According to the integrated carbon observation system, human activities are leading to the release of more than 40 gigatons of CO2 per year in the atmosphere, with consequences on the global carbon cycle and climate. 40 gigatons represent 4 million times the weight of the Eiffel Tower and 100 times the weight of the whole human population. I think this number is quite easy to understand why it's important and we are putting more and more efforts into finding ways to reduce CO2 emissions. One way to reduce industrial carbon footprint is to use a process which is called biological gas conversion. In this process we are using organisms, so in the most developed fashion of this process it's acetogenic bacteria. And these bacteria are using a very ancient metabolism, probably one of the most ancient that appear on Earth, that allow them to use directly gases, so H2 and CO2, to produce acetate. The idea of the conversion process is to fed these bacteria with the gases. The bacteria will consume the H2 and CO2, which is in the waste gases, so the greenhouse effect gas for CO2, and then will produce acetate. And it's a really interesting feature because then at the end we will obtain cleaner waste gases and also acetate, which can be used as an energy source or even for chemical synthesis. One of the main issue of this process is the presence of carbon monoxide or CO in the combustion waste gases. Carbon monoxide is a reactive and toxic compound that is harmful for a lot of microorganisms, nearly all, and also for acetogenic bacteria, so it's preventing a correct gas conversion. But there is a subclass, a subgroup of acetogenic bacteria that are able to not only survive to high concentration of carbon monoxide, but also to use directly this carbon monoxide to produce acetate, so that these bacteria will also convert the carbon monoxide from the waste gases. We are studying this organism in order to understand how they can survive and how they can be so efficient in converting the different gases, including carbon monoxide, how they can survive to the toxic gas, which would represent a really good opportunity for gas conversion. In this study we assume at first that the major actor of the CO-resistant and consumption will be the protein which is actually consuming CO in the organism. So from other studies we know that there is one protein that is converting carbon monoxide into carbon dioxide, which is way less toxic and also which can be absorbed by the organism like classical acetogenic bacteria. So our idea was that this protein should have really a specificity to be so efficient to consume and to detoxify carbon monoxide. To analyze that, we first took one organism that is able to grow on carbon monoxide, so Clostridium Autoeternogenum, we cultivated it in the lab, and the idea was to extract this precise protein, the carbon monoxide adrogenase, and to study what can make it so specific compared to other enzymes from the same family. So I extracted this protein and then at the end we studied this protein on a chemical and structural aspect, because what characterize a protein are the reactions it can chemically perform, but also the structure it has, which is important for reactions. And we have all the expertise and the techniques in the laboratory to study both aspects of the protein. And by this way we managed to understand what is making this carbon dehydrogenase so specific. We were expecting to find some specificities in the CO consuming protein from this organism, and indeed we were kind of happy to see that we were right and there were some different key features for this protein. So first what we realized when just extracting and prefiring this protein is that it's not alone. So it's in complex with another protein forming a deep unit that is working as only one big thing. With another protein the acetyl-CoA synthase, which is a protein which is here to sensitize acetyl-CoA, which is an important key actor of the carbon metabolism and also for acetate production. So it's a necessary step for acetogenic bacteria. And what was interesting here is that we already know one such COD adrogenase acetyl-CoA synthase complex from another acetogenic bacterium which cannot use CO. And in this organism it's a bit different since you have some carbon monoxide but it's generated and not consumed. Why? Because you need a bit of carbon monoxide in acetogenic bacteria. It's important for acetate production. So whatever you do you need to have a bit of carbon monoxide. And here the two proteins are working together. From CO2 the COD adrogenase will produce a bit of carbon monoxide but it's still a toxic compound and it consumes energy to create carbon monoxide. So the solution that has been found is that CO will be produced in a sealed tunnel which is connecting the two proteins. So one enzyme will produce carbon monoxide but will just diffuse to the other one that will use it for reaction. So the rest of the cell will never see any carbon monoxide. The fact that we already know this other protein was really important for us because then we have a template to compare our system. The second thing that we realized when looking at the structure of our protein is that we have the two same proteins but that are organized completely in a different way. We checked with several experiments to see if it was really the case of it could be coming from a mistake or an artifact but no it is indeed like that in the cell so the organization is completely different. With a consequence that the normal sealed tunnel from the other protein cannot be used because it will just lead to nowhere. Instead of that we realize in our protein that there is a completely new tunneling system with multiple entries and exits which is completely open towards the outside of the protein which is completely different to the philosophy of the sealed tunnel in the other complex. When we looked at the different other sealed consuming cytogenic bacteria which are really a few organisms actually we realized that they seem to hold up the same kind of leaky tunneling system as we have in our protein which led us to conclude that this organism should have this kind of system just to maximize the carbon monoxide diffusion to both proteins of the complex and then the external carbon monoxide could be directly diffuse to both proteins to be reduced by the COD hydrogenase making energy out of it and to be used by the acetyl-CoA synthase for acetate production. These kind of features just also led to the idea that this reaction should maybe be the only way the organism is deriving energy that was our idea and when we checked it was the case. So this organism is only using consumption of carbon monoxide to make energy the only reaction that can be used for that and when we look and we dig into the metabolism we realize that the whole metabolism of the bacterium is just organized around that reaction CO consumption by the COD hydrogenase. So our finding are relevant on let's say two different aspects. At first the scientific aspect which is that there are always some surprise that may be unraveled even in closely related organism for example here, acetogenic bacteria you may find some specificities in complex and you may find some really interesting way of combining of creating new stuff out of something you think you already know perfectly. The second and I would say more important relevance at least the most valuable one is the biotechnological aspect even if they are not the only CO consumers bacteria like Clostridium autoeternogenome are by far the most efficient ones and by be feeding by waste gases they are consuming H2CO2 and CO so all the toxics and greenhouse gases and they are producing acetate but also ethanol and butanol. That's a kind of specific features of this kind of acetogenic bacteria which by the way get its name to this train autoeternogenome which mean producing its own ethanol which is really interesting but also one thing to keep in mind here is not a by far perspective. There is already large-scale use of this bacterium to convert the waste gases from the steel mill industries so it's something that is actually working right now in that have real impact. So every step forward that we are doing in the understanding of their metabolism is a really interesting opportunity to enhance this gas-converting system. Moreover now in this precise bacterium there is some genetic tools that are available which mean that we can now modify the organism to try to enhance the reaction rates change switch the metabolic pathways that will maximize ethanol rather than butanol production etc. Now we can even induce completely new pathway inside which will make this organism produce whatever we can imagine. Basically here because of this use every small step that we are doing here is a fantastic opportunity to enhance a system which will allow to convert and to detoxify waste gases while producing and creating a new way to produce green energy sources and chemical sources. After this work on the COD hydrogenase from this organism we are now wondering what are the specificity of all the proteins that are constituting this pathway. The COD hydrogenase may be the most important protein in CO consumption and the whole metabolism but acetogenesis or the pathway of this bacterium is implicating the essence of protein and now that we know that evolution granted the COD hydrogenase with different specificities we are expecting to find some interesting features that we are doing things in all the other proteins from the pathway. We are trying to now work and purify all the different proteins of the acetogenic pathway. Another thing which is interesting us so besides being consumed the major problem of carbon monoxide is that it's toxic for a whole range of different proteins especially metalloproteins because of its reactivity and we are wondering how COD hydrogen is dealing with the carbon monoxide that is present in its environment and how this enzyme can be resistant or at least resilient to carbon monoxide and we are interested or deciphering the key features of this resistance in the protein that could be then transposed to other proteins in other biological applications to have some enzyme that would be more resistant to carbon monoxide.


