DSE

Those definitions died years ago. "Conservatives" traditionally opposed large and intrusive government, but conservatives currently support the most intrusive, secretive, most power hungry and the largest administration that ever existed. I know. Hence my "liberation" over the past decade and a half.

It's actually a conservative viewpoint to refuse to show government-issued identification to a police officer, not liberal. By definition, liberals want individuals to be less individual and more components of a collective. Not showing a receipt would fall into the same viewpoint of conservatism. That said, I've become pretty liberal in my older years, but have on many occasions refused to show "papers" to law enforcement (which has been a problem more than once). The bigger point, IMO, is that this guy wants to stand up for his rights. Lawfully or not, I feel respect for anyone wanting to protect their individual rights, property, etc. Hoping not to hijack here....but a man in our state may be charged with defending himself when a gang-banger shot at his house. He shot and killed the gangbanger. After the gangbanger shot at the man and his home, the man ran inside, grabbed a gun, ran back outside, and shot the gangbanger. There are several witnesses that say the guy did not have the weapon when the shooting began. So why is he being charged? Because he's a felon not legally able to use, possess, or have access to a weapon. Michael Righi is a folk hero of sorts, I hope he prevails. The store has a right to protect their assets/property. No argument from me. So put the register closer to the door, don't put merchandise in walkways post-register, and treat persons with respect, not as though they're thieves. I disagree with Righi regarding the license. The license would have shown his DOB, place of residence, and verified he was telling the truth with regard to his name. The officer would have allowed him to walk, and I believe he'd still have a valid legal complaint against Circuit City for unlawfully detaining him and treating him as though he were a criminal.

I see they have different boxes, but the point is, the boxes are the same excepting for the lens profile. They may have changed some small additional feature that I'm unaware of, but given that I have all three cams, have two HC3 boxes from Cookie and one from Bonehead, all cams are interchangeable in all boxes, once I cut 1/8" out of the lens opening of the Cookie box. I'd be surprised if they're using a different mold for this box, but they could have gone to that trouble. Look closely at the pictures and how the lens fits in. On the HC3 box there is quite a bit of extra carbon over top the lens. Look at the HC5, you'll see there isn't. That's the area that you need to Dremel/cut out 1/8". I also cut a good size opening out of the right side back of the Cookie box, as IMO, it's way too small to hit the on/off switch and record button when necessary.

The only significant difference between the HC3 and HC5/7 is the lens profile. Either you pad the top of the lid down, or cut 1/8" from the lens opening on the Cookie box. The Bonehead accepts either one, no issue at all. Dunno about Tonfly. I emailed them several months ago looking for information about what they've got going on, and didn't get a response, so I'm pretty ignorant of their products.

I guess I can't answer that. The box for the HC3,5, and 7 are identical. All the guys that I know have them, and have either Cookie's box or Bonehead's box. Other than a slightly different access...the end result is the same. Maybe someone else can comment on problems they're having with a box?

As long as the extension allows for the content...it should play. Surprise to many, an avi container may hold an mpeg file format.

http://www.paradisefx.com/pages/3D_viewer/index.html Not quite relevant to skydiving, but it is aerial camera. Check out the Niagra2K Test Flight In short 9x SI MINI cameras ala CircleVision recording to 9 Macbooks. All cameras synced and fitted with iris motors.

Sorry, should have been more clear. I meant exactly that. Had I dropped faster and backslid further, I could have had a similar angle to McGowans. I was focused too much on getting the 'over the top' dead center shot, but wasn't able to, given the short time formation. All in all, I'd have been much better off going for the lower angle anyway. I could have gotten in for more pre-deployment shots of the central subject, could have gotten better angles of the base as the others tracked off, etc. Thx for the input.

if it's topmounted, yes. Sidemount...no

I don't have a problem with getting as low as Deuce is in that shot, so long as I'm on the outside, and yes, that last shot helps me envision what I could have done differently. Had I dropped faster and back outside, I'd have gotten a better angle.

yes, of course I generally take center. However, this gal didn't have any pix of her deployment, so she dumped at 4K, taking the center for herself. That still left me plenty of room for vertical separation. Nope...no boobies. Sorry to disappoint. I'll post em' next time I see em'. Pic just looks weird to me. Would have been a much better shot had one of the positions not gone low and spent so much time fighting to get back up.

