VincentD.

Hey everybody, I just bought a light meter today but there are 2 settings on it that I don't understand. They are the DIN and ASA numbers. I would like to know what those numbers are, and how to decide what setting to put them to. Thanks!

Hey everybody, I'm currently interested in buying the Sony Vegas 6.0 and DVD Production suite. The site that I'm looking at offers an Academic price of the package that is a pretty good deal. I'm wondering if there are any differences between what is offered with the Academic and Regular packages? Does the academic package leave watermarks and things like that in the final product, and does it not include certain features? Or is it the same program at a discounted price, with the understanding the product won't be used for commercial purposes? Thanks!

Boy oh boy, where to begin. Well first of all, "news sources" aren't supposed to take sides on issues, they are supposed to report the news. They should NOT be supporting any claims. This is why I don't watch either Fox News, or CNN, or the BBC, and very little MSNBC. News companies today can't seperate fact from opinion. Here is another link to Clinton/Halliburton. http://www.nationalreview.com/script/print.../york070903.asp This comes from National Review, which is a highly regarded Conservative magazine. Do you honestly think I would go out of my way to lie about somthing so insignificant as Halliburton and Clinton? I mean give me a break. And do you honestly think all these sites are just making up the same information? They all talk about THE SAME CONTRACT. I find it interesting that all these sites share the same details. It must be that "vast right wing conspiracy" right? Did it ever occur to you that the Times, and CNN don't report this stuff because they are indeed biased too? Talk about ignorance. Do you think the world is that black and white that because you voted for somebody of a certain political party you MUST be a member of that party? In 2000 I was not old enough to vote, but I would not have voted for Bush if I was old enough. Bush may be conservative on social issues, but how conservative can one be when they agree on an Education bill with Ted Kennedy? In 2004, I voted for Bush because the election was way too close and I saw how Nader killed Gore in 2000, so I wasn't going to waste my vote on a third party candidate. I hope that clears up my voting record for you, since you can't seem to grasp the concept of somthing that isn't black and white. And why do you constantly have to portray me as this cliche, naive Christian with a low IQ? Read some works by Augustine and Lewis, and you will begin to grasp the complexities of the Christian religion, which so many "intellectuals" continue to attack. I find it odd that Christianity, which has fostered Western Culture, is now under attack by so many people today. We are destroying the backbone of our very civilization. Anyway, this wasn't meant to be a religous topic, but your attacks (using some very unoriginal comments I might add) turned it into one. You have resorted to name calling and mud slinging in an attempt to disprove the evidence I have provided, that at least cast doubts on your "facts". Alas, ignorance is bliss. Once again, I ask you to disprove one piece of evidence used in the articles I linked to. You can attack their credibility all day, but when it comes down to it, if you can't prove it wrong, then your credibility is the one people should be questioning. Since you have said you will not be saying another word on this topic (which I somehow doubt very much) I shouldn't be seeing another reply from you. It's been fun though.

While we're on the subject of ignorance, who said I was a Republican? I like how your first reaction is to call me a republican and go off on these stereotypes that I must watch Fox News or make some other claims that are way off base. Then you put words in my mouth and try to "predict" what I'll say next. Alas, the first sign one is losing a debate is when he resorts to name calling and attacks the other side, without talking about the issues. Concerning the articles I linked to, their credibility stands until you can disprove one thing stated in them. If you can't, then move on. By the way, I'm a registered Independent. The Republican party has lost the principles which brought it to power, and the Democrats do a pretty lousy job of countering the Republicans. A politician is a politician is a politician.

Here is the info. on Clinton: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=15426 And here is the info. on the flaws of carbon dating: http://www.specialtyinterests.net/carbon14.html I wonder whose really ignorant?

No I'm not doing that at all. By the way, Clinton also gave no bid contracts to numerous companies...including Haliburton. And actually, talk to any scientist and they will tell you carbon dating is severely flawed.

Sorry Mike, but i'm going to take the word of a man whose been there than the opinions of man who has not.

Thing is, the education system in America has failed. The war in Iraq is going relatively well, if you look past what the media is constantly showing. My best friend's brother just came back and said things are going great over there. The people causing trouble over there are NOT the average citizens...who by and large want democracy.