so here we have the new gpd xd this is a 5 inch rk3 288 very powerful 5 inch h IPS 1280 by 720 so you already have this in mass production this product since when do you sell this product that's the retail price 180 right and if people want to order 1k you have a special price yes sure the price it will be about one it's about 128 128 so people can just contact you and start ordering you also have a 7 inch what is this this is also mass production yeah and can we see this one a little bit let's see let's see the UI so let's go around you have it can go like this in your show and you have there so it's touch screen all the games can be there special UI that you develop and people can order with different design design like this for Japanese market or who buy this this one so you have customer in USA Japan Europe and people like to buy these these kinds of device is this more this is newer than this one right this newer design this is new design this is the latest press latest design latest products yeah all right this one the room is 40 34 30 34 34 j 32 gigabytes built-in right 32 gigabytes storage and can we look around on the side the all the ports you have you have this gun on the back so you have micro sd HDMI micro usb headphone and you have some controls here and so your company is a specialist to make a game player you do this for many years already right since 2012 you have you have doing many Android tablet game machine yeah this specialty you can do your design house in Shenzhen and factory


Hi, I'm Mark Hurt and welcome to the sixth and final talk in the Paul Mellon Centre's online public lecture programme for the summer of 2020. My talk is entitled Making an Impact, Thomas Lawrence's Arthur-Atherly. In 1792, the young and prodigiously gifted artist Thomas Lawrence, who was just 23 years old at the time, exhibited a portrait of a similarly youthful Arthur-Atherly at the Royal Academy's annual exhibition of contemporary art held at London's Somerset House. The painting which today hangs at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, known as LACMA, shows its 19-year-old subject, which graduated from Eaton College the previous year, silhouetted against a lowering grey sky, the heavy clouds of which hover over a dark panoramic landscape. In the distance, the upper reaches of Eaton Chapel reflect by pale rays of sunlight, as are a field and a tree. Arthurly himself, pictured in close-up, looks directly out at the viewer, his face framed by long brown hair.  He wears blue trousers, a brightly lit white waistcoat and neck scarf, and a striking red tailcoat, with long distinctively cut lapels. For those of us interested in 18th century British art, Lawrence's portrait of Arthurly is a familiar, even canonical work, which attracted fresh attention in 2016, when a study for the picture was purchased by the Hoban Museum in Bath. In this talk, I will be looking anew at Lawrence's painting, and placing it in what I hope will be some suggestive and even surprising contexts. We will be recovering its relationship to an ancient Narcane school procession, and an extravagantly ambitious painting and print project by a now-forgotten artist. We will discover the links between a picture and earlier exhibitions, portraits by Lawrence's most celebrated predecessors. We will find out more about how the work fitted into the carefully-pupcrafted portfolio of paintings that the artist submitted to the 1792 Academy exhibition. Finally, we will see how it slotted into, but also shone out from, the dense jigsaw pictures that made up that year's display. It's long been recognised that the commissioning of Arthurly's portrait, and all probability by his parents, coincided with his departure from Eden in 1791. But it is also apparent that the picture does not quite fit into the long-standing tradition of the Eden leaving portraits, which were works at the departing pupils or their parents, who donate to the school itself and many of which still hang there today. Rather, as I discovered when carrying out new research for this talk, Arthurly's portrait has a different character, a pictorial key to which lies in the red-tail coat he is shown wearing. In a brief discussion of the picture published in 2009, the artist oring Jean-Patrice Merendal, then Chief Curator of European Art at Lagma, noted that Arthurly's dress signified his membership of what he described as the Admontan Club, an ancient Eden fraternity with roots to medieval times that survived until 1874. Merendal went on to mention that, quote, one of the club's traditions was to take part in a procession during which boys in the fantasy costume, the salt bearers, participated in the maintenance of their captain at university by levying contributions from passers-by. Printed by this intriguing reference, I decided to delve deeper into this old public school ritual, which is here shown being pictured in two 19th century prints. I soon found out that in the late 18th century, the event known as a Monten procession took place every three years on Wiches days. As a contemporary account notes, it began at dawn when a number of the senior boys in the school dressed in, quote, fancy dresses of silks, satins, some richly embroidered, would station themselves along the roads around Windsor and Eden. These boys were known as the salt bearers and would demand money or salt from all passers-by, money which was indeed used to support the school captain, something like a head boy in his later studies at Cambridge. The procession proper then began at noon, led by bands of music and featuring what are described in the same account as all the Atonian boys, two and two, dressed in officers' uniforms. Those are the King's foundation wearing blue. The others, this is the majority of pupils, wearing scarlet uniforms. If this is not already spectacular enough, this procession will be accompanied by members of the royal family, who often included King George III himself, quote, attended by the Prince of Wales and other male braches of the royal family on horseback, and Queen Charlotte and her daughters, who were travelled by coach. The procession would be completed by further bands of music, by what was described as, quote, a great concourse of nobility and gentry in their carriages and on horseback. This grand procession wound its way through the towns of Eaton and Slough towards a mound known as Salt Hill or The Mountain. There, the boys all passed the King and Queen in review before ascending the mountain, where a grand standard would be raised and a narration delivered. One such mountain procession took place on May the 25th, 1790, when, as a contemporary newspaper noted, quote, the Prince of Wales honoured the celebrity with his presence. More importantly for our purposes, the same occasion featured Lawrence's subject Arthur Athely. This is quickly demonstrated by a page from a related publication on the history of the mountain, which lists each and every participant in that year's event and details their position in the procession. In the list, we find Athely with his name in capitals and seemingly playing a role of sergeant in the procession. Seeing Athely's name in this context and recognising the prominence of his scarlet mountain outfit in Lawrence's portrait suggests that our painting is a celebration not only of his graduation from Eaton, but also of his participation in seniority in a court-sanctioned event that had taken place in the year previous to the portrait's execution. This suggestion is given extra weight. We turn to an artistic project that made the 1790 mountain procession the basis for an ambitious, indeed a madly overambitious, exercise and group portraiture. This was the brainchild of a now obscure painter and engraver called Richard Livesey, who, thanks to the influence of his teacher, the court painter Benjamin West, was employed in this period to copy pictures at Windsor Castle and took drawing lessons to the world children. Then as he seems to have settled in Windsor by the late 1780s, in the early 1790, he embarked on a scheme not only to paint two large pictures of that year's mountain procession, which he then planned to engrave, but also to paint modestly-scaled individual portraits of every single one of its Atonian participants. In an advertisement published in June 1791, from which I'd like to quote at some length, Livesey described his project in detail. Mr. Livesey respectfully informs the parents and friends of the young gentlemen at Eaton and the public in general that, during the last 12 months, he has been engaged in a design of painting two large pictures representing the last mountain, where he intends to introduce the portraits of Dr. Davis and Dr. Langford, the masters, the assistant masters, and all the young noblemen and gentlemen who were at that time of the school, amounting to near 400 persons in their respective dresses and characters. The designs for the large pictures are arranged and as many of the portraits have already been taken, as will enable him to prepare one of the large pictures for engraving about Christmas next. Livesey goes on to write that, quote, the largest figures will be about two feet six inches high and the figures in the procession will be the portraits of the young gentlemen in the rank they walked. Sadly, but unsurprisingly, the project was never completed. But what does survive of Livesey's doomed enterprise includes one of the paintings he described in his advertisement, which, despite his best efforts, was left unfinished. It today hangs at Eaton. Even in its incomplete state, it offers a vivid and detailed depiction of the procession in which Athalie participated. Furthermore, it shows the majority of the depicted Atonians wearing not only the white neck scarf, but precisely the same kind of scarlet tailcoat he's shown wearing in Lawrence's portrait. Indeed, it is quite likely, I think, that the painting includes, amongst its gallery of modest full-length portraits, a portrait of Athalie himself. Tracking across the diminutive faces that look out at us from the canvas, a number of candidates suggest themselves. Is it the boy who stands behind the leading figure in the procession? Probably not, I would guess. Is it one of these boys standing further back? Again, none seem entirely convincing. But how about the boy who stands above and slightly to the right, the one person of colour included in the procession, and near two of the very few boys shown wearing blue jackets? Looking at his face, and that swirl of hair on his forehead, and comparing them with those found in the portrait painted by Lawrence, suggests that he too might be Arthur Athalie. This is all intriguing enough, but what is especially interesting for us is that, as Livesey notes in his 1791 advertisement, many of the small-scale individual portraits he painted of the Athenian boys, which served both as preparatory materials for this large painting, and as modest works of art in their own right, would be seen hanging at