DSE

Fish doesn't do that as often here, we're at 4.5K, so a little thinner. He'll hook em' on occasion though. Had some great jumps with him today.

Some NLE applications can take advantage of certain types of processing (Open GL), although most don't. For DV and HDV, there is little benefit to worrying about a vid card; laptop components are generally fine. Overall, gaming needs more resources by far than a vid card. One of my very old machines is still running a pair of S3 vid cards! Bear in mind that off-the-shelf laptops are often not ready for editing serious vid without some changes under the hood. Most of them come so loaded with garbage apps that you'll want to spend half a day cleaning house, IMO.

Slow mo from these cams applies to all optical functions. The problems/challenges are two-fold, IMO. 1-The resolution simply sucks. But this is subjective. 2-The display is always delayed/buffered as it writes, which takes some getting used to. I do have some overcrank footage of aircraft approaches and some other stuff, but it was all shot XDCAM, which has gorgeous overcrank. But for SD delivery, this lil' cam ain't too bad. This review has some super slo-mo for download at the very bottom of the page. You can see the resolution for yourself. This is from the V1 camera, which is better than the HC3/5/7, but you'll get a very good idea of what's going on.

Ooh, another Mac vs PC argument. Lemme get some popcorn. Safari on my left hand, Firefox on my right, here I am, back in the middle again. Some older cams require the DV port to be enabled for in or out modes. Some don't allow for input/return at all. Dunno about the HC40.

Indeed. Hmm...hadn't considered that possibility. Let me think about it for a moment...... Nope, don't think so.

In one thread, one calls someone a bigot and it stands with no warning, but one pops up here? Same word, same forum, similar context, different response? I guess things are as I thought they were. [edited to add: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2886677;#2886677

Wow...longest runon sentence I think I've ever seen. I agree; currency doesn't mean how many jumps you've made that day. I did just over 400 jumps in a year, does that make me more or less current than the guy that's got 700 jumps in 7 years? That was my reference. Experience? Does the guy that has 100 RW jumps of one kind or another have more experience than the guy that has 400 solo jumps? I'm probably not qualified to answer that, either. Then I look at a guy like Jon Tagle that qualified for his AFF I in less than 8 months....is he more or less qualified than the guy that made his 6 hours of freefall in 4 years? Read the camera forum, you'll see I'm one of the folks that agrees there should be a rating for camera flyers. I don't know that I agree with a 500 jump number, but rather some fairly stringent in-air evaluations coupled with a written test. Flying a camera isn't as easy as so many think it is, and I don't see why there shouldn't be a testing/evaluating system that goes beyond the reach of a DZO or S&TA. FWIW, I'm actively involved in helping design a proposal for such a program. In other words, we're on the same side of the fence (I think), but for some reason, the answer to my question seems to be a hang-up. Diablopilot spelled out his opinion well, and I don't know that I could disagree with it. Your closing comment: People *with* jump numbers are a danger to situations in which they are not familiar. What do you do when you realize too late that you've fallen into the trapdoor of a Sigma and the TM is far beneath you? How do you train to escape a trapdoor of a Sigma vs a Strong? Is it a video briefing, is it a discussion? Is it reading horror stories on DZ.com? Or is it a smart ass comment like "I'll tell you when you've got more jumps?" (f@#@! you twice, J). Can you escape the trap if you're caught in it? Or do you train for it at all? Should camera operators have a special rating? They have nearly as much to think about before and during the skydive, plus they can be a second set of eyes for the TM in the event of a mal or potential mal, not to mention documenting less than ideal situations. Should they be trained to handle all of this? I think so.

I love the trend of smart-ass answers that don't relate to the question asked. Re-read my post. I didn't suggest how it "should be" but rather echoed comments about jump #s in my opinion. I asked a question, question still stands, smart ass answers aside. "How would UPT's enforcement affect small DZ's that follow a fairly common progression? Or would it? Many vidiots live for the day when they hit 501 jumps and their 3 years so they can become TMs and take off the camera helmet. Seems that enforcing a 500 jump requirement on UPT's part could affect business for a small DZ that doesn't have a vidiot with 500 jumps, because their vidiot became a TM when he hit 500. To answer your question about how many tandem students have been killed by freefall or deployment collisions? I don't know the correct number. Do you? I'm aware of two incidents with fatalities; I'm sure there are more. In both cases, the camera op (as I'm aware of) had at least 1000 jumps. The one non-fatal incident I personally witnessed, the camera flyer caught in the trapdoor had 10K jumps. Read carefully; I don't disagree with the jump # requirements, I'm asking what you think will happen if UPT and/or USPA begin to enforce those requirements.

Well...if it shaves off an hour a day or even less, for the manifestor, or allows the DZ to use one less person behind the counter, a quarter a jump is very cheap. I'd think a sliding scale might be more effective, but either way, it's possible it could save a DZ a lot of money. We recently went to an online res system for our tandems, and it rocks. It saves a tremendous amount of time.

