Disqus - Latest Comments for lonseidman

Re: “Rolling Shutter” Plagues Nikon’s D300s Video

amrulkareem — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 02:11:54 -0000

i mean shoot video. the pictures came out great. but the video. under pendaflour lights, u could see lines

Re: “Rolling Shutter” Plagues Nikon’s D300s Video

lonseidman — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 20:00:03 -0000

I haven't experienced that yet. I will say I took some great shots at a
birthday party yesterday. Looks like film. The D300s is really starting to
grow on me.

Re: “Rolling Shutter” Plagues Nikon’s D300s Video

lonseidman — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:43:07 -0000

It's not just pans that are a problem -- it's also fast moving objects too. I'll play with it a bit more this week and post some additional samples so people can make a better judgement.

Re: REVIEW: Canon HFS10 / HFS100 High Definition Camcorder

deborahtier — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:08:54 -0000

Thank you for your response. I guess I might have to break down and invest in upgrading my computer. I will then buy a new one and then that will be obsolete in no time.

Thanks Again

Re: REVIEW: Canon HFS10 / HFS100 High Definition Camcorder

lonseidman — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 10:35:01 -0000

I think you might be out of luck with the G4.. Most of the AVCHD video
editing software requires an Intel based Mac due to the tremendous amount of
compression that takes place.

Re: blip.tv: the next generation

lonseidman — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:50:59 -0000

Great new tools! We've always been very impressed with how great the Blip.tv toolset has been for our brand new startup. Keep it up!

localonlinenews.tv

Re: REVIEW: JVC Everio GZ-HD300

lonseidman — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:38:18 -0000

"I do take issue with JVC's 1080/60p badging on the product tag. They are just saying their DSP and software can supporting de-interlacing to this progressive scan rate."

Thanks you agree with my point which was what I wrote about. The badging leads some to believe that it is a 1080p camera which it is not. It records at 1080i just like everything else on the market in that product space.

And for the record there are better cameras out there. Canon's older HF100, which can be found for about the same price, is a lot more flexible in its manual controls and includes the external audio port.

Re: REVIEW: JVC Everio GZ-HD300

Everio — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:28:00 -0000

"I stand by my review. If you took the time to read it (which you clearly
did not) I stated the camera records video at 1080i which it does. I also
stated that the marketing materials for the camcorder may lead some to
believe that the camera records video at 1080p. It does not."

[EVERIO]

A) Up until only very recently, the HDV Consortium (Composed of JVC, the developer of HDV I might add, SONY, SHARP, amongst others) did not include 1080p in the HDV standard. Your point is moot because only VERY EXPENSIVE professional cameras can record at 1080/30p, let alone the film industry standard 1080/24p HD camcorders.

B) At this point, NO CONSUMER camera records at 1080p, this however does not mean the camera is not a 1080p camera. This is where I take issue with your commentary. The video is recorded at 1080/60i, which really just means the odd lines are scanned once 30x and the even lines are scanned once 30x = 60 fields interlaced per second. So while 60 fields are scanned per second, the screen is scanned twice. Since with Progressive scanning, you're scanning in sequence (Not odds and evens), when the signal is de-interlaced, this translates into 30 fields per second.

Bottom line, if you connect this camcorder to a 1080p TV or burn the data to a BD, you will be looking at 1080p video upon playback. The camera uses very sophisticated algorithms to de-interlace, NOT "Upconvert" as you incorrectly stated, the video so the video outputed is up to 1080p. So what you're saying is moot in my opinion since the output is a true 1080p, regardless of the the actual image being captured at 1080/60i. The camera has a Digital Signal Processor (DSP) and proprietary software that handles this output conversion. The only case it really matters to record natively at 1080/30p is where the utmost image intregrity must be preserved. There is technically a very small amount of loss in de-interlacing the video, not much, but there is some. Obviously for professional usage, this becomes increasingly important.

Had you stated that no consumer cameras record at true 1080p, I would not have objected to your review. JVC has every right to state the camera is a 1080p camera if it's input and output is 1080p without upconversion. There is zero upconversion, there is de-interlacing, two very different things.

"It is not true that all televisions upconvert to progressive format. In
fact my older Panasonic CRT is a 1080i device. Not 1080p. Not 720p.
Regardless, the point is irrelevant - the camera's recording format is what
I questioned, not what some television might do with the video."

[EVERIO]

Correct. I never said all TVs upconvert. 1080p TVs do de-interlace 1080i signals, this is why it's not likely HDTV will be broadcast anytime soon at anything more than 1080i. Broadcasting at 1080p would require too much bandwidth and would be pointless since TVs can de-interlace
so efficiently. We are talking 1080p, not about your old 1080i TV which can't handle 1080p. So
as I stated, above, if you connect the Everio to a 1080p TV, you will get 1080p video, not 1080i.

"Don't come on my site with insulting commentary when you don't take the time
to actually read what's written. Thanks."

