CameraGeek

Cessna 140 Cessna 182 Cessna 206 Cessna 207 Cessna Caravan Cessna 411 Piper Navajo DC-3 (a bunch of them -- at least 12 different ones) C-130, several variants Twin Otter (super, standard, 200 and 300 series) Beech 18 "Twin Beech" Hot Air Balloon Skyvan CASA Islander Pilatus Porter Helio Stallion (!!) Westwind III Turbine Twin Beech Beech King Air A90, and 200 Beech Queen Air Beech Twin Bonanza Bushmaster Tri Motor Caribou Bell Jet Ranger CH-47 CH-53 CH-56 (?) Bell 422 Super Connie Boeing 727 Robbie Culver

Chicagoland Skydiving - formerly Phoenix Skydiving, The Hinckley Parachute Center....Hinckley IL Possibly early 1968 depending on when you call it http://www.skydreams.net/history.html for some Chicago Skydiving History. Corrections and additions ALWAYS welcome Robbie Culver

WAY TO GO LADIES! Congratulations Lisa and of course my ruvery wife Brenda. Way to go each and every one of you - it sure was a tough journey, but look at you now! WORLD RECORD HOLDERS! YAHOOOOOOOO! Robbie Culver

Word from my wife was they're OH SO CLOSE in Perris Valley...one more dirt diving on the web cam as I type - think record everyone! Sending them good vibes and record thoughts - GO LADIES!

go girlies! Get that record. And thanks to Perris for even HAVING the web cam. Of course - it DOES need a cleaning.... Robbie

it's the CamRL and actually it's very cool - I have used it and am in the process of converting my setup to it full time. The camera trip switch can be wired separately and you can protect the switch for the video so its not bumped. Advantage I found is that *every* time you trigger the still camera an LED indicator flashes so you KNOW you got the shot. It offers the identical features of a Cam Eye II which I used until now. I like the new toy (okay - not so new, but this is the first time I got a chance to set it up) Also - if you have any remote mounted cameras on an aircraft this is ideal for triggering them. Robbie Culver camerageek at earthlink dot net

Okay - its there! I just got off the phone with a good friend in manifest at the WFFC - the C-130 is there, flying loads. It will be there through the end of the day Thursday. Folks - if you have a chance - go jump the Hercules! Its a RARE (!!!!) chance and an awesome experience - it rivals the jet. I mean that! In 17 years I have had exactly TWO opportunites to jump a C-130 - they are not around for 'public consumption' often! Funny - the front page of freefall dot com no longer mentions the jet, either....??? Robbie Culver

I look forward to reading some of your writing in our sports magazines one day Michele - you have a natural "voice" for this! PLEASE - keep writing and send some of it in!!! Robbie Culver

First, congratulations on surviving. Second That's Robbie knocking you upside the noggin' because I hate cleaning up messes. PLEASE don't do that again! Take all the advice you get here - but especially go slowly my friend! If you just began flying a camera I do not care how many jumps you have - you don't have many with a camera. Flying on your back at breakoff...?? Um, don't take this the wrong way my friend, but WHAT WERE YOU THINKING? Okay. Sorry. Your post implied this was not a one-time thing. If it was not, don't forget the lessons - and don't repeat the errors. You don't want to be upside down, low, wearing a camera helmet you don't feel used to yet. As for the ring sight and chin cup - you probably do not need a ring sight at first, but the chin cup is a good idea. Several reasons - you name them. Security, stability, and actually its more comfortable. Please - find a camera flyer with some experience and have him look over your stuff with you for snag points or problems. Even if they charge you - I hope they don't - but it may save you money, or quite possibly your life. Camera flying is a lot to do in an already fast-paced environment. Don't be in a hurry to make it more complex than it already is - but welcome to the flock! Its fun..when it goes well. :-) Robbie I Did my first camera jumps this weekend with my side mounted JVC on a invertigo x helmet. I have not swapped my ditter from my other helmet although i will before i jump again. On most of the jumps i tried to film everyone opening while tracking away on my back and being so engrossed in trying to get a good shot i lost height awareness and ended up low. On the last jump i deployed at 1500ft hanging in my harness at 1000ft (oh shit) wont do that again. Anyway to the point I will be mainly using it for freeflying and would like to get a few opinions on ringsights. Should i be using one ? Or should i just get use to the helmet without it ? Most the freeflyers at my dz don't use one. Also i do not have a chin cup and would like to know a couple of things about them. Are they just for security (to hold helmet on) or do they stop camera shake (from helmet moving)as well. I know this has been brought up before but i cant seem to get my answer through searching the forum. Any opinions appreciated.

