The full interview is live and published at her site.

Thanks for the opportunity, Barb!

The good news is there’s an easy fix: run Photoshop CS5 in 32-bit mode like you always have.

How? That’s easy as well.

If you’re on a Mac:

1. Select the Adobe Photoshop CS5 application file, installed by default in the Applications/Adobe Photoshop CS5 folder.
2. Choose File > Get Info, and select Open in 32 Bit Mode.
3. Simply deselect this option to run Photoshop CS5 in 64-bit mode again.

If you’re in Windows:

1. Close Photoshop CS5.
2. Navigate to the Program Files (x86) > Adobe > Adobe Photoshop CS5 folder.
3. Double-click the Adobe Photoshop CS5.exe file.

Personal observation – I don’t see a huge increase in speed or performance in 64-bit mode on my Mac. I only have CS3 on my XP machine so I can’t comment on 64-bit on that platform. However, the big, obvious benefit in running in 64 is for very large files. I’ve found that even with PSD’s with layers numbering in the 100+ (which isn’t even that large for some of the work I do) I don’t see much of an improvement. Adjusting Photoshop’s disk usage yields more benefit to me than 64-bit. Plus, having all plug-ins and filters work is a nice plus, too.

Of this group there is a subgroup always on the lookout for help in selling their wares. Although this Top 10 list can apply to anything from direct selling to gallery sales (to a certain degree) the following links to blog posts I’ve authored has its strongest emphasis on helping artists who sell online and more particularly via POD (Print on Demand) avenues.

Number 10: Conversion, prospects, suspects, and coffee.

Number 9: You need a marketing calendar. Oh yes… you do!

Number 8: Generating Publicity – think outside the box.

Number 7: Stronger Designs.

Number 6: If it works – don’t do it?

Number 5: Features vs. Benefits.

Number 4: Keying & Tracking.

Number 3: Press Releases.

Number 2: Pricepoints.

Number 1: Designing for Presentation.

I hope you find this list helpful!

It’s easy enough to answer those questions because I have pretty strong opinions on them so I’m not sure why I’m having a hard time figuring out what, exactly, to say in a blog post? So, I’m just going to go for it and type-away.

Do I use a graphic tablet in my art?

Yes! I actually have several. I’ve used Wacom (it’s correctly pronounced “Wah-Kum”) brand tablets exclusively and yes… it’s been by choice and I could have used other ones but I won’t. I honestly believe that Wacom tablets are the best even though I don’t think they’re perfect. I’d rather have a lower-level Wacom tablet than a higher-level tablet by another manufacturer.

What have I used?

Pretty much a range. My first tablet (reaching back nostalgically) was not a Wacom but rather a “Koala Pad” with my Apple ][e (I don’t even think Wacom was around then?). Since then I’ve used the original Intuos, entry-level Graphire 2, draw-on-screen Cintiqs, and currently an Intuos4 large.

Why switch off to the Intuos4?

Because of a couple things that it has over the Cintiq. Now, don’t get me wrong – the Cintiq has an extreme coolness factor with its ability to be not only a monitor but also the fact you draw on the screen itself. It’s the gold-standard for those types of devices and, until the Intuos4 came out, had probably the best specs out there. It’s a great device and it’s been a pleasure to use. However, the downsides just happen to conspire against me for the specific qualities I need to work in my favor: color calibration, resolution, portability.

Yes, one of the biggest advantages of the Cintiq series is that it eliminates the “disconnect” one gets from drawing in one place only to have your eyes looking elsewhere (eg. drawing on a tablet on your desk while looking up at a monitor). However, there exists a tiny element that throws me in the Cintiqs where the thickness of the glass between the stylus tip and the monitor image itself where the cursor is. I find it a tad bit disagreeable. You can adjust that differential in the software calibrations but it does require you to keep your physical placement over the Cintiq consistent. In other words, if you move your body or head around you may situate yourself to view the screen from a new angle that makes that compensation no longer work. You’ll see the spacing again. If you’ve ever seen me work you’d know I tend to move around a bit, change my seating position, maybe even kick back in the chair with the tablet on my lap, etc. When you clock as many hours a day driving a graphic tablet as I do – being free to move around is invaluable.

