Vinyl to Digital
in [UK Mac]
|
From: J. J. Lodder on 25 Mar 2010 17:44 Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > > > >So for very loose definitions of "exactly" and "precisely defined", you > > >could say "the inch is *exactly* as precisely defined as the metre." > > > > And that being "one/ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to > > the North pole along a meridian through Paris"? > > Used to be, once. At the time, it was a good try. Still, beats the > distance from the King's nose to his thumb (the yard, once). > > > Plus or minus a baguette or two? ;-) > > Ah no; you're thinking of the International Standard Baguette, which sat > in Paris altogether too long and finally curled up. Not to say turning > green... > > Now, it's measured in wavelengths of light from a Helium-Neon laser. > However long that might be. All I know is that it's kind of *that* long. Obsolete too. The metre is nowadays the 1/299 792 458th part (light)second, Jan
From: Peter Ceresole on 25 Mar 2010 18:38 T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > > All I know is that it's kind of *that* long. > > Are you gesturing as per a one armed fisherman? A one armed king is what I had in mind. Ages ago I was an assistant film editor on the old 'Tonight' programme. For some reason that I now forget, we banged together a short piece of film about 617 squadron destroying the Bielefeld viaduct using a Grand Slam bomb. The usual practice (this was a daily show and we didn't have much time to get these things together) was we'd put the material together, then somebody would come up to see the film and get timings of the various happenings in it, then go away and write a commentary that would fit. In the mean time we took the film down to the dubbing theatre, shoved some effects on it and then Cliff Michelmore came to add the commentary. All went well until the Lancaster released the bomb and the commentary said 'and destroyed the bridge' and then... the bomb fell... and it fell... and by gee it fell... And then the bridge went wallop. It didn't fit... We took the film back to the cutting room. Our chief film editor was a splendid chap, Eddie, who by coincidence had been a very young sergeant pilot flying Lancasters and ran the team with the steadiness and expertise he must have shown to survive a tour of duty. Eddie knew exactly what he was doing. He knew we needed to bring the wallop up by five seconds to meet the end of commentary, which was about 8 ft of film (this was 35mm), so with no time to view it or to do anything, he just grabbed it at the join after the bomb dropped and measured a royal yard- an arm stretch- and a third again. I snipped it there and remade the join. The we shot it down to telecine sight unseen. There was a slight tension as we watched it transmitted to about 8 million people. It fitted perfectly- nay, *artistically*. I learnt a hell of a lot from Eddie, including what a quick yard looked like. -- Peter
From: Peter Ceresole on 25 Mar 2010 18:38 J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > > Now, it's measured in wavelengths of light from a Helium-Neon laser. > > However long that might be. All I know is that it's kind of *that* long. > > Obsolete too. > The metre is nowadays the 1/299 792 458th part (light)second, No; that's why I said 'measured'. You've given the *definition*, but in practice the measurement is done by interference using a helium-neon laser. Actually, I use a tape measure. But the helium-neon thing is the standard for calibration. -- Peter
From: Peter Ceresole on 25 Mar 2010 19:26 Geoff Berrow <blthecat(a)ckdog.co.uk> wrote: > It used to get a kick out of physical editing too. Very satisfying. Yes, I agree. But the biggest pleasure for me was always just making it work. I loved working with a good editor- and mostly my editors were jolly good- because they could bring so much extra to the sequence and the ideas. And the pure sensual pleasure I'd get from a nice cut, a good juxtaposition of shots, the emergence of a good story, was just as great whether I actually cut it (cutting Julian Pettifer and Butch Calderwood's Vietnam stories was always pure pleasure) or whether I set it up and had someone else put it together. I was always astonished that they actually paid me to do it. For 30 years... Wheee! -- Peter
From: Rowland McDonnell on 26 Mar 2010 02:22
Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > > > >So for very loose definitions of "exactly" and "precisely defined", you > > >could say "the inch is *exactly* as precisely defined as the metre." > > > > And that being "one/ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to > > the North pole along a meridian through Paris"? > > Used to be, once. At the time, it was a good try. Still, beats the > distance from the King's nose to his thumb (the yard, once). The *original* yard was the length of a single pace - in Roman times, that was measured from `right footfall to the next right footfall' (or conversely with the left foot). Modern yards are half that length - what a Roman would call half a pace is what we call one pace. By the time that the English idea of the metric metre was first defined by the French using a different natural variable yardstick (size of the Earth[1]), the usual standard linear measure was a standard measuring rod kept somewhere. Thing is, that had been introduced as a method some thousands of years before Napoleon B. I've never come across any evidence that the king was ever really used as the standard measure as Peter C claims - it's just what was *said*, I suspect that the standard pace measure was turned into what was *claimed* to be a particular distance on the king, but always in reality was a set of measuring rods made by the priests (in the early days) and engineering types (later on) and they said it was the size of the king's whatever to give it more clout with `the people'. (or the king told 'em to do it that way, because he was like that) Standard weights and measures are one of the first tools of civilisation that are made by any civilisation - and I'm talking about centralized city type civilization here. One of the very few things we know about the lives of the ancient Harrapans is their standard weights and measures - that, and the fact that they didn't seem to bother with war. The ancient Chinese used standardised bells as a set of standard volume and weight measures. And as a symbol and also the presence of `Confucian harmony' if I understood `A history of the world in 100 objects' correctly. [snip] Rowland. [1] Bloody well does change size. Flexes, too. Okay, it's a good deal less variable than kings or legs... -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking |