Apr 2005
The Best Video You've Ever Seen
04/30/2005 01:02 Filed in: Technology
Quicktime 7 & H.264
Desktop Video advanced to the next stage yesterday with the release of QuickTime 7 . The new version of QuickTime comes standard with Mac OS X: Tiger which debuted on April 29. Owners of previous versions of Mac OS X were able to download Quicktime 7 for free, and Windows users will still have to wait a few days. Users can upgrade to Quicktime Pro , which allows you to save video off the internet and edit Quicktime files without having to first load it into another program such as iMovie or Final Cut Pro . You can also view Quicktime files full screen with the full version. The Pro upgrade will cost you $30, but it is arguably worth it for the reasons just mentioned.
The most exciting thing about QuickTime 7 is a new video technology called H.264 . This allows you to play high definition video on your computer and the results are absolutely stunning. H.264 is explained on the Apple website with the following description:
H.264 delivers stunning video quality at remarkably low data rates, so you see crisp, clear video in much smaller files. Chosen as the industry standard codec for 3GPP (mobile multimedia), MPEG-4 HD-DVD and Blu-ray, H.264 represents the next generation of video for everything from mobile multimedia to high-defintion playback. Numerous broadcast, cable and video conferencing groups consider H.264 the video codec of choice for their deployments.
Currently, on the QuickTime movie trailer website, there are a handful of new high-definition movie trailers available for download. QuickTime 7 is required for viewing. I took a screenshot (pictured above) of the Batman Beyond hi-def trailer playing on my Powerbook, but the picture doesn't do it justice at all.
If you've been impressed by the video quality of DVD's over VHS, this will blow you away. H.264 is actually four times the resolution of current DVD video. You won't find this level of video playback in Windows Media Player or RealPlayer (at least for the moment).
All this paves the way for video download services. Imagine downloading current movies the same way you can currently download songs from the iTunes Music Store . You could purchase (or perhaps rent) a movie (old or recent), download it over a broadband internet connection, and burn it to a recordable DVD to watch in your living room. Or you could just watch it on your laptop while on the road. H.264 represents the convergence of high definition video quality and smaller file size.
I wouldn't recommend investing in brick and mortar movie rental stores from this point on...
____________________________________________________________________________
Corrected at 5:28 PM. Thanks to those who emailed me.
Desktop Video advanced to the next stage yesterday with the release of QuickTime 7 . The new version of QuickTime comes standard with Mac OS X: Tiger which debuted on April 29. Owners of previous versions of Mac OS X were able to download Quicktime 7 for free, and Windows users will still have to wait a few days. Users can upgrade to Quicktime Pro , which allows you to save video off the internet and edit Quicktime files without having to first load it into another program such as iMovie or Final Cut Pro . You can also view Quicktime files full screen with the full version. The Pro upgrade will cost you $30, but it is arguably worth it for the reasons just mentioned.
The most exciting thing about QuickTime 7 is a new video technology called H.264 . This allows you to play high definition video on your computer and the results are absolutely stunning. H.264 is explained on the Apple website with the following description:
H.264 delivers stunning video quality at remarkably low data rates, so you see crisp, clear video in much smaller files. Chosen as the industry standard codec for 3GPP (mobile multimedia), MPEG-4 HD-DVD and Blu-ray, H.264 represents the next generation of video for everything from mobile multimedia to high-defintion playback. Numerous broadcast, cable and video conferencing groups consider H.264 the video codec of choice for their deployments.
Currently, on the QuickTime movie trailer website, there are a handful of new high-definition movie trailers available for download. QuickTime 7 is required for viewing. I took a screenshot (pictured above) of the Batman Beyond hi-def trailer playing on my Powerbook, but the picture doesn't do it justice at all.
If you've been impressed by the video quality of DVD's over VHS, this will blow you away. H.264 is actually four times the resolution of current DVD video. You won't find this level of video playback in Windows Media Player or RealPlayer (at least for the moment).
All this paves the way for video download services. Imagine downloading current movies the same way you can currently download songs from the iTunes Music Store . You could purchase (or perhaps rent) a movie (old or recent), download it over a broadband internet connection, and burn it to a recordable DVD to watch in your living room. Or you could just watch it on your laptop while on the road. H.264 represents the convergence of high definition video quality and smaller file size.
I wouldn't recommend investing in brick and mortar movie rental stores from this point on...
____________________________________________________________________________
Corrected at 5:28 PM. Thanks to those who emailed me.
|
So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!
04/29/2005 23:25 Filed in: Movies and Television
A Quick Review of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
The answer to the meaning of life, the universe, and everything is 42.
Okay, if you're already familiar with the book(s) by Douglas Adams (and if you liked them), you will like this movie. It's not a perfect adaptation because LOTS of material is left out. However, it's just about as good as you can get in a two-hour adaptation.
If you're not familiar with the Hitchhiker's Guide, but if you liked a TV show like Futurama (which ripped off a lot of material from Hitchhiker's Guide), you will probably like the movie.
Having said that, the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is about a normal fellow named Arthur Dent who loses his house and planet in one day as he is swept away from earth with his friend Ford (who turns out to be an alien) and embarks on an adventure with an assortment of unusual characters.
I know that's very vague, and I'm being that way on purpose. Part of the fun of the movie is the gradual discovery of things as the story unfolds. The screen adaption was written by the book's author, Douglas Adams, before his death a couple of years ago. Perhaps this is why it retains so much of the feel of the original story. Hitchhiker's Guide has some of the most unusual characters you will ever meet. The movie portrays most of them pretty close to the way I pictured them when I read the books and listened to the BBC adaption many years ago. The movie has some incredible special effects with some scenes that all but gave me a sense of vertigo seeing it on the big screen. The aliens were created by Jim Henson Studios, and they do a good job, but they have that fairly standard Jim Henson/Fraggle Rock look.
The movie is funny, quirky, and leaves you shaking your head in disbelief at times. But I also admit that it also grew a bit tedious now and then when I wanted the characters to just "get on with things."
If you're a fan, by all means see it. If you're not a fan already and know nothing about it, you're on your own. The movie is very British in style and sense of humor. If that appeals to you, I would imagine you will like it. I predict that this will not be a blockbuster, but the fans who appreciate it will be satisfied.
Overall, I liked the screen adaptation of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, but for some reason, I feel like I would have liked it more about twenty years ago. I wonder why that is?
The answer to the meaning of life, the universe, and everything is 42.
Okay, if you're already familiar with the book(s) by Douglas Adams (and if you liked them), you will like this movie. It's not a perfect adaptation because LOTS of material is left out. However, it's just about as good as you can get in a two-hour adaptation.
If you're not familiar with the Hitchhiker's Guide, but if you liked a TV show like Futurama (which ripped off a lot of material from Hitchhiker's Guide), you will probably like the movie.
Having said that, the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is about a normal fellow named Arthur Dent who loses his house and planet in one day as he is swept away from earth with his friend Ford (who turns out to be an alien) and embarks on an adventure with an assortment of unusual characters.
I know that's very vague, and I'm being that way on purpose. Part of the fun of the movie is the gradual discovery of things as the story unfolds. The screen adaption was written by the book's author, Douglas Adams, before his death a couple of years ago. Perhaps this is why it retains so much of the feel of the original story. Hitchhiker's Guide has some of the most unusual characters you will ever meet. The movie portrays most of them pretty close to the way I pictured them when I read the books and listened to the BBC adaption many years ago. The movie has some incredible special effects with some scenes that all but gave me a sense of vertigo seeing it on the big screen. The aliens were created by Jim Henson Studios, and they do a good job, but they have that fairly standard Jim Henson/Fraggle Rock look.
The movie is funny, quirky, and leaves you shaking your head in disbelief at times. But I also admit that it also grew a bit tedious now and then when I wanted the characters to just "get on with things."
If you're a fan, by all means see it. If you're not a fan already and know nothing about it, you're on your own. The movie is very British in style and sense of humor. If that appeals to you, I would imagine you will like it. I predict that this will not be a blockbuster, but the fans who appreciate it will be satisfied.
Overall, I liked the screen adaptation of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, but for some reason, I feel like I would have liked it more about twenty years ago. I wonder why that is?
Diet Coke with Splenda
04/26/2005 22:34 Filed in: Dining
One step forward, two steps back.
