What if you just push your knuckel against the reader, does it just read the patterns on whatever is placed against it or does it know whether the opbject on top of it is a fingerprint or not?
So those Blair Witch guys were fucking idiots, huh? Why is it that people who don't know what they're talking about always bring up this film? A) They used Film for the vast majority of it. B) They advertised well with this new medium called "The Internet" C) What about the approxomately 200,000 other films made that year with the same budget that failed miserably? D) They got lucky.
The rest of your post...are you serious? "Get as low res as you can"???? What, webcam? 7-11 security cam? You start as high-quality as you can, because you can always take information away through compression, color correction, etc if you want. You CANNOT add information.
I can't believe I even have to get mad over this shit, but here we go: The res is a term for a hell of a lot more than just individual pixel information, it's the way it's stored, the pickup medium, the color saturation, and a whole host of other things. You can film the same scene with a DV-CAM camera, and a Digital 8 camera, and the picture will be the same size. The quality will be a difference of leaps and bounds though. Home movies look like shit. 2k consumer grade 1CCD cameras look like shit. You're talking about optical zoom, which means you're looking in the realm of home video equipment. He's not editing on iMovie, he's got eight mics at his disposal, and a couple thousand dollars worth of professional software on his powerbook. With that 2 grand he's got an excellent rental package with a few lenses and a great set of batteries (and probably including a tripod and a hi hat) for a couple days. (Extra hint, rent over a weekend. Pick up on Thursday, shoot friday, Saturday and Sunday...you only get charged for the weekday.)
if you'll be able to do all the shooting within a tight time window. That's called "scheduling" which is also known as "the most critical part of filmmaking." Best get used to it now.
Unfortunately, the cameras that are good in these areas are going to tend to be the older cameras, so they'll be hard to find. Or maybe that's fortunate, since they'd likely be cheaper.:) This is just beyond wrong. Every part of it.
And yes, the lighting is extremely important -- just as important as the camera. About three times more important than the camera. Shooting shit with a 1.9 million dollar digital camera (a-la "Collateral") is still shooting shit.
Oh, and let me address this point again: So those Blair Witch guys were fucking idiots, huh? Yeah, they turned down 5 gross points for a flat million each upfront. Now they're broke, and Miramax owns their film.
The above commenter has no idea what they're talking about.
My advice is this:
A) Rent a camera, don't buy. You can rent a much better camera than you can ever afford and it'll show.
B) res does matter. You shoot with a shitty camera, and no amount of color correction or digital post-production is going to change the fact that it looks like you shot it with a shitty camera. You can always subtract information for video, DVD, or HDTV, you can always compress it, but you cannot ADD information that isn't there to begin with. If you're talking about regular tv resolution, than you're a fucking idiot and don't know shit about filmmaking.
C) If you're shooting indoors, and you're shooting a film, you're lighting a scene. Make sure you whit-balance it to the tungsten filament indoor lights you're using. If you're shooting it outside, likewise to the sun, which has more blue in in.
D) No camera is water-resistant/proof. You'll need a housing, and you'll need to be willing to run the risk of ruining the camera. If you're going to be shooting legally (i.e. with permits, insurance, etc.) shooting in the water will add about $30,000 in insurance premiums alone (trust me, I've done it before). Save yourself the trouble, the time, and the money: change the scene while it's in the script stage; it's free to change now, it'll cost you to change it later.
E) If you want more advice/some tips/anything else from someone who's shot more than a few short films (and produced as well) email me and we can chat.
Well, I used to be an Opera fanboy up until last week. I tried out Firefox, and it blew the shit out of Opera in terms of speed, page errors, and comptability. Firefox loads pages damn near instantly. Opera was fast, but firefox is demon-fast. As far as Thunderbird, I don't know, I don;t use the built in Opera mail client, but from a former Opera user...Firefox is now my default....
Motion capture is completely different from motion graphics. And yes, Motion capture is too expensive to be done at the consumer level.
Not to be an ass, but this could have been cleared up by simply clicking the link in the article and reading the first sentence in the product description...
