freeflydrew

I use Aperture (eduation discounted) and Photoshop CS in conjunction with one another. I like Aperture for some things, but prefer iPhoto for other things. (I'm able to deduct the expense of Aperture, so it makes it seem a little more worth it). Check i out... I think it's kinda hit or miss with peoples opinions. Kinda like Final Cut versus iMovie. Some people really like iMovie, others like FCP!

mac or windows?

(Interesting prediction of upcomingevents) Ex-U.N. inspector: Iran's next: Ritter warns that another U.S. invasion in Mideast is imminent By Brandon Garcia 02/06/06 (Santa Fe New Mexican, The (KRT) Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge) The former U.N. weapons inspector who said Iraq disarmed long before the U.S. invasion in 2003 is warning Americans to prepare for a war with Iran. "We just don't know when, but it's going to happen," Scott Ritter said to a crowd of about 150 at the James A. Little Theater on Sunday night. Ritter described how the U.S. government might justify war with Iran in a scenario similar to the buildup to the Iraq invasion. He also argued that Iran wants a nuclear energy program, and not nuclear weapons. But the Bush administration, he said, refuses to believe Iran is telling the truth. He predicted the matter will wind up before the U.N. Security Council, which will determine there is no evidence of a weapons program. Then, he said, John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, "will deliver a speech that has already been written. It says America cannot allow Iran to threaten the United States and we must unilaterally defend ourselves." "How do I know this? I've talked to Bolton's speechwriter," Ritter said. Ritter also predicted the military strategy for war with Iran. First, American forces will bomb Iran. If Iranians don't overthrow the current government, as Bush hopes they will, Iran will probably attack Israel. Then, Ritter said, the United States will drop a nuclear bomb on Iran. The only way to prevent a war with Iran is to elect a Democratically controlled Congress in November, said Ritter, a lifelong Republican. He later said he wasn't worried his advice would be seen as partisan because, "It's a partisan issue." He said the problem is one party government and if Democrats controlled the presidency and Congress, he would advise people to elect Republicans. Most of Ritter's hour-long speech focused on Iraqi weapons programs from shortly before the Persian Gulf War in 1991 to 2003, when the U.S. invaded Iraq. He also discussed the weapons-inspections process during that time. Ritter was in charge of U.N. weapons inspections until he resigned in 1998. Before the Iraq invasion, Ritter said, he told Congress that inspections needed to continue. He also said he was a Marine in the Persian Gulf War and was part of an assassination attempt on Saddam Hussein in the early 1990s. Throughout the 1990s, Ritter said, America's real policy for Iraq was regime change -- not forcing Iraq to disarm and destroy chemical-, biological- and nuclear-weapons programs. The U.S. insisted on regime change, he said, because it believes transforming the Middle East countries into democracies will help ensure American access to oil. The policy, he said, was borne from a political problem, not a threat to national security. Ritter said the CIA knew Iraq had no ballistic, nuclear, chemical and biological weapons by 1995. "We knew there were no WMDs in Iraq," he said. Ritter blamed Americans' apathy for allowing Bush to claim there was an intelligence failure. Presidents can lie to the public too easily about national security issues because Americans aren't paying attention, he said. "It's a damn shame there's so many more people interested in the Seattle Seahawks and the Pittsburgh Steelers," he said in reference to the two teams that played in Sunday's Super Bowl. After his speech, Ritter took questions from the audience. The first questioner wondered whether the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were faked. Ritter, a fiery speaker, seemed irritated by the question and said the attacks were real. Someone else asked if he was interested in running for Congress. While the question drew applause, Ritter responded, "I hate politics." Ritter, 44, was promoting his book Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of the Intelligence Conspiracy to Undermine the UN and Overthrow Saddam Hussein. The speech was sponsored by Peace Action New Mexico.

for me the decision of an rsl has more to do with skydiving in general and less to do with which helmet is strapped to my head. I choose not to fly with a rsl because I believe that there will be times when the reserve deployment immediately following the main cutaway is not ideal. But thats just me.

you should really do a search for these answers as they've probably been covered before... the micro drive isn't good for skydiving... stick with minidv, and opinions vary on where the best place for video is. I personally have the stills on top and the vid on the side.

