freeflir29 0 #1 January 31, 2002 Is anyone putting the tandem stills on DVD or floppy? Do you think this is econamically feasable? I mean, they will do it for you at Wal-Mart so why not give the customer another option at the DZ?"It's the cans..they're defective. Stay away from the cans"-Steve MartinClay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #2 January 31, 2002 For student stuff, most of what I've seen has the camera flyer handing over the roll of film to the student for processing. At that point, it's in the student's hands as to how it's processed.With the dawning of digital, I foresee a time when a CD-Rom is handed over. DVD is overkill and too costly. Floppies aren't large enough. CD-Roms could be handed over for about the same price as the roll of film.quadehttp://futurecam.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #3 January 31, 2002 Don't forget the time it takes to burn a CD, or even worse a DVD, compared to popping the film out of the camera.....Not really a big issue for fun jumpers exchanging snaps, but at a busy Tandem operation, its just something else the cameraflyer and teh video crew have to work on.....tuppence worth, and that's value for money D Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #4 January 31, 2002 "Floppies aren't large enough."Ummmm....I have gotten very nice pics put on floppies at Wal-Mart. 24 to disk and I don't think it was full yet. I guess it would depend on the "quality" of the them. I know my Mom's still camera will hold something like 100 low quality or 10 high res pics. So, I guess you would have to decide on what quality is acceptable."It's the cans..they're defective. Stay away from the cans"-Steve MartinClay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #5 January 31, 2002 If you're going to make an 8x10, something a tandem passenger might want to do, a reasonable amount of compression might give up a file size for a single image of maybe 2 to 4 meg. Since a floppy only holds about 1.4 meg . . . well, that's just not too practical.Just for reference I archive my high quality images with no compression at about 30 meg and submit to Skydiving and Parachutist with them compressed to about 4 to 5 meg.I would submit them at a lower compression/higher quality, but their email systems can't handle files larger than 5 meg.quadehttp://futurecam.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #6 January 31, 2002 Ahh..so far good quality a CD is a must. How long does it take to burn one. Yes I know I'm in the stone age...I don't own a burner yet!!! I think I remember seeing this offered at A DZ in Ga. It was an order type thing though and was sent out a week or so after the person did their Tandem. Knowing those guys they probably charge $300-400 or whatever the person has in their account..."It's the cans..they're defective. Stay away from the cans"-Steve MartinClay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #7 January 31, 2002 QuoteHow long does it take to burn one.If you shot the stuff on digital originally, then it would be almost trivial. However, if you shoot film and then have to scan the film, this becomes a much longer process.It takes my scanner about 10 minutes per image for the high quality stuff.However, like I said, if you shot digital and already had the stuff in the digital domain, then all -I- would have to do is basically drag and drop it on my "Toast" program and it would take about 10 minutes of unattended time.Far less time than it would take me to make the "student" VHS dub. So they'd both be done in about the same time frame.Of course, YMMV.quadehttp://futurecam.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #8 January 31, 2002 All of your questions depends on what kind of equipment you have and what you're willing to spend to get good (fast) equipment.Time to burn a CD. Ok, for a FULL CD, burning @24x you'll have it burned in under 3 minutes. Closer to 2 actually. Now, realizing that it takes 700mb to fill a CD and at most you'll have probably 10mb of data on the CD to give to someone, it'll take you under 2 minutes to burn a CD.Scanning. If you have a good quality scanner (HP 4700 comes to mind) that scans at atleast 2400x2400dpi then the pictures will look good. Scan time on these aren't 10 minutes, they're really quick actually. Still takes a minute or two, though.Digitial camera would be your best bet for the photos in relation to ease of use and speed. You'll need something with atleast 3.0 megapixals. A break down of what that means: at 3.0 megapixals you'll get an image quality that will allow you to print out NICE 8x10 pictures and some pretty damn good 11x14s, at 2.0 megapixals you're looking at NICE 5x7s and pretty good 8x10s. Yes you can go lower, but why and you can go up to a bit over 5.0 megapixals but you might want to buy a new canopy instead of that camera. Of course, those printing numbers rely on the quality of the printer being used. The newer