PWScottIV

Crap, this guy has entirely too much time on his hands... http://cgi.ebay.com/PACKAGE-DEAL-2008-C-R-E-E-P-S-UNIT-iDiED-REMOTE-UNIT_W0QQitemZ200218730870QQihZ010QQcategoryZ106980QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1742.m153.l1262 Gravity Waits for No One.

Nice. I have a friend who's obsessed with making crème brûlée... I'll have to recommend that to her. Gravity Waits for No One.

What gave you that idea? Gravity Waits for No One.

It's even better over chocolate brownie ice cream. I poke a bunch of holes down into a 1/2 gal container and add about a cup or two... Let it sit for a week or so to let the amaretto diffuse through it. Then I put that on top of one of the brownies.

Open enrollment right now too! Gravity Waits for No One.

I've been putting amaretto into brownies and it's awesome. Instead of water I add twice the volume of Amaretto... Then I sprinkle on about half a cup more after they are cooked. I also add about 12oz of semi-sweet chocolate chips to the mix. They're by far the best brownies I've ever had. Gravity Waits for No One.

Happy Birthday! Thanks for being so understanding after I elbowed you in the face. Gravity Waits for No One.

If you're expecting people to be all excited that you stood up you landings, then IMHO you probably don't need to be downsizing. Not standing up your landings should be the exception. I've only had two non-standup landings in about 100, not that that's supposed to be super or anything, but if you've only had 60 out of 200, then I'm guessing others would agree that a smaller canopy probably ain't in order. Gravity Waits for No One.

Asking the guys "Does ya sleep with the ho's? Or work for the Bitches?" It's possible to get most girls to hook up within about 8 hours or less (sometimes MUCH less), provided that the guy works the situation right. Gravity Waits for No One.

YOU ARE FUCKING NUTS Yes, I know. However, it is a brand new fully loaded (that means I got pretty much every option possible, even stuff they've never done before) Vector 3 with PD Reserve, Cypres, and Safire 2. It shouldn't be a surprise that it would cost that much. I understand WHY it cost so much. I don't understand why you would SPEND so much on something that is fairly transitional - with under 100 jumps I doubt you will be hanging on to it enough to enjoy the $6K investment or get good residual value. Of course, to each their own, but to me - THAT'S FUCKING CRAZY. Considering how often I jump, I'll actually probably have this container for quite a while. I'm gonna be loading it at 1.2 right now and with a 150 I'll be loading it at 1.4. I have many other sports I do, I'm a student, and I run my own company... That doesn't put me at the DZ often enough to downsize very far... Safely at least. Gravity Waits for No One.

YOU ARE FUCKING NUTS Yes, I know. However, it is a brand new fully loaded (that means I got pretty much every option possible, even stuff they've never done before) Vector 3 with PD Reserve, Cypres, and Safire 2. It shouldn't be a surprise that it would cost that much. Gravity Waits for No One.

Apparently cat people have waaayyy too much time on their hands, or pussies as it were... I voted anyways. Gravity Waits for No One.

Shit, I just spent a little over $6000 on my first rig. If you only paid $2700, then you got off easy. Gravity Waits for No One.

Nope, its free to all users! http://www.youtube.com/blog?entry=ponKL3LTyr0 Cool, that IS much better than the typical Youtube crap. Gravity Waits for No One.

I have CS3 and I did download/install the MainConcept Plugin... Unfortunately it's not gonna be too useful until I get access to some AVCHD footage though. From what I've seen, CS4 isn't going to support AVCHD either, but if Adobe pulls their heads out of their asses, that may change. I didn't know about that, so I'll have to look into it. I've got quite a bit of storage space, so that shouldn't be too much of an issue. It would be nice if there was something more streamlined out there, but I might have to just deal with the extra time requirements until a better option presents itself. That's what I was initially thinking... But when I asked their technical staff, they said that shooting in progressive HD would produce better results. I guess it's possible that they're full of crap, but I don't know. I'm thinking that maybe the effect is similar to what you see when you attempt to view an array of fine lines on an LCD screen... For instance, when you look at an excel document on an LCD, some of the horizontal lines can look different size, some even disappear. I could be wrong, but maybe there's a similar effect when you downsize video and the ratio of lines in one direction (width or height) isn't even (i.e. going from 720 to 320). Is it possible that the downsized final product might look better if you've started off with more lines of resolution? I guess I should ask them exactly what their reasoning for making the claim is. Their justification for using video that's shot in progressive mode makes complete sense to me, as the final product ends up in 30p regardless of what format you began with. But yes, the primary reason that the video looks so much better than anywhere else is that you can encode the video with essentially whatever settings you want (there's obviously some rules such as dimensions and file type). Although, I'm pretty sure they throttle the max speed for each video, so setting everything to the highest quality might have your audience sitting around waiting for the video to start for quite a while. However, when you use the default settings, a 5 minute video downloads in about 15sec, so there's definitely quite a bit of room for improvement. Yeah, but I'm pretty sure they're charging CBS for that. I doubt it's available to regular users for free like Brightcove does. Gravity Waits for No One.