It's marketed towards women; I thought there might be hope for the slashdot crowd afterall...
Damn good thing
on
Retro Vision
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Damn good thing this story was put on the front page of/. otherwise i would have never known about this "internet" that you speak of. Man, so much more to this world than I ever knew;)
Man that featurette doesn't scale well... Whomever decided to make it a shockwave movie and have it automatically scale to full-screen should be relinquished of any responsibility or decision-making opportunity.
Software doesn;t change the fact that storage is still a problem, especially since you need to use some of it to install this program. For the price of the software plus a memory card you can just buy a real MP3 player...
...of the scene in Minority Report where he walks into The Gap and based on his retina scan is offered another set of pants similar to the ones he's bought there before... It creeped me out then and it creeps me out now.
Nextel, Sprint and BellSouth are all interested in the technology Great...just what's needed from a phone provider: more wireless technology that they can provide terrible reception with.
So if Information and conglomeration are now copyrightable as intellectual property, can I copyright my DNA and fingerprints and sue anyone who tries to get a sample of either for copyright infringement and illegal tampering of my own personal database? Considering that I can fully claim myself as owner/manager of said conglomeration of information (being that I'm over 18), I think I can classify myself as a database, and all the information therein...
I've been hoping for something like this for a long time: a tablet that I can take somewhere like out on my porch or to school or wherever, and it mimics or uses my computer at home and all of it's programs. Basically, just a screen with USB ports that can connect (not sync, actually connect) with my home computer to enable me to have a moveable workspace. Keyboard, mouse, Screen, and BAM protable workstation that's EXACTLY like the one I'm used to using. I'd be willing to have some sort of trade-off of performance, i.e. for more complicated things such as video editing or Photoshop, it would have the main computer (the desktop) do the work and just send the results when done to the tablet, all I need it for is basically a fancy display that allows remote control over my main computer and a place to plug in a keyboard:)
...in loving the ability to think that each of these little pebbles are the beginnings of a landslide and that relatively soon Microsoft is going to be fucked?
Whether or not it ends up to be true, thinking "microsoft is soon to be fucked" is so satisfying a thought, no?
Yes but...people already know Flash, they've gotten years of practice and make lots of money off of it. Despite potentially better technology, will they switch from what is familiar?
For reference, see Minidisc, laserdisc, Apple, and Linux...
The evening keynote at CDXPO is by Darl McBride. On the way in they handed out a pamphlet from WIPO entitled "Intellectual Property: A Power Tool for Economic Growth." I'm not sure who decided to hand it out, but I think its a little silly.
Darl starts out with a history of SCO. He says "SCO = UNIX." (Note: in the interest of my fingers, I'm going to stop typing "he says" and just type the essence of his speech. If I add commentary of my own, I'll note that.) A year ago, the answer to the question "who owns UNIX?" would have gotten a variety of responses. While there are many branches of UNIX, they all tie into the same tree trunk. AIX, HPUX, and others are licensed products of SCO. There are more than 6000 licensees with access to UNIX source code. Now he world knows that SCO owns those licenses.
When Darl joined SCO, its market cap had gone from a billion dollars to 6 million and had about 6 months of operating funds in the bank. When he looked at the assets, he saw $60 million in revenue, a channel of resellers, and intellectual property. He didn't think the company was getting the most from its IP assets and saw IP infringements from "the upstart Linux."
He was told when he examined this space that going after Linux infringements would bring down the wrath of the Linux community on the company. He didn't see the Linux community as one of his assets. His constituents are his shareholders and customers.
SCO set up a licensing program to put UNIX libraries on Linux. IBM threatened that they would not support SCO on their products if they didn't retract their licensing program. 20% of SCO's operating systems ship on IBM hardware. IBM thought the program would imply licensing issues with Linux. IBM was talking about taking major parts of AIX and moving it into Linux. Since IBM makes a large portion of its revenue from its IP, SCO thought this was unfair.