Also, the Cintiq series has some complaints against it in terms of color-matching. For me, I really need to know that the color profiles I’m working on and seeing on screen are true. So, in a way, it’s an unfortunate problem that wasn’t dispelled as thoroughly as I wanted with the Cintiqs.

Portability was the final hurdle for me. I’m not constantly traveling around to shows or seminars each week like some of my peers. Having a more portable device, though, is important to me for the times that I do. A heavier Cintiq that runs pretty hot just doesn’t jibe with my idea of “portable” or the sort of thing I would place in my lap while I work.

I don’t want to give the impression the Cintiqs are garbage. They’re not. They’re so amazingly awesome I can’t begin to tell you how amazingly awesome they are. I’m just pointing out why I had to make a decision one way or the other once I decided to upgrade to a new tablet. Price might be one thing (several hundred dollars for an Intuos4 as opposed to $1,000 or $2,000 for a Cintiq).

So, why did I choose an Intuos4 this time around?

Bang for the buck was nice. I am now running on an Intuos4 Large (but I do keep smaller tablets in the bag in case I need to travel with a smaller one). It currently costs about $500. That’s for a tablet that gives me an A4 (approx. 8″x11″ paper-sized) drawing surface as opposed to a Cintiqs’ $1,000 6″x10″ size. It’s about twice as much cost for slightly better than half the active drawing area size.

Plus, I really needed a minimum of 8×11 inches drawing area. I grew up sketching and painting and standard art sheets or my workhorse-sized canvas were about that size. So, the way in which I draw (mostly from the finger tips, with rotation from the wrist, and sweeping from the elbow) work best at that size. Any smaller and I don’t draw the way I’ve been accustomed.

The Intuos4, as the numerical value of the name implies, is a 4th Generation device whereas the Cintiqs are now in the 3rd, previous Generation. Why does this matter? Because the Intuos4 has 2,048 levels of pressure sensitivity (twice that of the Cintiqs) and only requires 1 gram of pressure to effect register of drawing (much better than the Cintiqs) and register a range up to 400 grams of pressure. This means very precise control over a broader range and that’s something I appreciate a great deal. Then new Gen2 styli (pens, airbrush device) translate so much more than the Gen1′s so that tickled my fancy quite a bit with the Intuos4 series. So, new Gen2 styli on the new Gen4 tablets were a big selling point for me.

On a related note there’s an accessory for the Intuos4 (and Cintiq) line that makes all the difference in the world, for me. The Cintiq has a separate-purchase 6-D pen and the Intuos4 has a newer generation one called the “Art Pen.” The Art Pen is almost identical to the one included in the box with the tablet in that it registers pressure, sensitivity, tilt (yes, tilting the pen can alter the way the lines are drawn on screen!) but also includes barrel rotation. So, spinning the pen in my hand, in the right software application (eg. Photoshop CS5) actually causes the “brush” (or whatever I’m using) to change and rotate correctly. As you can imagine a painter or calligrapher finds this type of feature essential. So, I think the add-on pens that transmit barrel rotation data are as essential as the tablet itself.

Okay, another factor: the portability I mentioned earlier. The weight is much lighter for a tablet than a monitor/tablet but I’ll admit that the Intuos4 Large model is still a device with a substantial footprint. It basically occupies as much space as the width of my full-sized advanced keyboard but as much depth as two of them stacked one in front of the other. However, that’s the price I pay for getting that A4 drawing area I require.