I tried the new Diet Coke sweetened with Splenda tonight.
I like Splenda . I sprinkle it on my cereal in the morning. Iced tea is best with Splenda, in my opinion.
However, Diet Coke with Splenda tasted like... Tab .
Weird. I'll stick with my Diet Coke with Lime , my sweet addiction.
I tried the new Diet Coke sweetened with Splenda tonight.
I like Splenda . I sprinkle it on my cereal in the morning. Iced tea is best with Splenda, in my opinion.
However, Diet Coke with Splenda tasted like... Tab .
Weird. I'll stick with my Diet Coke with Lime , my sweet addiction.
My Very Own Batgirl Mystery
04/19/2005 23:02 Filed in: Culture Watch
Holy Phony Baloney, Batman!
When I was about ten or so, I was visiting my grandmother in Malvern, Arkansas (population 11,000). While there, my dad said, "Hey, how would you like to go see the real Robin and Batgirl?" Of course I jumped at the chance.
They were signing autographed photos at the local Gibsons (a pre-Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart kind of store).
Now, you have to realize that of course, since I was born in 1967, I never saw the Batman series in its original run. I saw them only in reruns and I have never seen all of them (not that I would want to at this point in my life). I remember watching them as a kid, not realizing AT ALL that they were done with high camp. I had read Batman comic books before I ever saw the TV show, and by that time, thanks to Neil Adams and Denny O'Neil, they were very somber again. But I also had access to all these tabloid size reprints which I understood were from the fifties. So, I think--if I remember clearly--that I assumed the TV series was based more on the older version of Batman, which it actually was.
Anyway, when I think back to that day that I saw Robin and Batgirl at Gibsons, it's really kind of sad. Poor Burt Ward . An actor must surely realize that his peak has come and gone when he's participating in these kinds of events.
I don't think they were promoting anything at all--maybe just trying to make some extra bucks traveling around making appearances. I remember walking into the store with my Dad and asking where Robin and Batgirl was. They directed us to a corner of the store, and sure enough, there they were sitting at a card table in full costume...well, almost full costume. I remember being very disappointed that not only did Robin not have his green gloves on, but that he was also wearing a wristwatch. I had drawn Robin dozens of times in painstaking detail copied from comic books and I knew good and well that he didn't wear a wristwatch.
And I don't know how well their appearance had been promoted in Malvern. There was NO ONE around them. They were just sitting there talking to each other. I got their pictures autographed (publicity shots that I'm sure Dad had to pay for), shook their hands, and walked out of Gibson's slightly disappointed...but I wasn't sure why. Dad and I were kinda silent on the way back to my grandmother's house.
Anyway, fast forward 20 or so years, and I'm having a conversation about the Batman TV show with a buddy of mine. I mention to him that I once met the original Robin and Batgirl: Burt Ward and Katherine Whitfield. He looked at me funny, and said, "Don't you mean, Yvonne Craig ?"
I said, "No, I've got her autograph; I met her. It's Katherine Whitfield." He said that he didn't know who I had met, but Yvonne Craig played Batgirl.
Well, obviously he's right. So, who the heck did I meet? Who was impersonating Batgirl? This really bothers me. I've done a search on IMDB but can find no Katherine Whitefield (even using variations such as Catherine or Whitefield).
Could my memory be wrong? But how could it be SO wrong? I lose sleep over this some nights. Not really. But it's a weird mystery. I am not sure where the photos are. They are stuck somewhere with my autographs of Darth Vader and Terry Bradshaw, no doubt. Hopefully, these pictures will show up one day and the mystery will be solved, or at least have some light shed on it.
When I was about ten or so, I was visiting my grandmother in Malvern, Arkansas (population 11,000). While there, my dad said, "Hey, how would you like to go see the real Robin and Batgirl?" Of course I jumped at the chance.
They were signing autographed photos at the local Gibsons (a pre-Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart kind of store).
Now, you have to realize that of course, since I was born in 1967, I never saw the Batman series in its original run. I saw them only in reruns and I have never seen all of them (not that I would want to at this point in my life). I remember watching them as a kid, not realizing AT ALL that they were done with high camp. I had read Batman comic books before I ever saw the TV show, and by that time, thanks to Neil Adams and Denny O'Neil, they were very somber again. But I also had access to all these tabloid size reprints which I understood were from the fifties. So, I think--if I remember clearly--that I assumed the TV series was based more on the older version of Batman, which it actually was.