Couldn't agree more. To toot my own, I spent a lot of time in the tunnel with good instructors, both in and out of my camera wings starting around jump 60. Still doing so when I can. Started lurking tandems at approx 100' around 100 jumps with approval of both DZO and TM. Started shooting not too long after that, given that the TMs were comfortable w/me, and had seen me not only with them as TM's, but with them on several 4-12 way jumps. There is a guy on a local DZ that has 700 jumps+ that no TM will allow in the air with them, not even lurking his friends taking their tandem. Most folks won't jump with him in RW, either. His progression hasn't been about RW or even being in the air with others. IMO, it's about currency, sensibility, currency, attitude, currency, experience. Jump #s seem to rarely relate to attitude, experience, or sensibility. Well...OK, some guys with high jump numbers seem to have a high attitude too. Since we didn't have RWS/UPT rigs when I started flying a camera, I guess I didn't need to worry. Back to topic. How would UPT's enforcement (if any) impact small DZs where the progression seems to be student, novice, coach, camera, AFF, TM? Will they seriously enforce this? Will USPA adopt a similar policy? Will Batman survive the fall?

You know...there was a link (I thought) in the upper right corner of their website. I guess I imagined it, because that's where I linked to as well, and it's obviously wrong. Perhaps Gordo can share the more specifics. If you'd like more pix, I can post em. I didn't want to appear to be bragging too much. It was a PIA I first tried it on, and damn, it felt good, so I ordered one on the spot, and so did another guy that was there with me. It took longer than normal, because RI hadn't worked out all the size templates yet, but from what I'm told, that is all done now (Should be, because mine is one of the larger sizes).

I'd brought this up earlier, along with someone else' post, but didn't think to bring it up again in my last post. I hadn't considered the Adventurize site to be suspect, until Stuart made the post above, where he said it's not active. By all appearances it is. Yet, Skydive4free is very actively and aggressively pursuing DZ's *now* and giving out the links that were posted earlier, yet it's "not done?" Moreover, the mere appearance of a "credibility" call to Jan makes me more suspicious, not less. Look, I don't mean to be beating up on skydive4free, but given the number of Skyride people we have show up at our DZ (at least 3-4 couples a month) plus the incomplete and less-than-candid information in this thread deserves dubiousness and wonder. If the story is good/clean, then out with it, so we can see it. Environmental charities are very different than children's charities, no doubt. Children's charities aren't the charity du jour, nor by comparison are they sensitive to who is giving them money. The only environmental charity I've worked on is "Save The Bay" and that was a bit of a challenge, no doubt.

Where I get tripped up: 1-Skydive4free.com claims "contracts with national charities." So far, no evidence of this exists. Rather, two small charities limited to San Diego, one of which is very questionable pop up on their website and in Stuart's post. 2-Skydive4free is contacting DZs to become "partner/subscribers." This is exactly how Skyride was started. What happens if they have no partners in your area? Do they create a website or offer a map that suggests they do? Or are they open that they don't have a DZ in your area? 3-Skydive4free endorses Skyride's services while decrying Skyride's practices on the web. That one endorsement and attitude alone is alarming. Moreover, they're inserting themselves into the business process when IMO, they're not welcome. Again, I'd *much* rather see USPA offer some sort of promotion, because then it's not a business model, it's a marketing model that we essentially already pay for. #1 is the big deal, IMO. #2....maybe they'll become Skyride, maybe not. I'd rather not find out. YOMV #3's meaning to you is determined by you own ethics/values/business acumen. I see it kinda like a "Skyride sucks, join our network because we suck less." No, it's not that tough to organize charitable events. I've done several both in and out of the skydiving world. I also don't begrudge anyone for being reasonably compensated for working with a charity if the time spent warrants it and it's a "job" vs a charitable act. But I'm not sure how that topic relates to this conversation. Hell, I'm still stuck on the "Murder, She Wrote" comment.

I havent seen that fool at the DZ is a while! Thanks. PS: Gordo, tiome to update the website... I couldnt find any info on the FX there You just gotta look harder Gordo hasn't been around cuz he's been too busy building my FX!

Gordo or one of the folks from RI would probably have a bigger list, but the FX is kinda like the best of a Voodoo and FS put together. The yoke is significantly narrower, so it rides more on the collarbone vs the shoulder (LOVE this for openings), the riser cover and main container flaps are one piece, it's narrower and rides higher on the back so it's more comfortable when bent over or sitting down on a bench seat, faster to close (not sure why), and the overall profile is much more streamlined. There are other differences, but these are the ones that come to mind immediately. I'm ordering another one and will sell my FS now that I've worn this one for a couple of weeks. FS is a nice container, I've owned an FS, Vector, an old Eclipse (which was very comfortable too), and been jumping a Voodoo V4 while waiting for my FX to arrive. Of all of em', this new FX is sweet. BTW, the backpad on those 100+ days? Well worth the small cost. It breathes nicely.