that year's Royal Academy exhibition at Somerset House. Indeed, if we turn to the catalogue for the 1791 display, we find that no less than 43 of these pictures, all but one of which are simply described as portraits of Athenians, were scattered around the main exhibition room, known as the Great Room, at Somerset House. The largest and grandest of Livesey's portraits, which enjoyed the longer title of Portrait of a Nobleman's Son in his dress as Salt Bearer at the late Monten Eaton College, pictured one of the Salt Bearers, George Montague, wearing the ceremonial outfit and standing in the landscape outside Eaton, with a view of the college in the distance. The 42 other paintings on display, however, which measured only some 23 by 20 centimeters in size, which were variously hung individually in pairs, and in two groups of 11, seemed to have followed a very different and far more modest head and shoulders format. I've not had much of an opportunity in lockdown to track down these pictures, but here are what's certain to be two examples depicting younger members of the procession. And here is another pair of such works, currently owned by Eaton, and seemingly of the same boy, Worley Butch, one of which is a more straightforward sketch, and the other of which, again, purportedly by Livesey, though I'm not convinced about this, shows him standing outdoors in his Monten dress with a college picture in the background, however negligible as individual contributions to the 1791 exhibition. Collectively, Livesey's works offered visitors to the academy display an extended and intriguing group portrait. One critic, at least, was impressed, writing that quote, for taking delineations of the young gentleman in the Monten was a very happy thought. Many of the faces, there are more than 30, are very interesting, and each head being undisguised by Marachel Powder, and ornamented with that natural frame which is given by nature, and their hair being in that easy state in which nature has left it, gives them a most wonderful advantage over the well-dressed and well-powdered heads which surround them. Much more remains to be discovered about these pictures and the abortive scheme of which they were apart. What of course is so interesting about them is that they offer us a new context for interpreting Lawrence's portrait of Athaly. It is not simply that Athaly himself may have well have been the subject of one of the Monten portraits exhibited in 1791. It is also that Lawrence's picture, itself, like Livesey's works, listed in the catalogue simply as Portrait of Anatonian, can now be understood to have functioned at the 1792 exhibition as a spectacular sequel to the collective and individual imagery of the Monten boys that have been an offer to the previous years' display. Specifically, it is as if his image takes the basic ingredients of the modest portraits, fashioned by Livesey, the youthful privileged male face, the naturally worn hair, the striking red rail tailcoat, the brown gloves, the distant view of Eden, and the shared allusion to the famous procession and transforms those ingredients into something that is simultaneously very similar and very different in character and, as we can now go on to explore, far more sophisticated. Here we can note that Lawrence, despite his own relative youth, was prodigiously knowledgeable about and technically fluent in the different models of portraiture that have marked the history of the genre and that were available to be recycled and revised by the ambitious contemporary practitioner. His portrait of Athely, even as it follows on from Livesey's more modest pictorial offerings, also sees him adopting and adapting the pictorial templates bequeathed by some of his most famous predecessors. Thus, Athely's confident, even swaggering, hand-on-hit pose, which sees his cocked elbow nudging up against the picture plane, provides, together with his flowing hair, an unmistakable echo of Van Dyke's courtly portraiture from the early 17th century. But even more relevant to his pictorial models, I think, are the kinds of paintings that Lawrence's most celebrated and immediate predecessors, Gainsborough and Reynolds, had submitted to the academy displays in the 1770s and 1780s. An especially pertinent example is a painting that offers a near-perfect bridge between Van Dyke's and Lawrence's portraits, Gainsborough's famous Blue Boy, which was designed in large part to make a spectacular impact at the 1770 World Academy exhibition. The direct gaze out to the viewer on the part of a young, long-haired male adolescent whose fringe falls heavily across his forehead. The bold use of a single colour, blue on Gainsborough's part, scarlet in Lawrence's, to attract visual attention. The confident hand-on-hit pose. The doft hat. The exploitation of an emptied landscape, a low horizon and a dark, booding sky, in order to grant the sitter a bold, light-catching silhouette. All these shared properties suggest how much the prodigy Lawrence had learned in Gainsborough's exhibition pictures and how extensively translated their qualities into such portraits as that of Atherly. Similarly, a glance at some of Reynolds's most radical late exhibition portraits, in which he focused on creating simplified, flattened silhouettes, reveled in the cuts and shapes of modern fashion, and experimented with bold combinations of colour, including the familiar martial formula of red and white, indicates the extent to which Lawrence's picture of Atherly also drew upon the advances in the genre, pioneered by the other great portraitists of the recent past. Significantly, however, these kinds of pictorial borrowings and adaptations are neither obvious nor falling. Rather, as in the case of Lawrence's recycling of Livese's Montemimetry, they're subtly absorbed into Atherly's portraits of formal infrastructure, an overlay with the imprint of the artist's own hand and what we might call his signature style. So, on that, in his male portraits at least, revolved around a dialectic of lushness and restraint. In these works, we typically encounter a smooth, almost slick, painterly handling and a rich, sensuous focus on the luxurious trappings of elite statives. At the same time, we find that these qualities are tied to and, in some manner, controlled by the deployment of flattened and deliberately simplified areas of colour. Look at the blocked out areas of red and white, he deploys in depicting Atherly's waistcoat and jacket, and the use of a bold but exactingly precise line, a line that, in this case, cuts the lapels of the same waistcoat and jacket with a couturious skill and turns them into a rhythmic flashing succession of elegant silhouettes.  For the artist, the exercise is in pictorial borrowing and formal interplay that I've just been describing were extremely hard one. He was someone who typically expended enormous amounts of nervous energy, anxiety, and time on his portraits. In fact, he was later to confess that, quote, I am as much the slave of the picture I am painting as if it had living personal existence and chained me to it. Yet, despite or maybe because of this, one of the most striking qualities of Lawrence's paintings, and one that made them so attractive to an aristocratic clientele, was that they seemed so effortless in their execution. A picture such as his earlier full length of the actress Elizabeth Barron, with its sweeping outlines and flickering highlights, looks as if it has danced off the Peter's easel. And this impression of effortlessness is also conveyed in the artist's portrait of Atherly, which portrays very little in the way of artistic labour or uncertainty, and oozes facility in its composition and handling. The ease and confidence displayed by Lawrence's privileged subject, entirely befitting an individual of his class and education, thus finds its perfect counterpart in the ease and fluency, with which it is so tempting and misleading to imagine his portrait must have been painted. Here it is suggested to turn to the Italian derived term sprezzatura, a word coined by Balthasar Castiglione in the 16th century book on the courtier, in which he defined as quote, a certain nonchalance, so as to conceal all art and make whatever one does or says appear to be without effort and almost without any thought about it. In this instance it is a term that usefully serves to bind both the artist and his sitter together and suggests the ways in which they have both masked the labour that has gone into their performances. I hope we can now agree that Lawrence's portrait in of itself offers a complex combination of different pictorial elements and references and associations. But it was a picture that, for Lawrence at least, was not intended to add standalone, but in company. First of all it formed part of a portfolio of 10 portraits he submitted to the 1792 Academy Exhibition that served to stake his claim even at the age of 23 as Britain's leading portraitist in the aftermath of the death of Reynolds, only a few months beforehand. The major artists of late 18th and early 19th century Britain tended to spend months planning their submissions to the annual Academy display and Lawrence was no exception. In fact he was especially assiduous in putting together selections of works that showcased his talents across varied categories of portrait that flaunted the status and celebrity of his clients and that in a highly competitive artistic environment he designed a steel attention of works of his rivals. The 1792 display offers a good demonstration of the artist's careful orchestration of his academy submissions. That year Lawrence's portrait of athlete shared space in the exhibition with such works as the artist's elaborate state portrait of the king George III in Garter Robes which, intriguingly, once again includes the image of the infant chapel in the pictorial background. Portrait of athlete also shared space with an artist's strange role playing portrait of the celebrated actress and muse Emma Lady Hamilton in the character of Milton's La Pensarosa and with his double portrait of the leading financier John Julius Angerstein and his second wife Eliza. And to give one last example of the artist's portrait of a young naval officer Captain Graham Moore this last picture offers an especially suggested counterpart to the athlete portrait and its male subjects direct outward gaze its depiction of a bright white neck scarf and a boldly silhouetted uniform and its use of a dramatic brooding sky to add atmosphere to the image. Such works I'd like to suggest had a particular role to play within Lawrence's portfolio of submissions. Portraits like those of George III and Lady Hamilton were intended to impress, at least in part, because of their famous subjects their monumental scale and, respectively, their grandeur and theatricality. Those of athlete and Moore had a different function. Though less celebrated than their sitters and far smaller in size they had the capacity to their direct and dramatic visual