Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2008 21:09:08 GMT
I remember some debate on the BSF a few years ago about timing video footage. Apparently, real time and video time are unequal............all the technical jargon went over my head, but it was generally agreed that real race times wouldn't be replicated on video tape. Not sure if the video was faster or slower than real time, but it would seem that if Genghis timed his video and recorded 56.2 secs (the same as Hans' track record) it's likely that the official time on the night was inaccurate.
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Feb 18, 2008 21:42:06 GMT
I remember some debate on the BSF a few years ago about timing video footage. Apparently, real time and video time are unequal............all the technical jargon went over my head, but it was generally agreed that real race times wouldn't be replicated on video tape. Not sure if the video was faster or slower than real time, but it would seem that if Genghis timed his video and recorded 56.2 secs (the same as Hans' track record) it's likely that the official time on the night was inaccurate. Kev, surely any difference would be extremely minor, otherwise if you were playing back, say a TV programme you'd recorded, you'd notice some sort of difference in the pitch of the actor's voices, etc, and I can't say if ever have. It might make a difference if the time was recorded in hundreths, but I somehow doubt that it would make a difference to a time recorded in tenths.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2008 22:00:25 GMT
I remember some debate on the BSF a few years ago about timing video footage. Apparently, real time and video time are unequal............all the technical jargon went over my head, but it was generally agreed that real race times wouldn't be replicated on video tape. Not sure if the video was faster or slower than real time, but it would seem that if Genghis timed his video and recorded 56.2 secs (the same as Hans' track record) it's likely that the official time on the night was inaccurate. Kev, surely any difference would be extremely minor, otherwise if you were playing back, say a TV programme you'd recorded, you'd notice some sort of difference in the pitch of the actor's voices, etc, and I can't say if ever have. It might make a difference if the time was recorded in hundreths, but I somehow doubt that it would make a difference to a time recorded in tenths. From memory Genghis, I think it was stated that it could vary by about four minutes over an hour, which equates to four seconds over a minute. If this is the case, it would make an appreciable difference to any track record, but as I said, I really don't remember the details.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2008 22:03:21 GMT
I remember some debate on the BSF a few years ago about timing video footage. Apparently, real time and video time are unequal............all the technical jargon went over my head, but it was generally agreed that real race times wouldn't be replicated on video tape. Not sure if the video was faster or slower than real time, but it would seem that if Genghis timed his video and recorded 56.2 secs (the same as Hans' track record) it's likely that the official time on the night was inaccurate. Kev, surely any difference would be extremely minor, otherwise if you were playing back, say a TV programme you'd recorded, you'd notice some sort of difference in the pitch of the actor's voices, etc, and I can't say if ever have. It might make a difference if the time was recorded in hundreths, but I somehow doubt that it would make a difference to a time recorded in tenths. To use dear old Peter Thorogood's favourite and frequently used phrase, "Are you sure? " Prepared to accept 'there or thereabouts' now are you Genghis? You in love or summat??? ;D
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Feb 18, 2008 22:05:47 GMT
Kev, surely any difference would be extremely minor, otherwise if you were playing back, say a TV programme you'd recorded, you'd notice some sort of difference in the pitch of the actor's voices, etc, and I can't say if ever have. It might make a difference if the time was recorded in hundreths, but I somehow doubt that it would make a difference to a time recorded in tenths. To use dear old Peter Thorogood's favourite and frequently used phrase, "Are you sure? " Prepared to accept 'there or thereabouts' now are you Genghis? You in love or summat??? ;D No doubts at all. If the timekeeping legend that is Roger Nettlefold says the time is 56.2 seconds, then it's 56.2 seconds. End of story. ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2008 22:25:29 GMT
To use dear old Peter Thorogood's favourite and frequently used phrase, "Are you sure? " Prepared to accept 'there or thereabouts' now are you Genghis? You in love or summat??? ;D No doubts at all. If the timekeeping legend that is Roger Nettlefold says the time is 56.2 seconds, then it's 56.2 seconds. End of story. ;D Then why did you feel the necessity to check up on him - TWICE?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2008 14:23:12 GMT
I don't think the transponders would be as accurate as the timekeeping legend that is Roger Nettlefold. I think Denmark are introducing transponders this year.Seen a lot of stuff about it on the Danish sites about it at least
|
|
|
Post by jimblanchard on Feb 19, 2008 16:53:45 GMT
Personally, I do not think transponders are necessary in Speedway racing as really its not a so critical anyway - the first past the flag wins etc. Normally, transponders are used more in other motor sports as a means to decide grid postitions in practice sessions but as you seem to be making an issue of it Rob, they will be a darn site more accurate than a human being can ever be with a stop watch or someone timing a fucking video with a stop watch.