A minor note for me but something I’ve come to appreciate over the years is the Intuos4 series is ambidextrous. I’m right handed. However, when I was younger (up to about college) I would draw and write with either left or right hand while I would show dominance toward my right hand in pretty much everything else (scissors, reaching for toothbrush, etc.). So, I do know that, for some people, the ability to rotate the tablet and have the buttons re-orient themselves and their illuminated labels, can be a major feature.

So, what does this mean for you?

I’ve explained why I went the route that I did, but you’re wondering how any of it applies to you, right?

Well, I’ve run into a couple of groups of people that express interest in using a tablet and I suppose it depends on which group you’re in for my answer to be meaningful. One group really wants to know if they, as artists, will benefit from using a tablet instead of a mouse. Generally, my answer is an emphatic “Yes!” There is also another group that exists…

You see, I’m also a musician. I can play by ear rather well as well as improvise. However, I can also sight read sheet music and it’s a skill I find very, very essential. I know talented musicians who can’t get certain work because they can’t read or write music or tablature. They have adopted an interesting coping mechanism – they say it’s by choice. I don’t buy it.

Some folks have gotten entry level tablets or used one from a friend and have had frustrating times getting used them. I understand this. It’s like learning to read music – a skilled musician can play all sorts of songs they learned by ear but when it’s time to learn something new from sheet music they stutter and stall like a fourth grader in his first week of piano lessons. That’s not fun, it’s embarrassing, it’s frustrating, and it seems at odds with where their skills are at with other songs they can play.

So, I’ve given a lot of thought to artists that try to use a tablet and end up giving up and using it as a coaster for their coffee cup. I understand it can be frustrating but I really wish I could impress upon them that the frustrating period isn’t that long if you just commit to it and that it probably would be a lot better if you got off that entry-level tablet and onto something a little closer to the professional level models. I know that when a tablet manufacturer recommends this it sounds like a cheap excuse to push people to the more expensive models. Since I don’t make any money off such an opinion I feel it’s fair for me to say I still actually agree with it. The better the tablet the more likely it works the way you expect without the odd, little idiosyncrasies the hobbyist tablets have. It could be that your frustrations and learning curve could be improved upon with a better tablet just because you get more out of them.

So, what do you get out of one?

Drawing with a mouse is like drawing with a bar of soap. Either that or, for those old enough to remember chalkboards in school, and the fun you’d have jamming chalk into erasers then drawing on the blackboard… well, yah… that’s what drawing with a mouse is like. A stylus is an appropriate analog to a pencil, marker, pen, or even to a lesser degree a paintbrush. Drawing with a mouse has no real ancestor. I think there’s also a difference between people who really draw as opposed to those who use a mouse to “construct” art (eg. clicking to make shapes, or using pre-made art to assemble into other pieces of work). I’m talking creating art from scratch – drawing (or painting, sketching, or however you define your technique). Clicking with a mouse can do many of the things an artist with a tablet could do… in a roundabout and indirect way, but there’s some things that simply can’t be replicated with a mouse and a real artist (there, I said it) couldn’t do without.

The natural movement, the ability to put an idea down quickly, making self corrections, a workflow that’s as natural as grabbing pen and paper, conveying your ideas to someone else in real-time by drawing in front of them, nuances only the finesse of finger tips can bring about, all that… it’s found in using a tablet and not in a mouse and I really don’t buy it when someone tells me otherwise. There are great artists out there – even ones that use a mouse. However, I think they are the exception not the rule and more often than not… they have to force themselves to compensate and learn the mouse and probably have limitations in some of the areas I previously described. Don’t let this be you. A tablet can be as liberating as people tell you it is if given the chance.

So, in case you get frustrated and think of falling back on ‘ol clicky to do your art – drag the tablet back out, suck it up, don’t pretend you “choose” to work with a mouse instead, and really learn to use the tablet properly. Once you do you’ll wonder how you ever did without it.

If you’re thinking about getting a tablet trust me – you’ll open so many more doors and probably, with a little backward training, get back in touch with the artist you used to be before your art was created on a computer.