Sorry Richard, I would think I know my own education abilities better than you. If you look at the word "calculator", and then look at the keyboard, you will also notice the letters "t", "r", and "a" all surround the letter "e". All three letters surround where the "o" should have been in the word. Also, if you look at all my other posts I don't believe there is one misspelled word in any of them.

Simple typo. The only mistake I made was not reading over my post! lol.

And people still have yet to refute the evidence supplied by N_Chaszeyka. You guys can say all you want, but the simple fact of the matter is that there is more to the problem than "guns". As is usually the case, nobody ever wants to address the root of the problem. And no, the roots of the problem aren't education. You don't need to be educated to know killing somebody is WRONG. Besides, the current liberal education systems in America have by and large failed. We need to revert back to the old education system where kids didn't need a calculater to do simple math. Giving them more money would do nothing except add more teachers to an already defunct system.

Yea Reagan pulled that whole right to bear arms thing right out of thin air. Boy, the founding fathers must be rolling in their graves.

"Note the use of the words "single", "uniform", "rational", "national", "gun", "control", "law" in the sentence above. Mix 'em, match 'em, put 'em in almost any order, and they address this and most every NRA-sponsored propaganda "issue/objection" you can think of." Um, because a national gun control law is going to stop people from going to MEXICO to buy them? Also, do you honestly entrust the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to enforce a gun control law in every city in America? "Remember: We're trying imagine a more civilized America, where (among other things) the police aren't corrupt and (more to the point) are properly trained and funded so they can keep us safe. In the meantime, every Tom, Dick and Jose owing a gun just makes us much, much less safe." Problem is, we don't live in a perfect world. Thats the problem with liberals. They always imagine some utopia thats just out of reach. There will always be bad people. There will always be good people. If given equal opportunity, good will always triumph over evil. If however, the good people can't protect themselves beacuse owning a gun is "bad" then the bad people will use this to their advantage and harass the good people. Simple as that really. "There's that thinly-veiled code language again. Come'on now, just come right out and say it! So what was it that "started" it exactly? "Immigrants" entering the middle class? "Brown"-skinned people migrating north from the southern states? Poor single-parent families struggling to survive? Hippies becoming Yuppies? Americans demanding more sex in their popular culture? French cooking classes on public TV?" Dude, get a grip. You have this pre conceived notion that I must be in the KKK or somthing. If your so worked up about "brown" skinned people maybe you should see a doctor. You seem like you have a phobia. "Stop beating around the bush, man. Tells us who you really think is the one true citizen, the one true believer, the one true American?" What the hell are you talking about? "Why is it often the case that the most righteous believe they require the most power to encourage (enforce) their beliefs?" I'm not enforcing my beliefs. I'm defending them. This country was FOUNDED on these beliefs, if you don't like it you can move. "Why do you personally need a gun to do it?" Because Joe Crack Dealer on the corner has one. Who, I might add, probably came from a single parent home, and was probably shown Scarface by an older cuosin or other father figure (who was probably in his mid teens) and told thats the type of guy you gotta aspire to be.