address to the viewer to make instant eye-catching impact within the exhibition space to reel in passing spectators as it were and thereby encourage them to take a closer look at the artist's handiwork. To get a better sense of how this might have worked in practice and of how Lawrence's portrait of athlete operated within the exhibition room we're fortunate enough to be able to turn to a set of diagrammatic drawings that depict the 1792 display in some detail. These drawings, two examples of which I show here, were produced by the architect Thomas Sandby who, that year, served on the Academy's Hang Committee. This committee had the onerous duty, as it still does today, of arranging the hundreds of successfully submitted pictures across the walls of the Academy exhibition rooms. These rooms were dominated by the famous Great Room which in 1792 featured more than 300 pictures arranged above and below the room's famous line, a wooden molding that, running some eight feet above the ground, helped support the paintings on the upper reaches of the wall which were collectively fixed to a wooden armature and tilted forward to ensure a better view of their contents. In his drawings, Sandby recorded the final layout of the works in the Great Room and introduced into his diagrammatic plan the names of the artists were produced each of the paintings on view. Using Sandby's studies and that year's exhibition catalog which listed the pictures in the order in which they were hung, we can securely identify and place all of Lawrence's contributions to the Great Room at that year's exhibition and put together the beginnings of an illustrated reconstruction of that year's hang. Thus, we find that the artist's painting of Lady Hamilton is by Penserosa and his double portrait of the Angosteans hung on the west wall. In turn, we see that Lawrence's portrait of the king hung on the north wall and derighted its centre. What about his picture of Atherly? Once again, the quirks of history have made it a little tricky to pick out his portrait from the many others on view, thanks to the fact that Sandby's finished drawing of the south wall, where the portrait was to be encountered, has not survived. Luckily, we do have Sandby's preliminary sketch of this part of the display. Though it is incomplete and slightly scrappy and back not entirely accurate, it gives us plenty to work with. It enables us, with the aid of the catalog, to identify the exact location of Lawrence's painting. More specifically, we can say with confidence that the artist's portrait of Arthur Atherly, which in the sketches yet to have Lawrence's name added to it, hung on the right-hand side of the wall, immediately next to the picture that Sandby notes as by she. Let's add it to Sandby's sketch. Significantly, though the painting of Atherly might thus seem to occupy a relatively marginal position in the Great Room, it in fact enjoyed one great benefit, that of standing directly on the famous line, which was understood to be the most privileged position for exhibition works in the period. In this instance indeed, we ensure that Lawrence's picture formed part of a monumental sequence of paintings on the room in the South Wall, running along the line from left to right, dominated at its centre by a huge religious canvas by the leading academician Henry Fusely. Fusely's work, which seems no longer to survive, was itself bracketed by two full-length royal portraits. On the left, contrary to Sandby's jotted reference the name of the established portraitist John Hotner, which probably referred to an earlier idea of the layout, the final display featured a full-length portrait of the Prince of Wales by John Russell. That's included in our reconstruction of the South Wall. On the right of Fusely's painting meanwhile, there hung a grand eloquent image of the Prince's younger brother, the Duke of Flandres, this time correctly noted as having been painted by John Hotner. I've not been able to track down the painting itself, so I illustrated here and put it into our illustrated reconstruction through an engraving after the work. Hotner's painting in turn was hung next to a full-length theatrical portrait of the famous actor William Thomas Lewis, playing the role of a Marcus in a popular play The Midnight Hour. This was painted by a new arrival on a portraiture scene, 22-year-old Martin after she. It can be our final pictorial edition to Sandby's drawing. Atherly we can now see was in Glittering Company. Two years after the Montem, we've become part of a new parade of male figures which once again, intriguingly enough, is graced with a figure with the Prince of Wales. No doubt he and his intimates were suitably impressed. For Lawrence meanwhile, the privileged location of his portrait opened up other benefits and advantages. First of all, it testified to the high regard in which his work was clearly held by the academy. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, it offered him one of the many promising opportunities provided by the hang to outshine his rivals. To be more brutal and to use a turn that was deployed by critics and artists in the period, it gave him the chance to quote kill the works that hung immediately next to his own in display. Thus, as they walked into the southwestern corner of the great room, visitors to the show who may already have looked at Lawrence's larger more centrally located canvases were given another chance to directly compare one of his paintings with those of his closest artistic rivals in the field of portraiture. In this instance, a work by a well-established artist, John Hopner, who painted the portrait of the Duke of Plants and a work by a newly emerging figure, Martin Archershee, who painted the picture of the Lewis, the actor. It was a comparison I will end by suggesting that did these artists few favours. Yes, the painting of the Royal Prince and the famous actor and larger, more grand eloquent than Lawrence's picture of a schoolboy, and yes, they featured far better known subjects. But to my eyes at least, his portrait of athlete, like a silent, elegant assassin, kills their works stone dead. No wonder perhaps that for a good number of critics, Lawrence emerged from the 1792 exhibition with his reputation as the leading portraitist of his day and as Reynolds's rightful artistic air, fully intact. Thanks very much and I hope you've enjoyed the series of lectures.


This was Elizabeth Warren's worst debate She not only didn't mention Medicare for all a single time but um, she decided to double down on the smear of Bernie Sanders and I don't think that this will only hurt her chances in 2020 Like I believe this will leave a lasting mark on her legacy. That's how bad it is because understand what she's doing She is burning the bridge To progressives that she tried to rebuild after she abandoned us in 2016 I'll be at this time. It's much worse because she is permanently burning that bridge You hate to see it, but um politics is dirty Now the moment that we all expected would happen when the moderators would ask about this happened of course, if you didn't see the debate and It's interesting because Elizabeth Warren ultimately chose to Side-step everything, you know, she is still maintaining that Bernie Sanders claimed that that a woman couldn't win But you know, she kind of brushes it off as if it's not a very big deal She just simply disagreed and he's not actually sexist. Okay. Well, if that's the case then why are we talking about it?  So I've said enough already Let's watch the clip and I have quite a bit to say about it afterwards CNN reported yesterday that and Senator Sanders Senator Warren confirmed in a statement that in 2018 you told her that you did not believe that a woman could win the election Why did you say that? Well, as a matter of fact, I didn't say it And I don't want to waste a whole lot of time on this because this is what Donald Trump and maybe some of the media want Anybody knows me knows that it's incomprehensible That I would think that a woman could not be president of the United States go to YouTube today There's a video of me 30 years ago talking about how a woman could become president of the United States in 2015 I Deferred in fact the senator Warren was a movement to draft senator Warren to run for president And you know what I said stayed back senator Warren decided not to run and I did I did run afterwards Hillary Clinton won The popular vote by three million votes How could anybody in a million years not believe that a woman could become president of the United States and let me be very clear If any of the women on this stage or any of the men on this stage win the nomination I hope that's not the case. I hope it's me But if they do I will do everything in my power to make sure that they are elected in order to defeat the most dangerous President in the history of our country. So senator Sanders Senator Sanders, I do want to be clear here You're saying that you never told senator Warren that a woman could not win the election. That is correct Senator Warren, what did you think when senator sanders told you a woman could not win the election? I Disagreed Bernie is my friend and I am not here to try to fight with Bernie But look this question about whether or not a woman can be president has been raised and it's time for us to attack it Head on and I think the best way to talk about who can win is by looking at people's winning record So can a woman beat Donald Trump? Look at the men on this stage collectively. They have lost ten elections The only people on this stage who have won every single election that they've been in are the women Amy Person on this stage who has beaten an incumbent Republican Anytime in the past 30 years is me and here's what I know The real danger that we face as Democrats is picking a candidate who can't pull our party together Or someone who takes for granted big parts of the Democratic Constituency we need a candidate who will excite all parts of the Democratic Party Bring everyone in and give everyone a Democrat to believe in that's my plan And that is why I'm gonna win senator Klobuchar senator Sanders. You can just to set the record straight I defeated an incumbent Republican running for Congress 1990 That's how I won beat a Republican congressman Number two, of course. I don't think there's any debate up here wasn't that 30 years ago. I Beat an incumbent Republican It's congressman and I said I was the only one who's beaten an incumbent Republican in 30 years Well, 30 years ago. It's 1990 as a matter of fact But I don't know that that's the major issue of the day I think what the major issue of the day is let's does anybody in their right mind think that a woman cannot be elected president That's enough. Nobody believes that if Hillary Clinton got three million votes more votes than Trump So who believes that a woman can't win of course a woman can win But the real question is how do we beat Trump and the only way we beat Trump? It by is by a campaign