DSE

Yes, reusing/viewing/previewing a tape often enough has the same effect. Metal oxide particles are bonded to a thin plastic ribbon, and bending that at moderately high speed over and over, will cause particles to flake or distort. That said, as long as the tapes are kept in a cool, dry area, they'll shelf for many, many years, and playing them on occasion isn't a bad thing. On our side of the fence, we archive everything to HDD, as HDD's are cheap these days. Every project gets its own HDD, and for general skydiving, I've got a 500GB drive used only for skydiving stuff. Tapes are shelved, but I can call up the BlueSkies drive on the SAN at any time, thus saving wear/tear on tape, and having to sort through lots of skydiving tape. Plus, my NLE has a fabulous Media Manager in it, so I can sort/recall all my skydiving clips in the snap of a finger based on dates, keywords, length, location, whatever...

WOW! People like that exist at DZ's? Your lucky if you know them! If you don't have at least a few, and probably several of "this guy" at your DZ, you might look at changing DZ's. Every DZ has the arrogant skygod that thinks his crap doesn't stink and he's so busy preening and asking "didja see me land that one?," but for every one of him, there's at least half a dozen as-good or nearly as-good skydivers that will help you as much as you need help. Buy em' a beer, buy them a slot, or bring them a bottle of wine (once in a great while) if they help you out over the course of time.

Tell me this, Spot (I really don't know the answer). I hear a lot that DV tapes should not be re-recorded, and after many many viewings that the data can degrade. I understand the signal is digital, but was thinking if the claim is true, maybe it is because of the physical tape construct being much more susceptible to degradation over time than a more rigid magnetic disk. Do magnetic DV tapes actually exhibit "analog-like" behavior, as I've been told so many times? I'd really like to know the truth here. Thanks. DV tape (or any taape-based digital media) should not be reused because the quality degrades like analog tape does, but rather as a result of the metal particles flaking or being desensitized. Dropouts occur, and/or error track functionality will diminish. So, you don't see a "poorer quality" picture, but you'll see dropouts. Sometimes, the segments being dropped out are miniscule and various NLE's or decoders will attempt to fill the dropout with frame information based on surrounding pixel content, which some people might associate with degradation that resembles analog behavior, but it's not the same thing at all. I reuse tapes in the studio for testing purposes, but would never use anything but the best quality, newly opened and depacked tape for critical projects.

This is not true; it's a web-myth. If you merely open and close the file, *nothing* is done to the file. If you open, edit at all, and save, even at same project/resolution settings, then of course it is degraded; all compression formats degrade with each recompression. http://www.michaelfurtman.com/jpeg_myths.htm http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/formatsjpeg/a/jpegmythsfacts.htm http://www.imaging-resource.com/ARTS/JPEG/JPEG.HTM This is a commonly held myth, but it's simply not so. Put into a different realm; many of the older high end video systems used MJPEG compression for motion video, some still do. Were this myth so, every time you open a video file using the MJPEG codec to watch it, the quality would degrade. It's just bits. Bits don't change unless they're edited. Every time you open/edit/save a jpeg/jpg, it's degraded, that's absolutely true. But merely opening in your favorite image viewer to look at the image doesn't do anything to it. Try it yourself. Open a copy of an image, put it to the side of your desktop. Now open another copy in your favorite viewer, close, open, close, etc. If you're really bored, do it a couple hundred times. You'll see pixel for pixel, the image opened 200 times is identical to the image you held off to the side as an original. On the video side of things, we hear this myth a lot. Shocking though, to hear that a publisher doesn't have Photoshop or other PSD ability? How do they manage comps?

Anyone heard from Royal/Max yet? I ordered a lens with priority shipping 10 days ago, still haven't seen it, but card has been charged. No response to email and no answer at phone. I did get a confirmation email after the order. Past experiences have been very good, maybe the holidays have them choked up?

