page 6.2
19 Benefits of the Old Studio System Imaging Process
as refined and improved by CFI™ Charisma Dynamics
The following is an overview of the old studio techniques that are available again and their new perspective in Charisma Dynamics™.
For most, this will be like preaching to the choir, but it’s important to define the relevance and correlations to the business today.
As it worked well then, it works even better now.
1. CHARISMATIC ON SCREEN TESTING
This well-known standby was just the beginning of the imaging process in the old studio system. In this test, the characterized essences of the player’s facial expressions were examined on film stock by studio chiefs who were practiced in critiquing facial innervation for its mass desirability or audience intriguing capacity. (Sometimes, these on-screen tests were given to the make-up department for their imaging feedback.)
In today’s industry, audition tapes were once the best way for agent or managers to screen test new faces, and therefore, modern studios relied upon agents to pre-select talent for them. CFI Dynamics™ has taken that process another step further through biometric facial scanning that validates the mass audience appeal and charismatic quality of any talent’s screen essence and film archetype. These radical new screen evaluations are available only from CFI.
__________________________________________________________________________
2. SCREEN CHEMISTRY TESTING
Once an actor had passed the first screen test, this extended version of the process evaluated the sexual or romantic chemistry of two leading actors being considered to work together on screen. For this additional screen test, the studio heads would gather additional viewers around themselves in an effort to objectively identify the sexual chemistry.
With modern imaging technology, the art of determining exact sexual chemistry has been retrieved and is cinematically guaranteed. Patterns of energy that interact between two exact actors is now measurable, verifiable, and precisely pinpointed without trial-and-error screenings. Burdensome screen testing can be easily replaced by CFI biometric sexual chemistry formulation and confirmation.
__________________________________________________________________________
3. COGNOMEN CONSTRUCTION
Name changing has been a standard operating procedure since theatrical entertainment was born. Attractive product identification for both film and talent alike is crucial to obtaining market audience loyalty and satisfaction. New names selected for actors and films were evaluated thoroughly by the old studios. They were homogeneously appealing to the masses, and indicative of the actor’s image, but not specific enough to cause any vulgarity or disenfranchisement of the fans.
Today, the ability to label a product or talent with a screen name that helps it stand out in the crowd (while still sounding appropriate to audience sensitivities) is critical. The previously over-developed generic star branding created an audience backlash and now, many artists keep their original names or find one odd enough to create uniqueness. Still, they must verify that the audience is able to recall it well and truly relate to it in accordance with the personal uniqueness or ‘essence’ of the talent they see.
__________________________________________________________________________
4. PHYSICAL ATTRACTION & SYMMETRY
In the late 1800’s, sociologists and personality psychologists began researching the physical appearance and the values of theatrical faces and their bodies in establishing patterns that would predict success. Studio make-up artists continued that research further to establish the parameters of facial structures that would enhance physical attraction and most glamorize screen success. Among the offerings was Max Factor’s 'mechanical modeler of facial symmetry' by which an actor’s head was measured and calculated for its image quality and charismatic set. The “golden triangle” of symmetrical beauty that Leonardo daVinci mathematically identified (1:1.6) was utilized and studio entertainers were measured and graphed for their facial potential for attracting and satisfying an audience’s demand for physical beauty.
Though it sounds a bit "Frankenstein-ish", academic research and independent physiognomy studies continued after the studio system collapsed … and it was discovered that the structural facial qualities of charisma, archetype, and graphic essence, or key descriptors were scientifically validated and mathematically verifiable. CFI biometrically evaluates artistic facial structure and the activity of articulated muscle groups which are relative to audience excitement and enchantment. With graphic precision, we can qualify the cinematic potential and charismatic imagery of every talent’s face, and then, stylishly accentuate the attraction it generates. Though it’s not the most important asset in CFI’s toolbox, it is usually the pivotal formulation for decisive casting when all else is found equal and there is the need for a final determination.
