DSE

You can half-ass author HD DVD with a Mac, just be prepped for a lot of headache and $$. Burning BD from a Mac is very easy, in fact, I'm teaching this today in Tel Aviv if you want to join me.

And your point is? Hysterical is hysterical regardless of the cause. Hysterical and weapons often don't mix.

There are several "prosumer" cams that do NTSC and PAL, but no small format DV cams that do both AFAIK. HD has no "NTSC" or "PAL" designates, although some manufacturers mistakenly identify the streams as such. The *only* difference in "NTSC" and "PAL" HD is the framerate. No frame size, no color space, nada.

If I wear my CX7, it mounts to a rather unconventional Bogen plate, which is the same plate found on my cheap tripods, since I have a dozen or more sleds. I don't recommend it, however. Mounting one of the HD camcorders on a sidemount helmet is a little tougher, they're kinda wide. The CX7 isn't as wide as its HDV counterparts. I haven't jumped the Cookie helmet, for some reason they're not keen on sending out review models like other manufacturers do, but their products are top-notch, and Jason is great about customer service.

PAL -- Phase Altermating Line NTSC -- National Television System Committee Does that help? ) And all these years I thought PAL="Picture At Last" and NTSC="Never Twice Same Color." Seriously, you got it exactly right. To add, the colorspace/sampling is different, so PAL ends up being oversaturated when converted to NTSC. PAL to NTSC conversion is actually very, very good these days, and NTSC conversion to PAL is reasonably good. But if you can avoid conversion, you're better off, because while most PAL systems can play NTSC, most NTSC systems will not display PAL. One of the benefits of HD is that there no longer are two color sampling schemes, no longer are there two resolutions, just different frame rates and all HD displays can display a 25p or 50i stream just as readily as it can display a 24p, 30p, 60i, or 60p stream.

Michael, if you have a reasonably fast computer (quad core), AVCHD (The format the CX7 produces) is easy to edit. If you have a slower, older computer (single core) then AVCHD is painful to edit. HD is a much better image quality even when downsampled only to SD. But it's more costly for the camera, although it's also more future-looking. At the moment, you'll not find a more lightweight camera package, that's for certain.

Signing the citation is the officer's evidence that the citation was delivered. Hence the reason that you aren't admitting nor denying guilt. Kinda like being required to sign for a FedEx package or UPS package. You're not acknowledging the package was delivered without breakage, you're not warranting that what's in the package is what was shipped or that you are aware of the contents. All you're doing is saying you've received it. I believe a court of law will uphold this opinion. Whether they'll uphold the officers response...that's another story.

Tehre's a better one, if I wasn't on dialup, I'd find it for you. Now you know why they call that area in front of the cop's car, the "Kill Zone."

In many cases, wrong. In many cases, yes I am. Standard advice for motorists who break down on motorways is (if it is possible) to get out of the car and move as far away from the road way as possible. Cars sitting on the hard shoulder get hit all the time. People standing well off the side of the road, not so much. Duh. reply] So in the UK, when a car breaks down on the side of the road, there is always a car with flashing lights parked behind it? And people STILL hit the drivers car "all the time?" BTW, on that road (which I've driven at least 100 times in the past 5 years) there is no place to go. The sides of the road are very high dirt embankments. I realize you may not be familiar with that sort of highway in the UK, you guys don't have big mountains like we do in this area.

