DSE

Like many other things, probably Skydive Dubai these days. Outside of that, perhaps Skydive Elsinore in terms of modern, fast post gear with a separate production room just for video that isn't shared with other things, that can manage anything from Arriraw to RED, to all the non-standard (and standard) codecs. There likely is another DZ out there that has a production geek like me with a Symphony, Composer, or some other stupid tool that doesn't belong on a DZ. For camera operators...Joe Jennings is a busy guy, he's an "everywhere" man but seems to be mostly at Elsinore, and Perris. Craig O'Brien is at Perris, and Norman Kent is at Deland. All three are shooting RED, Greg is at Eloy/travels and shooting ArriAlexa. Between those four, you've covered the bulk of the production shooting happening in the USA. Why do you ask?

That seems like an odd statement. Wouldn't a lens with a wider FOV offer more of the 'scenery', more of the time as opposed to a narrower lens? Beyond that, how does the FOV of the lens relate to the 'suckiness' of the camera flyer? As long as their framing is good, what difference does the FOV make? Truth be told, there are quite a few aircraft or step/handle configurations that do not allow good pictures in the door prior to exit without a wide angle lens. Sure, if you have an Otter with a large step and camera rail, you can climb way back and be able to frame them up nice in the door without a wide angle lens. but short of that a wide angle lens offers you a more complete FOV in the door, and like I mentioned above, provided you adjust your flying to the lens and your framing is good, what difference does it make? I don't think a 180 degree lens has much to say about the "suckiness of the camera flyer" but rather, if someone can't frame relatively well with a 180 degree lens...then yes, they suck. That's not the lens' fault. That said, I don't believe a ringsight is at all necessary with a 180 lens, and if it's not necessary, it's an unnecessary risk. Cryptocoin is flying a CX series with no lens adapter, and that speaks highly of his skill as a flyer, no doubt, and a ringsight would be very important/useful. And well beyond the skill of newer skydivers/camera flyers. *most* people today (it seems) are going for the cheap POV camera, most of which are 170 and 180 degree views, so to stay on track; *my opinion* is that a ringsight is not at all necessary for these types of camera setups. And if it's not necessary, it likely shouldn't be on the helmet.

yes, we're talking about the AS 100. And apparently we're talking exclusively about the GoPro 3 with ProTune enabled. Bitrate is only a small portion of the conversation. The compression method makes more of an impact on quality. Yes, Hellis, I get it. Somewhere the topic became obscured, I suppose.

I'll reiterate why there is no audio. In the bitrate, bits can be allocated for audio AND video, or video only. Since no one would use the audio from slow motion-acquisition content, it makes the most sense (from most perspectives) to allocate as many bits as possible to the video stream for the best image possible. If you want audio and don't care about mis-flagged video and don't mind some video quality loss, then the GoPro is the camera for you. If you want the very best slow motion that a POV camera can offer, then there currently is only the Sony. Toshiba has the framerates, but the compression is crap.

Nope, in my 8000+ jumps about half are video and all with blow switch and never this issue. The only reason I have an ultimate switch now and not the old blow switch that I got second hand that already had 1000's of jumps on it, is that I sold my flat top helmet with it mounted in. Who has had a fouled up blow switch? I have never heard of it. And OP, get an ultimate switch, it will most likely be the last one you will buy. I am, the guys that are too good to use them often drop the frame, a dot on the goggles does suffice but is a pain in the ass under canopy. A removable schumaker (spelling?) and an inexpensive ring site is the best. as you can get the thing out of your face for a safer canopy flight. My ring sight is very basic, cost me a box of beer for a local engineer to make. I feel the ring sight is most useful in the door and during the exit phase. a dot on your goggles can be too close to your eye to be accurate enough. So to clarify your points: You've never once maintained your blow switch? Never cleaned it, never taken it apart? That would be shockingly difficult to believe. As far as ringsights, you don't shoot with very wide FOV then? I'd guess you're shooting a .5 on a standard 38mm FOV camera, such as a CX. I do use a ringsight, and explained why. It has nothing to do with "being too good to use one" but rather using tools necessary for the job. Bottom line is that if someone needs a ringsight for a 180 degree lens, then they suck at what they're doing.

