Jason Davenport

Agreed. It is a workload.

 

Thanks for the tips. I live and work in Dallas. So the market is pretty big. Renting sounds like a good idea and I will look into other cameras. Do you have any advice on where I can rent cameras for 4-5 days?

Call MP&E in Dallas, Mayo Production & Equipment, top notch stuff.

http://www.mayovideo.com/

Just wanted to say thanks for someone here, who told me about gelling windows with half water and half "flat" Sprite. Gaffed a show where I needed 6 4X4 windows gelled for couple days. Worked like a champ, peeled off like sticky window tint. Just needs a once over with window cleaner afterwords.

Thanks for the tip.

If you and others like you actually paid any attention at all to how YOU are being manipulated, you would have known about the Reagan era idea in which the Republican Conservative movement came up with a philosophy they called "starving the beast." The basic idea was that if Republican Administrations ran up massive debt, when the Democrats got back into office (and they always do because these things are always cyclical), they would spend more time trying to FIX the deficits and wouldn't have any resources for the social programs that would actually help people.

 

This is NOT a theory. It IS fact. Your Republican mantra simply states that this is a world where everyone is in it for themselves. Anyone who can't hack it should just roll over and die in a corner.

 

Of course this is the hypocrisy of the Party that claims to be the "Christian" "moral" and "Family Values" Party. They simply use the Religious Right to get votes, then once they are in, they go about their anti-labor, anti-family, anti-poor ideology because all the Republican Party truly stands for is profit over all else.

 

 

 

Here is just one explanation of the evil philosophy:

 

 

You can also read more about it here: <a href="http://www.ndol.org/print.cfm?contentid=251788" target="_blank">http://www.ndol.org/print.cfm?contentid=251788</a>

Wow. You quote Paul Krugman from the NYT. I'm glad you chose such an un-biased writer from such a reputable newspaper to make your point.

So, you honestly believe that Republicans want people to "roll over and die?" Tell me then, why is it that Tom Daschle (a Democrat), who was going to be the Secretary of Health & Human Services here in the U.S. (until he was exposed as a tax cheat) believes that health-care reform will "not be pain free" and that the elderly should learn to "accept" many conditions that go along with getting older rather than expecting doctors to treat them? As Daschle discusses in his book, "Critical-What We Can Do About the Healthcare Crisis," he advocates developing a "Federal Council" that approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of a treatment by the number of years a patient is likely to benefit . So, if you're a 38 year old woman who discovers a lump that is determined to be cancer, then you may be in luck. But if you're a 68 year old woman who discovers a lump that is determined to be cancer, then you may just have to...oh, what's that phrase you use? Oh yes...roll over and die.

What was it that you were saying about an "evil philosophy?"

Amazingly enough, the first major bill signed by President Obama (a Democrat) included healthcare reform which included a provision for the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research. The goal of the council is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they drive up the health care costs. In his book, Daschle actually wags his finger at Americans for "expecting too much from the health care system." In other words, say a doctor, who is a medically qualified professional, decides it might be best for a 59 year old man to undergo an an angioplasty because it might prevent him from having a severe heart attack. Well a paper-pushing bureaucrat who has trouble opening a bottle of aspirin may decide that man doesn't need the angioplasty because there's no guarantee it will prevent the heart attack, so the procedure would be deemed "unnecessary" and too costly. So, that man would just have to hope he didn't...here's your favorite phrase again...roll over and die.

The term "evil philosophy" seems to apply here too.

The irony of both examples is that both the 68 year old woman with breast cancer and the 59 year old man with a bad heart would be forced by the government to pay into our wonderful universal health care program. They get to pay for treatment they won't ever receive. If you think I'm making this up, just look at what recently happened in Japan, where every citizen is required to pay into the health system. In February this year, a 69 year old man died in the back of an ambulance after being rejected by 14 hospitals because they were either overcrowded or understaffed. Well, at least he was old, right?

Why is "evil philosophy" coming to mind here?

You say that Republicans are the evil ones, and that we don't care about people. Why then is it that studies have shown the conservatives give 30% more to charity than liberals? And how is it that, on average, liberal families earn slightly more than conservative families (6%) yet still give less to the poor and underprivileged? I thought conservatives didn't care about poor people? Or maybe it's just that liberals believe that the government should be the one to "take care" of people, so they don't have to? Maybe that is why people like Al Gore gave only 0.2% of his income to charity in 2000. After all, he could always take other people's money on behalf of the government and still be seen as charitable.

And you claim that social programs "help" people and that Republicans are evil for wanting to halt those programs. If there's nothing else you take away from this rant, please let it be this...Conservatives WANT PEOPLE TO SUCCEED. We don't want people to "roll over and die." If someone genuinely needs help, we're the first ones to hold out a hand to help pull someone up. If someone is unable to make it because of a disability or because of an illness or old age, we will help (after all, it seems that it's the liberals who want old people to stop "expecting" health care). But a hand up and a handout are too very different things. We don't believe that telling someone they "can't" do something because they're poor or because of their ethnicity or gender. Things like welfare destroy an individual's self worth and drive to succeed. If someone is on welfare, he may one day find a job, only to learn that the welfare benefits he was receiving are decreased too soon. A mother living in gov't housing may find herself suddenly ineligible for rent assistance through the government because her new-found job at McDonald's pays too much money. So, that mother turns down the job at McDonald's so she can keep a roof over her child's head. Temporary government assistance becomes a permanent way to live. It's because a system that had the best of intentions actually enslaves generations of people who start to believe that the government is the only thing that can help them. The reality is that it's government that keeps them stuck in their poverty. That is what is anti-poor. That is what is anti-family. That is what is evil.

