Jump to content

Jim Feeley

Members
  • Posts

    2,807
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    40

Everything posted by Jim Feeley

  1. Tom, will you be hanging at the Tascam NAB booth (SL10827) the whole show, or just particular days and hours? Thanks, Jim
  2. Yes, doping in cycling goes back over 100 years. Same as with most sports at the elite/pro level. There was this story several years ago. Note the date (the three-week TdF starts in early July): Non-Doping Cyclists Finish Tour De France SPORTS NEWS • Sports • Other Sports • ISSUE 43•35 • Aug 30, 2007 PARIS—A small but enthusiastic crowd of several dozen was on hand at the Tour de France's finish line on the Avenue des Champs-Élysées Tuesday to applaud the efforts of the 28 cyclists who completed the grueling 20-stage, 2,208.3-mile race without the aid of performance-enhancing drugs. Finland's Piet Kvistik, adomestique with the Crédit Mondial team, was this year's highest-finishing non-doping rider (142nd overall). Kvistik claimed the maillot propre, the blue jersey worn by the highest-placed "clean" rider, on the ninth stage of the race when the six riders who had previously worn it tested positive for EPO, elevated levels of testosterone, and blood-packing. "This is a very, very proud day for me," said the 115-pound Kvistik, who lost 45% of his body mass during the event, toppled from his saddle moments after finishing, and had to be administered oxygen, fed intravenously, and injected with adrenaline by attending medical personnel. "They say it is physically impossible to ride all of the Tour without drugs, but we prove them wrong this day." Rest of the fairly funny story: http://www.theonion.com/articles/nondoping-cyclists-finish-tour-de-france,2268/
  3. I agree with what Jeff wrote. I first learned of Ebert as one of the Thumb Boys. But he was much more than that. He was a great writer, critic, and friend to worthy underdog films. An acquaintance of mine, the writer Bill Wyman (not the Rolling Stone bassist), posted on FB this evening: "Ebert wrote more and better in his last year, dying, than most of us do in our careers. He was rigorous and intellectually honest, and yet light on his feet. He had the soul of an alternative journalist—everything he wrote was personal and opinionated—and yet functioned fabulously in the highest realms of the profession. He was always tough and fearless, but he was always kind, generous with his time and praise, and thoughtful, too. He was one of the great critics, a great Chicagoan, and a great guy."
  4. I'm with you on all that. Geez, who was it that was going to bring cool t-shirts? Michael McQueen? Not that I want to create an obligation for Michael.
  5. I loved this bit of Ebert at Sundance: http://youtu.be/LSzP9YV3jbc?t=35s
  6. I'd like to think raffle rules would be a group decision with perhaps some special consideration given to the opinions of those donating stuff to the raffle. The event is, imo, for all of our community and that community includes manufacturers and dealers; think how much less valuable RAMPS would have been and JWS would be if people like you, Larry, Glenn, Glen, et al didn't participate. So why elevate one slice of our group above others during the raffle? On a less Kumbaya note, I recall one mixer saying he was going to bring some of his t-shirts for the raffle. I could see non-mixers enjoying those. And in the past, some other prizes had universal appeal, iirc. So perhaps we could widen or narrow the pool of potential winners depending on the particular prize. Or if someone wins something they won't personally use, they either take a pass or give it instantly to someone who will. My concern is probably mostly academic, though. My recollection is this is fairly self regulating. Not everyone participates in the raffle, people are happy to pass on prizes that aren't appropriate for them, and so on. Looking forward to seeing everyone next week, and to enjoying MC Dave.
  7. That's the price to ship to Canada. Note that the link is to the ebay.ca site.
  8. I don't completely agree, Glen. I'd guess that for an increasing number of party/dinner attendees the reference to RAMPS means nothing. So I can see a good argument for changing the name. Jeff's a good guy and I'm super glad he hosts this site (thanks again Jeff!). But the party is bigger than any one person or place. Perhaps we could call the dinner the Mixer's Mixer or something like Really Awesome Mixers Partying @ Sataybistro. The second one is kind of awkward so perhaps we should just use its acronym...
  9. I like that a group of self-proclaimed atheists expect people to take the claims in their study on faith.
  10. So actors will now use TV as promotional tools for their theater tours? :-)
  11. I don't recall that many ever...perhaps one of the last events at the Firefly? I just hope there's room for everyone to sit...
  12. Interesting, but would like some independent confirmation. Maybe the problem is Customs, rather than the postal service. Maybe this is just a bogus but clever marketing ploy (as BK also suggests).
  13. Ah. Good point. I made a slight edit to my post that will hopefully make everything clear.