Thx, I like the colors as well, although I was a little nervous about putting tyedye with solid colors. Brenda Reid at RI was great about color help with "you sure you want to mix this color with that one?" She has a great sense for design, and walked me through all of the embroidery colors, piping colors, etc. She also convinced me that putting tyedye on the legstraps was a better idea than solid blue, simply because tyedye helps hide the dirt from less than optimal landings. One thing I love on the FX vs the Voodoo and Talon I've been jumping, the lateral cut is very comfortable, which surprised me.

I haven't tried triggering it via LANC, you know you need to set it up in the screen menu, right? A deployment in slowmo like that would definitely be sweet, even at half res or quarter res.

Never done it with stills, but have done it with video. Manfrotto makes a multiclamp that will anchor to a float bar. I didn't worry about damping vibration. The clamp has rubberized mounts, and the plate has rubber beneath it as well, absorbing a very small amount, but the footage was quite useful.

it's useless (IMO) on a skydive, it's quarter resolution when used at 12 seconds, and half resolution used at 3 seconds. Not too much to capture there.

That's what I thought, but the producer of the project we're doing in Vail swears they skydive "like right near here, dude."

What DZ options are within an hour of Vail, Colorado?

Price was south of 3K, with every option available. Stainless, backpad, custom tyedye, custom embroidery, cutaway. I'd have to look at the invoice for exact $$, and it's not within reach. Sandy measured me for the rig himself, and damned if it doesn't fit like he did. I bought my other Talon as a used container, and it's .5" different than this one.

He merely defends their business practices. What you know is what you're told. What I know is what I spent at least 8 hours researching based on Stuart's response to an earlier post. I've posted my findings. If there is a contract with *any* national organization, demonstrate as much. "Standupforkids.com" is not a national organization, not really. Nor is the Child Abuse Prevention Foundation. Both aer very small local charities, that don't demonstrate their activities on their websites. As said before, I think this program deserves healthy skepticism; obviously others agree. I know what I was "told" in the initial contact with skydive4free, and I know what Stuart has said here. I know what he said on the phone, and so far, I've seen zero proof of these "national contracts." If skydive4free is wanting dropzones to participate in their program, aren't they obligated to demonstrate the benefits they bring to the dropzone, the skydiving community, and the charitable organizations they claim to represent? So far all we've heard is: ~"We represent national organizations. Spend a few minutes on the web researching these "national organizations" and you'll immediately find they're only San Diego-strong with nothing happening elsewhere. Additionally, charity ratings services rate these charities as exceptionally low (not of value to the community). Lookee here ~No one has seen our finished website Fine, that happens with many businesses, but is it fair to be asking for participation for an unfinished program? ~Booking services work great in the UK. We're not in the UK, and I for one, don't like the idea of a booking service inserting themselves into my business, representing that they have a DZ partner in my area when they have none. ~Booking agencies provide valuable services Like Skyride? ~Our Adventurize.com website isn't functioning yet and won't be for a while ...then why is it heavily built out, looks to be functioning, and has a significantly greater amount of information and option than does the skydive4free.com website? It looks, feels, smells, and acts just like a Skyride website. As a booking agency coming into this industry, it's inevitable that they'll be compared to Skyride, which is the best-known booking agency in this industry, and one most skydivers seem to hate. Jan, I'm surprised that you'd appear to accept at face value, what you're "told" when there is plenty of evidence that what is being said isn't the complete story. I'm sure Stuart is a great guy, but that doesn't mean his organization is doing grea things. Google their "charities." Ask for proof that they have contracts with national organizations other than the two listed on their website. What does the contract entail? Is it merely "we'll put a link to your site on our site?" Or is it substantive? If they're playing in our industry, don't we have the right and responsibility to not help create another Skyride?

The Ozonefly glove is very interesting, I've gotten one of those, a Waycool, and a no-name from the US. Of the three I've got, I prefer the Ozonefly for comfort and build. I'm not a TM, however, I'm using it for many other activities (rock climbing cutaways, BMX, MotoX, and in one case, demolition derby cutaway). I've also gotten probably 20 jumps with it, and a TM here has about the same. It's by far the most adjustable of the gloves/wrist mounts I've seen. I can't comment on # of jumps, since I'm not a TM, but my assumption would be that you'd want a number of tandems under your belt before adding a cam to the mix, wouldn't you?

Rec'd my Talon FX a few days ago, damn...can't say enough good about this rig. I also own a Talon FS, sized about the same. The two rigs couldn't feel much more different. The padding, the cut, the different angle...all add up to a super comfortable container, even on those 110 degree days. Open nicely, packs easily. Thanks to Brenda, Sandy, Gordon, and the rest of the gang at Rigging Innovations for the awesome craftsmanship, attention to details, the custom work...I'm very happy with this new rig.