""As usual", you forget that at least two of the people participating in this discussion describe themselves as LIBERAL gun-supporters/owners. What, no mention of the thousands of accidental injuries and deaths caused annually by "law-abiding" citizens?" Hate to break it to you, but politics are never black and white. Just because somebody is a liberal on most issues, doesn't make them a liberal on every issue. Since we are talking about gun control here, the liberals would be the ones who support it, and the conservatives the ones who are against it. These are the general terms used in most of the world today, which is why I'm using them for this discussion. You can be a "liberal gun supporter", but on this issue, you would be considered conservative. I suppose a "liberal gun supporter" would probably be looked at as more of a moderate by most. Let me get this straight, your saying since guns may accidentally kill innocent people, we should outlaw them? If that's the case, why don't we outlaw kitchen knives, or theme park rides, or cars! "So, wait, the rest of us should own guns because our culture encourages stupid or unhealthy or dangerous behaviour?" Basically. We have to protect ourselves somehow. Besides, even if there were gun contro laws, im not going to entrust that great organization known as the LAPD to enforce them. ""Villanizes"? Wow, you think WalMart, CocaCola, General Motors, Exon, et al _villanize_ "people of faith"? After all, these are the big corporations who _pay_ for most popular culture. Why would they try to alienate/victimize the majority of their customers? You do understand that most Americans consider themselves "religious" or "church going" and such?" No, not any of the companies you mentioned do that, or directly at least. They are smart. On the other hand, you have this undercurrent of popular culture which discourages Christian (and any other world religion for that matter) morality. You can't even go onto the internet without being bombarded with pornography advertisements. "In reality, a whole mess of self-described "religious" types actually _like_ (in a sneaky kind of way) guns-n-tits-n-ass in their culture, otherwise a big chunk of the money that pays for all that junk would disappear overnight. It's just like the "liberals" who support/own gun ownership: They know it's wrong, but they just can't help themselves." Not true at all. Don't look to Rush Limbaugh as the typical Christian please. Some Christians may watch this type of stuff for entertainment, but it's only because they are strong enough in their beliefs not to be influenced by it, or they have this half-assed (don't know any other way to put it lol) idea of religion where it's okay to disregard moral teachings, because you "still believe in God." "If you're looking for scapegoats, instead of picking on "defenseless" low-income single Moms (who in reality could whoop yo' ass in a fair fight), why don't you instead have a long heart-to-heart talk with your porno-buying-gun-pack'n-bible-thump'n brothers and sisters? _That's_ where the money and the power is." I'm not picking on low income single moms. I'm saying that they do not have the resources available to them that a middle class family with 2 parents does. You can say all you want, but statistics show that children born out of wedlock, and/or into a 1 parent home, are more likely to end up in jail and/or commit crimes. "Of course, if you really did this, you might learn that many of them really don't want to give up their violence-and-violent-sex-riddled culture, thank you very much. So _then_ what do you do, have a nervous breakdown? Damn them to eternal hell? Kill them all?" Huh? What gives me the right or the power to damn somebody to eternal hell? "Hint: It's a lot easier to just use the brain She gave you and lighten up. Guns don't kill people; it's people who think guns are AOK who kill people." Exactly. How do people come about with the idea its okay to kill people? When the media glamorizes a criminal, they are sending subliminal messages that that type of behaviour is okay. I'm sure seeing Scarface on DVD when your 13 years old, seeing all the money and power he has, leaves quite an impression. "No, not just more ethical behaviour in what you mean by "inner cities" (code for where "brown"-skinned people live)" I'm wondering why you have to bring race into the issue? Plenty of inner cities have white people living in them. This isn't a race issue. The fact you see it as such shows your level of thinking. ", but rather much, MUCH more ethical behaviour in the true centers of power of our cities: Especially, and starting first with the White House, Senate, and House of Representative in Washington, DC ... " Wait a second. If these people are so corrupt, why do you want to entrust the duty of enforcing these gun control laws with them? I agree with you 100%. Politicans are crooks and can't be trusted. The average guy with a family and kids to feed on the other hand, he's the one who can be trusted. Leave it to him to protect his property, not the corrupt L.A.P.D. or some politician in Washington. "Sorry, missed this one: Did this get into the US Constitution already? Myself, I'd much rather a single parent love me than have two parents who hate eachother, me, and their miserable lives. Anyone who thinks a single parent can't successfully raise a child in a _civilized_ country has really, really not been paying attention. Notice, I didn't say "in America" -- I can't use "successfully raise a child", "civilized" and "America" in the same sentence. (Whoops, just did ...)" Once again, your not looking at the staistics. It is proven when your born into a 1 parent family, chances are you will commit more crimes than somebody born into a family with 2 parents. You can succesfully raise a child on your own, but it's much harder to do so and sets you back. I think you have a misconception about most parents in America. Of course anybody would rather have 1 parent who loves them than 2 who hate them, but quite honestly how many parents hate their children or abuse them? A very small percentage. "Um, that's one of the things civilized people "gladly" pay taxes for ... so that trained, licensed, and democratically selected professionals can keep criminals in check." But you just got done talking about how corurpt politicians were. I'm confused.

heel, just because somebody belongs to a certain party doesn't make them "conservative" or "liberal". Neither Giuliani or Bloomberg would be considered conservative when it comes to the gun control issue, and certain other issues too. Also, nothing you said refuted my "root of the problem" theory. What does the fact that most guns in NYC come from certain states show you? Criminals, by their nature, will break the law to get what they need. If we outlawed guns nationally, the crimanls would go to Mexico or some other country to get them. Then what would happen? The guy who owns a restaurant and is trying to feed his family is gonna get robbed, and he's gonna lose his entire life savings because he couldn't protect HIS PROPERTY. Address the root of the problem, and laws wont be needed. In the 40s, 50s, and 60s we didn't need gun control laws. Crime rates were low. I find it a little odd that as the above mentioned problems start taking hold in our cities, the more of a problem the crime rate became.

