Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Why? (Score 5, Informative) 180

Well that's a failure of imagination. I'll admit technically speaking it often is *somewhat* compressed, - eg. 422 Subsampled chroma at least. But there is a massive difference between a delivery codec and a signal you're still working with. To start with H264 and their ilk are computationally expensive to do anything with. A single frame of 1080p is a pretty big dataset, and it's painful enough doing basic matrix transforms, but adding a bunch of higher level computations on top of that?... For example just cutting between two feeds of an inter frame compressed codec requires that the processor decompress the GOP and recreate the missing frames. Several of orders of magnitude more complicated than stopping one feed and starting another. And generally speaking the uncompressed feed you have in broadcast situation you're doing *something* oo. Switching, mixing, adding graphics, etc. But the biggest question is one of generation loss. Even one round trip through one of those codecs results in a massive drop in quality (as you rightly point out). You don't want to be compressing footage out of the cameras any more than you can, because you KNOW that you're going to be rescaling, retiming, wiping, fading, keying etc etc etc...

Comment Re:Why Video? (Score 1) 96

Your point is very well taken and for the most part I have to agree with you - AS far as communicating specific, for example technical, ideas are concerned. But as for communicating more subtle more nuanced things about the interviewee - especially things the interviewee doesn't specifically set out to communicate - video has it over the written word every time. You can't always tell if someone is lying over video - but you almost NEVER can when you're reading the written word.

Comment Re:Record it non-realtime (Score 1) 96

I concur. An even better solution would be to engage a local freelancer or stringer to do it. That way they'd actually have a decent camera, decent audio gear (people so often overlook this) and might actually know something about lighting, sound, scene etc. Doesn't have to be expensive maybe a couple of hundred dollars for an hour long interview. You can still do the interview over voip, just get a million times better picture. Have a point of difference.

Thoughts On the State of Web Development 253

rmoskal recommends his blog post up at Most Media on finding the right level of abstraction, Grails, and SOFEA. "[Three years ago] I was very excited about Apache Wicket as the way to develop line of business applications with a domain model, CRUD [create-read-update-delete] screens for maintaining the model, and in the most interesting cases, doing something else useful besides. I still like Wicket. It has, as its website says, a small conceptual surface area.' It reminds me of Python in that 'You try something it usually just works.' In many respects, though, Wicket seems to be at the wrong level of abstraction for the for the sorts of line-of-business applications described above. If your team is spending any time at all writing code to produce listing, filtering, and sorting behavior, not to mention creating CRUD screens and the back-end logic for these operations, they are probably working at the wrong level of abstraction. ... Recently I did a small project using Grails and was quite pleased. Grails uses groovy, a dynamic language compatible with Java, and is based on the proven technologies that I know and love well: Spring, Hibernate, SiteMesh, Maven, etc. ... I get all the power of the Java ecosystem without the fustiness and lack of expressivity of the core language (no more getters and setters, ever!)."

Comment Re:The solution is simple: (Score 1) 105

My local pub has a setup like this. I imagine it was fairly expensive to setup as it's 6-7 projectors, each with their own slave computer controlled by a server running a bit of software called watchout,( by dataton). It doesn't use cameras to calibrate, it was done manually (or so I'm told), but since the projectors have been installed for at least 5-6 years the time spent calibrating them isn't such a big deal. And the software allows for making minor adjustments (via sliders) in case you bump one of them.

Anyway this is the bar: http://www.horsebazaar.com.au/

The effect is quite cool, it's one long video wall that wraps around the pub. Shame they don't have any decent photos of it.


Submission + - Game company abandons employees, takes IP. (tsumea.com)

snicho99 writes: A US owned gaming company has fled Australia, leaving unpaid employees and a massive tax bill. Apparently many staff have been working unpaid for months to allow their game to ship and hopefully the company to recover. Interzone's Perth (Western Australia) office was created with the assistance of a state government grant.

Last week Interzone's (American) CEO entered the building at night and removed all the servers and IP so that Interzone could continue production at a new company they have opened in Ireland. The staff cought him on camera: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYyr_lX98Bw .

More background here:

Comment Re:Bad idea. (Score 2, Informative) 636

Mod parent up. Here in Australia we already have this legislation and it's *completely* pointless. Same deal, some ninny in parliament with no real understanding of the technology involved wrote some *bs* legislation:


The problem is coming up with an "objective" comparison of the loudness between two bits of programming. As the parent says it's more a question of compression and dynamic range than actual volume. (by compression I mean audio compression, not data compression). If you run a peak search on even the most mild mannered jane austen bbc tv program, you'll get the same reading as you do an a sham-wow commercial. It's just that the sham-wow tvc dude is trying to cram so much information in the 30 seconds that he'll run everything at -3db. Where as in the Jane Austen thing will only reach that point once or twice in 10 minute section.

But an even bigger problem is that the people making the ads have no idea what they're actually going to be screening with. How are you going to match the apparent loudness of your ad with the tv program, if you've got no idea what that program is anyway? It's retarded.

Consequently in Australia we have a vaguely written set of "guidelines" and a requirement that any tvc submitted to a network be "OP48" compliant and say as such on the slate. The result, everyone writes OP48 compliant on their slate and that's about it....

Comment Re:Lacie - No Incrimental Backup? Seriously? (Score 1) 101

Hrmm.. Yes I want to buy a 1TB drive because I'm about to capture 3 hours of HD footage for a project I'm working on. In fact I want to buy several. Most of the files going on to a disk like that are going to be tens of gigabytes, write once, read many. Incremental backup is so far from my mind it doesn't even register. Besides, the operating system supplies those tools anyway.(rsync rdiff - or even just "time machine"). To be honest in almost every other post production or graphic design studio that I've been in in the last 3 years has used laCie drives almost exclusively. I don't know why (maybe because they're pretty?), but if it's their target market then it seems they can get away without offering incremental backup software, just fine. And charge a premium for it. Note: this is not an endorsement of laCie products - just an observation. my 2c.

Submission + - Jet Pack Runs for Hours on Water

Ponca City, We love you writes: "Jet packs have been around for half a century, but there's always been one problem: they run out of rocket fuel very quickly. Now a German company has taken the standard jetpack design, run a fat yellow hose out the back, and connected it to a small unmanned boat which houses an engine, pump and fuel tank that sends pressurized water back up the hose, where it's shot out by two nozzles just behind the wearer's shoulders. Called the JetLev-Flyer, the design can purportedly reach a height of 50 feet, a speed of 45 mph and a range of 300 kilometers based on four hours of flying time. A digital fly-by-wire system is used to control the throttle and future designs may achieve higher altitudes and top speeds, extended range and even travel below the water's surface. The American manufacturers claim it is "amazingly easy to learn and operate" and they're taking orders now at $130,000 each."

Slashdot Top Deals

"We Americans, we're a simple people... but piss us off, and we'll bomb your cities." -- Robin Williams, _Good Morning Vietnam_