Do all firewire cards support transfers from PC to camcorders?

Discussion in 'Video Cameras' started by DaveA, Nov 23, 2003.

  1. DaveA

    Jerry. Guest

    Helpful until he gives you incorrect information and polite until you dare
    to tell him he is wrong...
     
    Jerry., Nov 28, 2003
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. DaveA

    Ptarmigan Guest

    |
    | | <snip>
    |
    | > I now believe that 'Jerry' has made his point and that it does not
    matter
    | > what any others say he still thinks he is right. And he has the right
    to
    | > feel that way. However I now feel that this is becoming a vendetta
    | against
    | > Mr Morgan, who has in my opinion been nothing but helpful and polite.
    |
    | Helpful until he gives you incorrect information and polite until you dare
    | to tell him he is wrong...
    |
    At no point have I read that he has been rude to you, infact quite the
    opposite, he had acknowledged your comments and replied in a very adult
    manner. YOU on the other hand have taken delight in castigating him for no
    really good reason.
    Now you tell me who is right ?
    I'm afraid you do not put your points over very well and Mr Morgan has
    definitely the upper hand - right or wrong.
    If you do feel that strongly why not give us clear and irrefutable evidence
    ?

    HTH

    Brian--
    Checked using Norton Antivirus 2004
     
    Ptarmigan, Nov 28, 2003
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. DaveA

    Jerry. Guest

    There are more way of being impolite than being rude, Mr Morgan has often
    tried to belittle people who dear to tell him he is wrong - even when they
    prove he is wrong...

    What I object to is Mr Morgan giving out his / opinion / as hard fact, he
    has (on numerous occasions) told us all that a dedicated hard drive for
    video capture is not required (and those who have them don't understand how
    computers work) but has failed to supply independent supporting evidence of
    his opinion nor has he offered his opinions to a wider critique beyond his
    web site or this group.

    Recently when another couple of posters proved that he was talking crap his
    response was not 'Oh, sorry, I was wrong' but more like 'I've had enough of
    you, I'm kill filing you and suggest other do the same'.
    Google is your friend, when I have more time I'll recover some of the
    articles and post them here.
     
    Jerry., Nov 28, 2003
    #43
  4. DaveA

    Ptarmigan Guest

    |
    | | > | > |
    | > | | > | <snip>
    | > |
    | > | > I now believe that 'Jerry' has made his point and that it does not
    | > matter
    | > | > what any others say he still thinks he is right. And he has the
    right
    | > to
    | > | > feel that way. However I now feel that this is becoming a vendetta
    | > | against
    | > | > Mr Morgan, who has in my opinion been nothing but helpful and
    polite.
    | > |
    | > | Helpful until he gives you incorrect information and polite until you
    | dare
    | > | to tell him he is wrong...
    | > |
    | > At no point have I read that he has been rude to you, infact quite the
    | > opposite, he had acknowledged your comments and replied in a very adult
    | > manner. YOU on the other hand have taken delight in castigating him for
    | no
    | > really good reason.
    |
    | There are more way of being impolite than being rude, Mr Morgan has often
    | tried to belittle people who dear to tell him he is wrong - even when they
    | prove he is wrong...
    |
    | What I object to is Mr Morgan giving out his / opinion / as hard fact, he
    | has (on numerous occasions) told us all that a dedicated hard drive for
    | video capture is not required (and those who have them don't understand
    how
    | computers work) but has failed to supply independent supporting evidence
    of
    | his opinion nor has he offered his opinions to a wider critique beyond his
    | web site or this group.
    |
    | Recently when another couple of posters proved that he was talking crap
    his
    | response was not 'Oh, sorry, I was wrong' but more like 'I've had enough
    of
    | you, I'm kill filing you and suggest other do the same'.
    |
    | > Now you tell me who is right ?
    | > I'm afraid you do not put your points over very well and Mr Morgan has
    | > definitely the upper hand - right or wrong.
    | > If you do feel that strongly why not give us clear and irrefutable
    | evidence
    | > ?
    |
    | Google is your friend, when I have more time I'll recover some of the
    | articles and post them here.
    |
    |
    Fair enough Jerry - I'll reserve judgment for the time being and keep an eye
    on this NG for the comments you have made however I feel that, only to date
    and from my own observations, you might be wrong.
    Regards

    Brian--
    Checked using Norton Antivirus 2004
     
    Ptarmigan, Nov 28, 2003
    #44
  5. DaveA

    Tony Morgan Guest

    No doubt carefully selected and well doctored. You've already recently
    demonstrated how adept at doctoring my posts you are.