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Feb 19, 2008 17:03:29 GMT
No doubts at all. If the timekeeping legend that is Roger Nettlefold says the time is 56.2 seconds, then it's 56.2 seconds. End of story. ;D Then why did you feel the necessity to check up on him - TWICE? I was bored.
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Feb 19, 2008 17:04:43 GMT
Personally, I do not think transponders are necessary in Speedway racing as really its not a so critical anyway - the first past the flag wins etc. Normally, transponders are used more in other motor sports as a means to decide grid postitions in practice sessions but as you seem to be making an issue of it Rob, they will be a darn site more accurate than a human being can ever be with a stop watch or someone timing a fucking video with a stop watch. Jim - can't there go wrong, though? In which case, you'd be back to the faithful bloke with this stopwatch.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2008 17:07:50 GMT
Personally, I do not think transponders are necessary in Speedway racing as really its not a so critical anyway - the first past the flag wins etc. Normally, transponders are used more in other motor sports as a means to decide grid postitions in practice sessions but as you seem to be making an issue of it Rob, they will be a darn site more accurate than a human being can ever be with a stop watch or someone timing a fucking video with a stop watch. Got it wrong anyway.After making enquiries it was to do with MotoX.Not sure why they were reporting it on speedway sites
|
|
|
Post by jimblanchard on Feb 19, 2008 17:32:24 GMT
Yes, they can. The timing computers indicate when one is not working, so they fit another. My brother takes part in VFV German regularity road racing competitions. At tracks like Hockenheim and Nurburgring. The races are not 'first past the flag' rather based on consistency of practice times which means the slowest can actually win the silverware. Without transponders its not possible to calculate the positions to 1/1000ths of a second. (Incidentally, he is the 350cc VFV German champion of 2007.) Like I said, personally, I do not have a problem anyway with a good time keeper with a stop watch at speedway events. Doug has realised its not speedway that he was posting about so we are all in agreement. Bloke with a stop watch for speedway. ;D But they could never match a transponder for accuracy no matter how good they are.
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Feb 19, 2008 18:52:49 GMT
Hold on... so these transponder thingys would be able to accurately time a speedway race to the nearest thousandth? We gotta have 'em them... it will need a bigger box in the proggie though.
|
|
|
Post by jimblanchard on Feb 19, 2008 19:09:39 GMT
1/100th, 1/1000th, 1/10,000th 1/100,000th how ever far you want to go Rob they are still more accurate than any human with a stop watch. ;D (Or you with your sony beta max and and alarm clock ...) But as I said, there is no need of for it with speedway. So there is enough room in the programme for most speedway fans. Which sadly does not include me - as I always make a pigs ear of filling in programmes anyway....
|
|
|
Post by Genghis on Feb 19, 2008 19:18:48 GMT
1/100th, 1/1000th, 1/10,000th 1/100,000th how ever far you want to go Rob they are still more accurate than any human with a stop watch. ;D (Or you with your sony beta max and and alarm clock ...) Hey, it was a VHS video and a stopwatch on a Lorus Sports watch which cost me £29.99... I'm warming to these transponder thingies, though... the winning time of Heat 1 was 59.31415926535... how cool would that be? ;D ;D
|
|