wolfvid

Stefan Kudelski, Polish Inventor of Recorder That Changed Hollywood, Dies at 83

By

PAUL VITELLO

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/01/business/stefan-kuldelski-inventor-of-the-nagra-dies-at-83.html?_r=0

 

Published: January 31, 2013

His death was announced by the Kudelski Group, the Swiss electronics

engineering firm he founded in 1951. No cause was given.

The Polish-born Mr. Kudelski was an engineering student at a Swiss

university in 1951 when he patented his first portable recording device,

the Nagra I, a reel-to-reel tape recorder, about the size of a shoe box

and weighing 11 pounds, that produced sound as good as that of most

studio recorders, which were phone-booth-size. Radio stations in

Switzerland were his first customers.

The bigger breakthrough came seven years later, when Mr. Kudelski

introduced a high-quality tape recorder that could synchronize sound

with the frames on a reel of film. Mr. Kudelski’s 1958 recorder, the Nagra III,

weighed about 14 pounds and freed a new generation of filmmakers from

the conventions and high cost of studio production.

Along with the newly developed portable 16-millimeter camera, the Nagra

recorder became an essential tool for the on-location, often

improvisational techniques of New Wave directors like François Truffaut

and Jean-Luc Godard, and American documentarians like D. A. Pennebaker,

who used the Nagra to record the 1965 Bob Dylan tour featured in his

classic film “Don’t Look Back,” released in 1967.

In various interviews, Mr. Pennebaker, Mr. Godard and Mr. Truffaut have

all credited Mr. Kudelski with helping to make possible the informality

and journalistic realism of their work.

Mr. Kudelski received Academy Awards for his technical contributions to

filmmaking in 1965, 1977, 1978 and 1990, and Emmy Awards in 1984 and

1986.

In the 1960s, Mr. Kudelski’s firm also began making miniature recorders

for what its online catalog calls “surveillance and security” work. The

first of these pocket-size machines was the SN “Serie Noire,” which the company’s Web site boasts was “originally ordered by President J F Kennedy for the American secret services.”

The collection of bugging devices on display at the International Spy

Museum in Washington, a privately financed archive run by former C.I.A.

employees, includes a Nagra recorder obtained in the 1980s from Stasi,

the East German internal security agency.

The Nagra’s value to customers like those was generally classified. But

it received acclaim by consensus from professionals in the radio,

television and film industries. By the early 1960s, Nagras were the

standard recording equipment in all three industries. They remained

dominant until the advent of digital audio recorders in the 1990s. The

company now makes digital recorders, as well as some analog tape

devices, but does not rule the market as it once did.

“There was virtually no film made from 1961 until the early ’90s that

did not use the Nagra,” Chris Newman, an Academy Award-winning sound

engineer, said on Wednesday. Mr. Newman used the machine in winning

Oscars for “The Exorcist” (1973), “Amadeus” (1984) and “The English

Patient” (1996). He also used one in making a celebrated 1971 action

thriller, “The French Connection.”

“We would not have the movies we have today without it,” Mr. Newman said.

Stefan Kudelski was born on Feb. 27, 1929, in Warsaw. He escaped Poland

with his family at the start of World War II and settled in Switzerland

later. After earning a degree in physics and engineering, he began his

company as an engineering design firm. It has since become a major Swiss

manufacturer of media and security equipment.

His son André succeeded him as chief executive and chairman in 1991. In

addition to André, he is survived by four other children, Isabelle,

Marguerite, Henri and Irène Kudelski. His wife, Ewa, died in 2000.

Mr. Kudelski’s tape recorders were carried on several expeditions to

Mount Everest. In 1960, the Swiss oceanographer Jacques Piccard took a

Nagra aboard his deep-sea research submarine, Trieste, to record his

impressions as he descended to 37,800 feet below the surface of the

Pacific off Guam. It remains the deepest known place on the Earth’s

ocean floor

--

my website: www.wolfvid.com

check a customized MX-40 here

wolfvid.com/datasheets/Specials.pdf

lots of other useful stuff -  cases, cables boompoles etc

call 695 - see if they care about members or dues

my advice:

small claims court for the equipp up to 7500 in Ca. Hard to collect.

State labor dept. or board. they can issue arrest warrants for nonpayment of labor and will. after a few months the labor bill is doubled and then tripled. they do have teeth, esp. if several people got stiffed.

Osburn knows exactly what to do if he can be bothered.

How Taxpayers Bankroll Business

http://tinyurl.com/bmogd52 -or-

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/02/us/how-local-taxpayers-bankroll-corporations.html

Winners and Losers in Texas

http://tinyurl.com/bzvx6ut -or-

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/03/us/winners-and-losers-in-texas.html

When Hollywood Comes to Town

http://tinyurl.com/abjsfhp -or-

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/04/us/when-hollywood-comes-to-town.html

The money quote in the third article -

| "You've got all these governors who are offering tax incentives

| to businesses to move from one state to another. What a lousy

| economic strategy that is. You are just moving the chairs around

| on the Titanic. Why not have a national economic strategy?"

|

| Jennifer M. Granholm, former Democratic governor of Michigan

are the organizations representing labor making an effort here?

they dont seem to dominate the conversation with the moral (cultural ) imperative to save Hollyweird.

asleep at the switch ? or am I deaf?

w

latimes.com/news/local/la-me-hollywood-tax-credit-20120906,0,5860362.story

latimes.com

Do Hollywood tax credits really help the economy?

Capitol's number crunchers wonder if proposed $200 million in subsidies could be used better elsewhere.

By Evan Halper, Los Angeles Times

6:04 PM PDT, September 5, 2012

SACRAMENTO — As Gov. Jerry Brown mulls whether to sign into law another round of subsidies for Hollywood production companies, the question that confronts him is how much each job on a movie set is worth to taxpayers.

In Massachusetts, lawmakers recently discovered a similar program was much more expensive than they thought. After years of subsidizing film productions without looking too closely at how that was helping the economy, state officials put it under a lens and found that taxpayers were spending as much as $300,000 to bankroll each position.

Other states that went in for a close-up after dispensing hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks found that every public dollar put into the film industry was generating a few dimes, or less, in revenue.

Boosters of California's tax breaks for filmmaking say they cost just $10,000 for each production job that would otherwise disappear from the state, an investment that more than pays for itself when the workers file their tax returns and spend their earnings. But some of Sacramento's most trusted number crunchers say the cost could be considerably higher, questioning whether the tax benefit to production companies provides any economic boost at all.

"Runaway production" — the flight of some filmmaking to cheaper states — has played a role in California's double-digit unemployment rate. But as the available government dollars continue to shrink, Hollywood is being challenged to prove that the plan for $200 million more in subsidies that lawmakers sent to Brown last week would not be better spent preserving other kinds of jobs.