    Hasn't it occurred to you that others can read the undoctored posts in
    Google? Are you really so clueless that you think that changing your
    moniker from "J.L.E." to "Jerry" makes that difficult? Now I wonder why
    you changed your identity?

    I could select many of your posts (from both this newsgroup and others)
    and post them (undoctored) here, but I'm not the petulant foot-stamping
    infantile person that you seem to be.
     
    Tony Morgan, Nov 29, 2003
    #45
  6. Trying to be even handed...

    I feel Jerry is ill advised to have persued the recent argument as
    right did not appear to be on his side but there has been a small
    number of occasions in the past (not in the last couple of months)
    when I have thought that Tony could have chosen his words much more
    carefully, or to be blunt, I have been shocked by how rude he can be
    about fellow posters.
     
    Malcolm Knight, Nov 29, 2003
    #46
  7. DaveA

    Ptarmigan Guest

    | |
    | > Fair enough Jerry - I'll reserve judgment for the time being and
    | keep an eye
    | > on this NG for the comments you have made however I feel that, only
    | to date
    | > and from my own observations, you might be wrong.
    |
    | Trying to be even handed...
    |
    | I feel Jerry is ill advised to have persued the recent argument as
    | right did not appear to be on his side but there has been a small
    | number of occasions in the past (not in the last couple of months)
    | when I have thought that Tony could have chosen his words much more
    | carefully, or to be blunt, I have been shocked by how rude he can be
    | about fellow posters.
    | --
    | Malcolm
    |
    | This is where I feel we miss out on body language with E mails. Perhaps
    emoticons added would help portray the correct 'image' ?
    I have only been with this NG a short while and to date Tony Morgan seems to
    have been helpful and I have learned a lot from his posts.
    Not everyone is fluent in writing exactly how they perceive things and
    sometimes it can come over as brusque where the person did not mean that at
    all.
    Benefit of the doubt and all that perhaps ?

    Regards

    Brian--
    Checked using Norton Antivirus 2004
     
    Ptarmigan, Nov 29, 2003
    #47
  8. DaveA

    Jerry. Guest

    Pot and all that, Mr Morgan....
    You really are thick, why do you think I mentioned Google - other than
    inviting the person I was replying to that he might wish to try Google.

    Are you really so clueless that you think that changing your
    No, in fact if you did retrieve one of my post from that period you would
    see that my moniker was Jerry (J.L.E), hardly trying to hide.... !

    The reason I changed was due to some people complaining that I didn't show a
    name, they didn't like just replying to initials for some reason.
    But you would not, as we can all do that, can't we, it was interesting when
    your name came up in a web authoring group some months back....
     
    Jerry., Nov 29, 2003
    #48
  9. DaveA

    Ptarmigan Guest

    |
    | | > In message <SlOxb.14300$9.net>, Jerry.
    | > >> Now you tell me who is right ?
    | > >> I'm afraid you do not put your points over very well and Mr Morgan
    has
    | > >> definitely the upper hand - right or wrong.
    | > >> If you do feel that strongly why not give us clear and irrefutable
    | > >evidence
    | > >> ?
    | > >
    | > >Google is your friend, when I have more time I'll recover some of the
    | > >articles and post them here.
    | >
    | > No doubt carefully selected and well doctored. You've already recently
    | > demonstrated how adept at doctoring my posts you are.
    |
    | Pot and all that, Mr Morgan....
    |
    | >
    | > Hasn't it occurred to you that others can read the undoctored posts in
    | > Google?
    |
    | You really are thick, why do you think I mentioned Google - other than
    | inviting the person I was replying to that he might wish to try Google.
    |
    | Are you really so clueless that you think that changing your
    | > moniker from "J.L.E." to "Jerry" makes that difficult? Now I wonder why
    | > you changed your identity?
    |
    | No, in fact if you did retrieve one of my post from that period you would
    | see that my moniker was Jerry (J.L.E), hardly trying to hide.... !
    |
    | The reason I changed was due to some people complaining that I didn't show
    a
    | name, they didn't like just replying to initials for some reason.
    |
    | >
    | > I could select many of your posts (from both this newsgroup and others)
    | > and post them (undoctored) here, but I'm not the petulant foot-stamping
    | > infantile person that you seem to be.
    |
    | But you would not, as we can all do that, can't we, it was interesting
    when
    | your name came up in a web authoring group some months back....
    |

    Sorry Jerry but again it is just innuendo's - please give us the facts so
    that we can make an educated decision based on FACTS - please.
    Again I state that nothing has been said that is concrete evidence of Tony's
    misdemeanour's.