SCO got to the point where they had one option left: litigation. That set in place a chain of events that led to the last six months. What is not in dispute: SCO owns all UNIX System V source code SCO owns agreements to all UNIX vendors SCO owns all UNIX System V copyrights SCO owns all claims for violation of UNIX licenses. SCO controls UNIX System V derivative works.
SCO doesn't own the derivative, but they have rights to confidentiality that are the same as for the original work.
The Linux infringements include literal copying, obfuscated copying, derivative works, and non-literal transfers.
Darl takes on what he calls urban myths surrounding SCO. I am not a Penguin Slayer or a Suit-Happy Cowboy. SCO does not want to destroy open source or Linux. With the appropriate checks and balances, open source has merit. End users are not safe in taking a wait and see position. SCO is contacting customers and asking them to take a license of litigate position. Linux infringements cannot be fixed by simply removing or changing it. The GPL is at risk, but IBM put it on the table, not SCO as part of the litigation.
Some other points: There's no free lunch or free Linux. The value proposition of Linux is UNIX for free. Free models such as free music, free Internet, free bandwidth, and free love haven't worked. Giving away a UNIX-like OS for free isn't a problem. What is a problem is giving away UNIX or pieces of it when you don't own it. Free software removes the incentive for innovation. There will lost jobs and lack of competition. SCO is in a tug-of-war between those who want software to be free and those who support proprietary software. SCO is a bellwether for this giant tug-of-war. This country was built on the notion of property ownership and being about to protect one's property. What's left in this company are concepts and ideas. If you take away the ability to protect that, we're reduced out ability to compete as a country (cue the break out the flag, someone).
Slashdot Mirror
Now had you said 720p or 1080p, I would have been more interested, but this is at least a way for home movies to look better...if you're rich.
What if you just push your knuckel against the reader, does it just read the patterns on whatever is placed against it or does it know whether the opbject on top of it is a fingerprint or not?
So those Blair Witch guys were fucking idiots, huh?
:)
Why is it that people who don't know what they're talking about always bring up this film?
A) They used Film for the vast majority of it.
B) They advertised well with this new medium called "The Internet"
C) What about the approxomately 200,000 other films made that year with the same budget that failed miserably?
D) They got lucky.
The rest of your post...are you serious? "Get as low res as you can"???? What, webcam? 7-11 security cam?
You start as high-quality as you can, because you can always take information away through compression, color correction, etc if you want. You CANNOT add information.
I can't believe I even have to get mad over this shit, but here we go:
The res is a term for a hell of a lot more than just individual pixel information, it's the way it's stored, the pickup medium, the color saturation, and a whole host of other things. You can film the same scene with a DV-CAM camera, and a Digital 8 camera, and the picture will be the same size. The quality will be a difference of leaps and bounds though. Home movies look like shit. 2k consumer grade 1CCD cameras look like shit. You're talking about optical zoom, which means you're looking in the realm of home video equipment. He's not editing on iMovie, he's got eight mics at his disposal, and a couple thousand dollars worth of professional software on his powerbook. With that 2 grand he's got an excellent rental package with a few lenses and a great set of batteries (and probably including a tripod and a hi hat) for a couple days. (Extra hint, rent over a weekend. Pick up on Thursday, shoot friday, Saturday and Sunday...you only get charged for the weekday.)
if you'll be able to do all the shooting within a tight time window.
That's called "scheduling" which is also known as "the most critical part of filmmaking." Best get used to it now.
Unfortunately, the cameras that are good in these areas are going to tend to be the older cameras, so they'll be hard to find. Or maybe that's fortunate, since they'd likely be cheaper.
This is just beyond wrong. Every part of it.
And yes, the lighting is extremely important -- just as important as the camera.
About three times more important than the camera. Shooting shit with a 1.9 million dollar digital camera (a-la "Collateral") is still shooting shit.
Oh, and let me address this point again:
So those Blair Witch guys were fucking idiots, huh?
Yeah, they turned down 5 gross points for a flat million each upfront. Now they're broke, and Miramax owns their film.
The above commenter has no idea what they're talking about.