"The state is using money it then can't use for other things, like education, transportation and healthcare, which also create jobs and economic growth," said Nicholas Johnson, vice president for state fiscal activity at the Center for Budget Policy and Priorities, a liberal think tank in Washington, D.C. "There is no accounting for what else the state could be doing with those dollars to provide economic growth."

The measure, AB 2026 by Assemblyman Felipe Fuentes (D-Los Angeles), would extend the existing $100 million annual tax break for two years, until 2017. Supporters say the credit, which Brown has until the end of the month to act on, has a "multiplier effect" on the economy.

"It brings so much associated investment and job creation in all the industries that benefit," said Barry Broad, a labor lobbyist and part of a coalition that includes the Directors Guild of America and the Screen Actors Guild, which is urging the governor to sign the bill. "Tourism, hotels, restaurants, equipment rental — it is just a huge benefit."

Proponents also note that a decade ago only a few states offered tax breaks intended to lure film productions. Now, some three dozen do.

If California withdraws its subsidy, they say, the industry will more quickly migrate elsewhere and harm the industry overall.

The California tax break "impacts the confidence of this industry and whether a talent pool of people will remain here," Broad said.

And the Motion Picture Assn. of America cites a study it commissioned by the major accounting firm Ernst and Young that says the tax credit should not be judged only by the revenue it helps generate in the short term.

"The primary benefits of film credits accrue to the private sector, not the public sector," it says. "The relevant policy question in evaluating film credits should be, 'Do the residents of the state get a good return for their investment?' and not simply, 'Does the investment pay for itself in terms of additional state tax collections?' "

Officials at the association, which is taking the lead for studios in promoting the credit extension, declined comment.

Some of the state government's top tax experts say the industry's claims are overblown. The nonpartisan legislative analyst's office, which both Democrats and Republicans look to for frank and reliably independent financial advice, recently produced a report declaring the proposed credit extension a net loser.

The report said each dollar spent on film tax credits is bringing back less than a dollar to the state treasury and "perhaps well under $1.00 in many years." It also ripped into the much-repeated finding by the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. that 20,000 jobs have been created by the tax credit for California film productions, which went into effect in 2009 and has so far cost taxpayers $300 million.

The county report assumed all of the subsidized jobs would not have been created without the credit. The analyst cautioned against that assumption, saying that it meant the benefits of the program may be "dramatically overstated."

Several productions that entered the lottery for the limited tax credits but did not receive them went on to shoot in California anyway, suggesting the credit was not essential to job creation. Five of those productions spent $20 million in the state, the analyst said.

In addition, the California Research Bureau, an independent agency that studies policy issues for the Legislature and administration, last year questioned the assumption that tax incentives in other states were luring California film jobs away.

It produced a study noting that growth in California's film industry exceeded that elsewhere from 2000 through 2009, when other states were most aggressively pursuing incentives and trying to take productions away.

The industry's employment and wage data, it said in a report, "do not provide clear evidence that any significant damage to the state's industry or economy has resulted from efforts by other states to draw movie production away from California."

The Tax Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, noted in a review in April that the majority of studies not bankrolled by industry-affiliated groups or local authorities eager to attract productions have found the credit's performance lackluster.

Government studies in Arizona, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico and Pennsylvania concluded that every dollar invested in the tax credit was returning less than 30 cents in revenue, the foundation noted.

Even the staff assigned to the lawmakers who passed the proposal for an extended credit appear ambivalent. Their report noted that two of the states trying to attract California productions with generous incentives — New Mexico and Louisiana — saw film employment fall far more precipitously during the recession than in the nation overall.

Their analysis raised the question of whether Hollywood firms that already enjoy numerous tax advantages should get another break and took aim at some of the "opaque" accounting maneuvers used by the studios.

"Forrest Gump," one of the industry's highest grossing productions, showed no profit on the books, the analysis noted.

"Perhaps the highest level of creativity in Hollywood," it said, "is the creative accounting."

evan.halper@latimes.com

from the video board with an excellent link

On Jun 22, 2012, at 9:42 AM, "nebtek02" <gnebeker@nebtek.com> wrote:

This quote from Chester L. Karrass has sold untold millions of copies of his book and filled his seminars.

I hope It makes you stop and think..Are we getting what we deserve? Have we left too much on the table?

I am sorry for the long post but this is very important. Please take time to read the linked article.

Anyone who has every made offer and counter offer on a house or legal settlement knows this one. It gets uncomfortable, it gets emotional and sometimes you just want to walk away and say take it!! I am tired of lawyers and the drama. But if you keep your head and your cool you can get a better deal in the end.

I my view we are not getting what we deserve to say the least and our leadership has done a poor job of negotiating on our behalf. But it's not their fault. Negotiating is really hard especially if you are trying to please everybody. If they knew the people they have to answer to were going to "ream them out" when they got out of the negotiation they would be tougher negotiators. But why should they bother? When they sold us out last time and the time we just ratified the contract. After all it is easier to not rock the boat right? We all turned our backs on our brothers that are not working continually by ratifying the last horrible contract that upped the health insurance hours from 300 hour to 400 hours!! The result is that there are now more of our brothers and their families who are without health insurance right now because we failed to stand together and say NO!. Why should we care? At least the lines are not so long for us in our doctors offices right? After all we get work all the time, 400 hours is really not so bad of a deal for us.

But the plan is broke! Give me a break!! The whole thing is mismanaged and corrupt. It's our Union!! We need to fire these guys who have just done such a poor job of management!

Our Health plan that you are sopposed to be managing is broke? Really Your FIRED!!

Why? For not fighting for a NATIONAL Union to protect all film workers. (see beolw)

Then there is the Fear Factor!! Oh my! I might not get another job. I better just agree to a lower rate, lower rental, lower benefits. Rolling over and handing more to the fat cats has never served the working class. NEVER. They line their pockets and squeeze us farther and turn up the fear. Now Greg has not had a job for a while and saying yes to the last contract is looking like not such a good idea could he fail to reach 400 hours?. So who cares if our leadership gives up more ground each year in their failed attempts to negotiate. So now economic turmoil and fear whipped by the same fat cats bears down on us and we are worried about how to make our Mortgage payment, kids tuition payments, provide health care for our families. So the thought goes.. we better just take this lousy deal and get back to work.