FYI- the file is ~90 MB

According to Phil Schiller, Apple isn't concerned if people want to run XP on Apple Hardware... He's quoted on MacRumors as saying that. And people have made OS X run on PCs already. We just ordered the new PB here at the school... We're especially interested in the built in isight for classroom discussions with satellite campuses, and also the new magnetic power adapter, which will hopefully eliminate 4 or 5 very expensive accidental repairs per year! -drew ACDT ACPT ACHDS

That's not a Rawa...

i jump the rawa with stills and video and it's great... pretty much the entire country of Brazil jumps them too...

I agree... the Ultra is way faster! I only use the slow card for portraits... the rest are with the ultras (I have 2)

I strap it to my carry on... never a problem

the roller thingee on the side of the camera is the focus... roll it a bunch in one of the directions and the camera will go into infinity focus. A little graphic of a mountain will appear on the LCD.

maybe because the lcd is on the left side so you can watch footage on the plane?

i read the exact same article weeks ago from a us news site... so weird

I use a 15mm fisheye sigma f/2.8 (on a canon) for freefly ~$650.00

OK, the bluetooth keyboard from apple is good... It's relatively cheap and the batteries will last for over 6 months. The Apple bluetooth mouse kinda sucks. The bluetooth mighty mouse would be cool whenever apple decides to build it... The Logitech MX900 bluetooth mouse is the Shi-at. It comes with a rechargable battery, a charging dock, and I think 7 programable buttons that you can apply expose commands to... I've been looking for a replacement, but have yet to find anything better than the 900!

Another thing about getting a faster lens (f/2.8) is that you can produce those pics where the subject is very clear and the background is all blurry... Super nice effect in photography. I think it's called a shallow depth of field.

IMO, neither lens you mention are going to be great for photographing landings... First of all, unless you're planning on being way fay away from the landing, having the extra 200-400/500mm is unnecessary. The f/4-5.6 means that as you zoom in and out you will have to constantly refocus because the aperature will be changing, where as a lens with a fixed f/stop of say f/4, would allow you to lock in your focus on the subject and then zoom in or out to frame the subject, without losing your focus. Also, the f/stop (aperature/speed) of the lens is kinda slow. Sigma and Nikon both make a 70-200mm f/2.8 which would probably better suite your needs for photographing landings. You can focus on your subject and zoom in or out without having to refocus, and the the faster lens (f/2.8), means more light and faster shutter speeds (greater range of photographic opportunities). You can still shoot at any aperature smaller than f/2.8 (f/4, f/5.6, etc), but you can get the bigger opening if you need it. The 200mm is plenty of zoom for most landing areas and competitions. The other thing is that the f/4-f/5.6 lenses are going to be too slow for indoor/lower light photography, so you are really limited with where you can shoot with those lenses. In terms of focusing, I think that the sigma lenses and nikon lenses will focus fast enough for landing photographs. Hope this helps -drew

it also depends on which 75-300 lens it is... should be at least a fixed f/4 or less (faster)...

I've paid for coaching each time I've flown (5 hours total), except for 30 minutes in SkyventureAZ. I hired Fabian and Joao as coaches. I think the price was totally fair, and it was completely worth every penny... Unless I have the opportunity to fly with friends that are great in the tunnel, I will continue hiring coaches... I have much more fun flying with another person than just doing solo time, you know?

Yawn... Foxnews isn't even picking up this one You really need to get over this one and stop bringing it up... it's like a broken record player in here.

It depends on where you are... there are a ton of really, really good freefly coaches. Dave Brown, Alaska Jon, Max Cohn, any of the boys from Perris (megacenter), Chris and Stan in Elsinore, anyone from SkydiveArizona (AZTC, AZFC), NoCal, Houston (anomoly), Dallas, Julianna Se, Blincoe, Babylon... The list would literally go on and on. The more jumps you hire for, the better the deal. Some coaches have daily rates, too. I would consider whether or not you can mix in a little tunnel coaching with your instructor... That'll narrow down your search a bunch as there aren't that many tunnels in the country. Also, go where the weather is guaranteed and the planes will be flying.

you can purchase a media converter which has rca in and firewire out and go directly between the vcr/dvd to the computer... they're a little pricey though.

which lens is it?

Sanford Pinot Noir 2001... probably a little above $20, like $24, but the extra 4 bucks is definitely worth it. (I like pinot Noir from the Russian River Valley from 2001 and 2003)