Screen shots from JAG

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by Ron Lindeboom on Mar 10, 2005 at 5:21:20 pm Simon, Just as still photographers "bracket" their shots so that there are a variety of shot options to choose from, it is VERY common when shooting for television to shoot the shot from different angles, with differing F-stops and focusing options. What many people here are missing is that OFTEN shots are chosen because they convery an emotion or reinforce a POV rather than being the one with the best and most far-reaching DOF, for example. It is the "art" of editing, not the science of DOF. If the shot was chosen because it quickly focused the viewers attention on the "feeling" that they were in a helicopter manning that gun, then why is it so hard for some people to possible imagine that that just *may* have been done for art's sake. No one here knows why this shot was chosen and no one can do anything but guess as to the motivation for the use of that shot. As David Cherniak has stated -- and oh god, I'm now agreeing with him ;o) -- drawing any real conclusion from a single frame is asking way more than common sense would dictate. Ron Lindeboom Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by David Roth Weiss on Mar 10, 2005 at 7:00:50 pm [Simon Wyndham] "People need to start discussing truly examinable facts using real test equipment. Or else all these arguments are totally invalid. " Simon, Most technical issues with video are identified via anecdotal observation, and not with scientific apparatus. Seldomly does a director yell "cut, back to first positions," because of something he saw on a vectorscope. And, in the editing room, 99% of the time, an editor spots a problem with his eyeballs, and only then checks those observations against the waveform/vectorscope. The typical audience certainly doesn't require a test bench to know when something doesn't look right on TV. God knows, there have been hundreds of questionable comparisons and unscientific facts bandied about on this forum. But, to say that only test equipment can determine the validity of all discussions is equally off base. That's not to say that invalid arguments can't be better challenged with scientific measurement, but there is no substitute for the trained eye. DRW Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by David Roth Weiss on Mar 11, 2005 at 11:25:21 am [Steve Mullen] "Contray to assertions made by some, I never made claims -- other than the color fringing -- based upon still pix! " Steve, have you forgotten that you broached the focus issue that is the focus of most of the debate on this thread? Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by David Roth Weiss on Mar 10, 2005 at 11:53:38 pm Simon, Of your approximately 1100 word response, about 12 had anything to do with what I wrote in my post. For example, did I ever say anything about shooting with a camera that isn't calibrated (in advance)? What I was speaking about was actually based on your earlier analysis of the focus "on" vs. "not on" the machine gun, which was not (in my opinion) accurate. Would scientific measuring tools have helped make your analysis any more accurate? I don't think so, because it appeared to me that you were not considering many elements intrinsic to the still image that are very much apparent to the naked eye. DRW Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by David Roth Weiss on Mar 11, 2005 at 11:19:56 am [Simon Wyndham] "You said that people wouldn't judge a shot or equipment on the day of shooting with a waveform." No, that's not what I said, that's you paraphrasing what I said, and paraphrasing incorrectly. Just so you know Simon, I've lived and worked professionally in Los Angeles for twenty-seven years plus years, and among other things, I happen to be a qualified video engineer. I say this not to impress you, rather to point out to you that, as a bonified professional working in a production hub like Los Angeles, calibrated equipment is the norm, and its use assumed. Nonetheless, and I repeat, in 99% of all cases, problem video is first spotted anecdotally (i.e. by trained observers using their eyes). And, a trained observer also does not require scientific instruments to determine the validity of an argument on The HDV Forum on the Cow. All the best to you in Worchestershire, DRW Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by David Roth Weiss on Mar 11, 2005 at 3:19:01 pm Strangely Simon we seem to agree[Simon Wyndham] "Comparing two different screen shots is pointless." Precisely the point of all of my posts in this thread, thank you. I'm glad we can finally agree on something... Good bye!!! Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by Ron Lindeboom on Mar 10, 2005 at 7:02:34 pm [Simon Wyndham] "In the mean time I don't really care a whole lot about this business. Use whatever camera you need to. I'm sure that most people here who really do do video for a living will hire a camera out if someone wants something in particular, or in fact hire out all the time anyway! This whole comparison thing is very 'consumer' orientated." I couldn't agree more, Simon. That is the whole point in this: The guy that got the shot and also the money for doing it, did so and it was accepted and used in the series. Perfect brush for the painting? -- if I might borrow the metaphor. Probably not. But we do not live in a perfect world and in the end, real pros know that these are merely tools -- some better and some worse than the others. There are few things in this market today that can be deemed useless. But the tired rhetoric of some of these threads seems to derive from, as you said, from a consumer point of view. Expecting one tool to be *the* answer is comical in the world of working pros. The goal is to get the job, perform to client satisfaction and hammer the check. It isn't any more glamourous than that. Standing around bragging that "mine is bigger and badder than yours" is for little kids in the school yard. Thanks for bringing things down to the real basics, Simon -- where tools are just tools and the real issue is performing the job and fulfilling the obligations well enough to support your family and/or household. Now *that's* prettier than any of the cameras or other stuff that I've owned over the years. Ron Lindeboom Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by David Roth Weiss on Mar 7, 2005 at 4:59:34 am Unfortunately Steve, this example doesn't make the point you'd like it to make. The HDV shot is obviously a handheld POV shot from the perspective of the door gunner in a vibrating Huey chopper. Not only is the focus on the gun, as was already mentioned, but the vibration of the chopper and camera are obviously distorting the image of the boat as well. And, the focal length is obviously not set at wide-angle, which would have minimized the apparent effects of the vibration. Thats not a fault of the camera. On the other hand, the HDCAM shot obviously isn't a POV shot, and it was shot with a fairly wide-angle lens, thus minimizing the vibration. In fact, for all we know, the camera may well have been on a gyro mount. In any case, instead of showing how inferior the Z1 camera is, these examples really only point out the possible advantages of shooting with a wide-angle lens from a vibrating helicopter. DRW Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by David Roth Weiss on Mar 7, 2005 at 4:22:34 pm Steve, What a bullshit response. The fact is, you've tried to use this single shot to shoot down the Z1, because you think (a mistaken assumption) that the shot supports your position. No matter how you'd like to spin it now, there can be no other explaination for your posting that shot here. And you have the nerve to call yourself neutral??? The fact is, that shot apparently filled the bill quite adequately. The creators of JAG evidently appreciated the visceral nature of the handheld helicopter footage enough to use in their sucessful series and enough to allow its use promote the Z1 camera worldwide. Perhaps they should have used a locked-down studio lit shot, but then that's not what they were shooting. I suggest that the next time you introduce evidence to support your "neutral" position, you scutinize the material a little more thoroughly. This example says precioius little about the Sony Z1 camera, and whole lot about you and your neutrality. DRW Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by Ron Lindeboom on Mar 7, 2005 at 6:47:39 pm [Steve Mullen] "So we are left with the Sundance/Sony/Jody claims verses the results we all can see. None of the PR said this is an example of HDV compromised by the conditions of the shoot. The PR was that "look how HDV can be cut into an HDCAM Broadcast HDTV program without anyone seeing much difference." That PR was B.S. It's like "I caught a huge fish -- but the line broke."" If the use of a fishing metaphor is going to define this argument, then "landing the fish" must define the success or failure of the attempt. Since Jody did indeed "land the fish" and the shot was used and was deemed "good enough" by the directors and producers of the show, then the line is hardly BS but is merely a difference in opinion as to what you may think is a good shot or not. Jody is a RESPECTED industry pro and reducing him to the level of an industry shill is both disingenuous and will ultimately backfire on you if you care to keep pursuing this line of discourse. How you can argue against the Sony while defending the JVC to such great lengths, makes many here question what is up here -- me included. None of these cameras is perfect and while I do indeed that to be the case, I also know quite well that some of JVCs GY-DV500s and other cameras had well-known and on-going issues which required well-documented service calls, etc. On the other hand, I cannot think of a single prosumer or above Sony camera which has fallen into that category in the last five years or so. Sony builds very good stuff. So does Panasonic. So does JVC. The same goes for Canon. Sadly, Jody wrote me and said that he wanted no part of this forum as it is contentious and disrespectful. I for one was very sorry to see him go. The Cow is about respect and give and take -- no one's opinion is Gospel here, not even my own. There are many hosts that I disagree with that are on the host team here at the Cow. If it were only my own opinion, this would be a boring one-dimensional place. I think it all comes down to that "throwing out the baby with the bathwater" thingie... Best regards, Ron Lindeboom Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by David Roth Weiss on Mar 7, 2005 at 9:16:09 pm [Steve Mullen] "Ron, my post showed the actual differences between HDV and HDCAM." There you go again!!! Get it through your head Steve, those shots did nothing to show the differences between the cameras themselves, the only difference exemplified in those two shots is in the way the cameras were used. Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by Ron Lindeboom on Mar 7, 2005 at 9:31:37 pm [Steve Mullen] "Until I saw video from the Sony I was a strong defender of the Sony against those who were heavily criticising it. Have you forgotten?" Hi Steve, I am not trying to be argumentative when I say that I have little recollection of times where you actually *defended* the Sony. As for the Sony and your comments in regards to it, you have been very pointedly anti-Sony for nearly all of this situation -- even before the camera was actually released. This is one of the reasons why many in these threads are remarking as to what they perceive as a strong anti-Sony posture, one that has been quite on-going. As DRW pointed out in his remarks to one of your posts, he felt that your claim to being "neutral" in regards to Sony's HDV cameras were preposterous and disingenuous. It matters little who is right or wrong in this. I have long argued online that facts are of little consequnce, as "perception is everything in a marketing war." The perception is that you are quite pointedly anti-Sony and pro-JVC. I often argue my own point-of-view, Steve. Usually, I try to use operative terms like "in my opinion" and "based on my experience." I try to leave people with their own opinions and life experiences (usually, though there have been a few times where I have put my foot down but that's usually no more than two or three times in the course of an average year). Having worked in the satellite television industry for years and having been to dinner on numerous occasions with Charlie Eregen (founder of EchoStar and Dish Network), I know how compressed digital television is and how far removed it is from what was probably seen in the first generation that Jody saw when he shot and submitted the shots which were approved. I *highly* doubt that what came across on television was what was submitted. Having been involved in the *original* General Instruments® DigiCipher™ project (not what later was shipped using the name) -- which was the first real HD system of any developmental consequence in the USA -- and having been an editor for years, I have little faith that what you recorded is what Jody saw in the original footage. None of this is life-or-death, it is merely art -- subject to interpretation, classification, recompression and dissection -- but in the end, I've never met a paint brush which is a "one size fits all" in all situations, nor totally useless either. In the hands of a great painter, any brush can take on a life of its own based on the degree of talent of the painter. If a painter hates a brush, then it makes little sense to use it. But in that regard, whereas I have little doubt that NAB will usher in new and exciting things in the days ahead, I think it's a safe bet to gamble that users buying a Sony have made a reasonable purchase that should fairly easily make back the investment proffered. (And no, we do not and never have gotten advertising support from Sony. But I do like to try to be fair.) Best regards, Ron Lindeboom creativecow.net Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by Ron Lindeboom on Mar 7, 2005 at 11:04:07 pm [Steve Mullen] Ron Lindeboom said: ""It matters little who is right or wrong in this. I have long argued online that facts are of little consequnce, as 'perception is everything in a marketing war.'" Since there is a written record of what happened in the past -- it can be easily checked. But since you don't care about "facts" there's little point in wasting the time diggerng them out." Steve: Mark Twain said it best: "There are liars, damned liars -- and then there are statiticians." I am NOT calling you a liar but I do believe that it has been quite clear for some time that you do NOT treat Sony with the same degree of respect that you do JVC, for example. What you consider indelible fact, is not seen as indelible fact by all of those present here. We have been getting mail for weeks from people asking Kathlyn why you have it out for Sony and is that our "official" site policy. Some say that they feel as if you are a college professor lecturing and talking down to your audience and that the only passing grade in this class is the one that agrees with your own interpretation. The point I am making, Steve, is that so much of this is subjective -- thus, the Mark Twain reference -- and you are as clearly "pro JVC" as Leo Ticheli is "Pro Panasonic." There is NOTHING wrong with that, but it is rather disingenuous to assert that