    Regards

    Brian--
    Checked using Norton Antivirus 2004
     
    Ptarmigan, Nov 29, 2003
    #49
  10. I would agree that Tony is the most prolific helper around and I have
    no problem with him, I always read his posts and have been known to
    endorse them and add detail to them when appropriate. But Jerry won't
    have too much trouble Googling back for occasions on which Tony has
    shown a disposition not to suffer fools gladly and used language he
    probably now regrets.

    The current dispute is silly and I am pleased to see that by and large
    Tony has behaved impeccably. :)
     
    Malcolm Knight, Nov 29, 2003
    #50
  11. DaveA

    Jerry. Guest

    Anyone can do the above, Mr Morgan can extract one of my old posts this
    placing it out of context and re post it as proof that I'm what he wishes to
    claims I am, I can do the same with Mr Morgan, Joe Blogs could probably do
    the same with one of your old posts. This is what Mr Morgan failed to
    realise when he made his remarks above, all I was doing was to point out
    that I could play the same game.

    If you're interested, put this into your web browser, it took 60 seconds to
    bring this up from 2003-07-15 on Google groups search - BTW mind the line
    wrapping !

    http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=wZKWP1Bkc5F
    %24Ew7p%40dsl.pipex.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fas_epq%3DTony%2520Morgan%26saf
    e%3Dimages%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26as_ugroup%3Duk.net.web.authoring%252C
    %2520uk.rec.video.digital%26as_uauthors%3DTony%2520Morgan%26lr%3D%26hl%3Den

    Read the thread, not just a couple of posts...
     
    Jerry., Nov 29, 2003
    #51
  12. DaveA

    Jerry. Guest

    To follow up on what I said ealier.....

    Or how about this from a different thread about 12 month earlier...

    From: Tony Morgan ()
    Subject: Re: 720x480 image size Good enough to edit ?
    View: Complete Thread (42 articles)
    Original Format
    Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.production, rec.arts.movies.tech,
    ucb.digital-video, uk.rec.video.digital
    Date: 2002-06-05 13:58:01 PST


    Bullshit.

    Here's exactly what you said:

    </TONY>

    <JON>
    no, its not.
    </JON>

    </TONY>

    <JON>
    BULL....
    </JON>

    </TONY>

    <JON>
    incorrect......
    </JON>

    Has it occurred to you that coming out with such rubbish as you have in
    this thread simply discredits anything else you might say?

    Since you've got such an inexhaustible pile of bullshit to disseminate,
    you clearly have nothing useful to contribute so....

    <PLONK>
    --
    Tony Morgan

    From:
    http://www.google.com/groups?q=+"Tony+Morgan"+group:uk.net.web.authoring
    ,+OR+group:uk.rec.video.digital+author:Tony+author:Morgan&start=10&hl=en&lr=
    &ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=%2BsrAbHBorn%248EwkW%40atomor.demon.co.uk&rnum=11
     