Anyway, when I think back to that day that I saw Robin and Batgirl at Gibsons, it's really kind of sad. Poor Burt Ward . An actor must surely realize that his peak has come and gone when he's participating in these kinds of events.
I don't think they were promoting anything at all--maybe just trying to make some extra bucks traveling around making appearances. I remember walking into the store with my Dad and asking where Robin and Batgirl was. They directed us to a corner of the store, and sure enough, there they were sitting at a card table in full costume...well, almost full costume. I remember being very disappointed that not only did Robin not have his green gloves on, but that he was also wearing a wristwatch. I had drawn Robin dozens of times in painstaking detail copied from comic books and I knew good and well that he didn't wear a wristwatch.
And I don't know how well their appearance had been promoted in Malvern. There was NO ONE around them. They were just sitting there talking to each other. I got their pictures autographed (publicity shots that I'm sure Dad had to pay for), shook their hands, and walked out of Gibson's slightly disappointed...but I wasn't sure why. Dad and I were kinda silent on the way back to my grandmother's house.
Anyway, fast forward 20 or so years, and I'm having a conversation about the Batman TV show with a buddy of mine. I mention to him that I once met the original Robin and Batgirl: Burt Ward and Katherine Whitfield. He looked at me funny, and said, "Don't you mean, Yvonne Craig ?"
I said, "No, I've got her autograph; I met her. It's Katherine Whitfield." He said that he didn't know who I had met, but Yvonne Craig played Batgirl.
Well, obviously he's right. So, who the heck did I meet? Who was impersonating Batgirl? This really bothers me. I've done a search on IMDB but can find no Katherine Whitefield (even using variations such as Catherine or Whitefield).
Could my memory be wrong? But how could it be SO wrong? I lose sleep over this some nights. Not really. But it's a weird mystery. I am not sure where the photos are. They are stuck somewhere with my autographs of Darth Vader and Terry Bradshaw, no doubt. Hopefully, these pictures will show up one day and the mystery will be solved, or at least have some light shed on it.
Personal Note: Heading Back to School
04/10/2005 13:06 Filed in: Personal
Saturday a week ago, I received my acceptance letter in the mail granting my re-admission to the doctoral program at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary . Thank-you to all of you who have been praying for me in this regard. I will officially enroll as a student in the Fall semester with the seemingly heady tasks of taking comprehensive finals in November and presenting a dissertation prospectus sometime before then.
Unfortunately, this means that I will no longer serve as chaplain or teach classes at Whitefield Academy as there is no way I could do both. I do hope to find part-time work on the seminary campus. Currently, I am scheduled to teach at Indiana Wesleyan University through the beginning of June, but will then take a hiatus from teaching there until my comps are over at Southern.
Over the next few weeks, I will begin transitioning back to student life again, organizing my notes, re-researching a dissertation topic, and if I am able to obtain it, setting up study space over at the seminary library.
I would still ask for your prayers, especially in regard to the comprehensive finals since I have not been in the program since 2000 and have a lot of catching up to do.
Unfortunately, this means that I will no longer serve as chaplain or teach classes at Whitefield Academy as there is no way I could do both. I do hope to find part-time work on the seminary campus. Currently, I am scheduled to teach at Indiana Wesleyan University through the beginning of June, but will then take a hiatus from teaching there until my comps are over at Southern.
Over the next few weeks, I will begin transitioning back to student life again, organizing my notes, re-researching a dissertation topic, and if I am able to obtain it, setting up study space over at the seminary library.
I would still ask for your prayers, especially in regard to the comprehensive finals since I have not been in the program since 2000 and have a lot of catching up to do.
Main Website Redesign
04/08/2005 13:09 Filed in: Miscellaneous
If you haven't looked at the rest of my website ever before or at least in a while, you may want to check it out. During a bout of insomnia, I have restructured it and modified the look of some of the pages. Photo albums now have a section all to their own, and Kathy and I posted some new pictures from her surprise birthday party.