May 2, 2009, 3:27 PM
Post #5 of 57
(2536 views)
Shortcut
Re: [clint] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Hey Clint, I haven't bought a glove for it yet, but I plan to use my CX-100 for handcam...overkill? I think not...ability to shoot video AND stills in a much smaller package than any PC model
The attached photo would be my version of overkill...
DSE (D 29060)
Moderator
May 2, 2009, 4:30 PM
Post #6 of 57
(2530 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Cyrus79] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Personally, I think you guys got it all wrong. Bellycams on students capture everything just fine, including deployment. No risk of instructor entanglement, hands-free... Pix coming soon.
billvon (D 16479)
Moderator
May 2, 2009, 7:25 PM
Post #7 of 57
(2518 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
> Bellycams on students capture everything just fine . . .
I made a few hundred jumps with a belly camera doing AFF. It was a decent learning tool - not as good as freeflown video but still better than nothing.
DSE (D 29060)
Moderator
May 2, 2009, 9:17 PM
Post #8 of 57
(2507 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
> Bellycams on students capture everything just fine . . .
I made a few hundred jumps with a belly camera doing AFF. It was a decent learning tool - not as good as freeflown video but still better than nothing.
I was referring to putting a belly cam on a tandem student.
May 2, 2009, 9:52 PM
Post #9 of 57
(2504 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Personally, I think you guys got it all wrong. Bellycams on students capture everything just fine, including deployment. No risk of instructor entanglement,
same angle all the time equals [yawn] Boring!
you don't just sit in front of the student the whole time when you are on outside camera, do you?
Handycam gives the tandem master something to do, if it do a tandem with no camera i feel like it it too easy.
i have never heard of an entaglement and if there was one or more then smothing seroud must have fucked up and the hand cam is not to blame.
belly mount cams are a shit idea IMHO for experienced T/M's
I enjoy getting good angles.
For the OP.
a CX105 would be absolutely perfect for handcam.
(This post was edited by rhys on May 2, 2009, 9:55 PM)
DSE (D 29060)
Moderator
May 2, 2009, 10:07 PM
Post #10 of 57
(2497 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
it was a joke, Rhys. I understand why handycam is popular at some DZ's but I'm not a big fan. If you've never heard of an entanglement, search DZ.com, there are a few posts on the subject. I'm too lazy at the moment.
Yes, if a camera is gonna be on a wrist, it's hard to beat the CX100/105. Light, small, high quality.
May 3, 2009, 5:01 PM
Post #14 of 57
(2411 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
. . . same angle all the time equals [yawn] Boring! . . . I enjoy getting good angles.
Are you seriously making the argument that handcam allows a variety of angles? Sorry, but that's laughable. The only angles I see in handcam videos are slight variations of nostril (and if you're lucky, maybe some legs and ground after opening).
May 4, 2009, 4:00 AM
Post #15 of 57
(2367 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bdazel] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
. . . same angle all the time equals [yawn] Boring! . . . I enjoy getting good angles.
Are you seriously making the argument that handcam allows a variety of angles? Sorry, but that's laughable. The only angles I see in handcam videos are slight variations of nostril (and if you're lucky, maybe some legs and ground after opening).
Or the passenger's reaction after opening? We are going off-topic. Just curious does the CX105 have a normal out including slowmotion so you can use lineair editing?
CX105 will do ok. For the moment I stay with my HC5. Some people consider this a large camera for handcam. I do not have any issues with it.
May 4, 2009, 8:04 AM
Post #17 of 57
(2349 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bdazel] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
The only difference between the CX-100 and my old pc101 is that there's no remote. I can do everything I used to using the touchscreen. I don't know what you mean about poor playback...it looks exactly the same to me, or should I say "comparable" (except now it's widescreen)
May 4, 2009, 8:13 AM
Post #18 of 57
(2346 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bdazel] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
Or the passenger's reaction after opening?
Not a different viewing angle. You missed the point.
cx100 playback is poor compared to MiniDV, especially slow motion. Linear editing may be possible, but the product will not be comparable.
Huh? I take it you never actually USED a CX100/105 yet?
You need to use the touchscreen for slowmo as there is no remote, but it is very possible to do linear editing using this camera. I do my editing on a pc but I had to do a linear edit yesterday when my graphics card quit on me.
May 4, 2009, 8:17 AM
Post #19 of 57
(2344 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dragon2] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Or the passenger's reaction after opening?