[EVERIO] Why post commentary and open up your commentary to comment, then complain when someone calls you on inaccuracy. If you're going to do this, I'm not sure why you have a comment box. To me, your commentary was insulting and misleading to me, so I responded as such. There is nothing personal in it, I just don't think it's fair of you however to make people think they got shafted on this camera with they in fact did not. The camera delivers in spades as advertised.

I do take issue with JVC's 1080/60p badging on the product tag. They are just saying their DSP and software can supporting de-interlacing to this progressive scan rate.

Re: REVIEW: JVC Everio GZ-HD300

lonseidman — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 07:58:17 -0000

I stand by my review. If you took the time to read it (which you clearly
did not) I stated the camera records video at 1080i which it does. I also
stated that the marketing materials for the camcorder may lead some to
believe that the camera records video at 1080p. It does not.

It is not true that all televisions upconvert to progressive format. In
fact my older Panasonic CRT is a 1080i device. Not 1080p. Not 720p.
Regardless, the point is irrelevant - the camera's recording format is what
I questioned, not what some television might do with the video.

Don't come on my site with insulting commentary when you don't take the time
to actually read what's written. Thanks.

-Lon

Re: REVIEW: JVC Everio GZ-HD300

lonseidman — Fri, 29 May 2009 11:09:14 -0000

You definitely can't go wrong paying a little bit extra for better quality. The lack of manual controls on this thing really reduces the quality of image that can come out of it.

I am a huge fan of the Canon cameras. I was sent a new HFS10 which I will be reviewing over the weekend. It is outstanding, can't wait to play with it more tonight.

Re: Announcing Atlas

lonseidman — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 23:54:43 -0000

I've been following your work for some time after first hearing you on one of Leo Laporte's podcasts awhile back. 280 slides is a work of art and I've been chomping at the bit for you to put together an IDE that gives us mortals an easy way to build powerful apps. I am really looking forward to playing with this later on this summer..

Will there be a mechanism to connect with MySQL databases?

Re: The “Biblically Fast” Electric Car Needs a Practical Refueling Solution

lonseidman — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 16:36:09 -0000

What I like about GM's approach to the Volt is that the underlying eFlex
platform will make its way into other vehicles. We do see some of the same
strategy with Toyota's hybrid technologies (in fact even licensing the
technology to Nissan), but fuel savings and efficiencies of the Toyotoa
system decline as the size of the vehicle increases.

GM will need to move quickly to get the cost down on this technology..
$30-40k for what's effectively a compact sedan is certainly going to leave
it in the realm of the early adopter geeks like me. I just hope these
declining gas prices will not equal a decline in interest for the platform.

Re: The “Biblically Fast” Electric Car Needs a Practical Refueling Solution

Tom Saxton — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 20:42:33 -0000

What happened with the EV1 was not from lack of interest; there were 800 in the field and 4,000 on the waiting list, while GM was actively trying to dissuade people from wanting them. The only reason the EV1 failed is because GM stopped leasing them, took them all back, then crushed and shredded them. None of the hundreds of people still driving a RAV4-EV would say they were a failure.

Who says anyone has to give the electricity away? Selling electricity for charging an EV isn't any more complicated than the coin-op mechanism in a laundromat.

With just over 100 Tesla Roadster owners starting to drive their cars, there is already talk of finding ways to put in charging stations in strategic locations. It's just going to take a little consumer demand to solve this problem, demand that will happen as a natural result of the starting trickle of production EVs. It isn't the hundred billion dollar problem that PBP wants you to think it is.

Re: The “Biblically Fast” Electric Car Needs a Practical Refueling Solution

lonseidman — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 18:07:47 -0000

It is kind of ironic the gas powered vehicle died because of it's electrical component :).

I will say that I am very excited about the prospect of owning an electric car. In fact I'd be out at the car dealer tomorrow if there were fully electric vehicles available for sale here in Connecticut. But that's me, a guy that lives on the cutting edge of technology who adopts new things even if it requires a little shoehorning every once and awhile. I suspect that you, like me, are not a typical consumer.

Here's my concern: the industry has not done much of anything to address what led to the failure of the EV-1. If electric cars ever have a chance of replacing internal combustion powered vehicles there has to be zero sacrifice on the part of the consumer to adopt them. While you and I would change our habits to be behind the wheel of one of these vehicles, the mass market wants convenience.

As of now I have absolutely zero options for charging an electric vehicle outside my home or office. I suppose I could find friends along the way willing to let me drain some of their power, but that's certainly no way to drive adoption of alternative fueled vehicles. And I just don't see an incentive for business and property owners to give away free electricity in their parking lots. Energy rates here in CT are off the charts and are crippling businesses - they simply cannot afford to give it away, even with a tax incentive.

So we're left with a classic chicken and egg scenario, one that just continues to repeat. Agassi's plan is the first one I've seen in a long time that is practical and works with existing infrastructure. The only burden would be on the vehicle's manufacturer who would need to design a battery mechanism to allow for a safe and easy swap at a service station.