of energy and excitement and a campaign that has by far the largest voter turnout in the history of this country and I believe that our campaign has the strongest grassroots movement Thank you endorsed by many grassroots I want to give you the final word. So I do think it's the right question. How do we beat Trump? And here's the thing since Donald Trump was elected women candidates have outperformed men candidates in competitive races and in 2018 we took back the house we took back state houses because of women candidates and Women voters look don't deny that the question is there back in the 1960s people ask could a Catholic win Back in 2008 people asked if an African-American could win in both times the Democratic Party stepped up and Said yes got behind their candidate and we changed America. That's who we are. So before we talk about this one more time I just want to show you how brazen the moderators are and Taking Elizabeth Warren's side over Bernie's here Senator Sanders, I do want to be clear here You're saying that you never told Senator Warren that a woman could not win the election. That is correct Senator Warren, what did you think when Senator Sanders told you a woman could not win the election? They are utterly shameless now. I thought that Bernie Sanders handled this brilliantly He said look, I don't want to waste a lot of time on this because this is what Donald Trump in the media want Precisely, but it's too late because this is what Elizabeth Warren wanted She wanted to fight and she's got it. There are reports that she's telling her supporters to deescalate But I mean it's a little late for that. Don't you think you brought it this far You could have attacked Joe Biden, but instead you chose to go after Bernie Sanders Good job He also brilliantly brought up how he advocated for war and to run Back in 2016. We all remember this. He did not want to run for president Nobody believes that he wants to be doing this right now. He tried to get Warren to run We were all part of this nerdy draft war and movement myself included But she didn't want to challenge Hillary Clinton She was too afraid to challenge the establishment. So Bernie stepped up Why would Bernie be dumb enough to not only tell his opponent that he doesn't think a woman can win But also draft someone in 2016 or try to draft them when he thinks the woman can win the entire Notion that he would say this is absurd on its face So, I mean Bernie handled that this as well as I think he could have but Elizabeth Warren then said look I disagreed with him Bernie is my friend and I'm not here to try to fight with Bernie Well, that's kind of what you're doing and then at the end of the debate when you refuse to shake his hand I mean is There really much of a friendship there left after you threw your friend under a bus your closest friend on that stage So she says the only person on this stage who has been an incumbent Republican in the past 30 years is me now this moment is Going to leave a lasting mark because not only is it incorrect But her response to learning that she's wrong was incredibly cringe-worthy and when Bernie Sanders corrected her She looked like the meme of the lady doing math in her head like it was that bad It was just it was utterly embarrassing for her and you know Bernie Sanders Corrected her. He said no actually I beat a Republican 30 years ago in 1990. It's actually 29 years technically It's not officially 30 years yet, but I digress, but he tried to correct her and then she still wasn't like believing him. I Mean, I think I literally face-palmed when I was watching this play out. It was that bad for her It was embarrassing. I mean to be wrong and then not believe that you're wrong Unreal and as Owen Higgins pointed out Elizabeth Warren was a Republican when Bernie Sanders beat a Republican So I just want you to stop and think about this imagine Elizabeth Warren on a debate stage against Donald Trump Bernie Sanders was being incredibly kind to her. He was handling her with kid gloves and she still managed to embarrass Herself, Bernie didn't own her. That was a self-own. He just said look no actually I did win an election against the Republican in the last 30 years and she didn't believe him She couldn't do the simple math probably because she was flustered. I don't know that I could do that in the moment as well But I mean let it go But she didn't and in spite of how badly that went for her guess what she did She took to Twitter to brag About the the attack that she lobbed against Bernie Sanders Not once when she tweeted out that video, but twice when she then reiterated the same sentiment Elizabeth Warren has the worst political instincts ever ever I Don't know what she's trying to do But I mean okay She's staking out a claim on the establishment side Like she tried to basically have one foot in the progressive camp and one foot in the establishments camp But when you take into account this attack and also the fact that she doesn't support Medicare for all anymore She's chosen aside It's the establishment and this shouldn't be surprising to anyone who's been paying attention She already chose the establishment over progressives But nonetheless, I think that progressives believe in forgiveness So we kind of skeptically tried to give her another chance while still supporting Bernie Sanders Because maybe she would have been the VP but after this don't think that's gonna happen I think that she permanently damaged her reputation among progressives and what was a genuine friendship With Bernie Sanders because she was trying to be an opportunist and wanted to smear him It's it's honestly sad it really is sad now She says ironically so the real danger that we face as Democrats is picking a candidate who can't pull our party together or someone Who takes for granted big parts of the Democratic constituency? Why don't you look in the mirror before saying something like that because you're taking for taking for granted all of the progressives as You throw Bernie Sanders your friend under a bus and She claimed the other day that Bernie Sanders or implied that Bernie Sanders was being divisive by attacking her by suggesting That her voters are affluent and well educated even though that didn't come down from the campaign officially Elizabeth Warren has no self-awareness. She has the worst political instincts ever and I really feel like this is going to do permanent damage To her legacy. It's sad So overall, you know, she sidestepped the entire implication that Bernie Sanders is sexist Didn't offer us any additional details about that private exchange didn't give us any more context didn't even you know entertain the possibility that maybe she perhaps Possibly misconstrued what he said she could have explained. Well, you know, he said what I thought was that a woman couldn't win I mean, we got none of that. She just sidestepped it and then after she said that Then what do the moderators do they pivot to Amy Klobuchar? Why you're not going to immediately give Bernie Sanders the chance to defend himself Really now finally skin in of course gave Elizabeth Warren the last word here because they love Elizabeth Warren quite a bit And they were obviously trying to prop her up the most during this debate And you know, she talked about how female candidates have recently outperformed the male candidates And here's the thing.  No, you're preaching to the choir. We're all incredibly Energized and inspired by all of these women across the country who are stepping up to run for Congress and challenging Republicans and beating Republicans I've interviewed more than a dozen Female candidates on my show in fact out of the almost 30 congressional candidates. I've interviewed I think at least half of them possibly more of them have been women So you're preaching to the choir. We believe in women We are glad that so many women are running for Congress and are successful the most popular progressives are women AOC Rashida Tlaib Ilhan Omar Pramila Jayapal. So The fact that you're choosing to make it seem as if we're against women by Side-stepping this and just touting the benefits of women. Yes, we know but we want you to Explain to us whether or not you truly believe Bernie Sanders is sexist because that's the implication That's certainly what it seems like. She's priming us to believe She's not directly saying that Bernie Sanders is sexist. She didn't explicitly say that But she's priming us to believe that she's trying to get us to think that he sexist without saying it So, I mean, I was admittedly naive enough to maybe maybe think there's a small chance that her and Bernie Sanders would be able to Come together, but this aside work out some type of solution or mutual agreement that they kind of Disagreed on the way that this meeting took place. I don't know but That didn't happen and it fanned the flames and she made matters worse So what else can you say about this Elizabeth Warren time and again has been a colossal disappointment to progressives she Refused to run in 2016 when we desperately wanted her to when we were practically begging her to Okay, that's her choice, but Bernie Sanders stepped up She could have at least been there for us in the form of endorsing Bernie helping him out in Massachusetts. She didn't We asked her to speak out on behalf of the Standing Rock protesters who were being brutalized by militarized police She remained silent while benefiting from this lie that she's Native American for decades And now at a time when she should in theory be Bernie's biggest ally on that debate stage She is doing him the worst. It's sad But this is what she wanted. All right You made your bed Liz lie in it bridge burnt permanently