    Jerry., Nov 29, 2003
    #52
  13. DaveA

    Ptarmigan Guest

    | To follow up on what I said ealier.....
    |
    | | >
    | > | <snip>
    | > >
    | > > Sorry Jerry but again it is just innuendo's - please give us the facts
    | so
    | > > that we can make an educated decision based on FACTS - please.
    | > > Again I state that nothing has been said that is concrete evidence of
    | > Tony's
    | > > misdemeanour's.
    | > >
    | <snip>
    | >
    | > If you're interested, put this into your web browser, it took 60 seconds
    | to
    | > bring this up from 2003-07-15 on Google groups search - BTW mind the
    line
    | > wrapping !
    | >
    | >
    |
    http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=wZKWP1Bkc5F
    | >
    |
    %24Ew7p%40dsl.pipex.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fas_epq%3DTony%2520Morgan%26saf
    | >
    |
    e%3Dimages%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26as_ugroup%3Duk.net.web.authoring%252C
    | >
    |
    %2520uk.rec.video.digital%26as_uauthors%3DTony%2520Morgan%26lr%3D%26hl%3Den
    | >
    | > Read the thread, not just a couple of posts...
    | >
    | >
    |
    | Or how about this from a different thread about 12 month earlier...
    |
    | From: Tony Morgan ()
    | Subject: Re: 720x480 image size Good enough to edit ?
    | View: Complete Thread (42 articles)
    | Original Format
    | Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.production, rec.arts.movies.tech,
    | ucb.digital-video, uk.rec.video.digital
    | Date: 2002-06-05 13:58:01 PST
    |
    |
    | In message <>, Jon Carroll
    | >THAT is what i was saying.
    | >
    | >which has nothing to do with the actual IEEE spec,
    |
    | Bullshit.
    |
    | Here's exactly what you said:
    |
    | <TONY>
    | >No. IEEE 1394 in video mode is isochronous.
    | </TONY>
    |
    | <JON>
    | no, its not.
    | </JON>
    |
    | <TONY>
    | >Codecs have absolutely nothing to do with IEEE 1394.
    | </TONY>
    |
    | <JON>
    | BULL....
    | </JON>
    |
    | <TONY>
    | > Other editors (or editing options) *do* use a codec to store (say)
    | >MPEG-1 on HDD to reduce the amount of HD space required during editing.
    | >This unfortunately precludes the write-back as mentioned above. And
    | >naturally, if you want to produce (say) SVCD or DVD media you'll
    require
    | >a DV-MPEG-2 codec.
    | </TONY>
    |
    | <JON>
    | incorrect......
    | </JON>
    |
    | Has it occurred to you that coming out with such rubbish as you have in
    | this thread simply discredits anything else you might say?
    |
    | Since you've got such an inexhaustible pile of bullshit to disseminate,
    | you clearly have nothing useful to contribute so....
    |
    | <PLONK>
    | --
    | Tony Morgan
    |
    | From:
    |
    http://www.google.com/groups?q=+"Tony+Morgan"+group:uk.net.web.authoring
    |
    ,+OR+group:uk.rec.video.digital+author:Tony+author:Morgan&start=10&hl=en&lr=
    | &ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=%2BsrAbHBorn%248EwkW%40atomor.demon.co.uk&rnum=11
    |
    Hi Jerry
    Its interesting that the link you posted cannot be found under Google.
    Also your language in the follow up post is less than polite so I have to
    ask are YOU the one who is wrong ?
    To date Tony has not made any vicious reply to you and it seems to me and no
    doubt other that it is you who has the problem.
    Sorry Jerry but I really do think you are wrong.
    For me this is the end of the thread and I will not be responding further.
    Thanks for your input Jerry.

    Regards

    Brian--
    Checked using Norton Antivirus 2004
     
    Ptarmigan, Nov 30, 2003
    #53
  14. DaveA

    Jerry. Guest

    Did you copy and paste or just 'click' the line wrapped URL ?

    Try this;
    http://www.google.com/groups?q=+"Tony+Morgan"+group:uk.rec.video.digital
    I never followed up to the post above !
    As I said, do a google search, ISTM that I'll have to do it for you !
    Have you not read other recent posts in this thread...?
    But you have chosen to ignore the evidence...
     
    Jerry., Nov 30, 2003
    #54
  15. I don't think he REALLY kill-files anyone. Just says he does. :)
     
    Laurence Payne, Nov 30, 2003
    #55
  16. Five?
     
    Laurence Payne, Nov 30, 2003
    #56
  17. If anyone want's to do a FAQ he doesn't have to ask permission. Just
    do it, and publicise it in your sig. If it's good, people will refer
    others to it. If it's full of crap, this will be (incessantly)
    pointed out.

    Anyone interested in music sequencing/recording drop in to
    alt.steinberg.cubase and see how it works. I asked no permission to
    set up my CubaseFAQ page. It seems to be appreciated. That's how you
    do it ;-)
     
    Laurence Payne, Nov 30, 2003
    #57
  18. Now, don't be silly. Tony knows his stuff, and is usually factually
    right. But he has a deserved reputation for being a curmudgeon. :)
     
    Laurence Payne, Nov 30, 2003
    #58
  19. DaveA

    Tony Morgan Guest

    aka Doesn't suffer fools gracefully.

    In truth *that* is what really pisses Jerry off.
     
    Tony Morgan, Nov 30, 2003
    #59
  20. DaveA

    Tony Morgan Guest

    <Noting the smiley> I do, but my newsreader shows kill-filed posts when
    someone responds. And of course the threading is displayed, so when
    Jerry starts his scurrilous and demented attacks on me, it is clear that
    he is doing so.

    He seems to believe that because he's in my kill-file he can continue to
    post misinformation and downright lies with impunity.

    It's a shame that he can't let matters drop and concentrate his time on
    contributing constructive posts to this newsgroup. I suspect, though,
    that he has problems in doing the latter, so he reverts to the former.

    To me, at least, it simply shows just what sort of person he is.
     
    Tony Morgan, Nov 30, 2003
    #60
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.