Just like 44,100 Hz, 16-bit digital sound with multiple redundancy doesn't sound like vinyl... thank the gods.
I'm no expert obviously, but I'd guess that the reason cinematographers complain about higher frame rates is the reduction of motion blur, which leads to a consequent reduction in fluidity. I suppose it's in principle possible that more fps would actually increase the sense of stuttering (though surely that could be compensated for by increasing motion blur? -- I'd guess, again as a complete non-expert, that very slight over-exposure could achieve that).
Just for reference, I found some discussion here; and there's a fairly detailed article about the fps problems of digital filming and of transferring movies to HD format here; it has some choice quotes --
For a century both the industry and audience standard for exposure duration has been 1/48th sec per frame (for features shot at 24fps). This shutter speed combined with the frame rate has a characteristic sharpness and judder that is in my view the strongest characteristic of what we call the film look.
In my view the judder effect of progressive capture at 1/48thsec shutter is the single most obvious technical factor for an audience that distinguishes film from interlace video. To put a figure on it I'd say 85% of the difference between film and video is bridged by using progressive capture.
Also it links to a chart of recommended panning speeds. The article concludes by suggesting that 60 fps capture is likely in the next decade, and that audiences
of the future may find the judder of 24fps movies made in the 20th century hard to bear.
The current specification for digital projectors calls for three levels of playback to be supported: 2K (2048x1080) at 24 frames per second, 4K (4096x2160) at 24 frames per second, and 2K at 48 frames per second.
-- though it doesn't mention whether the 48 fps playback is actually capable of 48 fps or is just using each frame twice per second; it also doesn't specify progressive or interlaced.
25-30 fps is enough for most purposes. I only find the deficiency noticeable when watching a very large display, such as in a cinema, in fast-panning shots.
Now that's genuinely informative. It's the first illustration I've seen to persuade me that there might be something in it after all. (Though I'd still place a higher priority on having ca. 60 frames per second -- on large displays, e.g. actually in a cinema, the jerkiness of fast-panning shots is a bigger issue for me than detail.)
Agreed. Now if movie companies were to double the standard frame-rate, rather than the resolution... then I'd be interested. (Actually, maybe they are. If so, hopefully someone will correct me.)
Notice the date -- 01/01/98. As someone else in this thread has noticed, archive.org preserves stories with comments from 1997. It looks like it's just that Slashdot's archive of comments only goes back to the start of 1998, for whatever reason.
I wonder what effect there would be from removing the +5/-1 caps on moderation? That could partially address the gpp's concerns about scalability, though probably with unintended side-effects. Mind you, it works well for bash.org.
Mind you, 16 year old girls not only often tend to be physically undeveloped but tend to also have their heads full of nothing but the most boring drivil...
I wasn't really expecting to find a law with "pedophilia" in the title; I was wanting to find out if, as I thought, someone who has, outside Australia, committed what Australia deems to be sex with an under-aged person, can be prosecuted in Australia. (This was an attempt to find an example of a country that prosecutes people for crimes committed elsewhere.) Just FWIW.
I was delighted, not too long ago, to find out the origin of the phrase "jumping the shark". I'd forgotten all about that. I'm not sure if I'm better off for remembering it.
I tried ask.com for a while but gave up -- after I tried hunting for info on Australia's laws on pedophilia, and got told "you're not allowed to make that query" or similar. Well, gee, thanks, in that case I'll take my searches elsewhere... Google gave me quite a lot of noise, as you point out, but at least it let me find the answer in a minute or so, as opposed to refusing to let me find out at all.
But.... that's what Yast is, isn't it? At least, what I understand by "a new package management system", is an update to Yast, though of course I may be wrong -- unless perhaps the new system refers to a wholly new back-end that Yast sits in front of? If that's the case, then I suppose the ggpp may have a point. I'm afraid I don't have time to do a lot of research into the murky depths of SUSE package management, so hopefully someone will enlighten me/us.