I wish too, that DPI would just go away and that PPI would take over (pixels per inch) for sensor size values only, or that overall resolution would just be mentioned along with sensor size. Great post, Laszlo!

True or not....come visit Utah. We have every weird sex law there is. And a few that go well past weird...

My 210 Silhouette. Custom colors Next one will be Sil 190 currently being custom done by PD with my logo in the middle. But its not white... My new reserve is white with a red cross in the middle of the bottom skin.

That's exactly what I was looking for...thanks for the point!

Has anyone ever seen pants-only with booties? Would I be better off just getting tracking pants as opposed to trying to have pants custom made with booties? There are times where I just can't seem to get the speed on to get across the sky the way I want/should.

http://www.seirus.com/catalog/06-07%20seirus%20catalog.pdf, check out the All Weather glove. Very nice, thin enough, but warm enough. $30.00 at REI

You might want to check out the custom micromics that Darren at Giant Squid manufactures. They sound incredible and are very small. But...like any other mic input to the HC 3, it requires some modding of the HC3 external mic housing.

The AVCHD format to static RAM does offer some interesting opportunities, but beware that at the moment, nothing can edit native AVCHD, and the processor horsepower is roughly 4 times the fastest existing system available to day. However, CineForm, Sony, and a couple small upstarts have already announced HDI's for AVCHD. AVCHD will eventually become the new DV in it's own way, but we're still a ways off. CES in 3 weeks will have some additional interesting announcements around HD-acquisition from a variety of manufacturers. Sony has 3 AVCHD camcorders out now, I've got an SR1 that we use for baselining, and if Sony would agree to pay for any damage, I'd jump it more. I've jumped it 5-6 times, but concerned about the HDD.

Thanks for that link. I was unaware of this product. Just ordered one for myself.

Sony still builds cams with LANC port, only certain, lower end models don't carry them due to licensing costs. Yes, the larger CCD makes a significant difference once you get larger than 1/6, but from 1/6 to 1/5, you'll not notice a huge diff, not with the light we have available for skydiving. But...the more pixels, the cleaner the image can be. You can't find a 100 series cam anywhere to give you a LANC?

I bought an Xti based on Phree's recommendations and the recommendations of others here (bought used from a fellow skydiver) and haven't regretted it one bit. The stock lens is *OK* for jumping, but sucks for any other kind of use, however. Based on ltdiver's recommendations, I went on the hunt for better glass and found Lseries glass dirt-cheap (by comparison) when we were in Malaysia, so bought a couple of lenses, one prime and one zoom. They are heavy, but well worth it.

I prefer this model.More power, and definitely longer reach

One of those mileage will vary scenarios. I did my AFF jumps on an Eclipse. Coupled with a PD300 or 265, it produced a rather constant stream of bad bruises on the arms and legs. Never again, not even for a custom job. Which, of course, is pretty much impossible to get now. Wow! Your experience with the Eclipse is exactly opposite of mine. Where I did my AFF, they only had Dolphin rigs, and I practically needed oven mitts on my legs and shoulders. First time I put on an Eclipse, it was heaven. So much so that even though they're out of business, I looked pretty hard to find a used one in good condition for my second rig. Very comfortable, very nice (for me). Both my local riggers and the riggers at Perris have been of great service in terms of modifying the rig.

The HC3 is currently the only side-mountable cam Sony currently has, and it's a far cry from the A1 that you've already got. Let's hope for something new at this year's CES show, Jan 8-11. I'd like to say more, but they'd have to kill me if I did. But...CES will have some killer lower cost, non HDD HD cams to announce.

I'd seriously consider that you look into HD of some sort, such as HDV, given that even though the cam is for fun, you'll likely be viewing it in the future on an HD monitor. I'm a bit of a snob, but SD on an HD monitor is worse than just "bad" but terrible. There are only a couple camcorders that fit the profile, but HD is coming on hard. However, there are also lots of used DV cams out there for short term. All that said, with CES only 4 weeks away, if "momma" can wait for a few weeks to see what's new, you might just want to wait. This is the year of several small HD camcorders being announced; I know of at least one CF-based HD camcorder coming.