Bravo niner Email me at camerageek@earthlink dot net I can probably help you out. Robbie Culver

I'd like to point out that there are times when its appropriate to comment publicly and there are times to let things be handled in less public forums. It's my personal opinion, but I think this is a good time to do a lot less public airing of laundry and vendettas and a lot more thinking on all of our parts. No, that is NOT directed at anyone or any post relfected here. Chris and John are expressing their beliefs as they can and should - others have their own to express. But maybe now and here is not appropriate for all of the discussion. I'd also add someone crossed a line - jumpers do not rat out their own. Terry Murray - I have known you since day one in the sport. You ratted us all out - every skydiver at every drop zone in America. Your vendetta has gone on far enough and it needs to stop and stop NOW Terry. Today. This instant. To all skydivers everywhere - be prepared for some unexpected results from this! Yes - you - at your drop zone. Personal issues on ANYONE'S part do not belong in a national newspaper - period. The article was what it was - a lot of things, but definitely no good for the sport as a whole. Robbie Culver disappointed camera geek

I have to agree with Quade and tell you that your deal with McGraw is a bad one. I had done an identical project for Discovery Books - they tried to have me give them the photos. I held out - and the payment covered a new canopy. My philosophy is simple - and often irritating to those who do not fork out the cash for the equipment. Want free photos? Find a free camera - or pay me (or someone else - doesn't bother me a bit). I realize that sounds like a lot of things - but in reality, its business, which is what it boils down to. I can no more afford to give you photos than I can afford to give any other publication photos - which they all want, for free - and since you're a photographer I have to admit I am stunned you ask for high quality images for free. Sorry - my work is worht more than that, and it took years for me to be able to say that and stick to it. No disrespect intended to anyone, but my advice to every single photographer is the same - charge for your work, give nothing away, insist on credit, and get mad when someone steals or uses your work without proper credit or payment. Anything else is selling yourself and every other freefall photographer short of what they earned. One last point -- you said : This is the very first time a major publisher has shown any interest in the skydiving market, and they do not anticipate much of a profit potential, thus there is no budget for photos. Sorry. That isn't my decision...it is McGraw-Hill That is not correct - not at all. Major publications and publishers have and do publish work on skydiving and do pay well. My project was for a textbook used in schools - I have seen others and know they paid well. There is profit potential there - they're just being cheap. Sorry - I stick with Quade - make them pay what its worth or don't help them a bit. Robbie Culver

If you can't find someone at LP, you're not looking! Its SMALL and WILD - and one of a kind. Wish I were going.... Its the best boogie going - but shhhh! Don't tell anyone! Robbie Culver Camera Geek

Hasselblad 500ELM with 50mm lens But I recommend the PENTAX 645. Robbie Culver

I agree with Sniper - LOOK AT THE HORIZON UNTIL THE CANOPY IS COMPLETELY OPEN AND FLYING! It's the safest way and the easiest on your body. My opinion, but I have 2000 camera jumps..... Robbie Culver