Thanks. That would've sucked to find that out for myself after I purchased it. I was thinking about moving over to AVID or Final Cut if I couldn't get Premiere to handle AVCHD... Do you know much about either of those? Gravity Waits for No One.

What the hell are you talking about?! Maybe you should re-read my post. I was asking what others thought about a new product that's coming out. Obviously I don't have any experience with it, as it hasn't even been released yet. I'm not arguing just for the sake of arguing. I'm just getting conflicting opinions from different sources and I'm attempting to separate fact from fiction. I'm not twisting the arms of the other posters, they are posting on their own free will. Additionally, I'm not twisting your arm either... If you don't want to read this thread then skip it... There's plenty of others out there. I'm fully aware of this. However, I'm supposed to have my new rig in from UPT in a couple of weeks and I'm planning to start jumping a lot more frequently. I don't think it will take too long for me to get to 200 jumps or so. I want to start shooting HD while rock climbing, scuba diving, and snowboarding as well, so that's why I'm looking for a camera now. My current camera (AG-DVX100B) is just too big (in weight and dimensionally) for my current needs. Skydiving seems to be the most demanding on cameras, so that's why I'm attempting to choose a camera that will be compatible with that environment. Whoops, hope you didn't HAVE to read this post too. P.S. Your post seems an awful lot like whining as well. Maybe even more than mine. Gravity Waits for No One.

It's not that I don't want the option to shoot with 60i, it's that I want the creative freedom to be able to shoot with 30p and 24p as well. I'll be using this camera for more than just skydiving... To afford it, I'm going to replace my dvx100 with it. If 60p 1920x1080 was available (in a more affordable and smaller package) then I would get a camera that could handle that. MainConcept has a product that supports AVCHD in Premiere. I didn't know that this particular camera was soo crappy. From the specs it sounded pretty sweet. I'm leaning more towards test testing the Canon HF10. I don't think anyone has actually tried it to see if the OIS is going to be a problem. I know it's a problem with previous Canon cameras, but I don't know if this camera will react the same way. If I can buy it at a location that has a 30-money back guarantee (like best buy), then I'd be ok with being the guinea pig. Remember, another reason that I don't want to go with Sony because they refuse to use a non-proprietary flash memory format. The minimal size and maximal cost of that Pro Duo crap isn't something I want to buy into. Additionally, Sony only allows you to take up to 3 still shots while you're shooting video... Apparently, the HF10 shoots as many stills as you want while filming (as long as the memory you are using is class-4 or faster). I only want to have one camera that shoots video and decent stills. Mostly because I think it would be safer. It's not as likely that I'll get a horseshoe mal if I just have one well snag-protected camcorder and I'll have less to think about with just one device. Maybe once I get a lot more skydives (and experience shooting) I might consider jumping both a still and a video camera at the same time. If I was posting on youtube then we wouldn't be having this discussion... I would just buy any shitty camcorder. The quality at youtube (or just about anywhere else online completely sucks. Obviously you can't see the difference in those formats on youtube. Did you not actually look at those brightcove videos I posted? Do you really think they look anything at all like youtube? Thanks, I'm always interested in learning more. I'll check that out. My mind is stuck on having a camera that's at least capable of shooting 30p... Like I've said about 10 times, I'd also like to have 24p and 60i available to use... Unfortunately, Sony doesn't give you that choice at this time. Gravity Waits for No One.

