quarterfinals, to sign a contract for the sale of a script, and to remain eligible for a fellowship, so long as he or she does not receive payment for the script during the competition.
Q: Can scripts be entered in the Nicholl and other competitions simultaneously?
A: Yes. But since you cannot hold the Academy Nicholl Fellowship while you hold another, you could not win the Disney competition, for example, and then win an Academy Nicholl Fellowship. Winning a competition in which you are hired to write (Disney) or in which your script is essentially under an option arrangement would make you ineligible for the Academy Nicholl competition.
Q: Can a writer win or place in other screenwriting contests and remain eligible for Nicholl?
A: Yes. A writer can win or place in other screenwriting contests and remain eligible for the Academy Nicholl competition, particularly if prize money does not secure rights to the writer's script. If the prize money is contingent upon the winner signing an option or any other professional writing agreement, it will count toward the writer's $25,000 earnings limit.
Q: When would winning a contest make a writer ineligible for the Academy Nicholl competition?
A: Any contest that offers prize money of over $25,000 that is contingent upon the winner signing an option or any other professional writing agreement would make a writer ineligible for the Academy Nicholl competition.
Q: Do you provide the judges' notes to entrants?
A: No, we do not. While we recognize that such notes might prove to be valuable to entrants, we simply have found that it is physically and fiscally impossible for us to provide notes to thousands of entrants each year. We also feel that asking judges to write notes directed to the entrants might alter the manner in which they evaluated the scripts.
Q: How many scripts have been entered into the Academy Nicholl competition since it started?
A: Through 2013 we've received more than 123,000 entries. Here's the breakdown by years:
1986 – 99 entries
1987 – 459 entries
1988 – 231 entries
1989 – 1,395 entries
1990 – 2,888 entries
1991 – 3,814 entries
1992 – 3,515 entries
1993 – 3,854 entries
1994 – 3,934 entries
1995 – 3,695 entries
1996 – 4,181 entries
1997 – 4,006 entries
1998 – 4,446 entries
1999 – 4,150 entries
2000 – 4,250 entries
2001 – 5,489 entries
2002 – 6,044 entries
2003 – 6,048 entries
2004 – 6,073 entries
2005 – 5,879 entries
2006 – 4,899 entries
2007 – 5,050 entries
2008 – 5,224 entries
2009 – 6,380 entries
2010 – 6,304 entries
2011 – 6,730 entries
2012 – 7,197 entries
2013 – 7,251 entries
Writers and Screenwriting Contests
Q: Over the last few years, screenplay competitions have proliferated. Besides the obvious – the cash prizes – why should amateur writers consider entering competitions?
A: First, a few words of advice: Don't enter screenplay competitions solely because you need the money. These competitions may seem like lotteries, with plenty of money to go around. But all of them, especially those that offer the largest prizes, are highly competitive. More than 99 percent of writers who enter contests will not receive a cash prize.
But there are a number of positive results that can arise from entering a competition:
Contests can serve as stepping-stones.
Winning writers, and occasionally runners-up, have used the "heat" generated by their contest victory or placement to jump-start their careers. Winners of the largest contests usually find an agent quickly (if they are not already represented). Their scripts are welcomed by major production companies and studios. If the writer so desires, this typically leads to meetings with countless development execs. Writers who have won major contests have often sold or optioned a script or been hired to write or rewrite a project within a year after winning. This often leads to other work or other sales.
Contest results can be added to a résumé or query letter.
Placing in a contest should certainly be mentioned in a query letter and added to a résumé when appropriate. While the mention of a victory or placement in an obscure contest will not guarantee positive responses from agents or producers, it can't hurt you. Mention of placement in major contests has often garnered writers reads at agencies and production companies.
Contests can serve as yardsticks.
While most contests do not offer any kind of written feedback on an entrant's script, the script's performance may serve as a good indicator of whether the script is ready for submission to Hollywood agents and producers. Reaching the second round of any contest suggests that something is going right. Reaching an advanced round of highly competitive contests may suggest that the script is meeting or is close to meeting professional standards. On the other hand, an early departure from one or several contests may suggest that the script isn't ready.
Contests can open doors and initiate professional contacts.
Since many contests use industry professionals as judges at advanced levels, it is possible to make contacts simply by advancing in a competition. Some contests provide lists of quarterfinalists, semifinalists and finalists to interested agents, producers and development execs. For a very few writers, these contacts have led directly to a career.