I'm not a SUSE user, but your comment strikes me as daft. In spite of your interpretation of its name, Yast is not new; it's been around for ages, and I don't think I'm incorrect in saying that it was the very first RPM manager that was both grandma-friendly and GUI-oriented. When I did some reading up on comparative reviews of package managers some time ago (roundabout the time of Mandrake 9.2), Yast was consistently rated as the very best of all package managers.
Yes, it does take tremendous pressure to change an electoral system. But it can happen. It happened in my country in the early 1990s. It looked for a while as though it might happen in the UK, until Tony Blair visibly panicked at the idea. It can happen -- if people actually care about it.
It is arguable that a fairer comparison would be the footprint of Opera vs the footprint of (Firefox + Thunderbird + mIRC). Or even just Opera vs Mozilla. As long as I've got a gig of RAM and as long as Opera feels ultra-snappy, I don't really care about Opera using 10% or even 30% more memory than Firefox; the deciding factors will be elsewhere.
I've often wondered just WHY firefox sucks so bad. I mean, it's also the best browser around, and it's the one I use, but it eats up all my memory (I don't care what anyone says, there is no excuse for that,...
FWIW, I've just revved up Opera 9 and it's already using marginally more memory than Firefox, which has been running for a couple of hours (63 MB vs 60 MB).
Also FWIW, when installing a web browser for grandma, I'm still not sure whether I'd choose Firefox or Opera. On a Mac, I'd definitely choose Opera ahead of Firefox (which is ultra-slow on some machines) or Safari (Opera is much, much more feature-ful without being more confusing). On Windows or Linux...? I'll try it for a week or so and see how it goes.
No; browsing a website without ads is not going to the movies without paying. It's more like going to the movies but not arriving until the ads are finished.
The online equivalent of going the movies without paying would be browsing a website without paying your ISP.
Someone please mod parent "dumb". The difference is between 5 x 10^11 and 3 x 10^12, less than an order of magnitude. The statement about the frequency of visible light is accurate, however (though the boundary between infrared and red is closer to 4.1 x 10^14 Hz).
Slashdot Mirror
Just like 44,100 Hz, 16-bit digital sound with multiple redundancy doesn't sound like vinyl ... thank the gods.
I'm no expert obviously, but I'd guess that the reason cinematographers complain about higher frame rates is the reduction of motion blur, which leads to a consequent reduction in fluidity. I suppose it's in principle possible that more fps would actually increase the sense of stuttering (though surely that could be compensated for by increasing motion blur? -- I'd guess, again as a complete non-expert, that very slight over-exposure could achieve that).
Just for reference, I found some discussion here; and there's a fairly detailed article about the fps problems of digital filming and of transferring movies to HD format here; it has some choice quotes --
Also it links to a chart of recommended panning speeds. The article concludes by suggesting that 60 fps capture is likely in the next decade, and that audiences
Interestingly, a Wikipedia article mentions that
-- though it doesn't mention whether the 48 fps playback is actually capable of 48 fps or is just using each frame twice per second; it also doesn't specify progressive or interlaced.
OK, show of hands: who would trust proofreading done by this person?
25-30 fps is enough for most purposes. I only find the deficiency noticeable when watching a very large display, such as in a cinema, in fast-panning shots.
Now that's genuinely informative. It's the first illustration I've seen to persuade me that there might be something in it after all. (Though I'd still place a higher priority on having ca. 60 frames per second -- on large displays, e.g. actually in a cinema, the jerkiness of fast-panning shots is a bigger issue for me than detail.)
Agreed. Now if movie companies were to double the standard frame-rate, rather than the resolution ... then I'd be interested. (Actually, maybe they are. If so, hopefully someone will correct me.)
Notice the date -- 01/01/98. As someone else in this thread has noticed, archive.org preserves stories with comments from 1997. It looks like it's just that Slashdot's archive of comments only goes back to the start of 1998, for whatever reason.