I’ve been a pencil sketcher from long ago. Eventually, pens, charcoal, pastels, took over. Those eventually gave way to painting with oil on canvas using brushes, knives, and airbrush. So, yes, I have a background in painting as well as drawing and illustration. I love them all – I can’t pick favorites. The day I discovered what a Koala Pad and an Apple IIe computer could do for computer graphics still sounds of the echoes of angelic choir in my monkey-touches-the-monolith moments of my artistic life.

So, you can imagine my thrill at the new Adobe CS5 version of Photoshop. It’s probably the best Photoshop I’ve ever used and I’ve been pushing pixels with this software since version 3.5… which was around 1994. I was a published artist at 12 and that was some years ago and I’ve gone round and round with different tools, mediums, and techniques. Trust me, I’m not easy to impress these days with new-fangled artistic goodies because I’ve had lots of disappointments but only a few contenders that could replace my beloved pencil or oil paints. Adobe’s Photoshop and a good Wacom graphic tablet have been some of the high points among my artistic tools.

I’m happy to say that Adobe’s CS5 has a lot going for it. One of those things is a new brush engine (which I have strong suspicions was purchased from Corel (Painter software). I can’t prove it but since I’ve used Painter X I can honestly say I immediately felt similarities.

This new brush engine allows an artist to take any piece of art and “brush” it as if it were just a canvas full of wet paint to create a painterly effect using only the existing pixels on the page. In other words – one could take a rather ho-hum photo and turn it into something much prettier.

Below is a photo of cacti planted at my Father in Law’s place in the Sonoran Desert. It’s a shame – the location and cacti are beautiful and stunning… my little iPhone 3G photo isn’t.

However, after firing up the Wacom tablet and driving the new Adobe CS5 Photoshop software all over that rather drab photo I was able to achieve a much improved, painted rendition of that photo (see zoomed enlargement). It’s not perfect but it’s a step forward in taking a dull photo and giving it some kind of life – even if no longer a straight image capture as much as a “painted” version of the same scene. It even looks nice framed.

A little work here and there adjusting colors, luminosity, texture, levels, and all that made it pop and achieve much more character and interest in its life as a “painting” than it ever would have as a photo. That works for me.

I love hockey.

I played when I was a youth and enjoyed everything about it… the character-building, the camaraderie, the sounds of skates on the ice and the ritual of wrapping my stick with tape and strapping pads on. I’m looking forward to today’s Olympic hockey gold medal game so much I can’t even tell you.

As a true fan of hockey I feel that Canadian ice is the hallowed, sacred ground. The gods smile upon each and every drop of water that fills the rink in Canada today. As a golf lover it’s much like the Old Course at St. Andrews in Scotland [insert angelic choir here]. Yes, to play hockey on ice divined in Canada against a Canadian team is right in so many ways. For us True Believers there is no loser today… there’s only hockey as it should be.

Having said this I’m now free to indulge, selfishly, in patriotic pride. Go USA! I trust my Canadian friends know that spirit is part and parcel of being American as I know theirs is for them but really… it’s hockey in Canada against a Canadian team – it’s a win/win point of pride no matter what.

Okay, lets talk statistics like a true sport geek for a second because this is interesting:

In the run up to today’s gold medal game we’ve seen the US beat Finland 6-1 (with a record-setting 6 goals in the first period but not sure what to make of the non-scoring throughout the last two periods). We beat Canada in preliminaries prior to that. However, what’s more important is that it means we’ve played each other and have had time for both teams to review the games in preparation for today.

Here’s where it gets interesting. That US vs. Finland 6-1 game was, with respect, a walkover. However, Canada barely beat Slovakia in their semi-final 3-2… Canada squeaked by on what might have been considered a secondary team. The interesting bit is that Slovakia and Finland had a higher scoring game against one-another than Canada had with Slovakia. In the end, the team we beat so well was the team that beat Canada’s squeaker… Finland beat Slovakia.