Fernseed and Elephants. This paper arose out of a conversation I had with the principal one night last summer. A book of Alec Wittler's happened to be lying on the table and express my reaction to the sort of theology it contained. My reaction was a hasty and ignorant one, produced with the freedom that comes after dinner. One thing led to another, and before we were done, I was saying a good deal more than I had meant about the type of thought which, so far as I could gather, is now dominant in many theological colleges. He then said, I wish you would come and say all this to my young men.  But I think his idea was that you ought to know how a certain sort of theology strikes the outsider.  That sort of thing is easy to overlook inside one's own circle. The minds you daily meet have been conditioned by the same studies and prevalent opinions as your own. That may mislead you. For, of course, as priest it is the outsiders you will have to cope with. You exist in the long run for no other purpose. The proper study of shepherds is sheep, not save, not save accidentally other shepherds. And woe to you if you do not evangelize. I am not trying to teach my grandmother. I am a sheep telling shepherds what only a sheep can tell them. And now I start my belating. There are two sorts of outsiders, the uneducated and those who are educated in some way but not in your way. How you how how you are to deal with the first class if you hold views like Luzi's or Schwitzers or Boltman's or Tellich's or even Alec Wittler's, I simply don't know. I see and I'm told that you see that it would be it would hardly do to tell them what you really believe. A theology which denies the historic historic city of nearly everything in the gospels to which Christian life and affections and thought have been fastened for nearly two millennia which either denies the miraculous together or more strangely after swallowing the camel of the resurrection strains at such nuts as the feeding of the multitudes. If offered to the uneducated man can produce only one one or other of two effects it will make him a Roman Catholic or an atheist. What you offer him he will not recognize as Christianity. If he holds to what he calls Christianity he will leave a church in which he is no longer taught and look for one where it is. If he agrees with your version he will no longer call himself a Christian and no longer come to church. In his crude course way he would respect you much more if he did the same. An experienced clergyman told me that what that most liberal priests faced with this problem have recalled from its grave the late medieval conception of two truth. A picture truth which can be preached to the people and an esoteric truth for use among the clergy. I shouldn't I shouldn't think you will enjoy this conception which when you have to put it into practice I'm sure if I had to produce a picture truth to a parishioner in great anguish or understand fierce temptation and produce them with this seriousness and fervor which his condition demanded. While knowing all the time that I didn't exactly only in some pick-wicky and sense believe him myself I find my forehead getting red and damp and my collar getting tight but that is your headache not mine. You have all you have after all a different sort of collar. I claim to belong to the second group of outsider educated but not theoretically, theologically educated. How one member of that group feels I must now tell to tell I must now try to tell you. The undermining of the old orthodoxy has been mainly the work of the vines engage in New Testament criticism. The authority of experts in this discipline is the authority in difference to whom we are asked to give up a huge mass of beliefs shared in common by the early church the fathers the middle ages the reformers and even 19th century. I want to explain what it is that makes me skeptical about this authority. Ignorantly skeptical as you will all too easily see but the skepticism is the father of the ignorance. It is hard to perceive in a close setting close study when you can work up no prima faca confidence in your teacher teachers. First then whatever these men may be as biblical critics I distrust them as critics. They seem to me to lack literally literary judgment to be in in perceptive about the very quality of the text they are reading. It sounds strange charge to bring against men who have been steeped in those books all their lives but that might be just the trouble. A man who has spent his youth and manhood in the minute study of the New Testament texts and of other people study of them whose literally your experience of those texts lacks any standard of comparison such as can only grow from a wide and deep and genuine experience of literature in general is I should think very likely to miss the obvious things about them. If he tells me that something is a gospel in legend or romance I want to know how many legends or romances he has read. How well his palette is trained in detecting them by the flavor not how many years he has spent on that gospel but I had better turn to examples. In what is already a very old commentary I read that the fourth gospel is regarded by one school as a spiritual romance a poem not a history or to poem not a history to be judged by the same cannons as Nathan's parable the book of Joa Paradise Lost or more exactly Pilgrim's Progress. After a man has said that why need one attend to anything else he says about any book in the world. Note that it regards Pilgrim's Progress a story which professes to be a dream and flots its allegorical nature by every single proper name it uses as the closest parallel. Note that the whole epic panoply of Milton goes for nothing but even if we leave out the grosser absurdities and keep to Joa the insensitiveness is crass. Joa is a tale with as few even pretended historical attachments as Job grotesque in incidents and surely not without a distinct though of course edifying vein of typically Jewish humor. Then turn to John read the dialogue that with the Sumerian woman as the at the well or that which follows the healing of the man born blind.  I have been reading poems, romances, vision literature, legend, myth, all my life. I know what they are like. I know that not one of them is like this. Of this text there are only two possible views either this is a reportage though it may no doubt contain errors pretty close up to the facts nearly as close as Boswell or else some unknown writer in the second century without known predecessors or successors suddenly anticipated that the whole technique of modern novelistic realistic narrative if it is untrue it must be narrative of that kind the reader who doesn't see this has simply not learned to read I would recommend him to read Orbach. Here from Baltan's theory of the New Testament page 30 is another observe in what unsimulated fashion the prediction of the Paros mark 838 follows upon the predictions of the passion 831 what can he mean unassimilated? Baltan believes that predictions of the Parusia are older than those of the passion he therefore wants to believe and no doubt does he build does believe that when they occur in the same passage from discrepancy or unassimilation must be perceptible between them but surely he foists this unantexed with shocking lack of perception Peter has confessed Jesus to be the anointed one that flash flash of glory is hardly over between the dark prophecy begins over before the dark prophecy begins that the son of man must suffer and die then this contrast is repeated Peter raised for a moment by his confession makes his false false step the cushion rebuff get the behind me follow follows then across that momentary ruin which Peter as so often becomes the voice of the master turning to the crowd generalizes the moral all this fall all his followers must take up the cross this avoidance of suffering this self-preservation is not what life is really about then more defiantly still the summons to murder them you must stand to your tackling if you this the so Christ here and now he will the so you later logically emotionally imaginatively the sequence is perfect only a bolt head could think otherwise finally from the same Boltman the personality of Jesus has no importance for the Keegman either of Paul or of John indeed the tradition of the earliest church did not even unconsciously preserve a picture of his personality every attempt to reconstruct one remains a play of subjective imagination so there is no personality of our Lord presented in the New Testament though what strange process has this learned German gone in order to make himself blind to what all men except him see what evidence have we that we he would recognize a personality if it were there for it is bolt boltman contra mondom if anything whatever is common to all believers and even to many unbelievers it is the sense that in the gospel they have met a personality there are characters whom we know to be historical but of whom we do not feel that we have any personal knowledge knowledge by acquaintance such as Alexander Attila or William of Orange there are others who make no claim to historical reality but whom nonetheless we know as we know real people false staff uncle Toby mr. Pickwick but there are only three characters who claiming the first sort of reality also actually have the second and surely everyone knows who they are Plato's Socrates the Jesus of the Gospels and Boswells Johnson our acquaintance with them shows itself in a dozen ways when we look into the apocalyptic apocryphal gospel we find ourselves constantly saying of this or that religion no it's a fine saying but not his that wasn't how he talked just as we do with all pseudo John Sonia we are not in the least put perturbed by the contrast which within each character the union in Socrates of silly silly and scabrous titters about Greek pedestrian with the highest mythical fervor and all homeliest good sense in Johnson of profound gravity and melancholy with that love of fun and nonsense which Boswell never understood though Fanny Burry did in Jesus of peasant shrewdness intolerable severity and irresistible tenderless so strong is the flavor of the personality that even while he says things which on any assumption then that of divine incarnation is the fullest sense in the fullest sense would be appallingly arrogant yet we and many unbelievers to accept him as his own valuation when he says quote I am meek and lowly of heart and coat when those passages in the New Testament with superficially which superficially and in intention are most concerned with the divine and least with the human nature bring us face to face with the personality I am not sure that they don't do this more than any other any others we believe his glory the glory as of the only begotten of the father full of graciousness and reality which we have looked upon and our hands have handled that wasn't quotes which is gained by trying to evade or dissipate the shattering in immediacy of personal contact by talk about quote that's significant which the early church found significance which the early church found that it was impaled to attribute to the master master and quote this hits us in the face not what they were impaled to do but what impaled them I begin to fear that by personality Dr. Boltman means what he should call in personality what you'd get in a dictionary of national biography articles or an obituary or a Victorian life and letter of Yeshua bar Yoseph in three volumes with photographs


Good morning and welcome to the 839 Transportation Battalion Assumption of Responsibility Ceremony. Today, Sergeant Major Tamika Horne will assume responsibility of the 839 Transportation Battalion. The passing of the colors from Sergeant First Class Silva to Lieutenant Colonel Harold signifies the key role of the non-commissioned officer corps as the guardian and protector of the colors and the men and women who serve to preserve honor and dignity for the battalion. Lieutenant Colonel Harold would then pass the colors to Sergeant Major Horne, charging her with the responsibility and authority as Sergeant Major of the 839 Transportation Battalion. The act of Sergeant Major Horne passing the colors to Sergeant First Class Silva represents the official assumption of her responsibility.