Lazlo, the HC3 uses the Active Intelligent Shoe, which is really sweet for consumers that aren't producing anything really worth looking at, but for people looking to "produce" vid vs shooting pix of uncle Albert and his amazing suspenders...the AIS is incredibly stupid. Nothing can connect to it except Sony's junky consumer mics. On a different side of the question, a guy on DVInfo.net has come up with a working hack to buy an AIS microphone and plug XLRs into it. Bear in mind though, you have zero level control, and you're limited by the built in limiter/gain system.

Nah, Bill...apparently you don't get it. If there is an aircraft emergency, the logic of this thread dictates that: The pilot doesn't get paid (it's probably his fault, right?) Any wear incurred on the aircraft shouldn't matter, because the aircraft obviously didn't accomplish its designed purpose, therefore wear and tear cannot be counted. Fuel? Hell, it had to use fuel coming down as well as going up, and if the emergency was bad enough, a competent pilot would have cut off the fuel, so fuel costs don't matter either. I like to bill the DZ for busy loads when we've flown halfway around the world to get on a load, but can't because of 8 way teams keeping the planes loaded up. In case you missed the tongue sticking out of my cheek... shit happens, gang. Deal with it. Dropzones are a business, but show me one DZO getting rich in this business (Skyride nonsense discluded) vs DZO's that are in the game because they love it, want to be around it, and even get to jump occasionally. If shit happens and we happen to be there, do we help out as best we can or do we bitch about $20.00? I've easily spent 20 times that over the summer buying lunch for the entire DZ on a given weekend just because it helps keep us in the air, and it's fun to do. Yes, my choice, no one asked me to. Guess what? On an occasion or three, the appreciative DZO has handed me a jumpticket and I was grateful for it. But never expected it. whine and the world is full of whiners. Smile, the world is full of happy people. It's all in your perspective. shut up and jump.

you're right, pixels are different dims. However, for purposes of broadcast measurement, we refer to a 72 dpi benchmark (although dpi has no value in actual resolution) Did you prove me wrong? Nope, you just applied a perspective that is marketing based, rather than reality based. Similar to how Panasonic claims 1920 x 1080 resolution from their HVX camcorders, stemming from a 960 x 540 imager. Ignorant buyers of the camera think they're getting one thing, but those that work with it understand what's taking place. It's all in what's displayed, and what's recorded that matters. Not in what is potential. Native pixel count from point to point is what matters, not what they're contained in.