Contests provide deadlines.
Writers have been known to complete scripts when a deadline looms.
Eligibility, Adaptations and Collaborations
Competition Process and Timetable
Readers, Judges and Judging Criteria
Submitting Scripts to Agents and Producers during the Competition
Writers and Screenwriting Contests
Contact Information
For more information, contact
Academy Nicholl Fellowships in Screenwriting
1313 Vine Street
Hollywood, California 90028
(310) 247-3010


text:
All states regulate and control the sale of controlled dangerous substances (CDS), though each differs in its exact definition of CDS and the penalties for sale. Mississippi classifies not only well-known drugs like marijuana, heroin, and cocaine as CDS, but also the compounds used to manufacture them.
This article discusses the manufacture and sale of CDS only. Possessing CDS for personal use carries different penalties. For more information on possession of CDS for personal use, see Possession of Controlled Substances in Mississippi.
Also, while marijuana is considered a CDS, this article does not cover Mississippi's marijuana possession and sale laws. To learn more about that topic, see Mississippi Marijuana Laws.
Mississippi divides CDS into five "schedules." Schedule I lists the most dangerous drugs, which have a high probability of abuse and addiction, and no recognized medical value. Schedules II, III, IV, and V decrease in dangerousness and probability of abuse, and increase in recognized medical uses.
These classes are also used to determine the applicable penalties for illegally making or selling specific CDS (described in the next section). If you've been arrested for illegal CDS production or sales, you'll need to consult the Mississippi Code that lists precisely which drugs fit into each group. Go to the statute (Ms. Code Ann. § 41-29-113, -115, -117, -119, -121.) and find the substance you're charged with selling -- it will be listed under one of the five classes.
It is illegal in Mississippi to make, sell, or possess CDS with the intent to do these things, with few exceptions, such as a doctor who legally prescribes a prescription medication. Penalties vary according to the type and amount of the CDS involved.
Making or selling a schedule I or II substance incurs a fine of between $5,000 and $1,000,000, up to 30 years in prison, or both. (Ms. Code Ann. § 41-29-139(b)(1).)
Making or selling a schedule III or IV substance incurs a fine of between $1,000 and $250,000, up to 20 years in prison, or both. (Ms. Code Ann. § 41-29-139(b)(4).)
Making or selling a schedule V substance incurs a fine of between $1,000 and $50,000, up to ten years in prison, or both. (Ms. Code Ann. § 41-29-139(b)(5).)
A person who makes, sells, barters, or transfers (without payment) the following types and amounts of CDS over any 12 month period will face life imprisonment. (Ms. Code Ann. § 41-29-139(f).)
"Trafficking" in a CDS refers to committing three or more offenses described above during a 12 month period, when two or more offenses occurred within different Mississippi counties. Penalties include a fine of between $5,000 and $1,000,000, up to 30 years in prison, or both. (Ms. Code Ann. § 41-29-139(g)(1).)
A second or subsequent conviction incurs up to double the applicable fine, prison term, or both, as described above. (Ms. Code Ann. § 41-29-147.)
CDS manufacture or sale convictions incur both heavy fines and long periods of incarceration. A local lawyer who practices CDS defense will review the facts of your case, explain your options, and advise you of the possible consequences.


text:
The influx of Strikeforce fighters continues with lightweight Caros Fodor being the latest transfer as he is set to face Sam Stout at UFC 157.
Sports Illustrated recently released its 112 best sports moment of 2012, keeping the Ronda Rousey hype train chugging right along.
UFC featherweight Marcus Brimage knows exactly who he wants to fight next, and it will be determined at UFC 155 next weekend.
Georges St-Pierre on Saturday night said that he believes Nick Diaz is the No. 1 contender, and also addresses talk that he is afraid to
Patrick Cote recently announced that he'll be making the drop to welterweight, now he has an event and opponent for his 170-pound debut.
Following three successful shows to introduce themselves to fans in 2012, Invicta FC will move into the pay-per-view game with their next show in January.
Jake Ellenberger understands Johny Hendricks' frustration about not getting a title shot all too well.
Dan Henderson's coach isn't happy his fighter is not the main event at UFC 157, but Henderson doesn't seem to mind one bit.
The final line-up for UFC 155: Dos Santos vs. Velasquez is now set with Joe Lauzon and Jim Miller slotted in as the co-main event
Strikeforce will officially close its doors on Jan. 12 with their final card on Showtime headlined by the welterweight title fight between Nate Marquardt and
"The Ultimate Fighter: Team Jones vs. Team Sonnen" debuts Jan. 22 on FX. Check out the video promo.