Do a Google search for: "what to do" traffic stop Every link I followed from the results said: Stay in the car. I did, and guess what, the very first result I looked at said you should stay in your vehicle because (guess what) officers are afraid of being shot. what d'ya think DSE? BTW, so did the next. However, if we continue to take DSE's assertions at face value (recap - officers are in more danger, both from being shot and from traffic, when the motorist remains in the vehicle) then why on earth would it be 'common sense' for the motorist to stay in the vehicle with the cop standing in the road? Cop and motorist both out of the car and as far off the side of the road as possible would make far more sense in a lot of scenarios - if, of course, the cop wasn't afraid of being shot. Duh. Citizens see it one way, municipalities see it another. A-Stay in car, because it's safer for driver. B-Stay in car, because police officer wants you to. C-Stay in car, because municipality insurance won't cover them if you get out of the car and are hit by another vehicle. D-Stay in car, because it's simply sensible. Officer is always exposed to traffic. Is it not more dangerous for him? Officer can't see what's under your seat or in your glove box. Is it not more dangerous for him? Officer doesn't know your state of mind. Is it not more dangerous for him? Officer is trained to be wary of everyone on traffic stop. Most Americans are sensible enough to know how to behave in a traffic stop. Are you suggesting the driver is less safe remaining in his vehicle, given the extremely close proximity to high speed traffic that we have in the USA? Think about the differences in your traffic and ours. Logic prevails; the driver is significantly more safe in their vehicle than out side of it. The officer is the one at greatest risk no matter how you slice it. Either way, we're off track. I don't think anyone supports the officer's actions, but I also dont' think anyone would accept the claimed superiority of police in the UK over police in the USA.

Amen BTW, it's "Flaccid", and not "Flacid." Umm...no. Actually, people are asked to remain in their vehicles at roadside so that their safety isn't in jeopardy by the other cars on the road. Has nothing to do with whether the cop is afraid of being shot or not. In fact, remaining in the vehicle is potentially more dangerous for the police officer, because he can't see through the doors (and sometimes the windows) of the vehicle he's pulled over. It's an insurance requirement of most if not all, municipalities. It's also common sense.

Nope, i can't. Whether in the UK, USA, or Timbuktoo, a hysterical, screaming person jumping out of a car in an already escalated situation equals threat. In those situations, *everyone* is a threat. That's how police are trained, even in the UK. I don't believe it's an acceptable situation if she had been shot, but it is acceptable for the officer to deem her a potential threat.

It really, really, really says something about the culture that you live in that a hysterical, visibly pregnant woman is lucky not to get shot by an officer of the law for having the temerity to get out of her car! That is not an acceptable state of affairs, m'kay. A visibly pregnant hysterical woman is just as likely (if not more likely) to shoot an officer that has just tased her husband. She was hysterical, screaming, and for all anyone knows, she had access to a weapon. In that part of the state, it's the rule, not the exception. What isn't an acceptable state of affairs is a hysterical woman getting out of her car after being ordered to stay in the vehicle, mm'kay?

When it comes to air travel, everything American is bad, but most other countries have it right, IMO.

Doug Park (Team Fastrax) bought the company.

I couldn't agree more. The stupid wife in this video is lucky she didn't get shot while the officer was trying to keep the situation under control. She got out of the vehicle what...2 times? Additionally, the guy didn't put his car into park, he had it in reverse. I don't agree with the use of the taser, but I can see how the officer was fearful he was losing control of the situation. The guy walked off, he was belligerent, he had his hand hidden, his car was still running. Contrary to someone saying the officer turned his back on the guy, watch the video again. The officer never turned his back, and clearly has his eyes on the driver even when putting the clipboard down on the car. The officer is *not* required to read you your rights in a traffic stop, nor if you're being taken to jail, unless there are additional circumstances. The officer overreacted, IMO, but the driver was an asshole, and continued to be an asshole the entire time, disobeying the officer at every point. Several of my family members are in law enforcement, one of them has been non-fatally shot, and I'm proud of what they do. Being a cop isn't easy. Judgement calls in very difficult situations can be the wrong ones, not much different from the ones we make in terms of decision time. Sometimes, they're gonna screw up. Guaranteed. Just like some of us do from time to time. Wishing a horrible death on an officer due to a questionable action is asinine, IMO.