Oh My all the jobs are out of state! It will only get worse unless we act! What did you expect? NOBODY worried about the other states. At least 695 rates are still OK! So who cares if the non-Maryland Area standards agreement sells out all those in the middle of the US, NEW YORK and LOS ANGELES are the movie capitals right? Well I have news for you. The Number one issue in Film funding is what state or county will give me the most subsidy to make my film there!. This is not going to change! We are becoming migrant film workers. Sure California can try to compete but with the financial mess they are in I don't see them being successful even if Sacramento had a sudden love affair with Hollywood.

The area standards agreement is the single most harmful agreement to our industry as a whole and we have stood by and acted like it only effects other peoples jobs. It has taken our jobs! It was the great producer's coop. It was made with all the weaker smaller stage hand and studio mechanics locals. Jobs are all interchangeable, Wages are low but it gave those unions a hugh influx of cash and simultaneously cost us and weakened our health plans. But the workers in those states got screwed and so did we! $27 and change an hour for video assist in those states while the camera guys nationally get the full rates!!!

WE SHOULD BE OUTRAGED!

READ THIS!!

http://web.me.com/jwsound/Site/i.a.history.html

This just may be the time to save our jobs by organizing!! This is what Unions are supposed to do! I have said repeatedly that Video Assist belongs in 600 not because I want to be in that local per se but because they have a national local! We can never address runaway production from such a weak bargaining position PERIOD.

The days of the Hollywood locals should be numbered and National locals should be formed from them. We ned to band together and organize with our brothers from another state to improve conditions for all. We can no longer afford to watch our jobs lost to runaway production. This industry is changed forever. It will never be the way it was cause the cat is out of the bag and the jobs are all over the country. And I suspect that more and more will be Migrant film workers.

If we say yes to a bad deal will we be better off in 6 months with only a 2% raise (which IS a pay cut when inflation is factored in)? Not to mention the Implementation of Monthly fees for our Health Plan, Extending the Studio Zone, No improved working conditions and No New Media Agreement?

We need to VOTE NO! Tell them to go back and re-negoiate. Tell them the loosing more in each round is not OK by us!

IMPORTANT!! A NO vote is not a vote to strike. It is just telling them we deserve better and we expect you to do a better job of negotiating!

Then Demand action. If we kick it down the road it will get worse. If your going to vote yes then you may want to get some goats.

In Solidarity,

Gaylen

Local 695

techla06 found the article from new york times regarding big profits of CBS and other media companies. Read about the startling 80% increase in profits below. The producers are doing very good, they are just greedy and will always try to gouge us and fill their pockets while not providing enough to the worker.

CBS, Ahead of Upfronts, Has Strong 1st Quarter

By BRIAN STELTER

Published: May 1, 2012

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/02/business/media/cbs-reports-strong-first-quarter.html

New revenue from syndication, online streaming services and subscription fees helped the CBS Corporation to report an 80 percent increase in profits on Tuesday, its strongest such first-quarter gains since it was spun off from Viacom six years ago.

Add to Portfolio

The company's net earnings for the quarter were $363 million, or 54 cents a share, up from $202 million, or 29 cents a share, in the same quarter a year ago. Wall Street analysts had predicted earnings of 44 cents a share. "They are clocking it in every category," said David W. Miller, a managing director covering media and entertainment at the investment bank Caris & Company, calling the CBS earnings "outstanding."

Leslie Moonves, the CBS chief executive, said the first-quarter earnings foreshadowed a "record 2012" for the broadcaster, which is preparing to present its 2012-13 network television schedule to advertisers. The presentation on May 14 will kick off a period of so-called upfront advertising sales.

"We led the upfront last year, and we guarantee we will lead it again this year," Mr. Moonves said on a conference call with investors.

The company is benefiting from the CBS network's long-standing status as the most-watched among total viewers in the United States. CBS has fewer holes to fill on its television schedule than its competitors do, "meaning that we'll be much more selective than our competitors will have to be," Mr. Moonves said Tuesday.

Heading into the upfront period, "we're feeling a lot of strength from the ad market," he added.

But Mr. Moonves and other CBS executives pointed out that the company — traditionally the most reliant on ad revenue of any of the major media companies — is continuing to come up with more nonad revenue.

Of CBS Corporation's $3.92 billion in total revenue in the first quarter, 39 percent originated from nonadvertising sources, according to the company, up from 35 percent in the first quarter of 2011.

"Syndication, retrans and online streaming are having a huge impact on our numbers and are not directly tied to the economy," Mr. Moonves said, abbreviating the word retransmission, which refers to fees paid by distributors and affiliates for the rights to CBS programming. "Many of these revenue sources did not even exist just a few short years ago," he noted.

A 12 percent gain in total revenue for the quarter — from $3.51 billion in the same quarter last year — was attributed in part to digital licensing deals. CBS already licenses some of its old shows to Netflix and Amazon's streaming services, and it is in talks with other such online video distributors.

In the conference call, Mr. Moonves seemed to let slip the name of at least one of them, Intel, which has reportedly been in negotiations with channel owners about selling a virtual cable subscription via the Internet. CBS, he said, was talking to "the Intels of the world" as well as existing cable operators like Comcast. New digital deals will be made "over the next number of months," he said.

CBS revenue also grew thanks to traditional syndication deals, including a new one with the AMC network for "CSI: Miami," and increases in subscriptions to Showtime Networks, its pay cable arm.

Its local broadcasting businesses were flat for the quarter. Joseph Ianniello, the CBS chief financial officer, said at the company's television and radio stations, local ad sales outpaced national ad sales, which is significant because local businesses can be a "leading indicator" of an economic rebound.

The automotive and retail sectors were the bright spots for local ad sales.

Speaking to investors on Tuesday, Mr. Moonves also singled out the company's news division, CBS News, for praise. The "CBS Evening News," which has languished in third place among the network newscasts for years, is the only one of the three to be up year-over-year, he said.

------------- end

-------------------- note he was selling the network at the time... still

---- why can't our elected leaders make a suggestion on how to vote? pussies. what do we pay them for?

wolf

( yes it's a rhetorical question - no I am not comparing them to cats - yawn)

selling all the small accessories : cables, littlelight, duplex cables, cart setup, pelicans 1600 used and new

check

wolfvid.com/datasheets/Specials.pdf

wolf

Citing retirement and health plan concessions, and what they consider low wage increases, opponents urge a No vote on the recent tentative deal – but it’s unknown how widespread that sentiment is.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/opposition-iatse-deal-emerges-318031

Citing retirement and health plan concessions, and what they consider low wage increases, opponents urge a No vote on the recent tentative deal – but it’s unknown how widespread that sentiment is.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/opposition-iatse-deal-emerges-318031

i need to get my ears gold plated. silver varnishes so quickly.

it is really not that difficult and the fine points can all be very well argued by the people who get paid for it. They just have the wrong direction.

its all about how money is shared. they make more every year. they give less alll the time. we are not even getting the same share as last year(s).

