bdazel

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.

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.

Quote

Quote

Quote

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?

Quote

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.

Quote

. . . 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).

Thanks for the tip.

Nice. Love the sunset pics.

Watch that battery on the Sony. Seems it could be lost with a good riser slap or other impact.

Not all of the music on Jamendo is royalty free, however some artists allow their music to be used for commercial purposes. Some with strings attached (you must credit the artist in the production, and/or allow your work to be shared also), and some with no strings attached at all. Go to http://creativecommons.org to find out about the different licensing options used by artists at jamendo. You can search by CC license on Jamendo.

Quote

Canon also lifted their skirts just a little bit in the filmmakers gathering, and I'm pretty excited about what's coming down the pike.
So . . .
Very content to wait until January for what's new . . .

Don't leave us hanging, what is it?

Quote

Quote

Good example of a subjective statement couched as fact.

Not really!!!!.... it is a FACT the 15mm is lighter and shorter than the 10-22. And for some of us thats important!
I also recommend a 15mm but there is also a 10mm or 8mm??? depending on your flying skills.

Come on man. Re-read the posts. He didn't say the 15mm is lighter. He said the 10-22 is TOO LONG and TOO HEAVY.

Quote

go with the canon 15mm....the 10-22 is too long and too heavy ;)

Good example of a subjective statement couched as fact.

Many will disagree with your opinion, including myself. I jump a 10-22, and it is not too long, nor too heavy.

Fewer steps, more streamlined = faster, less time spent by the user.

Insert DVD, type first name, last name, and email. One more click (to submit) and you're done. The student gets an email with a link to view the flash video file.

Steve (the guy who runs LPV) recently updated the software to support FLV conversion straight from the hard drive. ie, select the .mpg file (be sure the .ac3 file is in the same folder), and type the three things above, hit submit and you're done.

The actual file conversion and uploading all happens in the background.

My experience with youtube tells me that youtube just takes longer. Also, LPV solves the problem of the directing the student to the youtube video.

Quote

Can anyone comment on the general quality of these cameras? (Will they stand up to the hard life of a skydiving accessory?)

These are already tried and proven to work fine in Skydiving. MANY skydivers use them.

We use it. It's quicker and easier than You tube. If fast and efficient is your goal, then it may be worth the cost. You need to balance the pros (easy/time-efficient) with the cons ($$) and figure out for yourself whether it's worth it.

Thanks. I have a couple on the way, as well as a new lens.

Lost my 3032. The ring stayed with the camera, but the lens popped right out as I climbed out of the caravan. I don't remember banging it on anything, but there must have been impact on something. I managed to save the student's video and pics by backing up a bit in freefall, then cropping the photos a bit with Lightroom.

I guess I should have listened when someone said "don't use a plastic step-down ring" a while back. Lesson learned. Anyone know where to purchase a good metal ring?

Quote

The question remains, "are you certain you can always get out of the way of a deploying tandem main when you're in that position?"

I bet the guy from Richmond was certain he could handle the situation. Whether you're certain or not, we're all human and humans f-up. There's no excuse to repeat the mistakes of dead skydivers, especially when a tandem student is involved.

Quote

If you can backfly you dont necessarily need wings. [emphasis added]

And you don't necessarily need anything but a point and shoot or maybe Canon's cheap kit lens. You seem to have missed the point of many well-informed statements in this thread.

I'm having the same issue. Three jumps on my new mantle from last weekend, and the thing was crazy tight on my head.

One thought: When I first baked the liners, I didn't have the helmet setup yet (no tongue switch, audible, ring site, etc.) Also, I didn't wear my sunglasses. I re-baked the liners with all those things added, so I'm hoping that will make a difference.

If that doesn't work, my next step will be to bake it again, but I'll wear a thin head mask (the one I use for Tandems when it's cold out) to add volume to the inside of the helmet.

One of the biggest problems with skydiving is the ego. I think in many cases it's the ego that won't let a person wear wings. In my experience, it's the same ego that makes videographers think that an 8mm fisheye is a good lens for a student's photos.

I'm perfectly content being "un-cool" with my wings and 14-18mm lens.

Thanks! I'll re-phrase:

Does anyone know if there is any loss in quality through using a combined audio/video Mpeg-2 file made through the "Render As" option, rather than using a separated audio/video Mpeg-2 and ac3 file made using the "Make DVD" option?

In either case the final output will be BOTH a DVD and an online upload (encoded to flash video format). (The combined Mpeg-2 will make things much easier for the online upload.)

I'm also still curious why Sony would make the separated Mpeg-2 and ac3 file output the "default" when rendering for DVD. Is that configuration standard with other video editing software?

So are you saying it's purely a functional thing? Why not do that in the editor before going to the DVD? Or is it for things like the actor's commentary track?

No, I want to keep the audio with the video. Vegas separates the files into Mpeg-2 (video) and .ac3 (audio) before going into DVD architect. I'm curious why it does that. It would make things much easier for online uploading if they weren't separated during the rendering process.

I'm using Sony Vegas Platinum 9.0. DV footage.

When I render using the "make a movie" button, the program separates the audio and video files, but then allows the footage to be automatically imported into DVD architect via a handy pop-up screen when the render is finished.

When I choose "render as" and select Mpeg-2, the audio and video files are not separated. I assume this file can also be imported into DVD architect, although I haven't tested that theory.

What is the purpose of separating the audio and video files? Is there some efficiency or quality reason for doing so? It seems that things would be much nicer if you could just work with one combined audio/video file.

Thanks for any help!