Welcome to this short video on the five common trading mistakes people make when they first start trading on the financial markets. My name is Rhino Donio, I'm the head of product development here at CMC Markets and we're going to show you some of the different tools that you can use to minimize those mistakes. So when you open up a trading platform there's a huge amount of information that you can use to analyze the markets. So the first mistake clients make is that they don't have a trading plan. So they come onto the markets, they have a look at what the price action is doing and they either just place or buy a sell on a hunch. So one of the things that we suggest is potentially to use a number of these tools to improve your trading strategy. So if you look at the platform you can see straight away that there's a number of different tools you can use. We've got the Reuters news calendar, we've got the charting package which has got an extensive range of technical indicators, drawer tools. Down the bottom you've got there a economic calendar. So when economic events are being announced there's a date and time generally and you can then analyze what that particular event such as GDP or consumer price index, inflation, how that's going to impact the particular markets that you're trading. So you can use the economic calendar. You've also got access to Morningstar equity research reports. So these reports based on the different markets around the world they'll give you details about what the financials have been for the last 10 years and you've got access to that directly within the trading platform. So it's important to start your trading journey by you know starting small. Try and figure out one particular market that you're interested in. Learn how that market actually reacts to certain news events and how it trends and then start with that as your base and start to analyze the markets and get a trading plan set up for that. The second common mistake is around money management. Money management is really important when trading the financial markets. The first decision you need to make is how much are you willing to invest in each individual trade? So you might put a thousand pounds or five thousand pounds into your trading account. How much do you allocate into each individual position? Do you allocate five percent or ten percent? It is all really up to you as an individual to decide what the appropriate amount is but have that as a base. So when you do start to enter a trade you look at the amount you think you should risk and then place that amount as your as your initial capital. The second part of that money management comes down to placing risk management orders. So within any trading platform you've got access to different tools such as stop losses and take profits that can help you limit your risk but also take profit when the market reaches a certain value. So let's have a look at a position on the SPX 500. So if we were going to place a trade on this particular product if we bring up the order ticket you'll notice that there's a number of tools available to you within that ticket. Firstly we need to decide how much we want to place. So let's just start off small and we'll do a trade of one unit on the SPX 500. Where the risk management levels come into it is in relation to the stop loss and the take profit levels. So you'll see here that you've got a stop loss and take profit areas of the order ticket. That sets a level that we want to get out at to limit losses and also a level above the current market price where we want to take some profit. Risk management is about controlling your losses while letting your profits run. So generally people look at what we call the risk to reward ratio. So we want to risk a certain amount but we want to make sure that the reward is beneficial. So quite often what people look at is let's say a 2 to 1 or a 3 to 1 risk to reward ratio and what that means is if I'm willing to risk 50 I want to at least make a hundred pounds on the upside to make that trade worth it. That's what we call a 2 to 1 risk to reward. Now on the chart you'll see that the take profit and stop loss levels are there. So if I drag the stop loss level down what we want to do with take profits and stop losses also is use historical key levels to determine where that take profit or stop loss will go. Because what we're suggesting is that if we put a level or a stop loss below has the market reached that before? If it has then potentially it might reach it again so we might want to place the stop loss just below. With the take profit the same thing applies. If we actually start to see that we've got a resistance level here the markets reach this level before we might want to put the take profit level just below that so that we've got a higher percentage chance of that being executed. But again make sure that you're putting your stop losses and take profit levels on to manage your risk but also do it in a way that you're getting a good risk to reward ratio. The third most common mistake that I've come across is around about your take profits and stop loss levels. When clients are actually looking at a particular trade and they've been in it for a while they'll start to see the market go down in value and they'll sort of say well actually maybe I'll move my stop loss lower. The reason for that is that people don't like to be wrong. What we should be doing as traders is sticking to our strategy. If our stop loss was a set at a key particular level then we get out at that level and we move on to the next particular trade. Clients are very good at letting their losses run so they continue to run into bigger and bigger losses but when they start making a profit they're able to cut that way too early. They start seeing a profit and they think the movement is coming back again they'll get out of the trade and then of course the strategy is correct and the market goes up in value and would have hit your traditional take profit level. So the moral of it is to make sure that you cut your losses but let your profits run. The fourth most common trading mistake is what we call over trading. It's very easy when you've got markets that are open 24 hours a day to be looking and monitoring the markets and trying to find a trading opportunity but sometimes there just isn't a trading opportunity for you especially in the markets that you're interested in. So it's really important not to trade when there's no signals there available. So stick with your trading plan make sure that there's a reason for entering a trade and only place a trade once there is because quite often when you get into a trade purely because of boredom or you know you just want the excitement of getting a trade you run the risk of it potentially being a losing trade. So again have some patience stick with your strategy and make sure that you follow through. The fifth most common trading mistake for me is over leveraging. It's basically when you're trading financial markets such through CFDs or spread betting you're able to take out a much larger position in the amount of money that you've got in your account. So you only have to put in a small amount of your own capital to take out a much larger position. So it's tempting to get into a trade that's much bigger than what you can afford. So again when you first start trading start out small you can trade a number of different products with a fractional amount. So instead of doing one unit you could potentially do point one unit for example. If you have a look at for example on the US 30 so if we bring up the order ticket you can see here if you put in the unit's value you can actually lower it to the point one unit value. Here we only have to put up 105 pounds worth of margin but we're actually taking out a 2100 pound position. So again start off small get familiar with the markets and then as you become successful then you can start ramping up your trading. So that's the five most common trading mistakes. Make sure that you start with a trading plan. Manage your risk management so setting those stop losses and take profits making sure you realize how much money you should invest in each individual trade. Don't get bored and over trade make sure that there's a reason for getting into that particular trade and make sure that you learn about the markets that you're trading. Make sure you understand what it is that actually affects that market whether or not it's an economic event whether or not it's financial statements coming out for particular companies. Really understand that market and know when it potentially could move and also start to use some of the charting package. Make sure you try and look at primary and secondary indicators such as support and resistance levels, MACDs, RSI's, find the ones that work best for you and then start to apply those to your strategy and see how you go. But you've got access to a demo account try it out and see how you go.