My advice is this:
A) Rent a camera, don't buy. You can rent a much better camera than you can ever afford and it'll show.
B) res does matter. You shoot with a shitty camera, and no amount of color correction or digital post-production is going to change the fact that it looks like you shot it with a shitty camera. You can always subtract information for video, DVD, or HDTV, you can always compress it, but you cannot ADD information that isn't there to begin with. If you're talking about regular tv resolution, than you're a fucking idiot and don't know shit about filmmaking.
C) If you're shooting indoors, and you're shooting a film, you're lighting a scene. Make sure you whit-balance it to the tungsten filament indoor lights you're using. If you're shooting it outside, likewise to the sun, which has more blue in in.
D) No camera is water-resistant/proof. You'll need a housing, and you'll need to be willing to run the risk of ruining the camera. If you're going to be shooting legally (i.e. with permits, insurance, etc.) shooting in the water will add about $30,000 in insurance premiums alone (trust me, I've done it before). Save yourself the trouble, the time, and the money: change the scene while it's in the script stage; it's free to change now, it'll cost you to change it later.
E) If you want more advice/some tips/anything else from someone who's shot more than a few short films (and produced as well) email me and we can chat.
This will work brilliantly until someone decides to outsource it to California...
Well, I used to be an Opera fanboy up until last week. I tried out Firefox, and it blew the shit out of Opera in terms of speed, page errors, and comptability. Firefox loads pages damn near instantly. Opera was fast, but firefox is demon-fast.
As far as Thunderbird, I don't know, I don;t use the built in Opera mail client, but from a former Opera user...Firefox is now my default....
Wait a minute...I've seen Star Wars and can say definitively that there are no Gorillas!
I don't think it would have fit inside the can...unless it was a RAV4 or something...
Motion capture is completely different from motion graphics. And yes, Motion capture is too expensive to be done at the consumer level.
Not to be an ass, but this could have been cleared up by simply clicking the link in the article and reading the first sentence in the product description...
So "serious" companies prefer digital rights management over audio quality and general ease of use? Sounds somewhat backwards to me...
...how much of it was true? ;)
It's marketed towards women; I thought there might be hope for the slashdot crowd afterall...
Damn good thing this story was put on the front page of /. otherwise i would have never known about this "internet" that you speak of. ;)
Man, so much more to this world than I ever knew
Man that featurette doesn't scale well...
Whomever decided to make it a shockwave movie and have it automatically scale to full-screen should be relinquished of any responsibility or decision-making opportunity.
Software doesn;t change the fact that storage is still a problem, especially since you need to use some of it to install this program. For the price of the software plus a memory card you can just buy a real MP3 player...
It was intended to counter soviet weapons...the soviets invent a new type of weapon, we cancel the aforementioned anti-soviet-weapon-weapon.
Go figure...
...of the scene in Minority Report where he walks into The Gap and based on his retina scan is offered another set of pants similar to the ones he's bought there before...
It creeped me out then and it creeps me out now.
Nextel, Sprint and BellSouth are all interested in the technology
Great...just what's needed from a phone provider: more wireless technology that they can provide terrible reception with.
So if Information and conglomeration are now copyrightable as intellectual property, can I copyright my DNA and fingerprints and sue anyone who tries to get a sample of either for copyright infringement and illegal tampering of my own personal database?
Considering that I can fully claim myself as owner/manager of said conglomeration of information (being that I'm over 18), I think I can classify myself as a database, and all the information therein...
So...who's the first to make a joke about "I've got 8Gigs in my wang baby..."?
Awesome trailer, though mroe of a teaser than an actual trailer. That alone makes me positive of next summer's number one B.O. hit though.
I've been hoping for something like this for a long time: a tablet that I can take somewhere like out on my porch or to school or wherever, and it mimics or uses my computer at home and all of it's programs. Basically, just a screen with USB ports that can connect (not sync, actually connect) with my home computer to enable me to have a moveable workspace. :)
Keyboard, mouse, Screen, and BAM protable workstation that's EXACTLY like the one I'm used to using. I'd be willing to have some sort of trade-off of performance, i.e. for more complicated things such as video editing or Photoshop, it would have the main computer (the desktop) do the work and just send the results when done to the tablet, all I need it for is basically a fancy display that allows remote control over my main computer and a place to plug in a keyboard
...in loving the ability to think that each of these little pebbles are the beginnings of a landslide and that relatively soon Microsoft is going to be fucked?