In a nutshell, the team we trounced beat the team Canada barely beat. We now play Canada.

I know, it would seem I’m suggesting that, statistically, we’re scheduled to play an inferior team (if all you did was base things on the winning model of Olympic preliminaries and semis). However, that couldn’t be further from the case. Actually, hockey, like baseball and football, can have many variables that come into play during eliminations.

Could the rest/recovery schedule be at work? Could a coach be biding time for more “important” games down the line in terms of protecting players from injury in less aggressive game play? What about the schedule and sequence of the eliminations themselves favoring one team over another?

Then, there’s the whole rock, paper, scissors element. A great team against a great team must make adjustments during the game (or in prep for a later game) to account for strengths and weaknesses. Finland switched goalies against the US late, I believe. It was 4-0 when the Finnish goalie himself went to the boards and presumably asked to be switched. Frankly, it should have been a call made by the coach one lost goal earlier. However, be that as it may, Canada won’t make decisions slow. They will make the vast majority of their decisions quickly and they’ll likely be correct ones from the get-go. Canada does not make rookie mistakes in play or coaching. Neither does the US.

My gut tells me that, although I want to see a close, high-scoring game today that ultimately goes into over-time with no empty-nets and sees the US score the final, winning goal in dramatic, back-shot fashion… I suspect it’ll be a case of the unstoppable force meeting the immovable object. My gut says each goal will be hard-won and jealously guarded, with both teams countering like freight trains in a tug of war with only the chain breaking between the two!

This is likely to be one of the best hockey games we’ll ever see!

I shall be watching and recording it in 55 inches of high definition glory and will have a soft spot on the sofa cleared out where I will collapse afterward, exhausted and spent.

Thank you Team USA and Team Canada for making today everything a true hockey fan could hope for. Thank you Canada for taking such good care of all of us during these 2010 Olympics.

GO USA!

Since everybody and their dog in the Apple fanboi world is speculating about the January 27th Apple event I figured I’d jump on the bandwagon. Yah, I’ve got a Macbook Pro and will be getting my wife a Macbook probably next month. We both have iPhones. However, I also have a steroid-driven XP machine sitting four inches from me, too, and have no problems being a hybrid user.

Having said that, I’m also not all that excited about the next Apple product except I’m hoping iPhone 4.0 OS is on the way and that it’ll be good and free. So, since I don’t care about Apple’s upcoming even where they may or may not announce some kind of tablet device that may or may not have front and rear facing webcams, expanded touch gestures, drink holder, free pair of dorky librarian glasses and turtleneck shirt… I’ll just play the game and speculate about the name. Let’s begin:

I’ll be called iPad.

Why? Because, it’s a universal necessity. El Esteban likes short, high-impact product names that are highly brandable (is that even a word?). Although I’m nauseated by all the iThis, iThat, eName marketing drivel of the last few years it’s pretty much a given that the new tablet product (which I believe there is one) will have the “i” naming convention. It’s iApple, afterall.

It’ll not be called “iTablet” because that’s descriptive. Apple doesn’t like hardware-descriptor names, generally speaking. If they do (eg. iPhone) they rely on the “i” branding convention to pull it into an Apple iNoun and not a mere person/place/thing noun.

Although “iSlate” has been tossed around a lot of people thought it sounded stupid. I’m not one of them. However, I happen to think that “Leopard” and “Snow Leopard” are goofy names for an operating system. “OSX” rocked… should have left it at that. “iTablet” sounds more like a temporary name placeholder until we learn the real name.

Anyway, it’ll be called “iPad” because of its heritage. If rumor holds that the iPhone-based OS and gesture-based interface are major features then it stands to reason it’s in that family. One might assume that, again, if rumors hold, it’s very communication-centric then that sets it in stone. So, the iPod name that eventually worked its way into an iPhone means that this is the only chance Apple will produce a product that could take advantage of the iPad name and have it applicable. You can’t name a phone “iPad.” You can’t name an OS that, either. Apple shouldn’t be making let alone naming computer mice under any circumstances – so there’s no chance of it happening there.

