DSE

Fixed it for ya. RIAA doesn't represent you, Walt, so they really don't give a damn about what *you* think. On the other hand, they do represent me. While I have issues with certain aspects of what they might say and occasionally do, I'm very glad they are there for me and my publishers. I feel the NGSA is way out of hand too, but then again, I'm not a member of their organization, and they aren't tasked with representing me, either, although their products do very directly affect my quality of life. I do still believe in the old-fashioned concept of asking permission before taking something that doesn't belong to me, particularly if one is making a profit with someone else' creative work, and putting out to where that creative person has lost control over their work. Quaint, I know, but asking permission and/or paying for things is how some of us were raised. Murrays, as far as that article, I can't give it any credibility. If they took one aspect of a website grossley out of context, for all I know they did the same thing with what this attorney said. For the record, by current law, you have the right to copy music from a CD to your computer for your own personal use, and/or put it on your portable music device for your own use. The only time (at present) that you can run afoul of the law in copying CDs is if you bypass copy protection on the CD. Very, very few CDs have DRM on them. That was a failed experiment on the part of a few big labels. DRM is not currently in heavy use, as the music industry is experimenting with trusting consumers to do the right thing. In most genre's, it's working. In the film/video world, it's a different story. DRM is on everything, if for no other reason than to provide a platform from which a copyright lawsuit may be launched. Isn't it sad how someone who owns something has to fight so fucking hard to continue to own what they created? The Skyride threads are almost hilarious when related to this subject. "F***ing Skyride, they stole my pictures to use on their website" screams the tandem guy that illegally ripped a Van Halen or Tom Petty CD to use in his tandem video. I read the gun threads about blowing away an intruder for coming through the door because they might steal a television worth a few hundred bucks, but when an artist undertakes actions, sometimes desperate and foolish, to protect that which they have created to put bread on their table, they're labeled as "Gestapo," "Greedy," etc. Doesn't matter whether we're talking software engineers, musicians, or directors/writers...any creative work that has a digital distribution model...they're at risk of piracy. Next time you see Norm Kent, Joe Jennings, Mike McGowan, ask em' why they bother to put big copyright watermarks on their work when it goes online. Happy new year!

Congratulations!

I'm sure it isn't a popular response. The RIAA isn't going to be popular with music buyers for similar reasons that the USPA isn't popular with a lot of skydivers. I agree, the RIAA has created a sense of fear in many people. I'm a member of RIAA, and embarassed/disappointed in their messaging and delivery. But the truth is, no one at the RIAA is going after (and never will likely go after) anyone for copying a CD to their MP3 player, because doing so is an authorized copy. Unauthorized copies are passing those songs to friends. Imagine the uproar if you could create a digital copy of a physical object such as a rig, candybar, or vehicle, and pass it along to a friend. Can't be done, but the exact same principles and laws do, and should apply. Software manufacturers are doing the exact same things the RIAA is doing, as are visual media providers. No one is as up in arms about it. Do you feel it's OK to buy a CD and make copies of it to give to your friends? Do you feel it's OK to walk into a 7-11 and steal a handful of candy bars to hand out to your buddies? the only difference is the likelihood of being caught. I do agree with making examples out of anyone who has been downloading music. Such as the bitch cited in the Post article. The article fails to mention that she'd been notified in writing on four occasions, and that after she'd been served, she attempted to erase her HDD of all the media she'd illegally downloaded and bragged online about, and sent literally thousands of links to friends for. It wasn't just an arbitrary "Let's go after this chick." She was given opportunity to deal with it. She said "F*** you" to the copyright holders via the RIAA. No, music *won't* continue to exist just fine without the RIAA. Another organization will step in to fill their shoes, and likely have their guns even better loaded. The RIAA is merely a collective of the various record labels and publishers (of which several represent me and my interests as a recording artist). They're needed in Washington and international forums, as individual labels, especially the smaller ones, can't afford to stand on their own. ~Nothing is illegal about buying downloadable music. ~Nothing illegal about ripping your own CD's to your MP3 player or computer library. ~Nothing illegal about handing your headphones to a friend and saying "Hey, check this out." It becomes a problem when one song is purchased, copies are made, and that one paid-for song may be listened to on multiple devices at the same time by multiple individuals. The existing industry is dissolving, and quickly. And fewer and fewer new artists are making it out of the mess as a result. Artists don't enjoy long life-spans anymore either, as A&R funds are practically gone. And all of that is OK, so long as artists can be paid for their work. Once my contract with Virgin is up, I'll likely not go back to a label deal again, but rather do something along the lines of Broadjam or Weed. but I'm very grateful that my label and publisher have been there to protect, negotiate, and obtain revenue on my behalf.