it is entirely impossible to get quality slow motion from 25p, 30p, 50i, or 60i framerate cameras. Even with tools like Twixtor, it cannot be done well, and certainly not with the quality bracket that we're discussing here. Although it's not uncommon to forget to change a setting, this is a user error, not a shortcoming of the product. Me...I'd prefer to use a camera that dedicates all of its bits to great footage, than to be using any of its bits for audio. In the pro world, none of the professional slow motion cameras record audio. i can see how non-pro users might think they want these features, but it does come down to right tool/job.

Last week, and again next week. It's actually exceptionally common, and if the client can't afford one of my higher end cameras, it's going to be the Replay or the AS or a GoPro. It's pretty clear you like GoPro. Perhaps you're even sponsored by them. Good for you, glad you're happy. But to claim that other cameras are "useless" in a skydive...that's a broad claim. When you suggest that teams are tolerant of GP's flare or fringing but not that of the Sony, it suggests you have a different agenda (such as selling a cable?) As far as the Toshiba (or most any other POV camera) I own approximately 70 POV cams (there is a photo here somewhere) and am familiar with most of them. I've shot for professional and casual application with all of them. Clients chose their camera based on color chart and example reels, and most every time, clients choose the Sony cameras over the GoPro cameras. For me, I honestly don't care much, I get paid either way. Sony and RePlay mean less work in post, but even with GoPro, it simply means pulling yellow and pushing blue a bit. With others, it means pulling blue by a few degrees. The AS100 has a neutral setting (which neither you nor I have seen), which supposedly removes the saturation curves that every one of the POV cameras out there (excepting Replay) have as a stock setting.

Curiously enough, dozens of DZs, hundreds of skydivers use the AS series without problems. It's a standard camera on at least 5 DZ's I'm aware of. Moreover, the color is better, compression more intelligent, stabilization the best there is without resorting to a gyro. Audio is useless in a skydive anyway, so the slo-mo modes really don't matter. On any pro/field shoot, there are two go-to cameras; Sony or RePlay (only these two offer T/C). YMMV

No. Noise filters work on constants. A lawn mower is not a constant, and like burbling water, cannot be effectively removed without having an impact on other audio. Any chance you can use audio from other portions of the recordings to cover the cut-outs from the lawnmower?

I disagree. The speed of freefall has no impact (pardon the pun) on the pilot's safety. The speed of the aircraft at exit does. BPA has a published standard on Caravan speeds, and following it seems to be ideal for all parties. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQOA5x4fbpA Low tail...

Re-read. "may even be" detrimental isn't the same as "always" detrimental. For an FFC to put their body into a hard track position will *frequently* be detrimental to the quality of the experience. Yes,there are some people that won't have issues. Rather than focusing on tracking until 200 jumps, focusing on more important skills like being belly-aware, clean deployments, accuracy, navigation, and being able to perform RW will benefit someone far, far more than buying a tracking suit and learning muscle memory that won't help them during the initial wingsuit jumps. I understand that some BASE-bound people have a different view, yet this is a skydiving forum. The conversation would be significantly different in a BASE forum. How many FFC's have you taught? Do you have data to help determine what factors often play into better or worse FFC experiences on a broad scale? What are other indicators of potential problem students vs likely successful students? Having observed several hundred FFC's, there are a few consistencies that have manifested themselves. One of them is that hard-core trackers often turn out to have muscle memory that doesn't serve them well in an FFC.

Sometimes we'll get students in that have been practicing tracking for WS that have the idea that maximum flight is what they want to achieve on their first few jumps. Part of a good coach's job is to catch it before the first flight occurs. If it's not caught, frequently the FFC will generate instability through a rigid, and usually improper body position. An FFC should be focused on exit, navigation, deployment, and nothing more. Body position, maximum flight, etc all come later in the process. "You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means" Which word? "sometimes?" Or "and?" "In" is a particularly difficult word for some.