Nope. Apple must name it the iPad because it’s their only opportunity to do so. It’s short, sweet, brandable, looks high-impact when printed all by itself on the backside of a device, pays homage to its lineage, and will make it possible in this one product to give it a name that applies and not miss the chance of doing so when another might not come along for a long, long time.

That’s my prediction plus reasoning, noted on this 21st day of January, 2010. If you don’t like it then you can kiss my assPod.

You’re certainly welcome to comment and debate (or agree) with me but I feel I’m duty bound to shout from the highest mountain top (or blog, as the case may be) my idea of the perfect martini.

It was said that Winston Churchill’s idea of a perfect martini was drinking a glass of cold gin while looking at a bottle of vermouth from across the room. Although that would certainly make for a very dry drink – a martini it was not!

A “perfect” martini is one with equal parts gin and vermouth. Personally, I see nothing perfect about such a drink because the vermouth overpowers most gin at these proportions… and I like vermouth. I also prefer the soul of a circa 1900′s classic, dry martini. (Dry being dry vermouth, not sweet vermouth).

No, to me, the perfect retro hipster drink is a combination of ingredients, preparation, and a little something extra. I’m inspired to write about my martini as I sit here and sip one – so you’ll pardon any poetic liberty I take because I do believe it makes a difference. I rarely drink but when I do a good martini is certainly at the top of my list of choices to indulge in.

* Start with chipped ice. Cubes are okay but chipped is better. Shaved ice is not permitted – it dilutes too much and gets too cold. Chill a martini glass with ice before beginning. A martini glass is best because A) this is a martini and B) you need that stem to hold on to so the heat from your hand doesn’t warm the drink too fast. Then, fill a Boston shaker with ice about half way. Give it a moment for the mixing glass to chill but not long enough to melt the ice much. If it does begin to melt – just pour it off leaving only the ice behind.

* Dry or extra dry Italian or French vermouth. I have a thing for Tribuno in spite of its pedigree. Splash about 3/4 or 1 oz. across the ice in the mixing glass. Give it plenty of time to reach the bottom – it needs to tumble across the ice to chill. Yes, you can jostle it a bit on the way down provided you do so lovingly. This is where a little Frank Sinatra playing in the background helps. I recommend “Fly Me To The Moon” on vinyl. Let’s not use an MP3 at a moment like this, okay?

The variation between 3/4 oz. and 1 oz. are not to be vague but are to be your first hint that ingredients must take into account the other players in which they are in the company of. In this case, personally, I find 3/4 oz dry Italian vermouth often works best with highly floral gin (such as Bombay Sapphire or Hendricks’). 1 oz. of vermouth works a bit better with gins such as Beefeater, Gordon’s, or Plymouth.

Now, and these are important bits, Don’t get fooled by this nonsense of “coating the ice” or draining out the excess vermouth. Measure in your vermouth and treat it with respect as a proper ingredient.

Vermouth is an fortified wine – it’s wonderful. However, I’m guessing that so many bartenders (or home bar enthusiasts) don’t realize it’s vino-nature and neglect to store it in the refrigerator. Old, spoiled vermouth would turn me off too! However, the fresh stuff is fantastic!

* Gin. You will, again, splash 2 1/2 oz. of this across the ice in the Boston shaker. Give it enough time to waterfall down to meet the gin at the bottom recovering from the 2-count. Do this all with unchilled gin. You’re keeping your gin in the refrigerator? What on Earth are you thinking? It’ll be far too cold to help the ice melt the bit that it needs to. Water, from that melting ice, is critical in most cocktails to blend and balance the spirits. Keep your gin on the shelf of your bar – not in the cooler. Besides, gin is an aromatic and if it gets too cold it loses that aromatic quality.