As is usually the case, the liberals here aren't using LOGIC. First, let's get this figured out: Who uses guns to kill people? Criminals. Are criminals (in other words: those who break the law) going to be stopped by a LAW that says you can't use firearms? No. Now that we have that figured out, let's move on. The reason America has such a high crime rate compared with the rest of the Western world is because of the root problems, not because of gun ownership. The fact that a large part of the inner city community is made up of 1 parent homes. The fact that America is the world's biggest illegal (and probably legal too) drug consumer. The fact that our culture glamorizes criminals, but villanizes people of faith. I haven't seen 1 honest film about Christians, that show them as multi faceted characters, and which was seen by a major audience, in the past decade. Probably even longer. Want to solve the violent crime rate? Encourage ethical behaviour in our inner cities. Produce an environment where a child is given his RIGHT to a father and a mother. But for the love of God, don't take away an honest citizen's hand gun, which he uses to protect himself from criminals who wouldn't give up their guns even if there WAS a law saying they had to.

I too am in high school and order film from kodak as well. They do allow us high schoolers to receive the student discount, but you have to fax them a copy of your student ID.

Alessandro, I have it all figured out now. Turns out my friend loaded the batteries the wrong way...lol. Thanks for everybody's help!

Santo, I did exactly that but nothing happens. What should happen when the camera is running? Alessandro, I'm using 6 AA batteries.

Hey everybody, I'm having trouble turning on my super 8 camera, if anybody can help me out and fill me in on how to turn this on, I would really appreciate it. Here is a link to the camera: http://www.sk8scamera.com/NIZO1048.html I already have the film loaded in, its just being a pain turning it on. Thanks, Vince.

Hey everybody, I just have a quick question on the different super 8 film formats. First part: For Black and White, whats the difference between plus-x and tri-x? Second part: For Color, whats the difference between 200T and 500T? Final Part: What are the advantages/disadvantages of Ektachrome 64, I notice its not available in 200T or 500T, its just on its own, even though its in color and the other color format is divided into 200 and 500. If anybody could clear these up that would be great! Thanks!

Hey everybody, I'm going to be buying a Super 8 camera this weekend, then some film this week, and hopefully I'll be shooting my first short on Super 8 next week. Anyway, I just wanted to get some info. on Super 8 so I don't go into this whole adventure totally blind. Here is a link to the camera that I will be buying. First, can I get any input on the camera? Does it have a good reputation, is it reliable, etc. Next, I'm divided between whether or not I should shoot on Black and White or Color film. Black and White is only available in Reversal, while Color is available in both Negative and Reversal. Can anybody please explain for me the differences between Negative and Reversal and their pros/cons? Also, it seems like every film is available in both Tri-X and Plus-X. Can anybody please explain the differences between these two as well? Finally, how do I make sure that the film is not over or underexposed, and change the DOF? (Also, since I won't be able to see the results on the camera, how do I figure out which DOF I need for a shot is?) Thanks ahead of time for all the help, I know there are a lot of questions here, and I appreciate it very much!

Thanks for all the replies!! I guess in the end you guys talked me into this. 2 weeks worth of work is a lot for only a 3 minute film (2:1 ratio, thats low but I'll be rehearsing a lot) but I'm sure i'll be much rewarded for it! Thanks again.

Well I would never really be able to show my film unless I edited it electronically because DVD will be my final product. Unless you know of another way where I can work around all that?

I'm looking into shooting 8mm film, and I was shocked to see what it will all add up to. After buying the film/processing/telecining its going to run me $131 for 7:30 worth of film! This is quite a lot of money, and doesn't include the shipping to send the film and/or receive it. I'm still in highschool, yet I want to shoot on film. Mini DV looks like crap, and film is what all the greats learned and honed their craft on. I make about $85/week at my job, so 3 rolls of film (7:30 time) is going to cost me $131 after all is said and done. Is film really worth all this? Keep in mind I don't want to shoot Mini DV, I hate the look. Plus, I want to get used to film to eventually shoot on 16mm. Does anybody know any places where I can compare prices for processing and telecining? Thanks.