"Why do our deals slip backwards as their profits go forward? We are not negotiating to hold onto what we have in a dying industry. We are in a growing industry. Each deal should be better than the last. We are the "talent" they need to make their profits."

"The Big Six Media Conglomerates that own 90% of all Media went from making 21 Billion Dollars in 2009 to earning 28 Billion in net income (aka PROFIT) in 2011."

so lets spread the simple word to vote NO on the contract. AWAKE !

Go to this website

http://saynotothecontract.com/questions-about-the-facts/

find out why to say just NO.

there is plenty of time to negotiate a better deal. The IATSE is in the pocket of the producers. Stop them.

Vote NO its simple.

wolf

call sounddevices - they know their shit wolf

http://www.cinegearexpo.com/category/expo-events-2/2011-los-angeles-expo/

most other unions have a silly booth at least. 695 is publicly croaking.

Today there are more 8 track recorders at non union rental houses in use for reality shows than have ever been sold to "established" sound mixers.

695 is fading out.

or am I seeing a half empty glass being filled in Atlanta?

wolf

for posterity sake

add your own myths

=======================

Subject: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: "Gene E. McCluney" <mccluney2@earthlink.net>

Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 01:47:09 GMT

--------

It has been my understanding that the term "M O S" is used, on a slate,

when a scene is filmed without sync sound (or any sound).

One guy I worked with back in the 1970's said that it stood for "mit

out sound". (said with a German accent).

What does it REALLY stand for???

Gene McCluney

mccluney2@earthlink.net

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: johnw248@aol.com (JohnW248)

Date: 08 Jan 2001 02:35:36 GMT

--------

In article <070120011948020463%mccluney2@earthlink.net>, "Gene E. McCluney"

<mccluney2@earthlink.net> writes:

>What does it REALLY stand for???

Motor only synch

It used used (or was) in the days when the sound department ran the camera

motors and a shot was to be made without film running in the sound department

recorder, hence it was a 24 fps synch shot but without sound and the camera

report and sound reports were marks M. O. S.

Not as romantic as the old Hal Roach camera assistant story Mit Out Sound, but

pay your money and choose your story.

John

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)

Date: 7 Jan 2001 22:08:05 -0500

--------

JohnW248 <johnw248@aol.com> wrote:

>In article <070120011948020463%mccluney2@earthlink.net>, "Gene E. McCluney"

><mccluney2@earthlink.net> writes:

>

>>What does it REALLY stand for???

>

>Motor only synch

No, it's actually an indication to the editor, meaning "MUSIC ON SIDE"

to remind the editor to put music over the silent sequences.

--scott

--

"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: peterh5322@aol.com (Peter)

Date: 08 Jan 2001 17:57:33 GMT

--------

johnw248@aol.com (JohnW248) commented ...

>>

> What does it REALLY stand for???

Motor only synch

It used used (or was) in the days when the sound department

ran the camera motors and a shot was to be made without film

running in the sound department recorder, hence it was a 24

fps synch shot but without sound and the camera report and

sound reports were marks M. O. S.

Not as romantic as the old Hal Roach camera assistant story

Mit Out Sound, but pay your money and choose your story.

>>

Indeed.

The "Mit Out Sound" legend is so old, one has to invoke the "The

Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" axiom to see the forest from

the trees.

That axiom states, "This is the West, sir! When the legend

becomes fact, we print the legend".

Whereupon the reporter tore up his notes, which notes

enumerated in excruciating detail the true history of Liberty

Valance's demise (namely, John Wayne killed Valance, James

Stewart did not).

I came (decades ago, admittedly) from a shop where the

cameras only had multi-duty 96 volt dc/240 volts ac motors

(240 volts is the most common three-phase "delta" ac voltage

while 208 volts is the most common three-phase "wye" ac

voltage).

The sound department operator controlled the 96 volts dc,

which was sent to the camera, and the camera's 240 volts

three-phase ac output was sent back to the sound department's

recorder (a Westrex in this specific case) where it provided ac

power for the recorder's drive (the ac power for the recorder's

electronics was provided separately).

A reed-type frequency counter was always across the 240 volt

three phase ac line, and this was the sole indication of the

camera's speed, as a 96 volt dc motor can actually run at

almost any speed from about 16 fps to about 32 fps, simply by

adjusting the dc voltage sent to the camera.

When the frequency meter read "24 fps" or "48 Hz", depending

upon the specific meter being used, the sound department's

operator would assert, "Speed!, and the shot could commence.

The selection of 96 volts is somewhat interesting and a

simplification of the selection of 96 volts, as opposed to 12 or

24 or anything else for that matter, is this ...

A shunt-wound dc motor designed to run on 120 volts dc has a

nominal rpm of just about 1800 (it is a pure coincidence that a

4-pole, 60 Hz synchronous motor also runs at 1800 rpm), and

the motor's rpm is almost linearly related to the applied dc

voltage.

Yet, 1440 rpm is needed for 24 fps on a direct drive camera,

such as a Fox Studio Camera, and some others.

So, we apply the simple linear equation ...

( 1440 / 1800 ) * 120 = 96,

and come up with 96 volts as being the nominal applied dc

voltage required to achieve and maintain 24 fps.

And, parenthetically, as required to send 48 Hz to the recorder

from the 240 volt output of this "multi duty" camera motor.

So, if the shot was to be made without sound, the sound

recorder's operator would still be required to perform every

function, including getting the entire system up to synchronous

speed, *except* for loading mag film into the recorder.

Under these circumstances, the operator's log would read

"Motor Only Synch", or, simply "MOS".

A similar situation would apply if this same camera was

operated in the studio, powered by an "interlock distributor".

In this case the sound department, which "owned" the interlock

distributor, would provide the 240 volts three-phase power to

the camera, which was usually 48 Hz in the case of a direct

drive camera, from its interlock distributor and the results

would be the same, "Motor Only Synch", or "MOS".

The only difference being that the speed did not need to be set

by the sound department's operator as an interlock distributor

always runs at synchronous speed.

Peter.

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: dylan_j@my-deja.com

Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 11:41:17 GMT

--------

This all sounds thoroughly convincing, so I'll believe you, but just

wanted to throw in that I heard it stood for "Minus Optical Sound"

which at the time made sense to me as I assumed that the slate was more

for the information of the editor than the camera department.

Doesn anyone happen to know what they write on the slate for silent

shots in France? I'll bet they use something different from the rest of

the world!

Dylan

>

> > What does it REALLY stand for???

>

> Motor only synch

>

> It used used (or was) in the days when the sound department ran the

camera

> motors and a shot was to be made without film running in the sound

department

> recorder, hence it was a 24 fps synch shot but without sound and the

camera

> report and sound reports were marks M. O. S.