If all goes well, Frank has already played among the stars and is holding hands and getting that first kiss. It’s time…

Add 2 dashes or orange bitters. This is an essential, original ingredient and one of the core definitions of a cocktail is that it must contain bitters.

Now, I can already hear some of you bellowing back about the gin and saying something completely silly about James Bond and vodka. I don’t care. Bond, James Bond is missing the boat on this and it’s not the only thing! So there! Nyeaaaah. Besides, gin is basically vodka but with hints of herbs and juniper – so I suspect that if you approve of vodka you’ll approve of gin and my rule of thumb is to not take fictional characters too seriously.

Let’s get back on track, shall we?

Having taken a moment to ponder what it would have been like if Frank really could have “sung forever more” it’s now time to stir. That’s right – stir.

You see, shaking chills gin far too fast and far too cold. This may be part of that old notion of not wanting to “bruise” the gin. We need to let the gin have some time to get to know the vermouth but without chilling below that 30 degree Fahrenheit threshold. Stirring is the way to go. Sorry 007… your two mismatched ships also passed in the night. It was never meant to be. Stir for 20 seconds while you enjoy the sultry tones of Frankie. Also, the exquisite mouth-feel of crystal clear (not clouded with air bubbles) can only be achieved by thoughtful stirring.

Okay, It’s at this point, if done correctly, Sammy Davis Jr. looks down from the heavens upon you and little ghosts of bartenders-past swirl around your chilled martini glass. It’s now time to work quickly. You must dump the ice from the glass and place at the bottom a green olive (yes, green, not black, we’re not making a buckeye here we’re paying homage to tradition). You may, however, do a couple of things to your liking at a moment like this. You can add one, two, or three olives (but not four as we’re staying under 3 oz. of total drink here) and you can let a little bit of the brine travel along with the olive/s into the glass but please keep this to a minimum. This is a good thing. Yes, Manzanilla pimento-stuffed green olives are perfectly fine. Yes, a 3 oz. martini is the right size. We’re not making a Spring Break Slushy Special here in a ten ounce glass. We are civilized, responsible martini aficionados.

Now, pour the contents of your chilled mixing glass that’s had the perfect amount of time to come to temperature into the martini glass with olives at the bottom. You’ve now created the perfect martini.

The ingredients and amounts are tied-in with the method and since we’ve had several stages in preparation we’ve also done some very important things – brought the ingredients to the perfect coldness as well as allowed just the right amount of ice to melt along the way to help marry the ingredients together. No umbrella, no neon, no rimmed glass, no bar mix… just pure, unadulterated cocktail happiness.

If all went well (and I’m sure it has) you’re beholding your glass about the same time ‘ol blue eyes is singing “I love you” and the moment couldn’t be more perfect.

Comments, questions, duels… all are welcome.

As one of the few concessions I’ll make to my method and belief of the perfect martini I do allow a nod to Alessandro Palizzi of the Duke’s Hotel Bar in the use of only frozen ingredients, frozen glass, no stirring, and no dilution. I accept any contradictions this may bring because who am I to argue with Maestro?

From the Jubb.ly site itself:

Jubbly is a reminder service that will perform a function a few minutes before the time you specify. Just like Twitter, Jubbly accepts 140 characters. On the date you need reminding, Jubbly will Direct Message your Twitter account or send you an email.

Well, it’s true. It’s clean, it’s simple, it requires no sign up, no request to add all your private contacts to some spammy mail service, no log in – nuthin. It just does what it does and does it well and all it asks in return is if you want those private, direct messages from Twitter sent to you you need to follow @jubb_ly – which is a requirement of Twitter itself (that’s how private messages are sent).

Seriously, just visit the site, set up a reminder to pick up milk, roll the garbage and totes out to the curb on recycling day, whatever. You’ll appreciate this little gem.