Check Six!

Barnyard BOb wrote:
Bob, Bob, Bob. Have you been to a nickelodeon in the past, oh, eighty years?
The motion pictures are in color now, and the music and the actor's words are
actually heard at the same time.

My DVD collection is totally of the great silent days.
Talkies and color are for you young chatty whippersnappers.
Distracts from the plot, ya know!

DVDs? That's at least two or three generations of technology too recent
for you, Unk.

Rich Ahrens wrote:

My DVD collection is totally of the great silent days.
Talkies and color are for you young chatty whippersnappers.
Distracts from the plot, ya know!

DVDs? That's at least two or three generations of technology too recent
for you, Unk.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Not a problem, Rich.
The kids and grand kids gladly handle these chores for me.

P.S.
No way will I let them near my Victrola/Gramaphone collection.


- Barnyard BOb -


..

"Barnyard BOb" wrote

Not a problem, Rich.
The kids and grand kids gladly handle these chores for me.

P.S.
No way will I let them near my Victrola/Gramaphone collection.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I think I am starting to get an insight, as to why you are so opposed to new
things, like auto engines in airplanes.

The way I see it, you are so stuck in the past with old technology, that you
think recordings should be on a cylinder, instead of a disk. (of some type)
g

Wow.

Thanks for helping me clear this up, just a little. {;-)
--
Jim in NC

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 10:56:46 -0600, Barnyard BOb wrote:

Couldn't be '1941'.
That John Belushi P-40 landed on a paved road and
then taxied to a gas station that was located ON DIRT.

But it was a *dusty* paved road. :-)

not a hapless cetacean.

Humongous whales.... HAPPLESS?!?!?
Tell that to Hemingway, Spencer Tracy and the Old Man in the Sea.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

"Hapless: Without hap or luck; luckless; unfortunate; unlucky; unhappy"

http://onlinedictionary.datasegment.com/word/hapless

Ron Wanttaja

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:33:58 -0600, Rich Ahrens wrote:

Barnyard BOb wrote:
Bob, Bob, Bob. Have you been to a nickelodeon in the past, oh, eighty years?
The motion pictures are in color now, and the music and the actor's words are
actually heard at the same time.

My DVD collection is totally of the great silent days.
Talkies and color are for you young chatty whippersnappers.
Distracts from the plot, ya know!

DVDs? That's at least two or three generations of technology too recent
for you, Unk.

When BOb says "DVD", he's referring to "Dichroic Viewmaster Disks."

Ron Wanttaja

..

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

"Hapless: Without hap or luck; luckless; unfortunate; unlucky; unhappy"

http://onlinedictionary.datasegment.com/word/hapless

Ron Wanttaja
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Sho 'nuff.

Me..... AND whales.

Hapless.


- Barnyard BOb -

"Morgans" wrote:


"Barnyard BOb" wrote

Not a problem, Rich.
The kids and grand kids gladly handle these chores for me.

P.S.
No way will I let them near my Victrola/Gramaphone collection.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I think I am starting to get an insight, as to why you are so opposed to new
things, like auto engines in airplanes.

As usual, Morgans...
Yer lights are on, but nobody's home.

The Pietenpol and Model A engine
were a match made in heaven.

Wish you were there. g


Thanks for helping me clear this up, just a little. {;-)

You are always welcome...
just not in this world.

P.S.
What's with the goatee? === {;-)
If it's respect yer after...
Hahahaahahhaaaa.


Barnyard - nail 'em before sunrise - BOb

That's some weird compression artifact...

Slow frame rate, I think.

Neither. The "shutter" speed actually looks to be around an effective 1/5000 of a second.
Normal video is 1/60. The distortion of the prop is not due to compression, but due to
how the image is scanned off of the sensor chip... sequentially, row by row, bottom to
top. That is, if it takes 1/5000 of a second to read each row of pixels, then multiply
that by 240 to 480 rows and you get 10 to 20 full frame images every second.