>

> Not as romantic as the old Hal Roach camera assistant story Mit Out

Sound, but

> pay your money and choose your story.

>

> John

>

Sent via Deja.com

http://www.deja.com/

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: est812@aol.com (EST812)

Date: 09 Jan 2001 13:45:49 GMT

--------

Nobody said: "Mit Ohne Stimme" in this thread.

Eric Tausch, Miami

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: davidjoachim@my-deja.com

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:58:54 GMT

--------

In article <20010109084550.06843.00000335@nso-fc.aol.com>,

est812@aol.com (EST812) wrote:

> Nobody said: "Mit Ohne Stimme"

Gesundheit!!

Sent via Deja.com

http://www.deja.com/

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: peterh5322@aol.com (Peter)

Date: 09 Jan 2001 13:59:55 GMT

--------

>>

This all sounds thoroughly convincing, so I'll believe you, but just wanted to

throw in that I heard it stood for "Minus Optical Sound" which at the time made

sense to me as I assumed that the slate was more for the information of the

editor than the camera department.

>>

That would date you to the very early 1950s as optical sound hasn't been used

for principal sound recording since about that time.

A better version would be "Magnetic Optical Sound" (say, 1958), perhaps meaning

that the sound department was recording three channel magnetic sound as one

principal element (for use in making 4-track mag prints), but that an optical

principal element was also being shot, perhaps through a "tap" from the center

channel microphone (for use in making mono prints).

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: dylan_j@my-deja.com

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 14:09:41 GMT

--------

>

>

> > This all sounds thoroughly convincing, so I'll believe you, but

> > just wanted to

> > throw in that I heard it stood for "Minus Optical Sound" which at

> > the time made

> > sense to me as I assumed that the slate was more for the

> > information of the

> > editor than the camera department.

>

>

> That would date you to the very early 1950s as optical sound hasn't

been used

> for principal sound recording since about that time.

>

I would assume that the origins of the phrase would have dated back to

the very early 1930s, and therefore when they STOPPED using optical

sound would be irrelevent. I was guessing that the term would tell the

editor that there was no optical sound recorded for this shot so non

sync sound would have to be added in post, and even when they stopped

using optical sound and switched to tape, the use of the term continued.

> A better version would be "Magnetic Optical Sound" (say, 1958),

perhaps meaning

> that the sound department was recording three channel magnetic sound

as one

> principal element (for use in making 4-track mag prints), but that an

optical

> principal element was also being shot, perhaps through a "tap" from

the center

> channel microphone (for use in making mono prints).

>

Maybe I got my facts wrong but I was under the pretty concrete

impression *MOS* referred to situations where no sound was being

recorded at all. Maybe we're not talking aout the same use of the term,

but I find it hard to believe sound departments would come up with the

same acronym for two almost contradictory activities.

Dylan

Sent via Deja.com

http://www.deja.com/

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: "Grant Roberts" <groberts@ozemail.com.au>

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 13:56:34 +1100

--------

minus objectionable sound-recordist

Grant

"Gene E. McCluney" <mccluney2@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:070120011948020463%mccluney2@earthlink.net...

> It has been my understanding that the term "M O S" is used, on a slate,

> when a scene is filmed without sync sound (or any sound).

>

> One guy I worked with back in the 1970's said that it stood for "mit

> out sound". (said with a German accent).

>

> What does it REALLY stand for???

>

> Gene McCluney

> mccluney2@earthlink.net

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)

Date: 7 Jan 2001 22:12:02 -0500

--------

Grant Roberts <groberts@ozemail.com.au> wrote:

>minus objectionable sound-recordist

The thing is that originally sound recordings were done on disc, so

it was impossible to make any edits within a sound sequence. It was

only possible to do serious editing in the sections of film that were

shot silent, so the "MOS" indication was made so that the folks in

post knew to "Make Optical Splices" in that section of film.

--scott

--

"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)

Date: 7 Jan 2001 22:06:37 -0500

--------

Gene E. McCluney <mccluney2@earthlink.net> wrote:

>

>One guy I worked with back in the 1970's said that it stood for "mit

>out sound". (said with a German accent).

>

>What does it REALLY stand for???

See, the story goes that Friz Lang sent a guy out for a ham and

cheese sandwich. And he came back to find out what sort of cheese

Mr. Lang wanted, but it was a long shot and he didn't want to walk

all the way across the studio. So he chalked MOS up on a slate,

meaning "Muenster Or Swiss?" and held it up to him, figuring it

was fine to use the "sound" field on the slate since it was a silent

shot. But Lang misinterpreted that, and ever since then he, and

all of use, have used MOS in the sound field to designate that a

shot is silent.

--scott

--

"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)

Date: 7 Jan 2001 22:14:50 -0500

--------

Gene E. McCluney <mccluney2@earthlink.net> wrote:

>

>One guy I worked with back in the 1970's said that it stood for "mit

>out sound". (said with a German accent).

>

>What does it REALLY stand for???

The thing is that in the early days of sound-on-film, the film had to be

processed to a very low gamma in order to get a good quality sound negative

with the variable density systems, so it was a very common procedure for

labs to underdevelop films substantially. This was a bad idea if you were

doing silent work, so it became common to denote these with "MOS" on the

slate, for "More Overdevelopment, Stupid" in an attempt to convince lab

workers to process the film to an appropriate contrast level.

--scott

--

"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: davidjoachim@my-deja.com

Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 10:40:18 GMT

--------

In article <93bbba$5r5$1@panix2.panix.com>,

kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

> Gene E. McCluney <mccluney2@earthlink.net> wrote:

> >

> >One guy I worked with back in the 1970's said that it stood for "mit

> >out sound". (said with a German accent).

> >

> >What does it REALLY stand for???

>

> The thing is that in the early days of sound-on-film, the film had to

be

> processed to a very low gamma in order to get a good quality sound

negative

> with the variable density systems, so it was a very common procedure

for

> labs to underdevelop films substantially. This was a bad idea if you

were

> doing silent work, so it became common to denote these with "MOS" on

the

> slate, for "More Overdevelopment, Stupid" in an attempt to convince

lab

> workers to process the film to an appropriate contrast level.

> --scott

> --

And then there are the news assignment editors who frequently demand

that crews go feel the pulse of the proletariat and get their take on

current news. They say, "Get me some MOS," which used to mean Man on

the Street. Being deferential to contemporary demands for politically

correct gender neutrality (not to mention the idiocy of such lazy

polling practices), I have renamed it Moron on the Street. Watch Jay

Leno as he polls people on current events, you'll get an idea of the

shooting ratio required on these news assignments.