__________________________________________________________________________
5. WARDROBE COLOR TRIALS
In the days of black and white filming the (1) density and (2) tonality of the color in an actor's screen wardrobing was critical to good cinematography. The wrong tone or density would make the actor’s skin either wash out or blast out on the screen, instead of maintaining a comfortable balance. A failure in tonal or density balance caused a distraction from the actor’s emotional expressions for the audience and left them feeling irritated (which they mistakenly blamed on a supposed lack of talent). When color movies arrived, the whole equation had to be recalculated to adjust for hue and shade. Unfortunately, this color endeavor was approached from only the DP’s scenic point of view and failed to take into account the balance of hue and shade with the player’s personal skin tones and densities. Color faux pas became evident very quickly in the early fifties as color came into fashion. The audience became distracted from the actor’s emotional talents because mismatched wardrobe coloring on screen continued. Even though decades have transpired, the problem can still raise a ruckus today. A million dollars in fashion design and quality construction can be totally annihilated by colors which looked great on the hanger...but completely missed the mark when mis-matched on the skin of the talent. Distracting from an actor’s essence (on screen or even in line for the Oscars) is really the last thing you want happening.
'You’ve Come A Long Way Baby' has never had more meaning, but yet, less influence on correcting the problem of fashion coordination than the issue of color matching to the screen archetype. Developments in the science of color complementation and cohesiveness had occurred in the early seventies, but their applications were slow to catch on and find a permanence in wardrobing. Their facets are sometimes difficult for wardrobers to accurately observe and objectively identify. This uncertainty was due to the multiple variations of dermatological tone, perceptual interpretations, and a lack of visual skill required to establish a correct pattern relationship for the multitude of possibilities in fabric textures and colors. It takes either a naturally skilled or a pre-trained individual to conduct color harmonizing and a balancing process to match the colors of the material to the colors of an artist’s skin, eyes, lips, and hair. Eventually, digital editing will be sophisticated enough to automatically correct wardrobe color conflicts on the fly in post, but until then, we must train specialists to recognize and verify the truly harmonic colors for talent imagery, and assist wardrobers and designers in achieving selection consistency. One actor’s color is another actor’s ashes -- so knowing the difference keeps the audience looking at your actor’s face instead of making faces about the color of the clothes they’re seen wearing in films or in public.
__________________________________________________________________________
6. WARDROBE STYLING TRIALS
Wardrobe styles in the studio years were carefully constructed mass-appeal products designed to establish fashion trends which would promote the actor. They were socially acceptable yet slightly provocative linear designs that accentuated the stature of a talent’s formulated career. Studio designers would be assigned to a talent with a map of their future and were expected to spend weeks or months experimenting and testing various designs until they found the perfect formation for that talent’s image. To evaluate the image, they would pass each new modification by studio chiefs and consult with fashion journalists. (In comparison, today’s wardrobe styling follows a cyclic ideology that tends to recreate a new look for the talent as quickly as the last look has managed to garner enough press and supermarket publicity. This is an insecurity-driven competition for attention NOT peculiar to females and one that is not helpful for charisma.) Many designer skills from Europe were incorporated by the old studios and a plethora of geometric combinations were developed by artists whose stylish looks were meant to last into immortality. What they accomplished through their intricate trial-and-error methodology was a true consistency that correlated to the talent’s cinematic archetype and screen essence throughout their entire career. Their styles programmed a foundation of visual imagery that we unconsciously expect to find inside their archetypes even today.
The rapidly-changing, recycling fashion industry creates a massive turn-over of fashionable products in films which prey on the insecurity of human beings who fear not appearing “in style”. This film activity surprises audiences and creates media discussion. Unfortunately, these media forums don’t discuss the charismatic acting of talent or their latest entertainment productions. They only discuss their wardrobes and then, “judge and jury” the styling of their latest attire. A fear of condemnation creates insecurity and confusion in talent and prevents them from focusing on a pure archetype “look” that would glamorize their imagery. A confused wardrobe equals a confused audience and a confused audience equals a confused career. To help talents be focused and fearless as possible, and still reinvent themselves every couple of months, we offer stylists the details on a talent’s screen archetype and its charismatic priorities. This foundation provides a consistent pattern for perfectly correlating and complimenting the wardrobe accordingly. In this way, their designers remain concise regardless of every direction fashion can take. The wardrobe changes, but the charisma remains consistent and the audience remains secure. When a talent uses CFI processing to define and clarify wardrobing, the audience can comfortably grasp the beauty that styling is meant to present and avoid disappointment. The charismatic styling will always be there to reinforce their archetype.