there has been a LEVEL playing field here in this forum where the facts simply do not bear that out. But that is just my interpretation of the "facts" and those that disagree are more than welcome to their own interpretation of the irrefutable and incontrovertibly obvious facts of all this. (pun intended) ;o) Best regards, Ron Lindeboom creativecow.net Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by Ron Lindeboom on Mar 7, 2005 at 11:52:26 pm Hi Leo, I was not disparaging you at all and I hope that you did not read it as such. I am a huge fan of certain tools, as you probably know. Others, I am less keen on. I have no problem having or exercising my opinion. The problem I was expressing is that while it is natural to have opinions, it is counter-productive to try to make them the only allowed viewpoint. In all of 2004, I think I banned maybe five people out of over 220,000+ unique people that visit the Cow in a month. They weren't banned for having opinions, they were banned for not wanting to give others any respect for their own hard-earned (or not) opinions. As you know, Leo, the Cow has always had a wide range of viewpoints but when a consummate pro like Jody feels like he has to run a gauntlet to participate in this forum -- to the point that he leaves rather than suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune -- then there is definitely "something rotten in Denmark." (Feeling like I need to quote the Bard to insure that I still can after all these new gray hairs that have been coming in.) ;o) Best regards, Ron Lindeboom Friend of Cowdog & His Beer™ Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: shots from JAG & Ron owes me an apology by Ron Lindeboom on Mar 8, 2005 at 2:58:37 pm Gary, I had no idea who you were or weren't when I demanded an apology from you for Jody. This as "Gary" is not exactly an uncommon name and because you post using your first name only -- as do many people around here -- I have no idea how to keep straight who is who. There are so many "Dave" and "Michael" and "Gary" and "Fred" accounts around here that there is simply no way to keep track of who people are. If you were disappointed, imagine my disappointment when I learned that the same guy who was going after Jody with some very uncalled for comments was you. Jody and I corresponded privately for a while and the reason that Jody said that he didn't need an apology was more to do with the class that he has, than to your claims that you hadn't tried to insult him. You took the argument personal and went after the man, not the artistry -- or lack of it. As I have said many times over the years and said again in this forum just this week: You are entitled to say whatsoever you wish about a project, a file, a shoot or just about any other created thing -- but when people fail to show respect to others, then there is going to be a problem. It has always been that way at the Cow and it has both worked for you, Gary, and against you, as you well know. Your articles will be down today, Gary, as I will not in this case change my mind. You insulted the man and tried to slam him as sure as eggs is eggs. If you wish to end a long friendship over insisting that you were innocent of trying to slam Jody when you know quite well that that was indeed your intent, then that is your call. I have defended you against an entire forum who turned on you, Gary, and have stood as one of the only people willing to stand in the heat to defend you when your name was being torn apart for no good reason. But when you and one or two others treated Jody in a manner that was quite unbefitting of the Cow, I do not care if you are Gary Gowman or Gary Williams or Gary One Thousand -- you will either apologize (which you did) or you will leave. I never apologized to you, Gary, because you were wrong. I do not care if Jody had so much class that he shrugged it all off with an "Aw shucks, I wasn't offended" aside -- it just shows his class. Gary: If you wish to be right in all this, then by all means, do so -- me, I will stand by my words that you owed Jody an apology and if you don't see why, you are free to think whatsoever you wish. I will instruct Kathlyn to pull your articles and stuff down today. Regretfully, I hate to see things end on such a sour note but I cannot and will not encourage nor abide people treating others as in the manner that Jody received from a handful of people on this forum, of which you were one. Attack dog mode has never been one of the acceptable codes of conduct here at the Cow. Ron Lindeboom ADDENDUM: PS: I just spoke with Kathlyn and neither she nor I can recall ever getting a resumé from you. We have never asked any of our leaders for one and out of about 350 leaders over the years, we've been sent two or three by their own prerogative -- none were from you. I thought that maybe you had sent one to Kathlyn and so I didn't mention it in my original reply to you. She just came into the office and we spoke about this, we can recall when people attacked your credentials, we heard from you about certain "in general" things but nothing specific with names and dates, as would be covered in a resumé. If you are going to make claims, Gary, please at least keep them within the realm of what actually happened. Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by Ron Lindeboom on Mar 8, 2005 at 3:17:18 pm [Ken Hodson] "People heralded the new Sony cams as being perfect. Again out of pure ignorace. Steve studied the new cams and stated their true ability angering some." I have to chuckle, Ken, at this oft repeated mantra because it seems that some here want to believe that if they repeat something often enough, that makes it true. I have been following this discussion and for the life of me, I can't find all of this espousing perfection that you guys are referring to... Sure, there is the to-be-expected oddball comment here and there that crosses the line but a return-in-kind on-going claim of "perfection" that you guys use for ripping on both the Sony cameras and, at times, even those who use them -- that I cannot find. But I can find *plenty* of day-after-day endless diatribe of people tearing into the Sony and those who use them. Think what you wish, Ken, that is your prerogative. Personally, I do not like the way Sony cameras are calibrated to look, period. It's why I bought a Canon XL1 years ago instead of the Sony. Like Steve, I much prefer the warmer and richer look of the way that cameras such as the Canons and JVCs look. So it is not Sony I am defending but merely that I fail to find all these "claims to perfection" on the part of Sony users that you and some point to time after time, ad nauseum. There are 120+ forums in the Cow and this is the only one that has the personality that this forum has. It is so irreflective of what the Cow is that Kathlyn and I have even talked about just yanking the plug on it as we believe that people are more important than bits and bytes and that in a world where no tool is perfect, to argue day after day against a good tool -- not a perfect one in any regard -- is quite self defeating and pointless. But you are quite welcome to think what you will about it all. Ron Lindeboom Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by Ron Lindeboom on Mar 8, 2005 at 1:02:45 am [Steve Mullen] "Ron, my post showed the actual differences between HDV and HDCAM. Many (most) here had no opportunity to see this. The stills matched what I saw on HDTV and did not match what Jody said they looked like. Many others -- an an other site -- have commented on the exactly same thing. Moreover, the color fringing is a serious problem since it matches what I see from 1080i. " Steve, As I said elsewhere and will reiterate here, I herald back to the days of satellite TVRO and actually helped pencil out the original marketing plan for what became DirecTV sipping Jack Daniels Lemonade in the bar at the Opryland Hotel with the founder of DirecTV (who was then the head of the National Rural Telecommunications Cooperative (NRTC)) and one of the key future investors. I also have been to dinner on numerous occasions with Charlie Eregen, founder of EchoStar and Dish Network. My point in saying this, is that I have a L-O-N-G history in satellite broadcasting and know full well how radically different what is broadcast is from what was first generation... I am not surprised at all at how things degrade when uplinked to the satellites. But the fact remains that Jody is the first DP that I know of to grab a shot using HDV that was "good enough" for the directors and producers of a *very* major network show. To disparage that and try to make Jody look like a clown indicates to me that you either do not really understand what the process is of getting things recompressed and up onto one of the birds for terrestrial distribution, or you do not care and merely wish to discredit a man. That's how I see it from here and I feel like you owe the man an apology -- not for the work, you are entitled to think whatsoever you wish about that -- but for the way that you have impugned his reputation and good name and have tried to disparage both his work and his professional judgment. But that is just my opinion. Ron Lindeboom creativecow.net Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by David Roth Weiss on Mar 7, 2005 at 7:10:03 am [Derek Antonio Serra] "Only a handful of people on earth where unhappy about it - and bizarrly they seem to all reside on this forum. " WELL STATED!!! Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	God bless those early adopters. Or: It's the pioneers that catch all the arrows. by Ron Lindeboom on Mar 7, 2005 at 5:39:23 pm In every market that ever develops, there are three classes of adopters: there are the "early adopters," those who want to be on the bleeding edge and are there as products come out of the gate -- they pay a premium and by doing so, often seize opportunities that early adopters are privy to due to being in the market first (along with the equal chance of risk and failure); then, there are those who wait until things shake out a bit and come in once the market begins to take shape and acheive some sense of legitimacy; lastly, there are those who wait and wait for the price to drop and drop before getting into the market. Opportunities and the risk of