I prefer the apochryphal "Mit Out Sound." Too hell with revisionist

historians who probe too deeply and come up with more logical

explanations of colorful trivia. After all, no one has ever explained

to my satisfaction why journalists write -30- at the end of their

stories (they don't in TV, they probably don't in print anymore). Let's

make something up right now: The first news story was 30 words long.

The first news story was written in 30 A.D. (Anno Domini is also now

politically incorrect, by the way).

David Joachim

Sent via Deja.com

http://www.deja.com/

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: johnw248@aol.com (JohnW248)

Date: 08 Jan 2001 15:08:25 GMT

--------

In article <93c5ei$8fu$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, davidjoachim@my-deja.com writes:

>After all, no one has ever explained

>to my satisfaction why journalists write -30- at the end of their

>stories (they don't in TV, they probably don't in print anymore).

There is a reason and it had to do with wire services--but you don't like my

other story which I got from someone who worked in the sound department in the

1930's at MGM

John

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: davidjoachim@my-deja.com

Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 20:59:19 GMT

--------

In article <20010108100825.28592.00000082@nso-ca.aol.com>,

johnw248@aol.com (JohnW248) wrote:

> In article <93c5ei$8fu$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, davidjoachim@my-deja.com

writes:

>

> >After all, no one has ever explained

> >to my satisfaction why journalists write -30- at the end of their

> >stories (they don't in TV, they probably don't in print anymore).

>

> There is a reason and it had to do with wire services--but you don't

like my

> other story which I got from someone who worked in the sound

department in the

> 1930's at MGM

>

> John

>

I doubt that Samuel Goldwyn ever said, "A verbal contract isn't worth

the paper it's written on." When he was told that THE CHILDREN'S HOUR

was about lesbians, he probably did say, "Well, we'll make 'em

Mexicans." But who really knows for sure? I love "Mit out sound," but I

could easily be convinced that MOS stands for something a bit more

prosaic--with reasonable documentation.

David Joachim

Sent via Deja.com

http://www.deja.com/

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)

Date: 8 Jan 2001 20:28:14 -0500

--------

In article <93d9n1$8fk$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, <davidjoachim@my-deja.com> wrote:

>

> I doubt that Samuel Goldwyn ever said, "A verbal contract isn't worth

>the paper it's written on." When he was told that THE CHILDREN'S HOUR

>was about lesbians, he probably did say, "Well, we'll make 'em

>Mexicans." But who really knows for sure? I love "Mit out sound," but I

>could easily be convinced that MOS stands for something a bit more

>prosaic--with reasonable documentation.

Well, in fact, that was the derivation of the term MOS in the first place.

From time to time, Goldwyn would go out on the lot and watch the productions

taking place there. And, being Sam Goldwyn, he just couldn't shut up,

so it was common practice for the directors to shoot silent footage while

he was on the set, as he couldn't understand that one had to be quiet.

The indication "MOS" for "MOGUL ON SOUNDSTAGE" originated here.

--scott

--

"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: "Angelo Sartore" <fangio@netspace.net.au>

Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 15:57:42 +1100

--------

> The indication "MOS" for "MOGUL ON SOUNDSTAGE" originated here.

> --scott

In Australia we say "Ducks on the pond", whenever a Producer or Production

Manager turns up on set! As if to say "Look Busy!"

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: Robert Harris <robert_harris@filmpreserve.com>

Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2001 21:09:46 -0800

--------

"Mit out sound"

RAH

On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 01:47:09 GMT, "Gene E. McCluney"

<mccluney2@earthlink.net> wrote:

>It has been my understanding that the term "M O S" is used, on a slate,

>when a scene is filmed without sync sound (or any sound).

>

>One guy I worked with back in the 1970's said that it stood for "mit

>out sound". (said with a German accent).

>

>What does it REALLY stand for???

>

>Gene McCluney

>mccluney2@earthlink.net

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: William Hooper <rotoflex@MailAndNews.com>

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 00:35:18 -0500

--------

>Doesn anyone happen to know what they write on the slate for silent shots in

>France? I'll bet they use something different from the rest of the world!

I believe the footage shot silent for the Pepe' LePew films is slated:

N'avec-pas le recordeur `a microphonee' du racquette

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)

Date: 10 Jan 2001 13:37:09 -0500

--------

In article <3A634BD5@MailAndNews.com>,

William Hooper <rotoflex@MailAndNews.com> wrote:

>>Doesn anyone happen to know what they write on the slate for silent shots in

>>France? I'll bet they use something different from the rest of the world!

>

>I believe the footage shot silent for the Pepe' LePew films is slated:

>

>N'avec-pas le recordeur `a microphonee' du racquette

--

"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)

Date: 10 Jan 2001 19:08:49 -0500

--------

>Doesn anyone happen to know what they write on the slate for silent shots in

>France? I'll bet they use something different from the rest of the world!

In fact, the original MOS designation came from Rene Clair, who on an early

sound shot didn't hear a reply from the sound guy that the equipment was

up to speed, and looked behind him to find the mixer passed out, completely

drunk. "Merde! Oubliez le Son!" he said, and the shot was made silent.

The clappateur dutifuly wrote "MOS" on his slate, and the rest is history.

--scott

--

"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: dmm8878@juno.com

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 17:10:49 GMT

--------

In Harry Box's "Set Lighting Technician's Guide," he says MOS stands

for "minus optical stripe." Can you believe that I was told that it

stood for "mit out sound" by one of film school professors? Why they

even pay these people is beyond me.

In article <070120011948020463%mccluney2@earthlink.net>,

"Gene E. McCluney" <mccluney2@earthlink.net> wrote:

> It has been my understanding that the term "M O S" is used, on a

slate,

> when a scene is filmed without sync sound (or any sound).

>

> One guy I worked with back in the 1970's said that it stood for "mit

> out sound". (said with a German accent).

>

> What does it REALLY stand for???

>

> Gene McCluney

> mccluney2@earthlink.net

Sent via Deja.com

http://www.deja.com/

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: davidjoachim@my-deja.com

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:56:01 GMT

--------

In article <93kpeg$c9a$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,

dmm8878@juno.com wrote:

> In Harry Box's "Set Lighting Technician's Guide," he says MOS stands

> for "minus optical stripe." Can you believe that I was told that it

> stood for "mit out sound" by one of film school professors? Why they

> even pay these people is beyond me.

>

If you look on a slate and see "UP" that means "Under Protest." It

means the DP disagrees with the director on how a shot should be made.

I wonder why slate a slate designation wouldn't change with advances in

technology and simply have "wild" or "silent" as a contemporary

designation for non-sync shooting. I prefer to believe the exotic

homage to the early days "Mit Out Sound" is what MOS stands for. But,

who knows for sure?