They're useless. The camera cannot manage the instability in freefall, the jellocam is abhorrent, and the compression is very weak.

Sometimes we'll get students in that have been practicing tracking for WS that have the idea that maximum flight is what they want to achieve on their first few jumps. Part of a good coach's job is to catch it before the first flight occurs. If it's not caught, frequently the FFC will generate instability through a rigid, and usually improper body position. An FFC should be focused on exit, navigation, deployment, and nothing more. Body position, maximum flight, etc all come later in the process.

Tracking for wingsuit skydiving isn't at all essential, and in some cases is even detrimental to the WS process. That said, tracking suits are fun, but are also more beneficial to people who already know how to track and want to add to the experience.

you'll need to use either the 720p or the 1080p settings. the 960 setting is not widescreen-compatible, and needs to be trans-aspected in post.

Expensive is a matter of relevance. To those paying $30,000 for a full on 4K rig, it's pennies compared to the nearly 250K I shelled out for HD a decade ago. 4K at 300fps will be here sooner than later, and will be under 50K$.

for these small cameras, it's pretty much the same end result. The small imager negates the value of putting a better filter on it.

it can be done with any Gopro, 1, 2, 3. For GoPro 1/2, cutting the polarizer film/gel is the same size as a US nickel. Cut it out, drop it in, done. Before the glass/plastic bigger lens covers for the GP 3 came out, I was doing this with small round gels (not just for polarizing, but for ND as well). http://www.polarizingfilm.com/linearpolarizingfilm.php

you can also put a piece of polarizing gel inside the lens of the GoPro case. These polarizing gels are free if you have a Rosco sample swatch. Otherwise, they're about 11.00 from a camera shop. http://havecamerawilltravel.com/photographer/add-polarizing-filter-underwater-red-filter-gopro-hero-3

I submit that for the extreme wide angle lenses that most tandem photographers use, a paper asshole or marking on the goggles is just as effective. If I'm shooting a 35mm, 50mm, or 85mm lens, a ringsight is critical. However, everyone has their own thing; I'm just not a believer in ringsights for tandems.

while we are on the subject if anyone is selling a wing suit bridal and pc Im in the market for when I get a bigger suit. shoot me a pm Rigger usually can extend your bridle. chutingstar has em' on the shelf as a package. So does Rigging Innovations. However, if your PC is hitting a few hundred jumps, might as well replace both in one shot.

Same PC of what size? If it's a small PC, then you'll want to upsize, particularly if big suits are the goal.

First, I'd suggest re-thinking the Narrow. FTP is a great helmet, but if you ever get the urge to jump professional camera gear, you'll not be able to use the Narrow. The whole point (IMO) of having a pro camera helmet is to be able to mount pro gear. A Tonfly CC series is a great helmet for tandems. Lightweight, it'll hold a still and a small video camera, depending on the route you're planning on taking. You'll want a .5 lens, and most of the lens adapters come with the 37mm ring adapter necessary to mount the lens to the camcorder. All that said, go slowly. You'll assuredly make some mistakes along the way. I'd recommend taking your CX camera for now, jump with a bunch of 'spec' tandems to get the hang of what you're doing, and then make decisions. You'll be able to do this with any helmet for now. You can purchase the HypEye from gethypoxic.com, and install it on any helmet with gaff tape or drilling it in (I'd gaff for now). You'll eventually decide whether you want a tongue, bite, or blow switch. I prefer tongue switches, many here prefer blow switches. Bite switches are great if you get a good one, but they fail fairly fast if you're not taking care. Blow switches get fouled from spit. Tongue switches have lasted longest for me, and give me the least amount of movement (for non-skydiving use). Talk to others, play with their switches, see what you feel seems best for you. Ringsights are not necessary for tandems. They're necessary if you're doing professional work, and have a solid knowledge of focal lengths of your lens. The ringsight can come much later in your skydiving career.

old news, new tech... Smellovision was all the rage. For about 5 minutes. It's been rebirthed a few times in the entertainment industry.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smell-O-Vision