failure are about equal within any of the aforesaid market adopter groups. (Meaning: There is greater ooportunity in the early adopters, just as there are more risks. In the middle, there are fewer opportunities but also fewer risks. If you wait long enough, it is almost risk free but you are also in a market that is nearly void of opportunity, as well.) A great example of this is that I had no confidence whatsoever in DV when it first came out. None. Call me skeptical -- especially when I owned a top-of-the-line Media 100 back then, along with an Avid Xpress Elite system. It was BetaSP or better for the ole Boomie. By the time I came to believe in DV as a format, Larry Jordan had already built 2-POP focused on DV and FCP (which I first refused to do, due to all the long drawn out problems that had ensued for nearly two-and-a-half years in getting FCP to market -- I was around during the Macromedia "Key Grip" days and even did TV shows with Randy Ubillos (creator of both Adobe Premiere and Key Grip/FCP)). Larry quickly built 2-POP into a vehicle that he sold to Creative Planet for some rather large money, while we had already built the W.W.U.G. (and had many times his traffic) but he got a huge deal that we never got. One time in New York City, Kathlyn and I were having dinner with Ralph Fairweather (co-creator of 2-POP along with Larry Jordan) and Ralph thanked us for not believing in either DV or FCP. "You left the door open for us to come in at an opportune time and if you had jumped on it when it first appeared, we'd not have stood a chance against you because you already had the lion's share of the traffic and most all of the good traffic." (Back then, there were few sites of this kind and it was not as it is today with a myriad of sites, some more general in scope (as is the Cow) and others, far more specialised in their focus and content.) We didn't believe in DV as a format until late in 1997, when we finally added it to our forums line-up. Call us skeptics. Skepticism is not a bad thing but it can sometimes be a costly preoccupation when it comes to "reading your own press releases" I have learned to take myself a lot less seriously because my own depth of knowledge (though some would argue a lack of knowledge) cost me dearly -- but my knowledge was indeed correct at the time, as broadcasters were open to BetaSP and better and DV had yet to prove itself. Still, I watched someone else take our model and run with it and take it all the way to the bank. Even Ralph Fairweather said in our meeting that Creative Planet loved our old site and were interested in it but chose to buy 2-POP instead because we had missed the boat where DV was concerned. The moral of the story??? Today, I subscribe to the belief that there are no perfect answers and that *every* answer out there is incomplete and the real issue is finding out what compromises you are willing to live with based on your own circumstances. HDV is no panacea for producers and I doubt that it ever will be. But what it is -- at least at the moment -- is a means for getting images that look head and shoulders above anything that I have seen in this price range. Some people prefer the "warmer" look of the "golds and ambers of Fall" that Kodak has been historically noted for over the years; others prefer the crisp, sharp but "colder" images that the "greens and blues" look of Fuji film gives you. JVC and Canon tend to calibrate their look to emulate the Kodak warmer look and Sony and Panasonic tend to strive for the Fuji look -- at least in my opinion. In the end, what we sell to clients are images and a look. Based on that -- and in a world where perfection is the Holy Grail still unfound -- we settle on what works for us. But being too married to an idea in a market that is in rapid flux, is what once cost Ole Boomie here a lot of opportunity -- and money based on what Ralph told me Creative Planet paid for 2-POP. Today, call me "a much more malleable" Boomer. ;o) Best regards, Ron Lindeboom creativecow.net Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by Ron Lindeboom on Mar 7, 2005 at 8:44:44 pm I must say, David, that the sentiment is indeed mutual. Ron Lindeboom Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: MOO! by Harry Pallenberg on Mar 8, 2005 at 4:28:09 am Well put. Thanks, Harry. Forum Cowmunity Leader: OSX Forum Cowmunity Leader: Indie & Doc Dual 1.8 G5 ** 1GB ** 10.3.6 Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: Screen shots from JAG by David Roth Weiss on Mar 10, 2005 at 1:45:49 am Hey guys, meet Bob Tur. Among other things, he is almost singlehandedly responsible for creating the spectacle of live helicopter coverage of the police pursuit as we know it... Welcome Bob, I've been watching your work for for years, and I hate to admit it, but I'm a big fan of televised police pursuits. BTW, I directed innumerable reenactments for Real Stories of the Highway Patrol, and got to stage and ride along on enough high-speed chases (at full speed) to choke any insurance man. All the best, DRW David Roth Weiss Director/Editor David Weiss Productions, Inc. Los Angeles Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index