Thursday's edition of MMAWeekly Radio welcomes UFC 155 fighter Tim Boetsch, Strikeforce champion Gilbert Melendez, and new UFC fighter Derek Brunson.
While the UFC 157 main event between Ronda Rousey and Liz Carmouche has sparked a lot of debate, the fight card continues to come together
Two former featherweight contenders have agreed to meet at UFC 157 as Chad Mendes faces Manny Gamburyan in Anaheim. In addition, featherweights Matt Grice and
Strikeforce champion Gilbert Melendez says that UFC champ Benson Henderson still has a test in front of him before he can tout himself as the
Robbie Lawler is set to make his Octagon return at UFC 157 on Feb. 23 against Top 10 welterweight Josh Koscheck.
The UFC is supporting the Victorian Labor Party in their push to legalize cagefighting in the state of Victoria in Australia, where they see a
UFC officials on Wednesday confirmed Brendan Schaub vs. Lavar Johnson for the UFC 157 fight card, and also announced a new fight for TUF Live
On Wednesday, UFC heavyweight champion Junior Dos Santos and top contender Cain Velasquez took questions from the media ahead of their bout at UFC 155.
UFC officials on Wednesday announced that Max Holloway has agreed to step in at the last minute to face Leonard Garcia at UFC 155 next
When it comes to the type of competitors that Junior Dos Santos faces in the UFC, he sees a big difference between guys like Cain
MMAWeekly Radio returns for Wednesday's show with former UFC champion Cain Velasquez, Bellator fighter Jessica Eye, and TUF 16 fighter Sam Alvey.
Cain Velasquez is happy and healthy heading into his rematch against Junior Dos Santos, and he's ready to get back the only loss he's experienced
Roy Nelson and Hector Lombard each blasted his way back into the MMAWeekly.com Top 10 World MMA Rankings with huge knockout finishes.
The welterweight division has added one of the hardest punchers in the sport as Patrick Cote has made the decision to drop down to 170lbs.
A late change has been made to UFC 155 and a former Strikeforce fighter will now get to make his Octagon debut.
The UFC on FX 6: Sotiropoulos vs. Pearson medical suspensions have Chad Mendes, Mike Pierce and several other fighters staring at a possible six months
Pat Barry leads the list of TUF Finale 16 fighters that could be sitting on the sidelines until June of next year.
MMAWeekly Radio returns on Tuesday with UFC 158 fighter Jake Ellenberger, Frankie Edgar's lead trainer Mark Henry, and the best debate in all of MMA.
Bellator's final Season 7 event bounced back from last week's abysmal season low to the second best TV ratings of the past 11 episodes.


text:
Oak Creek Archives
Pink Jeep Tours invests in the health of Arizona's forests
Pink Jeep Tours has announced a partnership with the National Forest Foundation (NFF) that will help protect the Oak Creek and Verde River watersheds by funding restoration projects on the Coconino National Forest. Through the partnership, Pink Jeep Tours will collect donations from its customers for the Northern Arizona Forest Fund, a program developed by… Read More →
L'Auberge de Sedona gets $7M in enhancements
This summer, L'Auberge de Sedona, the acclaimed creekside retreat nestled among the Red Rocks of Sedona, will undergo more than $7 million in property enhancements, and unveil an elevated creekside arrival experience and enhanced luxury guest accommodations this fall. The L'Auberge de Sedona is owned and operated by IMH Financial Corporation. As part of the multi-million… Read More →
Kimpton expands into Northern Arizona
Kimpton Hotels & Restaurants today announced that it has purchased Amara Resort and Spa, one of the leading resorts in Sedona, Ariz. The property was acquired through the company's proprietary KHP-III fund, which closed in first quarter this year. The 100-room boutique resort overlooking Sedona's beautiful Oak Creek, will be the third Kimpton hotel in… Read More →
Exploring Around Sedona
Deciding to take a day trip, my friend and I explored Montezuma Castle and Well, and went to Sedona to shop and check out Oak Creek.


text:
Family Recipe Sake social 2013 winter!