> In article <070120011948020463%mccluney2@earthlink.net>,

> "Gene E. McCluney" <mccluney2@earthlink.net> wrote:

> > It has been my understanding that the term "M O S" is used, on a

> slate,

> > when a scene is filmed without sync sound (or any sound).

> >

> > One guy I worked with back in the 1970's said that it stood for "mit

> > out sound". (said with a German accent).

> >

> > What does it REALLY stand for???

> >

> >

Sent via Deja.com

http://www.deja.com/

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: Eve Butterly <eve@airmail.net>

Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 13:54:55 -0600

--------

Everybody knows the term MEANS "mit out sound."

What it orginally STOOD FOR is still up for discussion. (Scott Dorsey has

some of the wildest stories. If they ain't true, they aughta be!)

--

================== EVE BUTTERLY ========================

======== Production Manager, Script Supervisor =========

=================== Dallas, Texas ======================

============ http://web2.airmail.net/eve ===============

I have enough money to last me the rest of my life,

assuming I die before 10 this morning.

Please call before then for rates and availability.

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: peterh5322@aol.com (Peter)

Date: 14 Jan 2001 20:48:09 GMT

--------

Eve Butterly eve@airmail.net added ...

>>

Everybody knows the term MEANS "mit out sound."

>>

To which I add ...

"Everyone who has never worked in the industry, and who gets all their

information second-hand from books, from AC or from other general circulation

publications, 'knows' MOS means 'Mit Out Sound'."

... and ...

"This is the Net, sir! When the MOS 'legend' becomes fact, we repeat the

legend. Ad nauseum."

=======================

Subject: Re: Origin of the term "MOS" ??

From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)

Date: 19 Jan 2001 11:03:34 -0500

--------

Eve Butterly <eve@airmail.net> wrote:

>Everybody knows the term MEANS "mit out sound."

>What it orginally STOOD FOR is still up for discussion. (Scott Dorsey has

>some of the wildest stories. If they ain't true, they aughta be!)

Thank you. I figure if the origin is truly lost in legend, we might as

well just help the legends along.

--scott

--

"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

go hiking even if its just overnight. Must make reservations. don't worry the bears are friendly.

wolf

advertisement: PS: we rent Pix 240 in Los Angeles wolf 310 822-4973 ( probably the wrong forum - Jeff dont kick me off)

PayPal gives you NO protection as buyer. as seller it does only after the money is in your bank account ( too slow).

Use Credit card to pay for stuff and you have good protection and accept credit cards because you can show the CrCard Co. that you are honest ( can be tough when dealing with a crook at the other end).

do not do cr Card interactions internationally AT ALL !!!

there is a swiper available for the Ipone they take 2.75 % of each transaction.

its called square https://squareup.com/

i have no experience with that service. I bet there is a future in that kind of stuff, esp. when we hit serious inflation rates.

w

Well informed and well said

What seems to really hurt is 2% instead of 3 % annual raise

Official inflation at 2% with these gas prices? Please !!

You know CPI (the official inflation rate) excludes food and energy.

go to this website and find out why you should vote no on the new contract and why you should convince others to do the same.

http://saynotothecontract.com/questions-about-the-facts/

wolf

Check out the discussions on Facebook, in the "2012 IATSE Contract Forum."

quote: The most important question on the table was... how much money is the

Producer going to give us? They gave us 6% over 3 years. Not enough to cover

inflation... but 6% higher than they "had" to. Health care costs went up...

production hours and contributions went down... and thus the plan is in trouble.

So how much extra will they put in? Enough to cover the increase in costs? So

far in this country, healthcare isn't a right, so the producer (or government)

isn't required to pay for it. They wanted the premiums to be 300% higher than

they finally agreed upon. In the end, they agreed to increase their

contribution to the Plan by 20% ($1 per hour) and we'd kick in a portion of our

IAP to cover the difference in order to keep the premiums low.

and

i think the worst of the contract is the handling of NEW MEDIA etc -- huge

loophole!!!!!!!

and this is how votes are counted by the IATSE

Quote: They count Delegate votes. Each local gets 1 delegate vote for each

100 members... plus 1 for just having a charter. If you have 99 members 2

delegates. If you have 100 to 199 members, you get 3. Local 695 has about 1590

members so I think we get 16 delegates. If 100% of Local 695 member votes

Yes... or if only 51% vote Yes... all 16 delegates vote Yes. So if you can get

just a little more than half of a big local like 600 to vote Yes, you get ALL of

their delegate votes... and you're well on your way to ratification.

I say vote NO and get a better deal. lots of time for better negotiations.

Jeff is right - but its worse...

... The Bargaining Committee consisted of the committees of each of the West Coast

Studio Local Unions,

( all make over $ 250K the larger unions over $ 350k)

Officers and Representatives of the IA

(IF YOU CALL THEIR ELECTIONS DEMOCRATIC YOU COME FROM KENIA or BOTSWANA ed.),

attorneys (unelected),

and pension and healthcare experts ( salesmen for insurance companies ed.).

The committee was

unanimous in its support for this tentative agreement. I would like to thank

each of them for their commitment to act on your behalf in participating in

these negotiations.

More specific details of the agreement will be forthcoming and as soon as

specific contract language is drafted this agreement will be sent to the members

for ratification.

In solidarity,

Matt Loeb ( $ 360K per year + expenses ed.)

IATSE International President

follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend

Copyright © 2012 IATSE, All rights reserved.

Note:

so we will get to vote on it... we can get more if enough people vote against this proposal.

NEGOTIATIONS THAT DO NOT INVOLVE THE MEMBERSHIP DIRECTLY ARE ALWAYS A SELL OUT.

Negotiations not backed by rolling strikes to show ones strength are always a

sell out.

Who is the example for good negotiations? in Ca. the nurses. They

have occupied Sacramento before negotiations to show they are for real. The IA

would never risk that.

don't forget the Entertainment industry is the richest industry in the USA. There is nothing about their wealth and increase in profits that is fragile, NOTHING. The IA is totally unaware of the riches amassing in the industries coffers. Stocks are at their maximum these weeks.

If you find a way to get your voice hear let us all know. We are being led by

the obedient and are being kept blind to the facts. Our Union reps let others GREED rule.

wolf

of course systems without delay have been used by video assist for 20 years. the cheapest way to go is CH 59 systems.

here is all i know:

WiFi to computer only

Teradeck Video cube: approx $ 2000.00

Rod Clark sais: My company, Teradek, makes HD video encoders and a product of ours called Cube ….. Cube is the world's first camera-top HD video encoder. It's tiny for Steadicam rigs.

