DSE

nah...non-voters will always bitch and moan, being a hypocrite is easy. I'd agree with Tdog, 70K for an online commerce system? Given the base code of the new USPA website, that's not only enormous, it's grossly overbudgeted, even to buy a packaged solution vs custom code.

So much for the "month" I quoted you. Quicktime 7.6 (released today) fixes the crushing problem for both Sony Vegas and Canopus Edius. I imagine FCP probably will manage the range properly now too, since the decode is in the Quicktime app

As do I. My check rhythm is "Eenie, meanie, minie mo, catch a tiger by the toe." Shrug, shrug, chest strap, hackey, cutaway, reserve, wingclip/wing, wingclip/wing.

If the USPA is involved in the proposed Homeland Security programs, that alone makes the cost of membership a significant value.

Therein lies the very value in this sort of discussion (and why the forums exist). If the thread gets people thinking about the subject, even if it's a "...can you believe what this guy said..." then it's a valuable thread. Consistency, regardless of your flavor of gearing up, is the key. Muscle memory isn't just for freefall, y'know?

Goggles with built-in camera Too bad they don't look like Gatorz.

No, the Cineform reader is only 99.00, plus CoreAVC. There is a plugin on the horizon in a couple weeks, perhaps a month, that will properly decode these files. "Properly" is the key word. Sony Vegas and Canopus Edius have zero problem importing/editing. The problem lies in the decode. There is more latitude than the applications are designed to handle, so the blacks/whites are severely crushed due to the dynamic range. The gradients need some reduction to fit within the confines of the Rec709 space, and that's what Cineform are doing. They're just not capable of decoding on their own (license is expensive). I'd considered having our AVCUpShift program act as a Canon decoder, but the cost of Canon's SDK and the MPEG LA license makes this unfeasible. The Canon is definitely beautiful when managed properly. But, it is a bleeding edge camera application....the market will catch up. But for now, the workflow for GREAT video is kludgy and clumsy. If you want OK video and speed is a concern (in your case, I don't think it is?) then there isn't a good workflow. If you have time and a little $$ to throw at the short-term solution, then it's a great option. It ain't no tandem camera. Because it packages progressive information in an interlaced stream. It's a way of reducing payload.

Yes. But it's "involved." without writing everything...the problem isn't mechanical, it's in the encode/decode. David Newman at Cineform has worked it out, and it works. It's just SLOW. So... Link to David's blog You'll need AVCCore as well. Good news is, it looks great if managed properly. Canon should have figured this out for us. It still isn't a video camera, but it's very fine.

Skydivers are obligated to know as much as possible prior to making recommendations. Kudos to those that are honest about their experience. In this case, if Todd (the DZO) says the OP is good, then the OP is good. But many DZO's or instructors aren't "Todd." We've all seen students who have been told "you're better than most at your experience level," and the Incidents forum is full of "better than average." Many DZO's simply don't give a shit, they just want a camera flyer to put coin in the coffer. It's not a question of judging a skill level. It's a question of meeting BSR's and manufacturer requirements. "Skill" is entirely another discussion. BSR's are physical benchmarks. They're merely the FIRST line of entry, and certainly not the last. I'm impressed as hell that Todd came in to support his skydiver, even if I have disagreements with what he's supporting.

Am I correct in understanding you're a USPA rep and DZO saying it's OK for the OP to be shooting tandems, USPA/manufacturer requirements notwithstanding?

Willing to risk his students, willing to let you hurt him, willing to violate manufacturer requirements willing to hang you out to dry if something goes wrong, willing to.....? I have both; my jacket is my preference most of th time. I need to get my bright yellow suit dirtied up so I'm not so embarrassed at how neat it looks. Get a bright yellow suit, by the time it's dirtied up just right, you'll have the jumps you need.

I'd like to go, but it's out of my skill range no matter the cost. Super fun group of guys to hang with tho....

Imger is too slow, and the glass isn't anythign to write home about. We're still stuck in the world of camera for stills, and camcorder for video. You can get decent web-images from the CX, but nothing more.

Purple Mike learned to not put his feet on someone else' shoulder on this day... Mike, you really need to pay more attention.