Not a different viewing angle. You missed the point.
cx100 playback is poor compared to MiniDV, especially slow motion. Linear editing may be possible, but the product will not be comparable.
Huh? I take it you never actually USED a CX100/105 yet?
You need to use the touchscreen for slowmo as there is no remote, but it is very possible to do linear editing using this camera. I do my editing on a pc but I had to do a linear edit yesterday when my graphics card quit on me.
Own one and use it. Playback is not up to my standards. Slow-motion performance especially. But this is an entirely subjective assessment, and reasonable minds will differ, eh?
May 4, 2009, 8:23 AM
Post #20 of 57
(2342 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bdazel] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
What format are you recording in then, and what lens do you use? Only things I can think of that can degrade the image to less then the usual PC/TRV style miniDV footage. Don't think I even notice much of a difference between my HC5 and my CX105 but haven't compared them side-to-side. I shoot HDV with the HC5 and highest quality SD with the CX105, both using a raynox hd3031 lens, and footage/dvds from both look great on the big plasma tv we have. Definately way better than most if not all PC style cameras the freeflyers use (with the single element lenses usually).
May 4, 2009, 8:33 AM
Post #21 of 57
(2336 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dragon2] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Not image quality. I refer strictly to real-time playback capabilities of the camera. My subjective assessment: clumsy to find specific location in mpeg clip; choppy slow-mo performance; clumsy to access slow mo options (speed, forward, reverse). These elements make linear editing sub-par to miniDV and a no-go for me.
DSE (D 29060)
Moderator
May 4, 2009, 10:01 AM
Post #22 of 57
(2322 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bdazel] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I
Quote:
refer strictly to real-time playback capabilities of the camera. My subjective assessment: clumsy to find specific location in mpeg clip; choppy slow-mo performance; clumsy to access slow mo options (speed, forward, reverse). These elements make linear editing sub-par to miniDV and a no-go for me.
I agree that any speed change from the camera is clumsy. I've never been a fan of the slomo from DV cams either, however. Either way, I agree. You *can* edit CX100 in a linear system, but the playback experience is less than stellar. Playback at half-frame rate doesn't cut it, IMO. That's just another reason we're non-linear.
May 4, 2009, 7:18 PM
Post #23 of 57
(2270 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bdazel] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Are you seriously making the argument that handcam allows a variety of angles? Sorry, but that's laughable. Laugh The only angles I see in handcam videos are slight variations of nostril (and if you're lucky, maybe some legs and ground after opening).
I don't want to stray the subject but i will answer that question.
Yes ther are a variaty of angles available, and you have obvously only seen bad examples.
You can have your camera behind and above looking down, to the side, in front, below... and you can pan from each angle creating a really dynamic video.
I can have the whole tandem pair in frame with two different angles with my hc96 and a black eye, some cameras are even wider than those for people with shorter arms.
after opening and interviewing the initial reaction give the customer the controls and tell them to do a righ hand spiral (while assisting them with your right hand) and start from above looking down to thier feet and slowly pan down stopping at there face having the best time of its life and finish with the camera on their belly looking up at the canopy with the horizon and scenery spinning around, learn to fly the canopy with your hands out to the side and slightly in front and have their whole body in frame, and with a good landing shot including thier facial expressions.
Or you could shove it in their face for 60 seconds (freefall) allowing their snot to slowly smudge the lens and have a nice shot of their elbow and your 3 ring when you slam your usless ass into the ground because you don't have enough passion to do you utmost to give every customer the best product you can given the conditions and equipment you have.
there are options but you have to work to get the best ones.
May 4, 2009, 7:40 PM
Post #24 of 57
(2266 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Nothing new in your descriptions. I'v seen it. And sorry, but I still see it as only slight variations of nostril.
But kudos to you for having passion enough not to have a useless ass to slam into the ground and for making the best of your situation. Passion is key in this sport; and infectious with students.
May 4, 2009, 10:24 PM
Post #25 of 57
(2253 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bdazel] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Nothing new in your descriptions. I'v seen it. And sorry, but I still see it as only slight variations of nostril.
But kudos to you for having passion enough not to have a useless ass to slam into the ground and for making the best of your situation. Passion is key in this sport; and infectious with students.