Hi everybody, Joe for Jasper's CaseBreaks.com coming at you with a 10 box break. A lot of numbers here. 2022 Panini 3-in-2 Baseball. Pick your team number five. With two boxes being given away of 3-in-2 if you bought at least two teams, if you followed the instructions right here. Obviously all card ship, a lot of great stuff. Let's get after it. There's the fresh case right there and thanks to everyone who participated. You're on Tuesday the 25th. Pick your team number five. If you have a little rooftop next to you, that means you won that spot in the filler that we did Nesser with the double last spot mojo. He bought those two teams before they were pulled for the filler. Thanks everyone. Now let's pop this 10 box break open. Full case break. Yeah Terry, I agree. We did a few of these breaks last night actually. So I've definitely been enjoying it for sure. Alright, one slapped autograph and then a few cards here. It is the debut edition. And just like the other one products, in case cards are just out in the open. Let's slide those two back there and put the memorabilia on top and then we'll do these sets of cards first. Alright, look at this feller here. Bob feller. Bullet Bob. For Cleveland, we've got Ezekiel Duran for Texas. That's the 32. And then we've got Mark McGuire Cardinals edition to 150. I'll list one more time here before I put that away. Put my little stand right there. Okay, now your hits. Now you've got Carlos Correa. Three and two. The count. Full count. 18 out of 49. That'll be for the twins. That's going to go to Mark, the spot that he won in the filler. Then we've got Christian Yellish. I love these superstar autographs. There's that shadow box feel right there. Got his auto. 21 out of 25 looks like just missing Jersey number. Alright, box one. Done. Onwards. Yeah, and I feel like, yeah, Terry was mentioning a little bit earlier that he got a two out of two McGuire auto last weekend. I feel like a lot of these cases have a lot of low numbered cards. So definitely some train whistle possibilities here. Here's Vlad Guerrero Jr. to 32. Say a Suzuki rookie card. One out of 15. That's for David and the Cubs. And the all hands team. That's Brooks Robinson. Like the human vacuum. At the hot corner, 123 out of 150. Alright, your hits. We got Mookie Betts.  Jumbo swatches 33 out of 49. Mark with my Dodgers. And the auto is Keebrian Hayes. Nice. Six out of 25. Two color patch and auto. Pirates, John with the buckos. Ryan Harold, what's going on? Who does everyone have in the World Series? We'll have a poll on Twitter maybe in the next day or two. Phillies facing the Astros. 31 out of 99. Rhino, Ryan Sandberg. And there's Shane Baz to 99. For the Rays. Ryan Harold thinking Houston easily, I think. And let's play two Ernie Banks. It's 11 out of 150. Ryan, are you thinking it's just going to be a sweep? There's Kirby Puckett in full count swatches. 18 out of 49. That will be for Mark. And Matt Manning. Detroit, day one rookie autograph. 32 out of 35. That'll be for John and Detroit. Chris thinks Phillies. I think it would be hilarious if Houston always goes to the World Series and loses to a different team. Yeah, it pains me to say Terry's thinking, but the cheat strokes are going to win. Ryan Harold thinking a gentleman sweep. 4-1. Yeah, Astros are looking really good. I don't think they've lost a game in the postseason. Have they swept their way through the first two rounds? There's Lou Brock, 13 out of 32. Sweet Lou for the Cardinals. Got Louisa Gill to 32 for the Yankees. They sure have, Ryan's saying. And there's Mike Trout to 150. When's the last time a team has swept their way through the playoffs? I guess in the last like 20 years. Playoffs were different back in the day. There's Albert Pools, 66 out of 75 for the Redbirds. That's going to be for Chris Parent. And we've got Bryson Stott. We'll see him in action in the World Series. Lone Star signatures, 19 out of 49. Another box in the books. Chris thinks, hey, the Phillies have a couple advantages. Over is really amazing numbers against Astros pitchers. Interesting. Look up the ALC stats from last year. Is that a sneaky good wager on Kyle Shorer? Wow. And the CS was around in 76, right? So they at least had to do a seven game CS and then directly to the Worlds. Our only team to sweep the playoffs. Wow. We did look up World Series MVP odds last night. Kyle Shorber is 13 to 1 plus 1300. It's Chipper Jones, 99 for the Braves. That could be an interesting play. Jordan's the favorite. It's plus 600, 6 to 1. 55 out of 99. Gunnar Henderson for Baltimore. Bryce Harper is the second favorite at plus 700. This is according to actionnetwork.com. It's odds from Bet MGM as of the 24th, as of yesterday. Could have changed by today, but here is a full count. Frank Thomas. Five pieces of his lumber. One out of seven. That's cool. Ryan Herald with the White Sox. Trust me, Ryan. She'll like it too. Nice low number on that as well. And we've got Nuelvi Martay, prospects. Nice patch. Nice autograph. 18 out of 32. That's Brian with the M's. Yeah, I like that bit of the Mariners silver. It's peeking out there, sparkling a little bit. I feel like I'm not very good at these sort of future-type stuff. I'm not sure exactly how I supposed to play it, but I feel like you maybe pick a few guys. Maybe you pick more of a favorite. Then pick kind of a middle shot and then one long shot. Rhino for the Cubs. There's Peyton Battenfield to 99. And another Frank Thomas card. Sultans insert for Ryan. She'll like it too. The Relic is Tyler McGill. Quad Relic for the Mets. Brian Herald, 6 out of 60. And the Otto is another Mariner autograph. 11 out of 32. Jared Kalanek. Again, I like the bit of color peeking at the bottom of the star right there. Another Mariner for Brian. Brian C. Got some Bryan's and Ryan's. Yeah, Chris would put some money on Kyle Shorbert, 13 to 1. Terry kind of likes Yordon at 6 to 1 plus 600. Reese Hoskins, where's he at? He's 18 to 1. See, that's like good, right? You pick like a favorite, pick a long shot. For sure that's Mets, Kalanek. Some Mariner fans wouldn't mind sending him back, I think. 6 out of 8. Detroit. Miguel Cabrera. Stephen Kwan, 67, 999. Rookie card for Cleveland. 50 out of 50. Clayton Kershaw. Future first ballads for my Dodgers. There is Aaron Ashby. We got that Milwaukee pinstripe going right through the middle of the plate. 5 out of 99. Brew Crew. It'll be for Adam Cupperman. Won that in the filler. And we got Roger Clemens' legendary autograph. Rocket Roger Clemens, 13 out of 20 for the Yankees. That is for Mark Ratliff. A few more to go. Harper is the second favorite. Plus 700, 7 to 1. And Chris was saying Phillies are being slept on big time in the World Series. They actually match up well if you look at the numbers. And Harper hits the Astros pitching very well. There's Jorge Polanco. 3 out of 3. For the Twins. That's a train whistle. Mark Ratliff. Minnesota Twins won that team in the filler. Got randomized. Or got... Yeah, we did the team random. That was the filler. Then got the Twins. And ends up with a train whistle. 3 out of 3. All aboard the Big Hit Express. There's Pepeo to 99. For the Dodgers. And we got Juan Soto, Washington edition. 25 out of 50. And we've got Adley Rushman. Two color dual relic. And that is Shea. With the O, 75 out of 75. I hear Jason talking. So it sounds like he might be back on Instagram Live. I think there were some technical difficulties on Instagram's part. Looks like I might be back. Alright. The redemption is... Vladimir Guerrero. Legendary signatures, hollow silver. I'm assuming that's Vlad Sr. But what team? Let's go to CardboardConnection.com. 3 and 2 Baseball. That's Vlad Guerrero. That's what's said. Legendary signatures. Card number 3. That is Expo's edition. And it's normally to 49. But hollow silver, 25 or less. So that's for the Nats. And that will be for David and the Nationals. Hollow silver, away! Vlad Sr. Nice. Alright, next up. Yeah, Rex. I think Chris was also mentioning that too. That Schorber just does well against... Just done well in playoff situations. We've got Freddie Freeman for the Dodgers to 99. We've got Brady House to 99. And a big Boppy Sultans car to 150. And we've got 3 and 2 full count swatches. 3 here, 2 there, Buster Posey. 24 out of 25 for the Giants. That's going to be for Kevin and the Giants. And the autograph is... Hedbert Perez. Day 1 auto for Adam and the Brew Crew. 32 out of 35. Alright, and the last box. Good luck. Logan, watch the 3 and 2 break that you were in. No hits, but you did get a sealed box. Nice. At least that worked out. Yeah, even if you go hit, listen to this break, ladies and gentlemen. Just a little chance to win a box if you follow the instructions. There's Yelich, 20 out of 99 for the Brewers. There is a 3 out of 5. Yuri Perez, Prospects card. And that's for the fish. That's Nestor and the Marlins. Last bottom mojo. Out of 5's an under-train whistle. All aboard the Big Hit Express. And then we've got Sultans. Judge 112 out of 150. Where does he end up? Be a free agent. Alright, the relic is Eloy Jimenez. 3 and 2 full count swatches. 57 out of 75 for Ryan H., Ryan Harold and the White Sox. And the autograph is... Is the Man of Steel. 6 out of 10. Timeless moments. That was a timeless moment. But today, I am the greatest, greatest, greatest of all time. Jonathan Kent, Oakland A's. And there you have it, boys and girls. A nice break of 3 and 2 in the books. Thanks for watching. Thanks for breaking with us. Let's give away a couple of boxes. Let's gather all of your names. Let's sort them by column A. Adam, you won two teams. So that's still an entry. Chris, you got two teams. That's an entry. David, two teams. That's an entry. David M, two teams. That's an entry. John, you won four teams. That's two entries. Jonathan, two teams. One entry. Mark, with six teams. Three entries. Nestor, two teams. An entry. Ryan Harold, two teams. An entry. Alright, so I got everyone. Ryan, Nestor, Mark. David, David, Chris. Alright, 12 spots here. Top two after 12. Get a couple sealed boxes of this 3 and 2 going your way. We'll ship it to you sealed. You can sell it if you want to. You can open it if you want to. If you end up opening it, you get something awesome. Definitely let us know. Tag us on Twitter. We'd love to see mail days and box-winning stuff there as well. At Jasper's Breaks on Twitter. Tag us there, photos. Two and a one. Three times. Three, good luck. One, two, and three. After three, it's Nestor and John. Congrats to you. A box each going your way. Thanks for watching everybody. I'm Joe for Jasper's Case Breaks.com and I'll see you next time for the next baseball break. Bye-bye.