__________________________________________________________________________
7. COSMETIC COLOR TRIALS
As in the wardrobe coloring category, the same studio system rules existed for facial make-up coloring dynamics. The same cinematic causes and effects existed also.. . The wrong tone or density and the actor’s skin either washed out -- or blasted out -- on the screen instead of remaining comfortably balanced. A failure in tonal/density balances caused distraction of the audience from the actor’s emotional expressions and left the audience feeling uncomfortable (which, they naturally blamed on a lack of talent). Again, when color movies arrived, the whole equation had to be recalculated to adjust for hue and shade. Unfortunately, this color endeavor was approached from only the DP’s lighting point of view and failed to take into account the balance of hue and shade in the player’s personal skin tones and unique intricacies for other appearances.
Our new solutions for facial make-up and coloring follow the same ideologies of wardrobe coloring along with several more technological correlations needed to correctly the balance a screen actor's make-up color with his or her own face. These color tricks of the trade are not published in public, but are taught discretely to artists and talents as part of the private CFI screen imaging process. The process scientifically coordinates the most charismatic colors of make-up to match the exact combination of colors in the talent’s face, eyes, hair, and lips; and provides a precise template for future color selections or color adjustments. One actor’s color is another actor’s muck -- knowing the difference will enchant an audience into looking at your actor’s face and not make faces at the colors of the make-up (or the wardrobe) they are seen in.
__________________________________________________________________________
8. COSMETIC STYLING TRIALS
Make-up styles were individualized combinations of designs that accentuated the size and shape of the talent's head and face. The stylists assigned to a talent would spend weeks and months experimenting and testing various formations until they found the perfect design for that talent’s face. Many of the early Max Factor measuring skills were involved and a cornucopia of geometric considerations were developed by artists who created looks that were meant to last through time. What they didn’t realize was, they were actually matching these styles to the cinematic or characterized archetype. To survey the image, they would pass each new modification by studio chiefs and consult with other make-up artists to generate imaging perfection. This was the beauty of art and science combined together in the glory and glamour of pure and precise imagery. In comparison, today’s make-up styling follows a cyclic ideology that tends to recreate a new look for the talent as quickly as the last look has garnered enough TV and magazine publicity. This time it is an 'insecurity-driven competition for attention' peculiar to mostly females and not a requirement for charisma. Male actors who stayed charismatic never used make-up wars to do so and the best females of the past never have to change their make-up because of its specific orientation to their archetype.
The rapidly-changing chameleon-esc 'cosmetic company driven' marketing schemes are designed to turn over more product based on the insecurity of women and its effect in motion pictures serves to shock audiences and create discussion. Unfortunately, the discussions are rarely about the charismatic acting talent of the female, but about the style of their make-up. This generally prevents make-up artists from focusing on developing a totally pure geometric look that would glamorize the artist perfectly like they did before ... so those studio secrets are outdated. In order to help talent specialize and personalize as much as possible, while reinventing themselves every six months, we offer make-up artists the audience’s definitive screen perspective of the entertainer so they may either specifically correlate or perfectly complicate their makeup accordingly. In this way, the design remains clear and precise so that regardless of the direction cosmetology takes, the direction is pure and absolute. When talent uses CFI image processing to define and clarify their look, the audience avoids any confusion as to the message the make-up styling is meant to represent. Muddled make-up equals muddled audiences and a muddled audience equals a muddled career.
__________________________________________________________________________
9. TONSORIAL COLOR TRIALS
Hair coloring became a major endeavor at the beginning of the century. But the only evaluation system stylists had to determine the correct color for anyone was to color the talent’s hair with different shades at different times and then gather a consensus from studio heads, journalists, or fan-mail responses from photo layouts in film star magazines. Glamour journalists and photo editors were surveyed and would supply feedback to the studio so they could compute these entries and determine which color the audience was most attracted to or impressed by. The color that the audience responded to the best … would be the color the talent was permanently assigned.
Today, CFI uses a color system which matches specific patterns of hair colors to the talent’s archetype and the unique patterns of essences found in the talent’s image. This process provides the widest audience attraction and the deepest visual charismatic response. Hair is the very first visual item an audience references when judging the form of a person’s desirability. The shade of the hair is the very first standard of the human recognition and comparison process. Either it magnifies the patterns of true charisma for the talent’s archetype or it just defeats the whole the purpose. Ignoring hair color can be an imaging disaster and occurs in at least half of every entertainer’s career.