You and I will never agree on this issue. You'll probably always think I'm evil for my beliefs and that's fine. Because trust me, I can take it, and I won't just roll over and die.

Well Canada is the very epitome of wealth re-distribution. I was referring to the Canadian Equalization payment program where the wealthy provinces must "share" their wealth with the poorer ones. Quebec is at the top of the pack when it comes to receiving money from the rest of Canada then they still have referendums on separating from Canada. That's gratitude for you.

 

It's rather odd hearing how Americans throw a fit when their money is going to be given to a different school district. Canada solved that problem long ago. Mainly the provincial government decides who gets what.

 

It seems that some American high schools are the most incredible places on earth, and those in poor areas are literally falling apart. Canada's system is to build everyone the same "average" school.

 

I doubt Americans are ready for this type of government? Maybe things have finally changed in the USA though and the middle and lower middle class have finally had enough?

 

Obama certainly talks tough but I think I'll see pigs flying over the moon before I see America with a national health care plan like Canada or the UK has. In order for it to work the billions Americans now send to private health insurance companies would have to be re-directed to the states, and then re-directed into the now public health care system. What are the chances of that happening?

 

The state's would then set the rates for every thing they pay for, no more free market. Many Americans would be absolutely freaking out at such a prospect.

 

R,

Your right we are freaking out over this, sorry for the rant, but getting sick of people not knowing whats going on.

No. we're not ready for this, and never will. America does not need National heath care, we need insurance reform. Why do so many rich Canadians come over to America when the need a special surgery, want to visit top notch surgeons or just don't want to wait in line. We may be expensive but it's the best in the world in terms of technology and advancements. Why is that? Because a Free Market encourages it!

Who would you like performing brain surgery on your child, a government funded hospital with low paid government doctors, minimal equipment (because the gov. didn't think your hospital needed that stuff) or a privately owned hospital that had top surgeons and the latest gear, that they themselves pioneered, because they were free to do so.

You really think that we want Obama, who is now running our country into the craper making decisions when it comes to my health. The Democratic party has done nothing for the poor and helpless, that's why their still poor and helpless! They have been dedicated to solving that problem for the last 50 years.

Now they want to double the national debt (trumped Bush, for all time on spending), punish the people who create jobs in the private sector, and raise taxes during a recession on the people who already pay close to 60% of what they already make.

Fine, the "rich" will just close up shop and lay people off and cancel that 400,000 thousand dollar corporate video that would have employed 20 people for a month. Don't worry you'll have unemployment benefits for life. No need to work. So why should the "rich" work hard to support you who don't. And who gives a crap weather they just spent $50,000 on a new office decorations, IT"S THEIR COMPANY! How may jobs were filled by painters and carpenters etc.

As for unions, I understand the bases for starting them but now they have total run amuck. Why are the car companies failing, because the unions have made it so expensive to build a car that the US can not compete with the rest of the world. And Obama says you don't need a secret ballot, but yet your Vice Pres. is now meeting with those unions in a secret meeting (no press or public) deciding your future, that's real fair and equal.

And go ahead a blame Bush for everything. The Democrats had the power two years before Bush left office. (hummm when did this all start to fail). It was the Democrats that wanted everyone to have a house, and forced the banks to give loans to people who had no business buying and wow they couldn't pay and crash! It was FDR and his New Deal that put the country into a Depression. Oh and of course furthering the Global Warming myth, which is the biggest fraud of all time.

You want to hand over your private life, all that you have worked hard for, to the government so they can do as they please, because your not smart enough to do so, so be it, but count me out.

Liberal thinking and policies are the norm in California, and Cali is rounding the drain as we speak and dragging the rest of the US down with them. Better pack up like like everyone else is, before it turns into Thunderdome.

E-films <http://e-films.com.au> makes a good, inexpensive SD card adapter. The SD cards itself quite inexpensive compared to the price of the Sony (or SanDisk) SxS cards.

 

As for lens adapters, there are 3 main makers each with their pros and cons.

 

- P+S Technik <http://www.pstechnik.de/en/digitalfilm-pro35-ex3.php>

Pros: Mounts directly onto the EX3 lens mount instead of in front of the lens like the other systems, image is properly oriented.

Cons: Expensive, 1.5 stops light loss.

 

- Letus35 <http://www.letus35.com> or <http://www.letusdirect.com>

Pros: 3 different models (Extreme, Elite, Ultimate), Back focus adjustment for Elite and Extreme, 0.5 stops light loss, image is properly oriented, relatively inexpensive, different bundles depending on your needs.

Cons: Mounts to the front of the EX3 lens as opposed to the lens mount.