You are of cource free to not jump with handcam, if you do not like the product, a lot of my customers are happy with it and yes they can choose between in and outside video.
billvon (D 16479)
Moderator
May 5, 2009, 12:36 PM
Post #26 of 57
(1693 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
>after opening and interviewing the initial reaction give the customer the >controls and tell them to do a righ hand spiral (while assisting them with >your right hand) and start from above looking down to thier feet and >slowly pan down stopping at there face having the best time of its life and >finish with the camera on their belly looking up at the canopy with the >horizon and scenery spinning around, learn to fly the canopy with your >hands out to the side and slightly in front and have their whole body in >frame, and with a good landing shot including thier facial expressions.
Wow - and people complain about drivers using cellphones while they drive!
May 7, 2009, 10:10 AM
Post #28 of 57
(1639 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bdazel] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Nothing new in your descriptions. I'v seen it. And sorry, but I still see it as only slight variations of nostril.
By nostril you imply that you cannot see the subject, i can ans do have the entire subject in frame for various shots.
In reply to:
But kudos to you for having passion enough not to have a useless ass to slam into the ground and for making the best of your situation. Passion is key in this sport; and infectious with students. Wink
Thanks, i do have passion, and i do want my customers to have what they want.
95% of my handicam customers have had the choice of outside camera and handicam, sometimes i try to tell them to get outside if they are most interested in photos, but often they demand the handcam because they love the shots after the parachute is depoyes so much.
it is the customers choice.
billvon (D 16479)
Moderator
May 7, 2009, 10:41 AM
Post #29 of 57
(1636 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
>This is a routine i can do with my eyes closed,
That's a bit of a problem IMO. We have already had one near-disaster because of a video camera, where the TM was doing things "with his eyes closed" (i.e. not even paying attention to what his camera hand was doing.)
>You could make the same argument about wing suits . . . .
Uh, no. Wing suits do not require that sort of attention to aiming, detail etc separate from the dive itself.
>camera flyers . . . .
Camera flyer is a good example. A camera flyer has a far more complex dive than a typical skydiver. He has to deal with camera issues, aiming, background, wings, entanglement hazards etc. Adding a student to a camera flyer would be nuts.
>If you are going to be so conservitive, why jump out of a plane in the first place?
Because some of us believe that skydiving is not either 100% safe or 100% deadly. Good judgment is essential to surviving long in this sport. Just because Luigi landed a 37 sq ft canopy does not mean that your choices are:
1) everything's fine, jump a 37 sq ft canopy all day!
2) if that scares you and you want to be so conservative, why jump out of a plane in the first place?
May 7, 2009, 12:01 PM
Post #30 of 57
(1630 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
By nostril you imply that you cannot see the subject, i can ans do have the entire subject in frame for various shots.
No, only that student nostrils are typically the center of attention. Not only is the nose closest to the lens and usually near the center, but the wide fisheye lenses distort the image in such a way that the nostrils are pulled even farther out of the face. i.e. handcam = nostril cam.
May 7, 2009, 2:06 PM
Post #32 of 57
(1614 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
At risk of going way off topic, I'm in agreement with ryhs on this one, seriously, no body's re-inventing the wheel here. There really is nothing hard about aiming your hand while doing a tandem after you've done hundreds, if not thousands...you're simply flying with your legs. We also offer both options, inside and outside video at our DZ, and both are the same price. We have customers who saw their friend's (handcam) video, and show up wanting the same. I agree, not everyone should be shooting handcam, as there are some awful examples out there...but if you're good at it, the excitment that is added to the video with the after openning expressions are priceless, not to mention the uncontrolable laughter from the student while performing a couple spirals up high.
(This post was edited by Cyrus79 on May 7, 2009, 2:07 PM)
May 7, 2009, 4:12 PM
Post #33 of 57
(1595 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydog] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Nothing to do with the fact that the majority are backpackers and handcam is the cheapest option??
not at all, for an extra $20 they could have had outside camera with 10mp stills but decide they like the handcam for tha parachute stuff and they only use the photos for facebook anyway.
for some people money is not a problem! but they still want handicam.
usually it is dedicated camera jumpers that don't like handicam, or those that don't understand it very well.
my only tandem cutaway i had handcam on and it was not a hinderence in the slightest, and they got good footage of the event without me even trying.
Different strokes for different folks, if you don't like it, don't do it or don't buy it. free choice!