__________________________________________________________________________
10. TONSORIAL STYLING TRIALS
Similar to make-up styling, hair stylists took their time calculating the geometrical style, size, and shape of the player’s locks as compared to their cinematic archetype. Similar to hair coloring trials, they evaluated negative and positive audience responses from internal studio staffs, fan magazine interest, comments from magazine photo editors, critiques from entertainment journalists, and enormous amounts of fanmail feedback in order to decide on the hair style which was most charismatic for that specific talent. Eventually, they found “the look” that defined the actor’s persona. The system was setup to distill the data and focus the imagery with intensity.
Similar to make-up styling paradigms, actors and rock stars change their hairstyles frequently just for the sake of change. Ignoring charismatic parameters, they shock audiences into attention, creating confusion and wiping out their trust and loyalty. Using biometric screen imaging, CFI can provide talent with the varieties of every hairstyle charismatic to their screen archetype and will advise on those that aren’t. Even if they insist on changing hair every week, they can change it to a style that’s always charismatic -- not one that confuses the audience. Size, shape, shade and style of the hair is the second standard of the human recognition and charismatic comparison process.
__________________________________________________________________________
11. PHOTOGENIC PRODUCT PLACEMENT
Studios were once in control of every graphic aspect of the talent’s public imagery. Candid, studio, or on the spot photography was coordinated and organized far in advance of the actual shoot. The press and media were limited in their capacity to utilize new opportunities and relied on the studios to formulate stories to fill their pages and enlarge their readership. In return for this studio assistance, magazines and newspapers provided the studios with constant feedback. The studio marketing and promo departments were relentless in their pursuit of the “perfect image” to feed the public through the news mediums. Using audience feedback and market research analysis, they were able to identify the truly charismatic images and eliminate the mediocre. They were able to test-market photographs in public with audience sampling of these publications and they were able to select the most interesting and most glamorous imagery to mass produce. Then, and only then, would they disseminate the image to the public. The studios only released previously validated product and this perfected the starmaking image that glorified their stars.
In today’s segmented entertainment market, it is difficult on your own to obtain viable feedback from any single credible source which can truly represent the mass audience's opinion and guarantee correct imaging charisma. CFI has redeveloped audience response programs and have produced the same feedback opportunities that were previously only available in the old studio system. The ability to generate mass market essence key descriptors for every entertainer with precise articulation gives CFI the data necessary to formulate charismatic imagery to use in publicity and public presentations. When coordinated with the biometric archetype parameters and formulated together with sample response profiling, the most charismatic and specific photographic imagery of any individual can be fully identified and completely processed for maximum exposure – thereby achieving the most positive audience reaction possible. Placing the most attractive, most charismatic, and most appealing photographs in front of a talent’s casting directors, producers, distributors, and motion picture consumers is paramount to a successful cinematic career.
__________________________________________________________________________
12. STORYLINE EXAMINATION
The old studio system used access to film audience feedback in order to determine the acceptability of archetypes in storylines along with the specific actors who cinematically represented them best. They compared the relationships of actors to each other and their personality behavior models to the character formulations found in scripts. They reorganized new scripts to incorporate the most viable characters or roles possible.
Through CFI cinematic component formulation technology, producers can now obtain the precise psychological parameters required in charismatic storylines. For mass media audience and critical acceptance, characters written into storylines must meet psychological expectations. With CFI archetype parameters, studios can vitalize characters considered for production and correlate casting preferences to match charismatic actors and fulfill audience appetites.
__________________________________________________________________________
13. CHARACTER/ROLE EVALUATION
The old system also used access to film audience feedback from fan oriented publications to determine the acceptability of actors as storyline archetypes and analyzing which actors represented them best. They also compared the relationships of actors to each other and their personality behavior models to the archetype formulations found in scripts as they organized casting to incorporate this crucial charismatic star-making data and fulfill audience expectations.
Today, we have new technology that starts where the old system left off. The CFI biometric archetype paradigm precisely measures the exact same articulation that audiences respond to in psychometric judgment of a film actor’s archetype. The new technology visually records the facial articulation data in less than a second, correlates it to key “essence” descriptors mined from CFI audience data resources, and then suggests the best actors available for glorifying storylines and attracting mass audiences.