Same tax was originally applied to blank CD's, too, but then it was apparent that more blank CD's were being purchased for data storage than for music copies. The cited article is flawed, and takes statements from the RIAA website out of context. The very next paragraph to the one cited in the article is: "Record companies have never objected to someone making a copy of a CD for their own personal use. We want fans to enjoy the music they bought legally. But both copying CDs to give to friends and downloading music illegally rob the people who created that music of compensation for their work. When record companies are deprived of critical revenue, they are forced to lay off employees, drop artists from their rosters, and sign fewer bands. That’s bad news for the music industry, but ultimately bad news for fans as well. We all benefit from a vibrant music industry committed to nurturing the next generation of talent. " In other words, the RIAA doesn't care if you archive/ time-shift your CD collection to your iPod or MP3 player. It's when you give copies of that music to your buddies that it becomes an issue. One of my best friends is an RIAA investigator that specifically targets the University of Utah, Westminster College, and Brigham Young University. She spends most of her time monitoring the university downloads and torrent site logs, because that is where they're seeing the hurtful trends. It's not illegal to rip a CD. If it were, Microsoft would have been sued long ago for enabling you do do so in their media player. The music industry WANTS people to listen to music on our iPods, Zune's, and other portable devices. What they don't want (and rightfully so), are file-sharing and illegal downloads through Kazaa, Gnutella, etc. In short the Post article is mostly a sensational piece of fluff and FUD.

Jarno, what you've posted is exactly what I'm hearing from folks recommending both suits. As beautiful as the Tony suit is, I won't go there, simply because it seems the design changes faster than I change my socks. I'd like a suit that will hold some resale value when it's time to move up to whatever the next thing might be. So far, haven't seen any real compelling reasons for the Ghost over the Blade or vice-versa. I prefer the look of the Blade, but not terribly thrilled to hear stories of 5-6 month wait times, either. Price is somewhat negligible, as the Blade and Ghost are about the same cost.

LOL, yeah...stay away from JVC consumer if you want rugged. It's for that very reason that Sony has pretty much dominated the Xtreme sports world; these little cameras are tough. You'll see a couple new cams in a couple weeks ( non-Sony) that are impressive as well. Stick that sucker on eBay for parts, you might make some of your $$ back.

Bingo. budget. Which is where we started this discussion, these cameras are perfect for low-budget, average quality productions. Like Discovery, MTV, ESPN, EXPN, CNN, Oxygen, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, History Channel, A&E, Sundance, Sci-Fi, HBO, and more (We've shot HDV primary for all of the above). Of course it all starts with the lens. And it finishes with the codec. No great mystery or statement there. You're great at tossing FUD, yet it's apparent wedding videography doesn't quite challenge the technology, or perhaps you'd understand more about the various applications of camera tools. None of this discussion has anything to do with skydiving photography, so we'll end it here. CreativeCOW.net or DVInfo.net are more appropriate for the final direction of this discussion. When you do begin skydiving with a camera, let us know. We'll have more to talk about.

I'm aware of how it works, just pointing out it's not all that easy. In case you hadn't noticed, I'm a mod and corporate sponsor on DVInfo.net Great group of folk over there. Seriously, it'll be good if you can figure it out. Others have, and it's not been a cakewalk for any of them. Simple start/stop is one thing, but what about when you want to play it back immediately? Or want to access a menu function. Bear in mind that the remote protocol takes over all the camera functions and you lose local control unless you release it. Yeah, sucks about the microdrive. We had a visiting guy bring one of the Sony SR units out, I warned him. He claimed he'd had dozens of jumps with it and it was fine. They were all jumps from a 182, around 9K. His camera didn't die right there, but it did shut down, and at that point, he took it off his helmet. Dunno if it's still working or not. If you got it cheap enough and you're a techhead, you should be able to replace the drive reasonably easily?

Discovery hates all HDV cameras 720p & 1080i because of their heavy GOP compression and small chip size. They do however allow 25% of their footage to be non-hd content. That is why they allow your Sony V1U, HC3/5's. While these cameras are technically HD, they are not up to Discovery's rigid HD standards. Your V1U was needed because it was basically used as an underwater crash cam. They do however allow the JVC HD200 series with the aftermarket 10K lens to be used for certain studio applications. In this scenario, they are not confined to the 25% restriction because even Discovery realizes how great these low cost cameras are. . A lot has changed since Discovery reviewed HDV in September of 2003. I don't recall seeing you in Silver Spring for the Discovery Producer's seminar? Your first line (which is incorrect) is runs counter to your last line (which is also incorrect). Changing a lens does not impact the chip size nor the GOP compression format. "Survivorman" is 100% HDV. "Deadliest Catch" is nearly 100% HDV. Which of any of these cameras are you putting on your head for skydiving, Scott?