Here's some of our beta test footage http://vimeo.com/14214693

If you're interested in learning more about Cube you can check here www.teradek.com and here at www.thevideocube.com. http://cube.teradek.com/cube_family.html

Best, Rod Clark,

http://www.filmtools.com/teradek-hd-sdi-encoder-wifi.html

In a simple network (let's just say excluding the internet for simplicity's sake), really there are two main items that will contribute to Cube's latency. As I mentioned before, it takes about 100 milliseconds just to get the video into the Cube, compressed, moved over to the WiFi, and transmitted. It's on the receiving end where the two major differences occur. Those two differences are:

- RTP to laptop, opened in VLC

- HTTP Live Streaming to iOS (iPad/iPhone)

RTP to laptop, opened in VLC

In the advanced settings for VLC you can adjust the desired latency. There is a continuum. Less latency means a higher probability of dropped frames or frames arriving out of order. The latency can be set as low as 100 milliseconds, which in practice works pretty well. The latency can also be set as high as two seconds, which is crystal clear. In our experience, setting 300 milliseconds in VLC provides EXCELLENT quality video, HTTP Live Streaming to the iPad or iPhone is 10 seconds delay. So short answer:

VLC = 1/3 second = 10 frames

I-Pad = 10 seconds

The rate limiter on Cube is the ability to stream over WiFi and we reach that limit around 6Mbps. That means you can stream to three or four clients simultaneously if you have low bit rates. In my experience, it's better to stream to one client with a higher bitrate (3 or 4Mbps) and use some sort of network infrastructure to distribute the signal. This video answers the questions: http://vimeo.com/14644326 [who wants to manage that on a shoot?]

Regarding your second question: Do we make a Cube decoder? Yes. The encoder is the hot item, but we've had a ton of requests for a decoder that the VTR guy can use in their system. I think we're about 4-6 weeks away from delivering the Cube-to-Cube solution.

Other products they make: http://www.teradek.com/products.html

Let me know if you have any questions. Best, Rod Clark,

SergeiFranklin : I measured the delay. It's 5 frames. 1/5th of a second.

Lawrence Karman: 6 frame delay! Can you record it???

Eric Fletcher S.O.C. Are you kidding me? 6 frames? .25seconds? That’s UNUSABLE

Steve Irwin : Ipad has an issue with decoding latency that makes it nearly unusable now. But Teradeck is working on a RTP solution (Real Time Transfer Protocol) to help this. [Vaporware condensing slowly?]

Best to have some wireless network savvy experience before jumping in and

promising the world with this device. Some people refer to this as a wireless HD transmitter. It is not. [it takes in HD but spits out low res reduced color]

It is a HD video IP encoding device that can feed an external wireless router or

be ordered with built in WiFi. This tool has it's place but understand it's pros and cons to manage your and your clients expectations. [Make all the excuses in advance]

Questions: If the WiFi radio space is busy with other users does it slow down? (I assume it just wont work at all with heavy WiFi use around) What is the Security of your images over the air – and latter over the Internet? Can it do several streams at once or can there be several in the same space?

John Trunk says: For standard def one can use it with a laptop on a secured network with about a 5 to 10 second delay and also access all the files from an ipad or iPhone to play on there own.

However when one leaves the range of the network their access and files will no longer be available

You can access and play HD footage but not live only standard def is available live or pseudo-live with a 5 to 10 second delay. It is also important to have a good wireless router and there is no need to be on the Internet however you can access the files as well as the pseudo-live image from 3g or wifi from a remote location thus making it a great tool for second units.

Good Luck [sudolive=pseudo-live= nearly live]

Note June 2011: Q-take shows it on its own monitor with the usual 3 fr delay ( I have heard this only on from one user)

Consider 150/350 Models for 5N w/cables, Difficult, tedious, extensive set-up.

Sold with the expectation you are an internet configuration expert -- if you are, it’s easy – if not, tech support is available but does not understand motion picture requirements. Expect at least 4 hours on the phone with tech support personnel. 5.2 band is much better than crowded 2.4 bands. OK to operate 2 units in the same space. Picture quality vs. delay adjustments is finicky. Uses Mpeg4 for compression which is not friendly to fast pans; they look horrible. Picture never gets as good as IDX or Boxx but good enough for most DITs to do color correction for DP and dailies. 2-4-frame delay after tweaking. Must have a MAC with Bonjour for set up. But think: you can send the picture to script or gaffers or producers with little hassle. Of course you loose control over content copyright, too. There is just password protection.

Q-Take receiver is not quite ready by October 2011. 4 frames late.

Derek H.: However, it DID definitely interfere with my Zaxcom QRX IFB unit. http://jwsoundgroup.net/index.php?/topic/8604-cube-encoders/

Paul Thompson: Overall, I would say things went great. You need to be comfortable using routers, and having a laptop or iPad handy to configure the cube. I used the Dual band cube in 5 GHz mode only, with a dedicated non-internet connected, private SSID (though not hidden) DLink router, which I would run out to set as though it were my tuner, and the ethernet cable my BNC.

Making sure the cube has constant power is a good way to avoid major issues, as it can sometimes take a couple of minutes for the cube to come back online if it's been shut off. I used a Sony M battery plate from Teradek when I had it on steadicam.

Image was best with bitrate around 5mbits or higher. Never heard a complaint from director/DP/production, though personally I could tell the image had some compression artifacts, and had an occasional step in its motion.

You'll want to familiarize yourself with the menus for the cube settings (only accessible via web browser) and play with caching (in ms) and keyframe interval.

NOTE: it didn't play nice with my Zaxcom QRX with IFB.

……it connects to the iPod through the Quick Stream link, no router needed. Our camera assistant also connects to the Cube with his iPhone so he can see the display for battery/tape changes. The Cube works great for us. When I use it on feature films with my Zaxcom IFB100, I use a 2.4 GHz spectrum analysis program (http://www.metageek.net/) to see exactly where the best frequency is. This helps immensely when using anything in the 2.4 GHz band.

[PS don’t use 2.4 use 5G and metageek make a pakage for that too... expensive though]

the ultimate test is if the range of the Helix is greater staight on or at 135 degrees. if its off axis, trash it and start over.

its not that easy !!!!!!!!!!!

i have some at 1200 MHz for sale - they really work well and have been tweeked and field tested. start to work at 900 but get better at 1100 and go up to 1800 or so, still OK at 2400. somewhere between 6 and 9 db over i. 6 turns. pvc tubing, alu backplane.

by a well know designer.builder in USA tweaked with an 80K $ signal analyser.

the math is only 50 of the build, the others are the tweak with a good test instrument. have fun. wolf