Whether or not it ends up to be true, thinking "microsoft is soon to be fucked" is so satisfying a thought, no?
Yes but...people already know Flash, they've gotten years of practice and make lots of money off of it. Despite potentially better technology, will they switch from what is familiar?
For reference, see Minidisc, laserdisc, Apple, and Linux...
From the blog, copied and pasted.
"Carl McBride: Linux Won't Remain Free
The evening keynote at CDXPO is by Darl McBride. On the way in they handed out a pamphlet from WIPO entitled "Intellectual Property: A Power Tool for Economic Growth." I'm not sure who decided to hand it out, but I think its a little silly.
Darl starts out with a history of SCO. He says "SCO = UNIX." (Note: in the interest of my fingers, I'm going to stop typing "he says" and just type the essence of his speech. If I add commentary of my own, I'll note that.) A year ago, the answer to the question "who owns UNIX?" would have gotten a variety of responses. While there are many branches of UNIX, they all tie into the same tree trunk. AIX, HPUX, and others are licensed products of SCO. There are more than 6000 licensees with access to UNIX source code. Now he world knows that SCO owns those licenses.
When Darl joined SCO, its market cap had gone from a billion dollars to 6 million and had about 6 months of operating funds in the bank. When he looked at the assets, he saw $60 million in revenue, a channel of resellers, and intellectual property. He didn't think the company was getting the most from its IP assets and saw IP infringements from "the upstart Linux."
He was told when he examined this space that going after Linux infringements would bring down the wrath of the Linux community on the company. He didn't see the Linux community as one of his assets. His constituents are his shareholders and customers.
SCO set up a licensing program to put UNIX libraries on Linux. IBM threatened that they would not support SCO on their products if they didn't retract their licensing program. 20% of SCO's operating systems ship on IBM hardware. IBM thought the program would imply licensing issues with Linux. IBM was talking about taking major parts of AIX and moving it into Linux. Since IBM makes a large portion of its revenue from its IP, SCO thought this was unfair.
SCO got to the point where they had one option left: litigation. That set in place a chain of events that led to the last six months. What is not in dispute:
SCO owns all UNIX System V source code
SCO owns agreements to all UNIX vendors
SCO owns all UNIX System V copyrights
SCO owns all claims for violation of UNIX licenses.
SCO controls UNIX System V derivative works.
SCO doesn't own the derivative, but they have rights to confidentiality that are the same as for the original work.
The Linux infringements include literal copying, obfuscated copying, derivative works, and non-literal transfers.
Darl takes on what he calls urban myths surrounding SCO.
I am not a Penguin Slayer or a Suit-Happy Cowboy.
SCO does not want to destroy open source or Linux. With the appropriate checks and balances, open source has merit.
End users are not safe in taking a wait and see position. SCO is contacting customers and asking them to take a license of litigate position.
Linux infringements cannot be fixed by simply removing or changing it.
The GPL is at risk, but IBM put it on the table, not SCO as part of the litigation.
Some other points:
There's no free lunch or free Linux. The value proposition of Linux is UNIX for free. Free models such as free music, free Internet, free bandwidth, and free love haven't worked.
Giving away a UNIX-like OS for free isn't a problem. What is a problem is giving away UNIX or pieces of it when you don't own it.
Free software removes the incentive for innovation. There will lost jobs and lack of competition. SCO is in a tug-of-war between those who want software to be free and those who support proprietary software. SCO is a bellwether for this giant tug-of-war.
This country was built on the notion of property ownership and being about to protect one's property. What's left in this company are concepts and ideas. If you take away the ability to protect that, we're reduced out ability to compete as a country (cue the break out the flag, someone).
Predi