The position of the prop changes by a couple degrees by the time the next row of pixels up
on the chip is read by the camera's firmware. The result is the shearing, bending, and
floating pieces of the blades when the whole image is assembled. Very disconcerting since
we are all too accustomed to our human vision having analog motion blur. This visual
distortion is called Temporal Aliasing (digitally sampled 'stair-stepping' of time).

So Ron. What I'd like to see is how you mounted the camera. There was virtually no high
frequency vibration in that mount... very rigid. Impressive. Plus being that these
cheapo digital cameras are tapeless (record directly to flash memory as an mpeg 4 file),
there's no breakup of the picture due to tape-to-record head gaps from a vibrating tape.
Going to a better, high-end camcorder (even the best mini-DV), your picture is no doubt
going to go in the toilet of digital dropout and break up unless you use an external video
recorder appropriately vibration/shock mounted in the cockpit to prevent tape vibration
that separates it from the rotating head drum.

Dean Scott

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article , Barnyard BOb says...


Rich Ahrens wrote:

My DVD collection is totally of the great silent days.
Talkies and color are for you young chatty whippersnappers.
Distracts from the plot, ya know!

DVDs? That's at least two or three generations of technology too recent
for you, Unk.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Not a problem, Rich.
The kids and grand kids gladly handle these chores for me.

P.S.
No way will I let them near my Victrola/Gramaphone collection.


Hey UNK
My #3 Son who retired from the USAF a few years back is an old radio and
victrola buff.He's got a couple of neat victrilas and even has one that plays a
drum style recording. He repairs old car radios for car builders who want their
49 Plymouth radio playing like new. He gave me a 1949 Crosby radio that I play
my radio classics thru and there's something about the smooth sound that tube
radios give that's hard to beat. Nothing better then Burns and Allen or Jack
Benny on a cold winter night.The lights are low and the Shadow comes on or
Suspense spooks ya. The new TV shows pale compare to them oldies us oldies like
:-)

OOps time for the Great Gildersleeve brought to us by Prell...The Shadow had a
story about an airplane caper last week so this post fits LOL!!

See ya

Nefoo Chuck

Eat any Paczki today? I had a nice poppy seed and a hot cup of coffee for ash
wed breakfast...ahhh

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 10:03:46 -0500, "Dean A. Scott"
wrote:


That's some weird compression artifact...

Slow frame rate, I think.

Neither. The "shutter" speed actually looks to be around an effective 1/5000 of a second.
Normal video is 1/60. The distortion of the prop is not due to compression, but due to
how the image is scanned off of the sensor chip... sequentially, row by row, bottom to
top. That is, if it takes 1/5000 of a second to read each row of pixels, then multiply
that by 240 to 480 rows and you get 10 to 20 full frame images every second.

That makes sense. IIRC, there is a type of still-camera shutter that works
similarly, and you sometimes see the same kind of "arcing" of moving propellers.

So Ron. What I'd like to see is how you mounted the camera. There was virtually no high
frequency vibration in that mount... very rigid. Impressive.

Beginner's luck. The cameras were basically mounted on an extension of a big
aluminum angle, which was clamped to the axle by hose clamps. I put piece of
inner-tube rubber under the angle/clamps to protect the paint of the axle.
Details, including photos, on:

http://www.bowersflybaby.com/pix/video.html

The one problem I have is a low-frequency shake of the image. If you watch the
ground in the distance, you can see it's shaking up and down at about a 1/2 to 1
Hz rate. Both cameras do it, the newer camera has electronic stabilization, and
it didn't seem to help.

My guess is that it's that bit of rubber that's protecting the axle...I think
the mount is "bouncing" a bit. The effect is not really visible with the old
camera when it was mounted atop the tail, where there isn't any rubber involved.

Gonna try to protect the axle with nylon or wood, instead.

Ron Wanttaja