(This post was edited by rhys on May 7, 2009, 4:13 PM)
May 8, 2009, 3:46 AM
Post #34 of 57
(1564 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
my only tandem cutaway i had handcam on and it was not a hinderence in the slightest, and they got good footage of the event without me even trying.
Different strokes for different folks, if you don't like it, don't do it or don't buy it. free choice!
I have had two Tandem cut-aways in around 1700 tandems. Both with Handcam and didn't even consider or realise there was a glove on my hand. Certainly didn't get in the way.
As for "nostril cam" I have just got a cx100 and am using a Cookie Composites .2 with a Downward Trend Glove. WOW!!! can't wait to get it in the air, Field of View is AWESOME!!!
May 18, 2009, 9:42 PM
Post #37 of 57
(1436 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I understand that you'll lose quality if you use SD lenses. What about the raynox 3032Pro.... It's not wide enough for HC's?
DSE (D 29060)
Moderator
May 18, 2009, 9:46 PM
Post #38 of 57
(1433 views)
Shortcut
Re: [clint] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
it's wide, but IMO, not wide enough to get head to waist if that's what you want. Gimme a few hours (tomorrow morning) and I'll post width comparisons with each various lens. I tink I have a .2 floating around here somewhere, it may be down at the DZ.
May 24, 2009, 6:47 PM
Post #39 of 57
(1342 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Thanks. the .2 lense that you have around, did you find it? Is it HD lense?
DSE (D 29060)
Moderator
May 24, 2009, 7:46 PM
Post #40 of 57
(1339 views)
Shortcut
Re: [clint] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I did find it, did make some shots, and didn't finish what I'd started. I wanted to do a page with 8 different lenses on this cam. There is no .2 HD lens available, and likely won't be a true HD-capable lens, as it would require some very expensive engineering.... Anyway, I'll post the pix from the DZ tomorrow. Promise.
May 25, 2009, 1:38 AM
Post #41 of 57
(1321 views)
Shortcut
Re: [clint] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
As DSE said there are a few that will do the job but my preference to date has to be Cookie Composites. In a market where there are a number of good products it often comes down to the customer service. Not bad mouthing anyone else just praising a good company.
May 25, 2009, 7:24 AM
Post #42 of 57
(1310 views)
Shortcut
Re: [koppel] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In a market where there are a number of good products it often comes down to the customer service. Not bad mouthing anyone else just praising a good company.
I agree, but the cookie does not offer a fliter on thier super wide lenses and they do on their narrower lenses.
for this reason I purchased a black eye, i only have to replace a $30 filter when it gets scratched.
If cookie or royal did this, then i would be inclined to buy off them but at this stage i will not.
Dec 17, 2009, 5:01 PM
Post #44 of 57
(1028 views)
Shortcut
Re: [koppel] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Got my cx100 today and i am using an opteka .3 on it and with the step up ring its plenty wide enough for tandem. It is very comparable to my royal .2 in how wide the shot is. Believe this might be do to the stepup ring that is on it. Anyone else using the HD lens for handcam?
Dec 18, 2009, 10:46 AM
Post #46 of 57
(994 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
it's wide, but IMO, not wide enough to get head to waist if that's what you want. Gimme a few hours (tomorrow morning) and I'll post width comparisons with each various lens. I tink I have a .2 floating around here somewhere, it may be down at the DZ.
Here's a grab (off of youtube), is that not head to waist? Shooting with a .25 lens, but the TI has a 80" wing span.
Dec 19, 2009, 11:33 AM
Post #47 of 57
(969 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydived19006] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
it's wide, but IMO, not wide enough to get head to waist if that's what you want. Gimme a few hours (tomorrow morning) and I'll post width comparisons with each various lens. I tink I have a .2 floating around here somewhere, it may be down at the DZ.
Here's a grab (off of youtube), is that not head to waist? Shooting with a .25 lens, but the TI has a 80" wing span.
I have one of DSE's .2 lenses.. he loaned it to me a while back & I've been using it for handcams. Attached is a screenshot from that lens,
Dec 19, 2009, 4:24 PM
Post #48 of 57
(959 views)
Shortcut
Re: [parachutist] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
it's wide, but IMO, not wide enough to get head to waist if that's what you want. Gimme a few hours (tomorrow morning) and I'll post width comparisons with each various lens. I tink I have a .2 floating around here somewhere, it may be down at the DZ.
Here's a grab (off of youtube), is that not head to waist? Shooting with a .25 lens, but the TI has a 80" wing span.