inkjets (like the HP 940c and up) all pretty much print at or around 2400x2400dpi. That is what you would want to be able to print images at picture quality. If you wanted to be able to print the images without having to use a computer, you could get a nice digital image printer. HP has a couple new ones that are sweet. One is a dedicated 4x6 printer that accepts Compact Flash, Smart Media and even Sony's Memstick. The other new printer is a full sized (8 1/2 x 11) that accepts those forms of media and it has a 3.5in LCD screen that will allow you to view AND edit your images right on the printer. Those things are SWEET! And pretty fast, if I remember right they print at 17ppm black and 15ppm color...Using a floppy would be worthless. You wouldn't be able to put a single print quality image on one. A floppy holds 1.44mb, which would, if full with one image, give you an ok looking 3x5 picture. That is it. Floppy driven cameras only real use is ease of use and compatability with virtually every computer in use today.DVD wouldn't be worth your time at the current state of technology. The medium is too damn expensive. For a DVD-RW drive you're looking at around $500 and $20 and up for a single (yes, single) disc. The only advantage would be to burn the videos on to one; however, this would take quite a bit of time. The quickest and easiest way is with a digital camera (TRV...) using a FireWire out to your computer. After you transfer the video (depends on length, guessing about 10 minutes) you would have to burn the video. That's with out editing the video. If you edited it, you would have to sit there and edit within the computer, recompress the video and then burn it to the DVD. Way too much trouble for the money.Success is how high you bounce when you hit bottom.-General George Patton- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #9 January 31, 2002 Hey Paul, YMMV??? whassat?Agreed if the snaps are already on the hard drive then its relatively simple with Toast, or Easycd or similar. Bear in mind you still need to get the snaps out of your camera, even with a dedicated card reader (to save camera batteries), you still need to upload to your hard disc then spit out to CD, assuming we are talking about 'doing this' like a tandem spool.Also, a lot of people still don't have PCs at home, so you would have to also offer traditional snaps as an option, ergo two camera setups, or a good high quality printer at the DZ.Don't get me wrong, I'm all about gadgets and gismos, but they have to be useful.......or provide a tangible benefit.Nice website by the way.CyaDPS I could have waxed technical, but it looks like Aggiedave covered a lot of the points I would have mentioned. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ojf1982 0 #10 January 31, 2002 my DZ if you ask for it will put the video on a CD. For $99 you get the video, stills, and CD. Not a bad deal IMO.Omar B-24801 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #11 January 31, 2002 QuoteYMMV??? whassat?Your Mileage May VaryAs in the outrageous gas milage claimed by a car manufacturer doesn't always equal the gas mileage you'll get.quadehttp://futurecam.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #12 January 31, 2002 Quote(HP 4700 comes to mind)Not really familiar with that particular scanner, but if it's a flat-bed scanner, that's not really going to cut it.This is the Nikon film scanner I have. It's -says- it's do a 42 second scan, but if you want the really high quality stuff, be prepared for MUCH longer wait times!quadehttp://futurecam.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #13 January 31, 2002 It's a flat bed, has like 2400x2400dpi and the 35mm/slide attatchment. It's nice, real nice, especially since it costs like $200 and has a ton of other functions that a dedicated negative scanner can't do (copy, fax, etc). Success is how high you bounce when you hit bottom.-General George Patton- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #14 January 31, 2002 Quote. . . it costs like $200 and has a ton of other functions that a dedicated negative scanner can't do . . .Unfortunately, the 35mm adaptors on flatbed scanners just aren't high enough quality for the type of work I do.http://futurecam.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #15 February 1, 2002 I think a better solution would be to drop them on a webserver, email or print the URL where they can pick them up.You could script photoshop to automatically resize the entire "roll". Auto resize into tumbnail, small, medium, large, and print quality...This saves the time of burning, plus you save the media cost. In fact, it completely reduces the cost to capital and labor. You'll never have the risk of running out of film on a busy Saturday. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WmLauterbach 0 #16 February 1, 2002 I use a TRV-11 and its memory stick...It has actually helped out in a few cases...The customer wanted stills, and my bite switch went bad ...SoooooooI offered to give them a 'set' of 8x10 pictures taken from the memory stick1) On the ground prior to boarding2) One of the exit with the a/c in the background3) Freefall4) Deployment5) LandingIn addition to the 8x10's I told them they would get a floppy with 24 'jpegs' just like they would have if the bite switch had worked...OR, I could just give you your money back ....Both times the customer went for the digital stills....This is the computer age, a laptop with a firewire will make a better product than a $50 radio shack mixing board....Just remember.... its going to take alot of paid jumps to make your money back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #17 February 1, 2002 QuoteI think a better solution would be to drop them on a webserver, email or print the URL where they can pick them up.That's nice. You're assuming that everyone has internet access and that everyone wants their pictures on the web which is in my mind an inferior format to film/negitives.QuoteThis saves the time of burning, plus you save the media cost. In fact, it completely reduces the cost to capital and labor. You'll never have the risk of running out of film on a busy SaturdayNo it doesn't. You still need someone to organize the photos, someone to put the photos on the web server, someone to email the link to the photos, and finally - you need a webserver. None of that is free. As to running out of film on a busy Saturday, well that's the photographers responsibility, no film, no job. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #18 February 1, 2002 Also bear in mind we are trying to compare high quality trad snaps with high quality digital snaps. At say 4meg/pic, say half a dozen images, thats 24 meg of webspace per tandem job. Say 20 a weekend, and that server is gonna be hot hot hot, and not everyone has access to fast connections..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #19 February 2, 2002 As for the time it takes to offload the digital pictures, that is easily scripted. It should be as simple as plug in the campera, click an icon, type in a name. Every thing else should be automated.As for the price of the server, yeah - obviously this is expensive. I was proposing this more as a big DZ solution more then a solution for individual videographers. Most DZ's already have internet connections at the DZ, etc.As for disk space, disk is cheap. When a 120 GB disk sells for $400, that's 40,000 images.I suppose you could also offer a CDROM's for people who don't have internet.People would only use the 4 meg/shot versions for reprints, which they could do at their favorite photo retailers.For web browsing and mailing to friends, a 125K jpg is more then enough..._Am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #20 February 2, 2002 K... Internet server with min options and HD space $2500Monthy bandwidth (T1 min) $350Network linking the computer and server $250Computer for uploading the Digital Stills to $1800Backups for the server (DLT's) $600 (Don't really want to lose the last 3 months worth of pics now do you?)Professional install $500+(Security, permissions, routing, etc)Seperate area on DZ for the Server $????Basically, the intro cost is going to be: $6000 to get the project off the ground.OR.....PC with CD Burner $1800Blank CD's 50 for $35Total Cost: <$1900 Still steep for a videographer, but its lots more doable the 6000I want to touch the sky, I want to fly so high ~ Sonique Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #21 February 2, 2002 QuoteAs for the time it takes to offload the digital pictures, that is easily scripted. Easily scripted by who? There's a number you didn't include in your cost estimate.QuoteIt should be as simple as plug in the campera, click an icon, type in a name. Every thing else should be automated.Yeah. Lots of things _should_ be simple, but the reality is that they aren't. That's why I have the job that I do.QuoteAs for disk space, disk is cheap. When a 120 GB disk sells for $400, that's 40,000 images.It's not likely that any server is going to have: (A) IDE disk, (B) only one. For the sake of performance, and data availability almost any server is going to have multiple redundant disks (RAID), and that costs money. Remember that disk need to hold an OS too, so you can't have all of it for image storage. This technology is significantly more expensive than $400.00, and on top of that you need someone to set it up and maintain it.QuoteI suppose you could also offer a CDROM's for people who don't have internet.What about people who don't have CDROMs? What about people who only have 8 bit color, or small monitors? For these people digital images aren't going to cut it. QuotePeople would only use the 4 meg/shot versions for reprints, which they could do at their favorite photo retailers.And now they're paying more than they would have if they just developed the film themselves. Certainly