__________________________________________________________________________
14. MOTION PICTURE PRE-SCREENINGS
One of the old techniques still in use is the “target audience” or focus group pre-screening. It portends to estimate the commercial viability of a motion picture via collective responses from audiences volunteering to see the film free of charge in return for responding. Unfortunately, this simple and subjective technique hasn’t developed any further than it had a century ago when it was first introduced. Though there have been some electronic advances in the collection and recording of the audience response, the same categorical questionnaires and tabulation techniques inspired from decades past are used today. To estimate audience acceptability, they bribe the audience with free passes (and sometimes refreshments or gift certificates) which in itself tends to bend the prejudice of the respondent towards a positive and negates an honest profile. Add to that -- the audience is usually qualifying the visuals without music and they have replaced the “suspension of disbelief” a regular audience will use with the “philosophy of critique” that only columnists aspire to … and we all know how good they are at picking hits.
Once a film is made, pre-screening can tell you only which film you own should go straight to video. CFI Risk Aversion Component Analysis can tell you BEFORE you blow millions on a property whether or not that property will return the investment … or die at the door. The audience response technology developed by CFI does more than just ask the pre-screen audience its subjective opinion -- it analyzes the post-screen results of thousands of screenings and produces the exact formulations that enchant the audience -- and the patterns of elements which dispel them. Using the CFI cinematic archetype equation as a standard baseline for component comparison, the CFI team can pre-evaluate the elements of any motion picture in consideration for production and tabulate profitability and audience response outcomes. CFI can constructively diagram the valuations of the successful and unsuccessful components within your storyline and calculate changes required for mass audience acceptance and maximum profitability. CFI can provide this purely objective and guaranteed technology.
__________________________________________________________________________
15. EXHIBITOR POPULARITY POLLS
In the old days, motion picture exhibitors would respond to their bosses at the studio with reports concerning the popularity of talents in their films. The exhibitors would poll audiences for the studio chiefs and record the chatter effect. Audience comments and requests were filtered to the head office and tabulated in search of patterns to predict the next big star or the next big vehicle to consider. How popular a star was with exhibitors could increase their level of marketing and the momentum they would generate on the star’s behalf. The patterns that studios found in the data they gleaned from exhibitors was priceless – but unfortunately, this system was doomed to extinction by anti-trust legislation and their star formulations were lost; the once fabulous imagery now ignored by disenfranchised exhibitors.
In today’s world, exhibitors are large corporations separated from studios by government regulation and are targeted for marketing with the same hyperbole and razzle-dazzle an audience receives. Knowing how to market entertainment talent in charismatic fashion is vital for avoiding the waste of millions of dollars in mis-guided publicity and to avoid the disappointment of exhibitors over the quality of the products distributed by studios. Essence formulation and charismatic marketing knowledge is crucial to avoid the decimation of the invaluable audience curiosity generated by new products and stars. CFI provides charismatic image and marketing components that distributors need to avoid promotion and distribution failure. We provide them with patterns of profitability -- and keys to a brand new paradigm.
__________________________________________________________________________
16. CONSUMER ATTRACTION POLLS
The studio system had their own stars and they had their own marketing departments. They did not rely on outside producers to generate talent for them. They had scouts who would continuously survey the audience for their attraction to the studio’s latest young talents. At public appearances around the country, a line-up of new talents were subjected to a virtual beauty contest in front of live audiences. Those which quickly garnered audience attention were contracted and sent to Hollywood, while those that did not -- were summarily tossed. This system was lost when independent agents took over finding talent and replaced studio scouts. Attracting consumers to newer prospects fell to managers and agents who second-guessed the public and pitched their talent’s cold. Secondary entertainment markets became trial-and-error proving grounds without accurate relevance or consistency.
Today, there are several market research companies which can only track the popularity of very established or semi-established talents who appear on screen. They have no protocol that can track the attraction of new, up-and-coming talents before they appear on screen. They cannot categorically define the appeal of unknown product, nor can they suggest any more about a talent than that which they recorded in audience surveys conducted AFTER the project is finished. CFI has the new protocols they are lacking and can provide you with whatever they are capable of and more. You need to know the audience's attractional probabilities BEFORE you shoot -- not after. Using our exclusive biometric technology, we can gather the same data that old studios implemented and provide your producers with meaningful statistics and archetype protocols for use in product development and creative selection processes.