Snap. (FWIW I don't listen to NPR as I'm not in the US, but I do listen to BBC Radio 4 online a lot.)
I wonder what effect there would be from removing the +5/-1 caps on moderation? That could partially address the gpp's concerns about scalability, though probably with unintended side-effects. Mind you, it works well for bash.org.
Thanks for that -- it's not something I've encountered yet on Google. Anyway it's largely a choice between a douche bag and a turd sandwich.
Mods, what the hell is trollish about the parent??! Time to do a batch of metamoderating, methinks ...
As compared with 16 year old boys ...
I wasn't really expecting to find a law with "pedophilia" in the title; I was wanting to find out if, as I thought, someone who has, outside Australia, committed what Australia deems to be sex with an under-aged person, can be prosecuted in Australia. (This was an attempt to find an example of a country that prosecutes people for crimes committed elsewhere.) Just FWIW.
I was delighted, not too long ago, to find out the origin of the phrase "jumping the shark". I'd forgotten all about that. I'm not sure if I'm better off for remembering it.
I tried ask.com for a while but gave up -- after I tried hunting for info on Australia's laws on pedophilia, and got told "you're not allowed to make that query" or similar. Well, gee, thanks, in that case I'll take my searches elsewhere ... Google gave me quite a lot of noise, as you point out, but at least it let me find the answer in a minute or so, as opposed to refusing to let me find out at all.
But .... that's what Yast is, isn't it? At least, what I understand by "a new package management system", is an update to Yast, though of course I may be wrong -- unless perhaps the new system refers to a wholly new back-end that Yast sits in front of? If that's the case, then I suppose the ggpp may have a point. I'm afraid I don't have time to do a lot of research into the murky depths of SUSE package management, so hopefully someone will enlighten me/us.
Well, in my country SUSE is the distro of choice for government departments deploying Linux.
I'm not a SUSE user, but your comment strikes me as daft. In spite of your interpretation of its name, Yast is not new; it's been around for ages, and I don't think I'm incorrect in saying that it was the very first RPM manager that was both grandma-friendly and GUI-oriented. When I did some reading up on comparative reviews of package managers some time ago (roundabout the time of Mandrake 9.2), Yast was consistently rated as the very best of all package managers.
Please! It's Pirate King .
Yes, it does take tremendous pressure to change an electoral system. But it can happen. It happened in my country in the early 1990s. It looked for a while as though it might happen in the UK, until Tony Blair visibly panicked at the idea. It can happen -- if people actually care about it.
Oh dear GOD that is painful to look at in 1280x1024. Aaaaaggghh /claws eyes out
It is arguable that a fairer comparison would be the footprint of Opera vs the footprint of (Firefox + Thunderbird + mIRC). Or even just Opera vs Mozilla. As long as I've got a gig of RAM and as long as Opera feels ultra-snappy, I don't really care about Opera using 10% or even 30% more memory than Firefox; the deciding factors will be elsewhere.
FWIW, I've just revved up Opera 9 and it's already using marginally more memory than Firefox, which has been running for a couple of hours (63 MB vs 60 MB).
Also FWIW, when installing a web browser for grandma, I'm still not sure whether I'd choose Firefox or Opera. On a Mac, I'd definitely choose Opera ahead of Firefox (which is ultra-slow on some machines) or Safari (Opera is much, much more feature-ful without being more confusing). On Windows or Linux ...? I'll try it for a week or so and see how it goes.
No; browsing a website without ads is not going to the movies without paying. It's more like going to the movies but not arriving until the ads are finished.
The online equivalent of going the movies without paying would be browsing a website without paying your ISP.
Someone please mod parent "dumb". The difference is between 5 x 10^11 and 3 x 10^12, less than an order of magnitude. The statement about the frequency of visible light is accurate, however (though the boundary between infrared and red is closer to 4.1 x 10^14 Hz).
Probably less. The schools bear the cost of duplicating the media.
Just out of curiosity, when was the last time you tried to depart from a US restaurant without leaving a tip?