there's alot more running around involved this way. Nothing beats just dropping off some film and picking it up later in the week.QuoteAs for the price of the server, yeah - obviously this is expensive. I was proposing this more as a big DZ solution more then a solution for individual videographers. Most DZ's already have internet connections at the DZ, etc.I think that big DZs are less likely to offer a solution such as this. A DZ offers photo images and video because people want them, if the DZ starts putting the images and video on a media that doesn't sit well with the customer they'll sell less and less of it. They've got a format that works well now, it makes the customer happy and provides the DZ with a pretty significant profit. I don't think they're going to fuck with that.-Jim Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #22 February 2, 2002 QuoteEasily scripted by who? There's a number you didn't include in your cost estimate.I was in discussions with a DZ to do exactly this. My fee was 10 free jumps. I could write this script in under half an hour.QuoteYeah. Lots of things _should_ be simple, but the reality is that they aren't. That's why I have the job that I do.In my profesional history, I've taken lead posisions in www.molson.com, www.rubbermaid.com, wwwlittletikes.com, and others. Previous that that I have a background of enterprise data systems at companies like CIBC. I have absolutely no doubt this could be reduced to a very simple procedure.QuoteIt's not likely that any server is going to have: (A) IDE disk, (B) only one. For the sake of performance, and data availability almost any server is going to have multiple redundant disks (RAID), and that costs money. Remember that disk need to hold an OS too, so you can't have all of it for image storage. This technology is significantly more expensive than $400.00, and on top of that you need someone to set it up and maintain it.Raid 5 is easily done with software rather then hardware, on IDE disks. Especially under linux.Still, I think it's fair to budget $2500 for a server. This easiy buys a base model Dell 2550 rackmount. That's way more hardware then this application would need, including hardware raid with scsi disks.QuoteWhat about people who don't have CDROMs? What about people who only have 8 bit color, or small monitors? For these people digital images aren't going to cut it. and then laterI think that big DZs are less likely to offer a solution such as this. A DZ offers photo images and video because people want them, if the DZ starts putting the images and video on a media that doesn't sit well with the customer they'll sell less and less of it. They've got a format that works well now, it makes the customer happy and provides the DZ with a pretty significant profit. I don't think they're going to fuck with that.Yes, doing this would be dependent on people actually WANTING digital pictures. Personally, I think they do, but I'm a geek.QuoteAnd now they're paying more than they would have if they just developed the film themselves. Certainly there's alot more running around involved this way. Nothing beats just dropping off some film and picking it up later in the week.That's if you want paper prints. With the people that I know (which granted, are geeks) they would only have one or two printed, and they would be printed to a very large size. Even my mother prefers digital pictures to prints for informal events.Again, this whole project assumes that people WANT digital photos.Remember that I offered this as an alternative to handing out CDROM's for people that wanted digital. I would agree, that there's probably a whole lot of people that aren't ready for digital yet._Am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airann 1 #23 February 3, 2002 Quade is a GOD. Nevermind he thinks I try to take over the world. (Just a little at a time, PaulWreck!)Just got a Sony DSC-S70, really coolio. It interchanges some things like power cord with my Sony TRV-11. All of it is a pain in the ass. I punch all the buttons on there and still cant figure it out. I just want to take a freakin picture and put it on my web site. Same thing with video, take it and post it. It used to be easy- now I get a fcked message on every single vido program I have, StudioDV for Sonys, Premier, Adobe this Adobe that.... Ulead.. you name it... same message. On the camera, computer doesnt see it. It is suposed to show up as Drive F. Fckit, I need adult supervision 24/7Had a nice jump yesterday.....Quade, leave your gf, and call mehttp://www.AirAnn.comUgly Girl #6 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #24 February 3, 2002 Uhummmmm.......God??? Never got -that- far....;^) !__________________________________________http://www.discover.net/~ltdiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyhawk 2 #25 February 4, 2002 airann what does the message say??(o)(o) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