It is *not* a 1080p panel. Physically impossible. It can display a 1080 signal, but that doesn't give it the requisite 1920 x 1080 pixels in a horizontal/vertical measurement. Somwwhere, those pixels are rescaled up or down. Video resolves at a rate of 72dpi in terms of how the image is "drawn" or measured on a plasma or LCD panel. Do the math. I cover this topic at length in my HD book; "HDV: What You NEED to Know". 1080 HD is broadcast in a non-square pixel aspect ratio of 1.333. That image in native format, requires a native display size of 59.6" for native pixel display, no horizontal or vertical compensation. It requires a display size of 51.6" if based on horizontal resolution-only, and a whopping size of 68.8" if you're basing on vertical resolution of the format. 720p is broadcast and displayed as square pixels-only, and has a fixed size of 46" for native display. Anything outside of those four size parameters is scaled at some level. Any of those sizes can accept either a 720p or 1080i/p signal, but will scale one or the other accordingly. DVI isn't the same as HDMI, HDMI has a scalable protocol which DVI doesn't have. We're now in the third protocol of HDMI. HDMI can carry a higher voltage level and instruction set that DVI cannot carry. However, due to backwards compatibiliy, HDMI can easily be converted to DVI via a small converter plug. Converting DVI to HDMI doesn't give you the addiitonal benefits (or detriments) of HDMI, but it is still convertible/compatible. On the semi-professional broadcast side, HDMI is replacing HD/SDI as the transport medium, which makes HDMI even more development-dependent even though it's carrying an 8 bit stream in a 10 bit package (the last 2 bits are set to zero). Back to topic, the quality of the display is of course, very important. More important, is the quality of the scaler built into the display. If it's poor quality, when it accepts a 1080i/p signal and downverts/scales to display size, it may or may not look great. Conversely, 720p is upscaled on displays larger than 46", and depending on the scaler, it may or may not look great. There are simple algorithms and complex algorithms used in scaling both up and down, and cost is a significant factor in which is chosen for various displays by manufacturers. Sony SXRD is incredible, Polaroid displays of equal dims are not. Price diff? About $1500.00. Sony is losing bucks, according to most industry commentators, by putting BD in the PS3 to continue to batten down the hatches of BD vs HD-DVD, and it's a smart move, because it makes the PS3 the most affordable and accessible DVD display device with true 1080i/p output, and doesn't require the tech geek to have multiple boxes for game playing and DVD viewing. When you are looking at displays in the store: Be sure you're seeing 720p or 1080i/p content on the display, or that the salesperson can tell you what you're looking at. Consider investing 24.99 in your favorite DVD in BD format, and taking it to the store with you so you have a baseline to establish when viewing. Find a few critical scenes with high contrast/high motion to look at on each display. Find out if the display accepts: HDMI Component DVI Firewire/USB2 is a plus, but not a necessity. Accepting camera mem cards ie; SD/QD/CF cards is a plus too. Hopefully the device accepts more than one HDMI input. Imagine unplugging your DVD player each time you want to view video from your 1080 HDMI camcorder that you'll likely eventually own. Sony has 5 units with HDMI on them; Panasonic has 2, JVC has 4, and Canon has 1. It will become more common, so it's just as easy to have 2 HDMI inputs so you're not decoupling/reconnecting your DVD player. If you live above 5k MSL, be sure that the display has a solid warranty if you're buying plasma. Plasma burns out faster at high altitudes. They're also significantly noisier. There are specific models made for high altitude use, BTW.

Absolutely. BD was chosen by virtually all manufacturers because it's the long-term solution. It's also standard on PS3, and has a higher flexibility than does HD-DVD. HD-DVD wouldn't even exist if Bill Gates didn't have a personal issue with Sony, and if Microsoft hadn't signed on with Toshiba. Even Toshiba is making BD devices. Pioneer's VP of marketing had a great line..."We're sticking with BD, because we needed to make an investment in the future, not an investment on what can come to market first." Consider that BD can hold up to (so far) 7 layers, giving it a total capacity of over 200GB of storage at seek times of 70ms or faster. HD-DVD can't touch that in it's most wild aspirations. If it weren't for HDCP issues, we'd see BD as the standard already, but even that said, there are more BD movies available right now, today, than there are HD-DVD movies. Add to that the fact that Sony, Time-Warner own most of the media in the world, and they're both the big proponents of BD, they're likely not going to license their content to HD-DVD, so they've got a serious market control. Next, consider that there are several BD desktop burners available now, but no HD-DVD burners that are accessible to content creators. There are several BD authoring solutions ranging from $88.00 to $50K available as well. It was a tough decision for our post-house, because HD-DVD is here, now, ready to rock in almost all aspects except for the desktop burner, which we don't care much about. We've been sending in DLT masters for years anyway. But...BD is (to the insiders of the industry) the winner of this ridiculous circus that many of us experienced back in the days of VHS vs Beta, 1630 vs CD, 44.1 vs 48k audio, CD+R, CD-R, DVD+R, DVD-R. Of course, we *could* be wrong....I was wrong about DVD+R....But that wasn't an expensive mistake. BD authoring at the professional end is. God, did I really type all that?