Family Recipe
Wednesday, February 27, 2013 from 8:00 PM to 11:00 PM (EST)
Who's Going
San Francisco, California
London, United Kingdom
Florence, Italy
Event Details
Join us for a night of fun, food, music, and mingling! Chef Akiko Thurnauer will pair favorites from our winter menu with eight sakes selected by Sake Samurai Timothy from Urban Sake and Chizuko Nikawa from Sake Discoveries. Both will be on hand to discuss the selection. Don't miss this chance to enjoy delicious food, meet new friends, and sample some of the most exciting dsicoeries from the world of sake.
Sake lee cod tacos
Kale and shiitake shiso dumplings
Heritage pork belly buns
Cauliflower with Edamame Purée *recently featured in New York Magazine!
FR squid ink Okonomiyaki
FR mini ramen in pork miso broth
Shishito pepper
Carrot cake with yuzu cream
Assorted Mini Ice cream cones
Sake Selection
1.Tatenokawa 50 Junmai Daiginjo from Yamagata pref.
2.Tengumai 50 Junmai Daiginjo (Dancing Goblin) from Ishikawa pref.
3.Nanbu Bijin Tokubetsu Junmai (Southern Beauty) from Iwate pref. (served chilled and warm)
4. Hakkaisan Honjozo (Eight Peaks) from Niigata pref. (served chilled and warm)
5.Tengumai Umajun (Dancing Goblin) from Ishikawa pref. (served chilled and warm)
6.Amabuki Yamahai Junmai Marigold flower yeast from Saga pref. (served chilled and warm)
7.Nanbu Bijin No sugar added Umeshu (Southern Beauty) from Iwate pref.
8.Amabuki Gin no Kurenai (red rice sake) from Saga pref.
When & Where
231 Eldridge street
New York,
Wednesday, February 27, 2013 from 8:00 PM to 11:00 PM (EST)
Add to my calendar


text:
Welcome to Tillmouth Cottages
Self-catering accommodation in the Border County of Northumberland.
Situated in the grounds of the Tillmouth Park Estate, Cornhill-on-Tweed, where the rivers Till and Tweed meet, the 3 luxury cottages are grade II listed buildings lovingly renovated in 2008. Combining modern technology and comfort with rustic and historic charm the cottages sleep 2, 4, 8 or even 10 people.
Family-owned and run, we aim to provide you with a holiday experience you will want to come back to again and again.


text:
Today, I took my 4-year-old son to the bank with me. He asked why we were going, and I explained that I had a couple of checks that they would turn into money. When we got in line, he loudly exclaimed that "Mommy has checks for money!" Except "checks" sounded almost exactly like "sex". FML
Profile completedYou've filled out the necessary details. Having done so will be much appreciated.
Keen reader – Level: master ninjaYou have voted for 50% of the entire collection of FMLs to date.
Keen reader – Level: student ninjaYou have voted for 15% of the entire collection of FMLs to date.
MobilityYou are connected to FML via the mobile site or an app. How modern.
SocialiteYou used FML's private messaging service for the first time. Will they reply? Wait and see…
Up and coming moderatorIt's nice of you to help us sort out the submissions, using FML's moderate feature.
I agree, my mouse works.200 "I agree" votes is a good start.
JudgmentalYou have voted "You deserved it" over 100 times.
50 favoritesLove knows no boundaries. You've already added 50 FMLs to your favourites list!
It's in the can!Hey, you uploaded your photo, and you're cute as a kitten!
A new thumbYou've used your thumb on 1000 comments.
Who's the fairest of them all?This is now the third time you've changed your profile pic.33%
Keen reader – Level: godlike ninjaYou have voted for 100% of the entire collection of FMLs to date.3%
The return of the thumbYou have thumbed 5000 comments.31%
The thumb strikes backYou have left your thumbprint on 2500 comments.62%
YDI MasterYou made your 500th "You deserved it" vote.70%
One more and it's business timeYou've received 68 Hugs on your profile. Kinky.0%
Today, I told a guy he should be ashamed of himself for parking in a handicapped space. He hit me with his prosthetic leg. FML
Today, my sister, who knows I'm severely afraid of heights, got me tickets to sky dive for my birthday. When I reminded her of my fear, she stated that she forgot and should just keep them for herself and her boyfriend. My mom agreed. FML
Today, in order to try and get over my slight fear of swans, I went down to the local park to feed them. One decided that I looked tastier than the bread I was throwing and chased me around the feeding area while everybody laughed. FML
Today, I had a dream in which I was playing tennis. As I hit a powerful serve, I suddenly woke up due to having slapped myself in the face. FML