Go into your ~/Movies folder (thats the Movies folder in your home folder) and move the iMovie Projects folder to the desktop and then start iMovie. See if that fixes it.

The JVC GZ-MC100 isn't a flash-based camcorder, it is a microdrive camcorder, and no hard drive camcorder is going to last long when used for skydiving. Most won't work the second you leave the plane due to lack of air pressure. JVC doesn't have LANC, they don't license. If you're meaning it's gonna be easy to hack into the other remote...blessings and best wishes to you. It requires a processor chip and a lot of time working out protocol switching. The HCC underwater housing doesn't work the same as these do, but you could probably rip the guts out of the HCC and use them as a start/stop control.

I'm a big guy, 195, 5'9". So far I've jumped a Classic, GTI, Firebird, Phantom...and trying to decide between a Ghost and a Blade. I flew just fine with all of the suits I've tried, and feel comfortable deploying all of them. Seems like a tough choice between the Ghost and the Blade, and have had recommendations for both from people I trust. I'd like some input that might help me make a decision?

I feel cheated. In Eloy 3, I'm just starting to creep up on the formation, and it was the only damn formation I got close to. Thanks LouDiamond, Monkeycndo, Scott, James, John, Bob, Dave, and everyone else for making the wingsuit lessons so enjoyable and exciting. Damn, wish I was still there with you. That last jump was incredibly memorable. Thanks for the gainer lesson, Scott. That has to be the best exit I've ever done.

Since they're gonna have to reconfigure video rules for competition anyway... They just might as well figure this into the mix. Not just PAL and NTSC (actually, it somewhat is a relevant question but it'll do SECAM and NTSC-J, too. I'm currently beta-testing the suck-less option, and so far, it's not working. In fact, after this past week at Eloy, I found that it might cause suck-more. Flocking with some of the guys from this community...either they were beta-testing the suck-less, or I was truly sucking more.

This predominantly affects large broadcast batts such as the Bauer series. However, there are already ways around it, so I don't expect it to have a significant impact on individual camera contractors. Large productions in the field however....

It'll have a "Talent" knob too. We're still discussing a "Suck less" knob feature. Then there is the option to mount a target on your tandem student's forehead or the ass of the key on a four-way team. The device reads the target via IR when the camera op is within a 100' range, and swivels the camera to the target, thus assuring no more missed shots, assuming the camera flyer never sinks low on the student or the formation. That'll cost you extra though.

5999.00 isn't "well over 5 grand" in my book. "Plagued by .25 sensors???" OK. Whatever. ESPN, EXPN, CNN, Oxygen, have all aired footage I've shot with the V1, Dean Devlin just used several V1's on "Isobar" and "Leverage" (both of which will be 35mm releases). "Urban Justice" (Steven Seagal) also used em, as did "Flight of Fury." "Survivorman" has used V1's along with HC3/5's. So has "Deadliest Catch" and other Discovery shows Yeah, they're just crummy lil shows, but let's not lose scope over what you're doing vs what my company is doing with clients like Seagal and Devlin. Ever Norm Kent purchased a V1 with it's "plagued" imagers. It's one thing to measurebate (and it's fun to toss numbers around). It's another to be actually using the tools and knowing what they will and won't do in a variety of circumstances. All that aside Each time I answer your complaint, you come up with a new one, so there is little point in trying to continue. I'm a lousy dancer.

After what happened to a freeflyer yesterday I'm glad I waited a day for it to shut down for sure, before jumping. Probably different circumstances, but...