Wow! I am absolutley impressed. I've been doing this a while (camera flying) and writing about it a while - but I have to tell you, Quade - you just literally wrote the book. And did so very well. All you camera flyers out there - save this thread - its sage advice and its well-written and tought out. My 2 cents is minimal - I learned the trick of centering your camera ring sight on the Otter wheel - then when you exit (early, late, on time - whatever) its much easier to keep them in frame as they "fall into" the center of the frame easily. Wish I thought it up - I did not. But it works and works well. Robbie Culver Camera Geek

Quade is most correct - and I would add.... You said you're new to skydiving so you may not be aware that these systems do already exist and are in use. In fact, several are readily available in the sport. It comes down to cost, quality, and safety as previously mentioned. In essence, I can go buy a Sony Mini-DV, a pre-made camera helmet, and I am ready to shoot. Add a 1/4"/20 bolt to mount it and off I go. No wires, no connections, few complications. (Yeah, right!) And it is affordable, relatively speaking. The quality is good enough to use on TV and the equipment is easy to use. Simply put, using a lipstick type lens is a complex solution to a simple problem. HOWEVER - having said all that - you are correct in that they are unique, small, and can be used easily in odd locations - one was mounted on the door of a 727 jet used for jumping a couple of years ago and made for some stunning footage. Also there are things you can do with a camcorder (effects, etc) that are not easily done using the lipstick camera. And last - there do not seem to be any with firwire cables so they use an analog signal and lose the digital advantage. My 2 cents. Robbie Culver

Mariusz - what's your email? I am interested in your thoguhts on that camera... Robbie Culver

I have to make a point here. In fact, the first live air to ground was (and still is) an analog system designed by an unknown genius named Andrevideo (you pronounce his last name - I ain't touchin' it!). He lives in Milkwaukee, no one outside of the midwest typically knows him, but he invented it. (Of course, he also helped invent MRI...as in hospital's Magnetic Resonance Imaging) Any rate - he never patented the idea. But back in 1985 and 1986 I saw him sending live TV to his van at Skydive Sandwich - looooong before anyone else mastered it. It was - and is - an analog RF signal. Too many details to post, but it is slick. Robbie Culver

rculver at interaccess dot com Am I that hard to find? :-)

Josh I'm just about to try a Canon S30 3.2 Mega Pixel in a couple weeks - so far what we shoot on the ground is amazing. Does yours have a remote shutter release or did you rig it up like I am having to do? Robbie Culver

about that attached file....

Perfect explanation. I've played around with depth of field a lot in RW photography and every where I else I shoot. It adds a lot to any photo but in skydiving especially it can make a special moment even more unique by isolating the subject and basically removing the background from notice. To use depth of field you usually have to look at your lens to understand how to set it up. If you're lucky, along the top there will be some colored marks on either side of the place where the f-stop and focus cross. (Look at your lens or I'll lose you here!) Again - you have to look straight down at it with the lens pointing 90 degrees away so you see the focus ring and f-stop setting (manual focus cameras may be best for this). Okay - on each side there may be colored lines or "tick" marks evenly spaced out from the center - ON EACH SIDE of where you set the focus and the f-stop. Now - again, if you're very lucky - the numbers that correspond to the f-stop (i.e. 5.6, 8, 11, 16) may also correspoond to a color of those....tick marks I mentioned. If you have that, and follow me, all you have to do, is set the distance to the subject within those colored tick marks to be in focus. I use 1/500 at f 8.0 almost religiously. (ASA 100 Color Print) To use depth of field I just set the "infinity" focus mark OUTSIDE of the colored tick marks, and ensure that the distance from me to the formation is WITHIN the tick marks. You can do that. It works. If I didn't lose you then maybe just go shoot a roll in the backyard as described perfectly by the moderator. Play with the focus only for a few frames, then change the f-stop only for a few frames - shoot 24 exposures and you'll get the idea very quickly. Better yet - if you own a digital camera with manual controls, the same principal works. (Digital camcorder or still camera) I attached a small example of a photo I took in my backyard that is a great example of depth of field. Hope that made sense Robbie Culver