__________________________________________________________________________
17. FAN-MAIL FEEDBACK TABULATIONS
The old studios doted on fan-mail feedback like it was gold. Every comment was categorized and tabulated into databases that provided executives with the mass audience’s specific likes or dislikes, favorites or disappointments, and excitement or displeasure They dug into the fan-mail for the vein of public opinion it was. By it -- they chose their talents, their talent’s image, the talent’s co-stars, and even the motion picture stories they were likely to produce. Feedback from fan-mail was religiously studied for patterns that would guarantee success in anything that the studio was considering. The public's taste was paramount in all their decision making. Tabulating the feedback showed them the path that the audience was eager to follow. Most of the time they were rewarded as their ratio of success-to-failure was only limited by the studios ability to correctly analyze the feedback and intelligently promote the data to the appropriate department heads.
Besides tabulating fan-mail feedback, CFI has developed even stronger feedback systems than those available to big studios. CFI organizes field market research and target audience forums that gather the specific expectations of mass media and motion picture audiences and formulates them into demographic tabulations with talent specific calculations for use in film project enhancement and production risk aversion. When combined with the talent’s charismatic profile and cinematic archetype, these details become invaluable assets in the development and production of profitable films or the creation of star-power careers. CFI provides long-term assistance for correctly analyzing and disseminating the data to production teams or industry associates. When audience expectations are creatively realized via feedback implementation, audience satisfaction is rapidly increased and the reputations of studios and artists are magnified accordingly.
__________________________________________________________________________
18. PUBLICITY STUNT ANALYSIS
Whenever the studios had an option that lacked audience responses, they would go out and purposely generate responses to analyze with a tool called the “publicity stunt”. Not merely enacted to promote an upcoming star or picture, these choreographed events were designed to expose the audience and the media to concepts studios were anxious to gain feedback about. New directions or ideas for production were exercised in public as spontaneous occurrences and the resulting opinions and critiques were gathered and analyzed for consumer appeal. A few UFO sightings were just studios calculating audience responsiveness to space stories. A few erotic episodes by stars were merely staged events for judging the response to a risque storyline that might include the star.
Current social conditions prevent most types of the publicity stunts once hoisted upon the masses. Public intolerance of foolhardy inconveniences, the threat of arrest or litigation, and the lack of general forgiveness usually prevents today’s marketing teams from incorporating many options once afforded to the old studios. CFI feedback programs compensate for the lack of the old studio devices and uncover any information or audience opinions without costly stunts or phony publicity. The over 200 component formulations found in CFI risk aversion technology answer audience concerns and pre-empt errors. Through audience response technology, film agents, producers, or talents can acquire the best data available for guaranteeing success in their endeavors and to facilitate their film imagery needs.
__________________________________________________________________________
19. PRESS IMAGE MANIPULATION
The studios had so much control of the system that they were able to manipulate their talents and the image they publicly projected through coverage in the press. The image that the studios needed to project was the image the public expected from the actor on screen – not the image the talents would project if it were left to their own wilds. The difference between a talent’s outer social “act like” and their intimate screen “act as” can be tremendously misunderstood and without correct discernment, the two can be confused and the result is disastrous. Knowing the difference between the two “acts” made all the difference. Through feedback analysis, the studio chiefs understood the difference and always pressed the intimate “act like” screen essence onto the public. Any personal “act like” behaviorisms were covered up and the press was forbidden to release them. This kept the talent’s public image in line with their screen image and fulfilled audience expectations. Even the charitable activities and events they participated in were manipulated to accommodate this imagery.
Understanding the difference between the “act as” and the “act like” of film talent is crucial for maintaining consistent audience empathy for the talent and any producer thereof. Without the feedback mechanisms available to the old studio system, entertainment providers are (1) merely guessing at which image is which, and (2) risking their incomes on the talent (or their team members) to know when the time is right to project it. CFI technology is the only scientifically objective, accurate delineator of the invaluable cinematic archetype. CFI key descriptor and essence evaluations are also the only products available in the industry for acquisition of “act as” vs. “act like” cinematic profiling. With these star-power imaging tools, talent industry facilitators can achieve increased successes with far lower time expenditures and lower costs. Competing against the rest of the herd for valuable press and publicity requires correct imaging and critical timing. Presenting the best image expected by audiences is crucial for succeeding as efficiently as possible.
|