Already there, as if it mattered anyway. HDCAM (good enough for George Lucas and Steven Spielberg among others) records 1440 x 1080. It does use 1.333 PAR, but that's not pixel shifting nor uprezzing. They're anamorphic pixels. Varicam (good enough for a huge percentage of non-film commercials until a couple years ago) records 960 x 720, and is upsampled to 1440 x 1080 for broadcast. XDCAM EX is full-raster and is in the cost-class you want. XDCAM HD is full raster 1920 x 1080 imager, recording a 1440 x 1080 image. It does use 1.333 PAR, but that's not pixel shifting nor uprezzing. They're anamorphic pixels. Canon XLH1 is a full raster imager, recording a 1440 x 1080 image. It does use 1.333 PAR, but that's not pixel shifting nor uprezzing. They're anamorphic pixels. Sony V1U is a 1080 sensor, no pixel shifting or uprezzing. It does use 1.333 PAR, but that's not pixel shifting nor uprezzing. They're anamorphic pixels. Anamorphic imaging has been a standard since the 1930's and began heavy use in Hollywood in the 50's. If it's good enough for Orson Wells, Alfred Hitchcock, Clint Eastwood, Mel Gibson, Michael Bay, George Lucas, Steven Spielberg, Dean Devlin, John Swartzmann, and a host of others, I'm quite sure it's good enough for you and I, yeah? It's a lame discussion, particularly when you're arguing from the standpoint of a poorly built HDV camcorder such as the JVC HD100U. Even JVC is embarassed over that camera. On the subject of 1080: 1080 comes in both progressive and interlaced formats. Interlaced still very much has its place in the world today. How many broadcasters are sending any kind of a progressive signal? (I know the answer, do you?) ~Yes, 1080p is a superior format to 720p. ~Yes, 1080i60 provides smoother motion than 720p30. Critically so in high motion scenes. ~Yes, 720p30 can provide sharper image detail than 1080i in high motion scenes, but it's juddered when in motion. Great for still/freeze frames though. ~Yes, 720p can have problems when displayed on interlaced displays. ~Yes, interlaced content can exhibit artifacting when displayed on a progressive display. ~Yes, 720p offers approx 25% greater resolution than 1080i when you don't factor Kell. When you factor Kell, the difference is negligible. ~Yes, 1080p provides better everything mentioned above. ~Yes, there are many 1080p cameras; more than there are 720p cameras. ~Yes, 1080 (as Laszlo first mentioned) has become the predominant format of choice by consumers, broadcasters, and most production houses. Poll your tandem vid customers, I'd wager you won't find even one, that has a native 720p display. Not one. Ask em' about "full HD" displays, and they'll all tell you that's what they have, if they have HD displays at all. Poll the forum; you'll find folks have 1080 or 1080-capable displays whereas they don't see, and never have seen a native 720p marketing campaign, or monitors advertised as being 720p. And why would they? If a consumer sees a native 720p display next to a native 1080 "full HD" display, most folks are gonna buy the higher number, simply because it's "more" whether it's better or not. Give it up already. You don't know what you're talking about.

It fires up, it just counts down and then switches off. Either way, glad to hear that Airtec might give me new batts. Meanwhile I'm fine jumping w/out it.

I've been given the greenlight to talk about controlling non-LANC camcorders, as there have been so many questions. You'll shortly see a new control system that provides more than just an indicator of camera on/off, connected via the AV/D link of the Sony camcorders. Contrary to an earlier post, this is NOT LANC in another connector. It's entirely a different protocol, and is much more complex and less cut/dried like LANC is. However, due to it's complexity, it can perform much, much more than mere start/stop/indicate. The underwater housing manufacturers have been working through this connection for over a year, and it functions very nicely. There are some issues related to skydiving, and those are being addressed by the developer of this control. I for one, am very excited about what this new control brings to the table, as whether you're shooting 4 way, tandem, or freeflying...it offers SO much more than the typical controls have offered.

While it may be unsafe, it's common, and we're not seeing horrendous numbers of snags happening. Terry Schumacher told me he's aware of at least 4 saves due to nylon screws on ringsights, however, and the number of people that have had neck issues due to side mounts is pretty high. A few hundred deployments with an offset weight isn't healthy, IMO (I'm not a doctor, but this forum is filled with sore neck/sidemount posts). Even with the recessed mount for the HC series, it seems to stick out pretty far, and only appears to minimize the impact of riser slap rather than being far enough in to actually avoid it. It makes me shake my head though, seeing helmets designed for cameras that are already discontinued, or will be discontinued shortly.

I'll bet I was at one of those shows. Panties all over the stage? Fowler Bros? Ike Willis? Ike was living in SLC for a while, now back in Portland. Walt/Tom/Bruce are in SLC a lot, even tho their dad retired (professor of music at U of U). Zoot Allure Sheik Yerbouti Joe's Garage are all in my mp3 player. Had the strange coincidence of being next to a very nasty big Jewish princess on a flight from DC a month ago, and the random sequence in my player brought up "Jewish Princess." I laughed for at least 10 minutes on that flight.

You're not. Me for one, and Slotperfect for another.

Do you believe 1080 only comes in interlaced flavors?