It's true that putting all of my eggs in one basket with brightcove is sort of a crap shoot, but they seem to be pretty diversified and have some pretty serious customers. The majority of their market pays to have them host video, but if you have less than 1000plays per video per month, it's free, after that they have several options, including advertisements. It's a different strategy than youtube or the other hosting sites. It's true, they could fold, but I really don't get the feeling that's going to happen right now. Additionally, if they did fold, I could serve the videos myself on my server, so it's not that big of a deal. I did try to post over at DVinfo yesterday, but even after I activated my account, I still didn't have the proper permissions to start a thread for whatever reason... Maybe they have some sort of waiting period so people don't setup accounts and then post advertisements or something? I obviously don't want the video to look stroby, and I know exactly what you're talking about. I haven't experienced too much trouble shooting with 30p on my dvx100, so I didn't consider that it might be a problem for skydiving. I'd really like to see an example of what it looks like, but if everyone is shooting with equipment than only has 60i, then I might have to do those tests for myself. Do you know anyone who has any test footage? Or is it possible that everyone is scared of it because nobody has actually tried it? Gravity Waits for No One.

says the same thing with regard to skydiving video. You've apparently made up your mind that no matter what, you want 30p. So...go for it. If half the spatial and temporal resolution work for you...GREAT! [/url]http://www.youtube.com/user/VASSTTraining[url] might help you gain a better understanding of some small aspects of video. A - I wasn't referring to 720p... Everything we've been talking about here has been in reference to 1920x1080 HD. And although I don't honestly know when we'll see something with 60p that's affordable and jumpable, I was speculating that it's not going to happen soon enough to have that be my next camera. B - I NEVER said I wanted to convert 30p to 24p... I was talking about converting 60p to 24p (which IS possible), but I assume any camera that could handle 60p would also be able to do 24p so it's a mute point. I had also mentioned that I wanted a camera that does 30p, 24p, and 60i, so maybe that's what confused you... Read back and I you'll see that I never said that. Gravity Waits for No One.

Well, I'd honestly guess that the 60i was the youtube2, but I don't get the feeling that it's an even comparison. There seems to be interlacing artifacts on both, but on the first one that might just be aliasing because of the low resolution. Youtube2 definitely is interlaced, regardless of when it happened (in the camera or during encoding). De-interlacing that video either during editing or while encoding would remove most of those artifacts, but the edges of objects would never be as crisp as they could be if shot in 30p. With respect to 60p 1920x1080, I know the cameras are "available", but from what I was able to find, they're both extremely large and expensive... Much out of the range of $2000... More like $50000 from what I saw. And I doubt there's anyone who would jump said camera daily (due to both). The only reason I want 30p is because I know that is going to look the best on Brightcove, which I have chosen as my primary mode of distribution. If I could get 60p, I wouly only be able to use half of those frames for viewing online... However, if I decided to slow the speed down, I could do so at 1/2 speed and still get the same frame rate as if I had shot it at 30p. Additionally, converting to other modes (24p, 60i, etc) would probably produce better results, and obviously playing the video on an HDTV that is 60p capable would look much better, at least with high-speed motion. I still think 24p has it's place (which is why I'd also like my camera to be capable), but the best luck I've had with that was when I knew where I was going to have to pan the camera (and more importantly how fast, so I could be at the proper zoom to do so). In a couple of instances, I actually had very good results with even high-speed motion (roller derby matches). I erected a very stable double-high scaffold to give a decent perspective on the rink. As long as I was able to "lock into" the subject well, I found it did a wonderful job of making the subject the focal point of the shot... Obviously the background and even some of the other players had serious motion blur, but the overall effect was exactly what I wanted. Obviously, it took an extreme amount of concentration and motor control to keep the camera stable, but canon's OIS is very effective. That said, I've seen quite a bit of crappy shots taken with the DVX100, but you can get crappy shots with the $60,000 cameras as well if you don't know what you're doing. I do want to have clean smooth video for skydiving, so I'll use whatever works best to be able to post on brightcove... You still haven't answered my question regarding the fact that I'm going to be posting online in 30p whether I like it or not, so why would I want to shoot in 60i? Gravity Waits for No One.

From what I've heard, and from experience, Panasonic's "Master" quality tapes seem to be pretty good. They're white with a blue label. Gravity Waits for No One.

I'd say the "youtube1" was shot in 60i... Only because you're probably trying to trick me... Unless you shoot the same speed motion in both modes, then it's impossible to make a fair comparison. It's obvious that neither person is moving in the "youtube1" image, and it's obvious that the TM just hopped to the side in the "youtube2" image. I agree with you on this point for sure - 60p IS undoubtedly the holy grail of HD video. But I'm not holding my breath. I know it will happen, but that day may still be a few years away till the price and size becomes reasonable. One thing is for sure, if 60p was available for our application and budget then we would not be having this discussion. Gravity Waits for No One.