When I was over the center not everyone was in/one guy low. As we approached 6k, I backslid, intending to drop down to catch the deployment of one of the girls. By the time the low guy got in, I was too far back to comfortably return to the middle. Aside from the perspective, the angle is too extreme? I'm not comfortable getting down closer than around 25' above the formation. Any suggestions on how I could better have gotten this shot without going lower, or do I simply need to learn how to dig deeper into the formation? I could put on a longer focal length, but then I'd lose the speed, and this was fairly close to sundown.

actually I don’t believe 18 seconds was too long of a wait since that the proven physics says that FF's going out first followed by RW's causes dangerous close opening windows due to RW drift vs FF drift. If the time I extended to allow a safer separation caused the jumpers behind me to be a bit long on the spot then there should be a go around. no? Nope we were second out and jump run that entire day was ify. In fact 2 passes became the norm that day. I have an issue with this statement on a personal level. I believe its difficult to maintains others safety if your safety is compromised in doing so. However...In my life I have often been in situations where I have abandoned My safety to ensure others Safety. From doing Executive Protection, to Army service. to being in situations in real life b4 I was even trained to be a bullet Catcher where there has been gun fire and I without worrying about me have made sure that others were safe b4 taking action to secure my own safety. now the dilemma arises of do as I say not as I do.... LOL I have instructed others under my command that they should do the exact opposite of what it is I do, Have done , or will do in those types of situations. I accept the risks involved in those situations and if my life is the cost of others saving their lives then I'm comfortable with that. As far as finding Balance I do not have the answer to that but will always work towards learning and finding that balance. As far as the bit about If those guidelines are not sound and safe in my eyes then I guess it would be time for me to move on don’t you think? *Edited for Spelling and content*

Once I've released my PC, I begin to draw my knees forward. This assists in putting me into an upright position as the bag comes out and the canopy begins to open. If you throw your knees forward, it can put you towards your back, so you have to be careful and move slowly. After a couple of tries, you'll figure it out.

There are several carrying systems out there, and they're not cheep. What you've got in your pictures is incredibly clever and looks like it cost very little. Glad to hear you're finding the NLE faster as well. Hint for Movie Studio; Save title templates for faster assembly, and save a few music pieces in various templates for faster assembly.

Why not just take the VOB file to the Premiere timeline vs messing with the ISO?

Not even close. This is part of why the RED phenomenon is what it is. The closest camera in capability until about 1 year ago, carries a body cost of 190k, lenses not included. We shoot HDCAM 900, which has a complete package cost of around 150k. RED is unusual, and is a very unique camera kit. It does have some significant disadvantages, but it also has some sweet advantages. There is also the new Silicon Imaging 2K cam, which is a tad more practical and offers a significantly better software package. It's been shipping for about 4 months now. Either way, the cost of awesome cameras has been brought down due in great part to RED and the research the RED team/Jim Jannard of Oakley fame have brought to our industry.

That is just SICK. Looking forward to receiving our RED eventually. Been a long while since we placed our deposit.

Congrats to you! From your posts, it's obvious this has been very important and at the top of your priority list. Way to go, now you get to really get into it.

He won't get off easily. He won't be dealt with quickly, and it is entirely likely more charges will soon follow.

Good point, my apologies. I posted the poll based on my own small world and didn't consider the bigger picture. 4-ways, 8-ways, student jumps and tandems are all I have the opportunity to shoot. I'm not ready for CRW

What do you wear, and why do you choose to wear it, or not? Curiousity, and there will be a point to this poll at some near future point.

I've lent my Raynox out to a friend, but when I pick it up from him, I'll post some comparison pix. Noticeably better? On a small screen...barely. On a 40" or larger...yeah. You'll notice.

Very nice! Now if we could only jump the Twin Towers in the background (Petronas)...that would be something.

Depends on how you look at it. The Cookie lens resolves (I think, cuz they never sent us a lens to use in the lens shootout) at around 330-370 lines. Royal isn't a lot more than that. Raynox 5050 on the other hand, is nearly double that value. But... you're still shooting HD, so rather than having a soft image in a soft format like DV, you're getting a slightly softer image in HD than you would be if you'd have used no wide angle adapter at all. So, if you shoot DV on an HC3 with a Cookie (or other lens adapter) you'll have a soft image that is sweetly wide. If you shoot HDV on the same cam with the same lens, you'll have a sharper image, that would be sharper still if you have a better lens. How much lesser are you for using a softer lens? It's all a matter of perspective. If you are used to seeing DV, then you'll LOVE the look of HDV with a soft wide on it. If you're used to looking at HDV with no wide, then you'll probably notice the softer wide, but you'll also notice you're way ahead of the guys that are shooting DV with the same lens. Does that help? BTW, before someone posts that you can raise the sharpness on your HDV camcorder, DON'T do it. You'll only increase edge enhancement, and just like turning up an audio EQ in the very high frequencies, the picture becomes brittle and can fragment, and worse, you'll make the very edges you want to clean up, look aliased. Softer is generally better with HD, which is one of the reasons that although the Cookie/Waycool/Royal low profile lenses soften the image, it works pretty well. FWIW, for tandems and fun jumps, I use the Royal .5 or .3 and fly very close. For the "this really matters" or "want to capture stock footage" I jump with a larger cam, and very high end 800 line wide that weighs a lot. In other words, I'm pretty happy with the HC3/5/7 with a Royal. I just wish Max could figure out a 700 line, lo profile lens for less than $300.00.