I have one of DSE's .2 lenses.. he loaned it to me a while back & I've been using it for handcams. Attached is a screenshot from that lens,
zoom in to get rid of vignetting or get a better lens...
Dec 19, 2009, 4:43 PM
Post #51 of 57
(656 views)
Shortcut
Re: [TaylorC] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
zoom in to get rid of vignetting or get a better lens...
everybody's got their preference. thanks for sharing yours =p
you like the tunnel shot?
I'm trying to get as much in frame as possible with the camera sitting on my hand. If I zoom in then I get less in the shot. It would be like buying a .2 and shooting with a .3. If I were to zoom in far enough to eliminate the black ring, then I couldn't fit all of me, the whole student, and background scenery into the frame.
Right now there are no lenses I'm aware of that're suitable for this job, that can provide such a wide view without the ring. Handcam videos have sacrifices that are expected: either you get the ring and lots in the frame, or you get less in the frame.
Dec 19, 2009, 4:52 PM
Post #52 of 57
(653 views)
Shortcut
Re: [parachutist] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
zoom in to get rid of vignetting or get a better lens...
everybody's got their preference. thanks for sharing yours =p
you like the tunnel shot?
I'm trying to get as much in frame as possible with the camera sitting on my hand. If I zoom in then I get less in the shot. It would be like buying a .2 and shooting with a .3. If I were to zoom in far enough to eliminate the black ring, then I couldn't fit all of me, the whole student, and background scenery into the frame.
Right now there are no lenses I'm aware of that're suitable for this job, that can provide such a wide view without the ring. Handcam videos have sacrifices that are expected: either you get the ring and lots in the frame, or you get less in the frame.
i do handcam video as well and i use a royal .2 with my PC1000 and i dont have to zoom-in at all. I just started using a CX100 with an opteka .3 and its just as wide and i dont have to zoom in either. I did own a blackeye .25 at one point though where i had to zoom in which sucked. There are lenses out there that dont have this problem or maybe its just the camera.
Dec 19, 2009, 5:45 PM
Post #53 of 57
(637 views)
Shortcut
Re: [TaylorC] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
i do handcam video as well and i use a royal .2 with my PC1000 and i dont have to zoom-in at all. I just started using a CX100 with an opteka .3 and its just as wide and i dont have to zoom in either. I did own a blackeye .25 at one point though where i had to zoom in which sucked. There are lenses out there that dont have this problem or maybe its just the camera.
Dec 19, 2009, 6:04 PM
Post #54 of 57
(632 views)
Shortcut
Re: [parachutist] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
i do handcam video as well and i use a royal .2 with my PC1000 and i dont have to zoom-in at all. I just started using a CX100 with an opteka .3 and its just as wide and i dont have to zoom in either. I did own a blackeye .25 at one point though where i had to zoom in which sucked. There are lenses out there that dont have this problem or maybe its just the camera.
Gonna post some examples?
I did not edit these or put them on youtube. This is not my full handcam video and if you got a problem with the way i do tandems or handcam send me a PM this is just a comparison of lenses. I dont have any video online of my CX100 yet.
DSE (D 29060)
Moderator
Dec 19, 2009, 6:08 PM
Post #55 of 57
(630 views)
Shortcut
Re: [TaylorC] TI's Sony cx105 for HandCam
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
[i do handcam video as well and i use a royal .2 with my PC1000 and i dont have to zoom-in at all. I just started using a CX100 with an opteka .3 and its just as wide and i dont have to zoom in either. I did own a blackeye .25 at one point though where i had to zoom in which sucked. There are lenses out there that dont have this problem or maybe its just the camera.
It's not a lens "problem." A wide adapter merely widens what the camera already has as a maximum wide angle. If the camera is say...55mm (wide image becomes 26.5mm wide) and you stick a .5 on the front of it, it will be nowhere near as wide as it would be putting that same lens on a camera that has a 38mm (becomes 19mm) width.
As Parachutist suggests, zooming in to get rid of the vignetting will remove any value in having a wider lens, and one might as well buy a less wide lens. No one likes vignetting but if the wider lens tells a better story...content is king.
handcam.jpg
The only angles I see in handcam videos are slight variations of nostril (and if you're lucky, maybe some legs and ground after opening). 
it looks exactly the same to me, or should I say "comparable" (except now it's widescreen) 