That's what I was suggesting up thread. But..that would prevent putting on legstraps first. So...which is the priority? Legstraps first, or having a permanently routed chest strap? I suppose you could have a Jay Moledzki chest strap that is long enough to tie a horse with, and step through the chest strap first....

No, the screen does not need to be flipped open to record.

For free? Sure I would. I wouldn't buy one for the upgrade, but for free?? Sure! You offering me one?

Why? Have you jumped with the 15mm on the XTi? It's perfect for tandems and most four-way, as it's equivalent to 24mm on a non-APSC/full frame camera. there is a reason 15mm is one of the most popular lenses for tandems and many other skydiving applications... But if you like flying *really* close ALL the time...

A-Let's get this straight "R" in BSR is "Requirement" not "Recommendation B-the self-imposed rule has been commonplace for maybe...40 years now? Have you never broken a rule? I can think of at least one.... And the ONE requirement I know you broke has carried a 100% relevance to 100% of recent wingsuit fatalities. Everyone eventually screws up. The question is one of severity, and what they learn from it. Basic Safety Requirement or personal rule... people are people. Mistakes occur. If the thread gets people thinking about the subject, even if it's a "can you believe what this guy said..." then it's a valuable thread, I think.

There's no such thing. It could be stitched closed with a lot of extra...and put on over the head. Except that would prevent legstraps going on first.

Yes. it happened to me. Differences in MY case were; -it was my first wingsuit jump. And as a result of that jump, I didn't jump a wingsuit again for quite a while. I saw Dan's wingsuit and realized I could have easily been in his slot not so long ago. you ask how it happened to me? Mental overload. -I had 473 PREVIOUS jumps. I had nearly 500 opportunities to screw it up, and never had. I screwed up other things instead. When I first put on the wingsuit, I had more belly skydives than you have total to date. Do you think you're better, more heads-up, less prone to accident than me? Remember that you thought you were pretty good back when you put on that wingsuit... Did a BSR keep you from wingsuiting before you had 200 jumps? Of course not. You went early in spite of advice to not do it. Go read some of your old posts, see if you still feel the same way now. In this post, you advocated (indirectly) that the BSR's don't matter. Has this incident changed your outlook now that you're on the other side of that fence? Skydivers who don't observe the BSR's don't get to pass judgement on those that might put their legstraps on in a different order. It's a rule. Look it up. You ask why you were able to make "thousands of dives" in the water without a gear problem...well...in "thousands" lies your answer. Part of the BSR is there to try to ensure that skydivers have at least a minimal amount of muscle memory. 200 skydives is barely enough, IMO, for camera or wingsuit. It'll happen again, Ed. No matter how many safety devices, vigilant loaders, nosy instructors, cameras in airplanes, or TSA security checks...at least a dozen of our comrades will die somewhere in the world in 2009 as a result of an error. Count on it. Statistics don't lie. FWIW, look at your own jump progression and see what the statistics say about you. Use that information to see that you don't become part of the statistics. Rule One-Skydiving is dangerous and not everyone can do it. It requires a heads-up mindset. Rule Two-No matter how many rules, AADs, MARDs, training, BSR's, you can't change Rule One. If you tell yourself you can, then you're fooling yourself. All we can do is our best to look out for each other, to be repetitive in our safety (without gaining the complacency that often comes with repetition), and do our best to be vigilant for ourselves and others. We don't need more stinkin' rules about our gear. We need to first begin observing the rules we've already got.

Congrats, TK. Wish I coulda been there. I'm sure the entire DZ is cringing CHEERING on your behalf.

Already being discussed http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3458977#3458977

I didn't vote, but my method outside a wingsuit, is to put shoulders on first, then bend my legs through legstraps. In a wingsuit it's the same, but there is a different reasoning behind it. As Wendy suggested, fixating on why some do something isn't the efficient approach, IMO. Fixating on how consistent we are in our own methods is the more applicable approach, IMO. Or do we need a BSR regarding whether legs or arms go into the harness first?

There generally aren't massive quantities of spectators packed into a limited area beneath BASE wingsuiters. The low openings aren't so much an issue per se (in my mind), It's the low openings above spectators.