 

- RedRock <http://www.redrockmicro.com>

Pros: Inexpensive, lots of accessories (follow focus, mounting options, etc.), 0.5 stops light loss

Cons: Image is inverted (upside down), mounts to the front of the EX3 lens instead of the lens mount.

 

best,

e

Letus now has a direct relay to the EX-3.

There is a mini usb under the cameras shoulder pad area, but you can't do it yourself, has to be sent to Sony. And I just read that pretty soon it's not going to be free, so do it as soon as you can.

For picture profile recipes check here..http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/sony-xdcam-ex-cinealta/

And here for a vast improvement for the EX-1 viewfinder, everyone really likes it. http://www.hood-pro.com/

Also there have been some updates for the camera make sure to have them done before you get it sent to you so you don't have to seen it to Sony after you just get it.

You can also reap the benefits of using much cheaper media cards (no slow mo) but works all day, otherwise. All you need to know here.

http://www.glasseye.com.au/articles/sdassxs/

You will be very happy with the image from the Sony, can't compare to HVX. I have an EX-3 and I'm so glad I bought it.

EX-3 for sure.

What equipment do you need to record 4:2:2 10 bit with the EX1?

I like to do some tests... but don't know what do i need to do it, can you record it directly to a laptop with a Blackmagic? :unsure:

 

Thanks in advance.

 

TS

Here's one way.

http://www.convergent-design.com/CD_Products_FlashXDR.htm

Just an FYI, it has been confirmed by testing that the EX-3 will output 4:2:2 10bit out of the SDI output while it's 420 and 8 bit to the cards. Improving green screen work tremendously. here's the forum for more info.

http://www.dvinfo.net//conf/showthread.php?t=130855

Andrew, you've stated it correctly. If you have a focal length on a 1/2 inch camera and want to know what focal length will look the same on a 2/3 inch camera, you would multiply the known focal length by 1.375.

 

You would multiply by .72 to go the other way (know a focal length on 2/3" and want to know a focal length that will look the same on 1/2")

 

I will say it once again for posterity. This math above is to find equal fields of view. The focal length of each lens never changes simply from using it on a different format.

Thanks, thats exactly what I was looking to find. "multiply the known focal length by 1.375."

Recite this sentence:

 

The focal length of a lens does not change when you put it on a different size sensor or piece of film.

I beg to differ unless the adapter in question repositions the the focal plane to the correct size. Correct?

Recite this sentence..

"The zoom ratio is stated as being for instance 6:1 this means that the longest focal length is six times that of the shortest. The usual way of describing a zoom lens is by the format size, zoom ratio and the shortest and longest focal lengths, i.e. 2/3," 6:1, 12.5mm to 75mm. Again, great care must be taken in establishing both the camera and the lens format. The lens just described would have those focal lengths on a 2/3" camera but a range of 8mm to 48mm on a 1/2" camera. Similarly a lens giving the same performance on a 1/2" camera would be a 1/2," 6:1, 8mm to 48mm."

Is there a formula for finding out the new lens MM's when putting a 2/3 lens on a 1/2 censor. Yes, it's for the new EX-3. 2/3 is 11mm diagonal and the 1/2 is 8mm, if this is any help.

Thanks all for the help. Once I got there, on closer inspection, a combo stand chain vised to the corner worked out just fine. Now I'm going back to the bed after my 21 hour show day yesterday. whipped....

Need to rig a 6K on a free standing set of grandstand. The pic shows location, and second circle is where I was going to be able to use a scissorlift, but now it's all fenced in. Needs to be out of reach, for the public and aimed just in front of stands. Don't have scaffolding either. Do have a 5 ton on the job and able ask them to load anything special on tomorrow before it goes out.

Thanks, J

"Just saw the same issue on page 3 of forum, sorry for the rehash."

Going to see building in outside shoots as well. Multiple cameras out and in. Other than sticky window tint, am I just stuck with water and a squeegee? No kick-ass secret grip trick?

I need to have some window NDed and would like to have them done the night before. But have had it bubble and come loose by morning before, and have had to redo them all over again.

I can have them done the morning of shoot but it would be nice to get it out of the way. Is there another way besides just water sprayer and a squeegee. And the will need to stay up for 10 hours.

A 1K Chimera Pancake lantern works really well. And has skirts for spill. And have a dimmer on it as well. That would do the trick.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/2186...ftbox_with.html

I'd say you nailed the look. Only complaint I would have is the reflections in the guy's glasses from your square ringlight. Nice job!

Yeah, I agree with you there. The glasses helped the regular looking (sales manager) guy to look more boy bandish. And helped them form being nervous in font of the camera. I also had to by beer for them, to loosen them up. They almost demanded it..

Hey all, just joined forum, though you might want to see this fake music video I shot for Brinks Home Security. Copied the boy band look, with KINO's. 4 banks in the back pulled apart and made a ring light with 4 2'2 banks. And the little blurr in the corner in some alum. foil on a stick close to camera. Plus a net on the back glass. It all worked great, client couldn't believe it. Shot with HDX-900 1080 24p.

Anywho, can't wait to start utilizing this forum.