FNRttC to Brighton March 9th

[ianrauk]

thanks .

Question, regards the CTC membership...do I NEED to join as a commuter or just the basic?

I can't really see any explanation of the difference.

Contact Simon (Delzeqq) to join as an affiliate.
Be great if you join us Johnny.. it's jolly fun..

 

[GrumpyGregry]

commuter iirc includes some sort of basic breakdown service. basic doesn't. but I'm not a ctc member any more. no doubt one will be along in a minute to explain properly.

 

[jonny jeez]

Contact Simon (Delzeqq) to join as an affiliate.
Be great if you join us Johnny.. it's jolly fun..

certainly looks it. Sorry do you mean to join CTC or the ride? (I assume CTC)

 

[ianrauk]

certainly looks it. Sorry do you mean to join CTC or the ride? (I assume CTC)

sorry, meant CTC. £19 iirc

 

[jonny jeez]

commuter iirc includes some sort of basic breakdown service. basic doesn't. but I'm not a ctc member any more. no doubt one will be along in a minute to explain properly.

Ah, I see, thanks. I don't really need a breakdown service (I hope) I'll sign up through Del then as an affiliate

 

[dellzeqq]

you need to have 3rd party insurance. You can get this from the CTC for £39, or via The Fridays for £15. There are five spaces for people with 3rd party from the LCC and BC - but those may go quickly.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Ah, I see, thanks. I don't really need a breakdown service (I hope) I'll sign up through Del then as an affiliate

Top. you may even be able to buy a lovely club shirt.

 

[mcshroom]

I think it's £15 as an affiliate.

 

[jonny jeez]

Top. you may even be able to buy a lovely club shirt.

They do look rather fetching..

 

[dellzeqq]

JJ - could you send me an e-mail. My snazztastic QA system doesn't do PMs. http://fnrttc.blogspot.com/p/fridays_06.html gives you the information you need, though!

 

[arallsopp]

..and we're there. Hooray. The motion is much smoother than my previous efforts, mainly due to having somewhere around 1,125 times as many source frames than I usually do. The neat thing, I think, is that with the frames being that much closer together in subject, you can reduce the amount of time given over to each frame. It used to look manic if I any more than 10 fps. Now I'm using 60. (This may be the coffee talking... still stuck in the office).

 

[mmmmartin]

Wow! That's brilliant.

 

[MacB]

Yep, very slick...Slick

 

[theclaud]

It's busy at work and I can't watch the video!

 

[Mice]

..and we're there. Hooray. The motion is much smoother than my previous efforts, mainly due to having somewhere around 1,125 source frames than I usually do. The neat thing, I think, is that with the frames being that much closer together in subject, you can reduce the amount of time given over to each frame. It used to look manic if I any more than 10 fps. Now I'm using 60. (This may be the coffee talking... still stuck in the office).

Blimey that's awesome. I do think it's slightly unnecessary for you to freewheel Up the Beacon!!! (Jealousy will get me nowhere!)

It's busy at work and I can't watch the video!

Ooooo bad luck TC - something to look forward to later then!!

M