The economics of Agassi's model are also more realistic. It's not relying on the government or business owners to give away free electricity. Under Agassi's model the electricity is paid for with a built-in profit incentive to small business owners to provide the charged batteries to customers. They make a small investment on the front end for equipment and can immediately begin fueling cars. It's a heck of a lot cheaper than converting a few of their pumps to offer hydrogen, and the growth potential is enormous.

I look at it this way: Agassi's model solves the "physics problem" by providing an electric fueling solution that can be nationwide in a year or two. There's simply no alternative that can solve this problem faster. The remaining concerns with potential monopolies and other regulatory issues are "people problems" that people can solve.

Re: The “Biblically Fast” Electric Car Needs a Practical Refueling Solution

Tom Saxton — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 17:14:57 -0000

My wife and I bought a used RAV4-EV last summer. Even though it only has a range of 80-100 miles, we've never been limited by range since we starting using it as our primary vehicle in July.

In fact, we were out on a quick grocery run with the battery at 70% because we hadn't bothered to charge it the night before. While we were out, we got a call from my wife's mother. She was stranded because her Accord had crapped out with a dead alternator.

She couldn't reach her husband and needed a ride home, a 20-mile roundtrip with a 1500 foot elevation difference for us. Even though it was a totally unexpected trip, and we hadn't even started the day with a full charge, we had plenty of range to get her home.

For people who, like you and us, normally drive 30-50 miles, an EV with a range of 100 miles allows for significant unexpected driving. With a 150 or more, running out of charge just isn't worth a second thought. You do lose the theoretically infinite range, but you gain complete independence from gas stations. Once you get an EV, you quickly learn to change your model of driving. Instead of thinking, "whenever I get low on gas I have to find a gas station" to "every morning I start with a full charge that will easily last all day."

As malls, restaurants, hotels, and pay parking lots start putting in outlets to attract EV drivers, even with a lot of unexpected driving you can just plug in and pick up some extra charge while doing your errands. It's just not a problem taxpayers need to spend billions on, especially in the current economy.

Re: The “Biblically Fast” Electric Car Needs a Practical Refueling Solution

lonseidman — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:40:03 -0000

Thanks for stopping by my blog. I am a huge fan of Tesla and what you are doing, but frustrated by what I see as a lack of an effort by the auto industry as a whole to find a solution to this fueling problem. It's what ultimately "killed the electric car" that GM introduced ten years ago, and will likely determine the fate of the next generation electrics being developed and marketed amidst falling gasoline prices.

People want these cars but don't want to spend a bunch of money on a vehicle that will limit their travel options. Just about every car on the market has a nearly limitless range not only because there's a gas station around every corner, but also because it only takes 5 or 10 minutes to refuel and get back on the road. Who wants to get stuck somewhere for an hour because they had a few unplanned errands to make?

Sure, most weeks I only drive my car 30-50 miles per day, but there are times where I need to go farther. I just can't afford to own a car that requires me to buy or rent a second one to go longer distances.

What Shai Agassi is putting together is something that truly works to address the fueling problem in a very practical way. Pulling into a service station and quickly swapping out a discharged battery for a charged one is so brilliantly simple I don't know why electric manufacturers aren't flocking to this model in droves. It would require relatively little infrastructure investment if the car was designed to allow this fast battery swap. Such a design will also help thousands of small family owned service stations diversify their businesses and break away from the stranglehold of Big oil.

Short of that, I think what GM is working on with the Volt is a good start. They smartly recognized the fueling problem is the major barrier for nationwide adoption and have created a car that gives most of the electric benefits (for the first forty miles) without the range and convenience limitations of cars without a backup power source.

Re: Obama Responds to the RNC’s Nasty Tone

lonseidman — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 23:15:10 -0000

You're welcome!

Re: CrossLoop: A free and very easy to configure screen sharing app

lonseidman — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 01:18:53 -0000

Constantin,

Thank you for the recommendation! I will try and review teamviewer the next time I have an opportunity to use a desktop sharing app.

-Lon

Re: CrossLoop: A free and very easy to configure screen sharing app

lonseidman — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 22:36:42 -0000

You are quite welcome. I needed to walk somebody through a rather complex process this afternoon and this was a huge lifesaver. Keep up the great work, can't wait for a Mac client!

Re: Blogging Gear for Denver

lonseidman — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 14:36:27 -0000

I'm just lucky I have a very understanding wife.

Re: iPhone 3G is a Great Revision of an Already Great Product | LonSeidman.com

lonseidman — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:18:40 -0000

You sound like a Verizon rep :).

I switched from a Blackberry last June and for my line of work it's significantly more useful. The web browsing and PDF capabilities have yet to be matched on any handheld device, period.

Re: Barack Obama's 75,000 strong rally | LonSeidman.com

lonseidman — Thu, 29 May 2008 12:09:53 -0000

Test comment!

Re: The Tesla Electric Roadster | LonSeidman.com

lonseidman — Mon, 12 May 2008 15:14:41 -0000

test