I'm sure no one will accept this context, but; The officer obviously overreacted. However, not long before the time this stop occurred, another officer had been shot and killed along that same stretch of road. The area is an area filled with right-wing fundamentalists, most of whom not only are armed, but often carry weapons in plain view. The area is also on the fringe of the Duchesne reservation where "moonshine" runners buy alcohol outside the area and run it into the reservation to sell are common, and have attacked officers in the past. Not justifying the officers actions, but I do understand why he was edgy. He expected a level of compliance and the guy was an asshole. I'm guessing that given the attitude presented, the officer felt that a straightforward arrest wasn't going to happen, yet he's in an extremely remote area where backup is not an option. Additionally Utah allegedly uses the least/lowest power available for tasering, and obviously it didn't really do much to this guy, he's talking immediately after he hit the ground. Dunno if the context alters any perspectives or not...

it's available in SD only because of the GOP structure of MPEG. HD camcorders have a different issue. Playback requires no buffering for slomo. Recording requires a large buffer for recording slomo. Most HD camcorders split resolution in half for good slomo.

Our method is similar to AFFI's, we teach flat turns, no 90's below 1000 feet, and as a backstop to the "telling" process, we walk them out to the 1000 foot flag, walk them to the 600' flag, and from there, have them walk through the turn from base to final, hands in position and calling out numbers. In other words, they walk their downwind, base, final before the FJC is over. Students aren't aware they'll have a radio when they're in the classroom. We don't say anything about the radio until they're suiting up for the first jump. We don't want them relying on the radio at all for all the reasons mentioned above. Following all that up with teaching the student that they are under their own command is pretty important, IMO. I once saw a student completely ignore the radio, turned to base long after the AFFI told him to make his turn, and he ended up hitting a radio antenna. Despite ignoring the radio, he also didn't use his own judgement. He was also on his 6th solo, so he should have been capable of figuring it out regardless. Fortunate to have only broken an arm.

No one in this thread said anything about zip-tying *handles.* PanicButton specifically mentions using colored zip ties on the *bags.* I do the same thing whether it's skydiving gear or camera gear. I route my chest strap around my handles, which makes it very difficult to unintentionally pull anything.

Which post makes fun of you? In this vid the baglock stands him up. So does this one. More importantly, does it matter? I'd sure hate for the last thing to go through your mind to be "The folks on DZ.com were right/wrong!"

If you have 1500 (or more) jumps and were chatting with a 200 jump newbie strapping on a camera, what advice, caution, etc would you give them? Additionally, if you were to sit down with a 50 jump newbie looking forward to strapping on a camera, what would you recommend they do in order to prepare for flying with a camera? Personal anecdotes are appreciated.

One couldn't use a DVD-format camcorder in a Stearman anyway, unless willing to invest a lot of $$ into a shock mount. That airframe vibrates too much to ask the laser assembly to manage constant vibration. DVD cams can usually buffer up to 15 seconds of vibration, then the bit-bucket fills to overflow and the picture goes to hell.

The $200,000.00 camera was being carried on, and was in a very nice Petrol bag. Carry-on only assures that you're able to witness the damage as it's being done, nothing more.

Have you actually had to pull your canopy out of the bag? Or are you referring to pulling the D-bag out of the container? I'm wondering what kind of puzzled looks you'd get from the average passer-by while repacking a parachute by the security screening area of an airport terminal. I'm pretty sure she's referring to pulling the rig out of a gear bag, not pulling the Dbag out of the rig. But you have the repacking concept down. They could ask me all day long to leave the secure area (where I'd be repacking) and I wouldn't go. TSA rules say that the passenger is allowed to stay in the secure area until they've got all their belongings repackaged and personal items about them. I don't leave the secure area ever, until I've got everything where it was prior to entering the secure area. Having had a very expensive and valued heirloom stolen at McCarran/Vegas airport during a shift change, I'm pretty paranoid now. Coincidentally, a broadcast community to which I belong, has a nearly identical thread happening right now, regarding TSA damage to a 200,000.00 camera and lens assembly.