  14. Hey Jeff. I think I'm misreading your note and concern. Kathy forwarded me the menu and price for the RAMPS/JWS party, and I posted it since we hadn't previously announced the final menu and price. And since it's in the RAMPS/JWS party thread, I figured people would figure out the posting applied to that event. But whatcha thinking?
  15. Well, several vulture law firms are trolling for clients so they can try to squeeze some money out of Avid. Those firms start a lot of these sorts of "investigations." How often do they find actual wrongdoing and a settlement for their clients? Got me. As for the NASDAQ letter, seems like more of a "WTF is your paperwork?" thing. Is Avid in great shape? Nope. Do these particular actions mean much? I kinda don't think so. Let's see if there's any news next week at NAB. In the meantime, I'm still working on some jobs that cut on Avid. And I'd be OK starting another. Will they be around in two years? Who knows, but every NLE is an expendable these days.
  16. Cute Dave. Audio worked for me, too.
  17. Hi Everyone, Here's the menu for the RAMPS/JWS party next Tuesday night. Thanks to Kathy Baca at Lectrosonics for arranging a great buffet at the Satay Thai Bistro. Looks like a great selection of food at a great price. Hope to see you all next week.
  18. Ya, we didn't get any RSVP response when I posted there around the time I first posted details here. I remember when David Barr Yaffe was trying to drum up 100 people to sign his petition to get RAMPS started. Sigh.
  19. Those HPRC cases look a lot like the hard cases Portabrace sells: http://www.portabrace.com/products/hard-cases Nothing wrong with any of this. I don't own any Portabrace hard cases, but friends who do are happy with them as far as I know. As for latches, the original Pelican C-clamp is a bear. But they do last. Pelican now has cases with what they call a Double Throw Latch. Much easier to open and close. Works well. But like the Storm latches a lot, too. I mostly own Pelican and a few Storm cases (from before Pelican bought Storm). Thanks for the heads up on HPRC David and Alex...
  20. To the original question, X2Pro seems pretty reliable now. Another alternative for editors with both FCPX and FCP7 (and a need to move back from X to 7): Buy Xto7 for $50, and use it to export from FCPX to FCP7. Then from FCP7 export an OMF. http://assistedediting.intelligentassistance.com/Xto7/ But X2Pro is more direct. As for FCPX: My friend Logan Kelsey has been an editor for 15ish years (and a camera guy for several years before that) and he uses FCPX for most of his work now (mostly high-end corporate and branding...nice work). He started as an Avid editor, then bought a Media 100 system to go out on his own, then moved to FCP fairly early. Now he's using FCPX for longer and longer work. Been a long-time After Effects user, and is fine round-tripping between FCPX and AE (and Resolve). Now for short stuff he shoots on his RED Scarlet (Epic coming soon), edits at 4K on his MacBook Pro (connected to a RAID and external monitor). For longer stuff and stuff shot by other people on other cameras, he still uses proxies or ProRes. He makes a good living with his work; really nice house in Mill Valley, raising his family. He's neither a student nor a hobbyist. And FCPX is doing the job for him. Wouldn't do it for me, but it does for him. Huh. Here's something short but pretty nice he made recently. Ya, the audio needs work. Besides that, I like it:
  21. John hit the highlights. A bit more detail here (as you might expect): http://www.lectrosonics.com/faqdb/index.php/component/mtree/027-what-are-the-differences-between-the-um200b-and-um200c-transmitters
  22. Shoulder-mount cameras: RX on the camera. Smaller cameras (HVX200, EX3, etc) in verite-ish settings : I'll offer a bag to hold the RX, along with a belt clip & loop, then run a couple cables up to the camera. Some camops are fine with that; negligible extra weight on camera, can still move around, etc. But sometimes the RX ends up on the camera...or just nowhere. DSLRs: Ya, well. Do what we can. A couple camops I've worked with have portabrace sling packs and expect RX to live in one of the pockets. But that's like two guys around here, one guy in the midwest, one back east. Not something I can foist on a camop: http://www.portabrace.com/products/production-gear/546-side-sling-messenger I'm not being so helpful, other than to say for some camops, having the RX on (or near) their body with cables to the camera can work. If they're into it, etc.
  23. Not being an idiot, I agree with Jon and Jay (and thanks for the shout-out Jay!...btw- my main tasks in those efforts: "What a great idea ... Here's your check."). And being a bit of a wiseass, I also agree with Steve. I haven't work with the Canon XF305, but have worked with many other Canon cameras from the old Hi8 A1 (iirc) to the C300. In all that time, Canon's audio has rated: meh. Good enough for dialog, I guess, but neither super clean nor loads of headroom. But again, not terrible. So if it were me, I'd: -Do what the producer wants. Are they OK with double system? And if I have a choice, I'd go for -Option #2, straight to the Tascam just so I'm (more) in control of everything. And I'd send a scratch track to the Canon. Apologies if I'm being way too elementary here.
×
×
  • Create New...