X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 09:48:13 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nm26.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com ([98.139.91.96] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.2) with SMTP id 5206538 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:44:18 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=98.139.91.96; envelope-from=randylsnarr@yahoo.com Received: from [98.139.91.70] by nm26.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Nov 2011 15:43:42 -0000 Received: from [98.139.91.44] by tm10.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Nov 2011 15:43:42 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1044.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Nov 2011 15:43:42 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 41124.48506.bm@omp1044.mail.sp2.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 81233 invoked by uid 60001); 19 Nov 2011 15:43:41 -0000 DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=awgv6YJQ4z/e9kiTDrkrqb59MmiHb3QVeb52ndj+va4otrK06SgKLgsztxTf054zS3vX1OugN3nJ5/CaFFjHcm73ILtem/wKrTnNSU7Z5EaguwF1yT72ZUZawCRFJ96wM7c3p38y2VRX43Jg7MPbMlNDEFU+Wj07EFQE4Lh4XJc=; X-YMail-OSG: IXbehbsVM1mG51VvkRhNlrto3oLmqJEWYgIMZhE3Q_l9JXu cpeLQOQxvKVliXTx2bq4pj_6Ymv_5FZHc2sc9btKU0x4zlM2d9CxyTlCDnqf mRzSitMOm5OGg0ZZcqgkaqXF67dRHpTzBaO_Ozt4zmVoUFrAhskVkVIdIpet 9Dp5lh581HMJDmQiN5T5qcO9N_wVfv7Qe6Nj6yZvLfu7ee1cRxlcxp45EDRT O0uFVy7punmOIg7QJ92RvhX8DKnTQ1GTTbaA0FQssngz81FD5flkPfu.YBCR eD_NknQjlwVC_uAS4dvQOtdRaSlwJVpNdIfYPrXfZhm4ScFsDdN6w8GvCeNZ DOShUqkCGE.6KRzO9H8GLzz72LhmietOTGoxN1GfdXdJgWWE.niWA1P5n8OQ nyaCaGRxru6wiL30YA0smJ.othbgo8adXpUjR8S5WZzpa0UGegFKHgcPlpXr H2DU12rX4xRN6RTSzThLNkif38vj_tOk_T4Bhv9Gg4zKGcPWKC7sJP8qavwO 4hnIxY_xt77tYRp4K4fuVyPwyEKnRF8er.upozJAvi_G._Kx5K4EPgknIGbk - Received: from [76.8.220.20] by web111407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 19 Nov 2011 07:43:41 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.115.325013 References: X-Original-Message-ID: <1321717421.72667.YahooMailNeo@web111407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> X-Original-Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 07:43:41 -0800 (PST) From: randy snarr Reply-To: randy snarr Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Inflight video X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-438862054-1625117447-1321717421=:72667" ---438862054-1625117447-1321717421=:72667 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Angier,=0AYou are correct, =0A=0A3 different cameras were used. =0A=0AThe m= ounted camera is the Contour HD. The hand helds were Sony and Cannon consum= er HD camcorders...=0ASorry for the prop blade thing, I have since learned = that you can put a darker lens on the camera that changes the frequency of = the frames and solves that..=0AHaven't tried it yet though...=0A=0A=0ARandy= Snarr=0A=0A=A0=0A"Flight by machines heavier than air is unpractical and i= nsignificant, if not utterly impossible"=0A-Simon Newcomb, 1902=0A=0A=0A___= _____________________________=0A From: "Greenbacks, UnLtd." =0ATo: lml@lancaironline.net =0ASent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 8:17 A= M=0ASubject: [LML] Re: Inflight video=0A =0AHard to tell here if all the vi= deo was shot from the same camera but I'm guessing not.=0APerhaps the autho= r could let us know. In several sequences, prop blades are seen rotating sl= owly (not fun to watch) and in others, not visible at all.=0ASo, is there o= ne video camera this group would highly recommend for inflight video?=0A=0A= Thanks,=0A=0AAngier Ames=0AN4ZQ=0A=0Ahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=3D1&v= =3Dd81TNNZBeRU=0A--=0AFor archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:= 81/lists/lml/List.html ---438862054-1625117447-1321717421=:72667 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Angier,
You are correct,
3 differe= nt cameras were used.
The mounted camera is the= Contour HD. The hand helds were Sony and Cannon consumer HD camcorders...<= /span>
Sorry for the prop blade thing, I have since learned= that you can put a darker lens on the camera that changes the frequency of= the frames and solves that..
Haven't tried it yet t= hough...

Randy Snarr
=
 
"= Flight by machines heavier than air is unpractical and insignificant, if no= t utterly impossible"
-Simon Newcomb, 1902

<= span style=3D"font-weight:bold;">From: "Greenbacks, UnLtd." <= N4ZQ@VERIZON.NET>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 8:17 AM
Subject: [LML] Re: Inflight video

= =0AHard to tell here if all the video was shot from the same camera but I'm= guessing not.
Perhaps the author could let us know. In several sequence= s, prop blades are seen rotating slowly (not fun to watch) and in others, n= ot visible at all.
So, is there one video camera this group would highly= recommend for inflight video?

Thanks,

Angier Ames
N4ZQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=3D1&v=3Dd81TNNZBeRU
--
For a= rchives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
<= br>
---438862054-1625117447-1321717421=:72667--