SpectateSwamp:

First do a "gf" for "Get Files" at prompt #2 This function will do an auto catalog looking for mp3 files You pick the folder you want or the entire c:\ drive. This won't take a minute or 2.

Why, when Music Player Daemon already has my music folder indexed?

 

 

SpectateSwamp:

at prompt #2 enter "rand" so it will pick a random song.
at prompt #2 enter "randa" so it will pick a random start point.
at prompt #2 enter "thumb" so the song will stop after the number of seconds in the timer setting below
at prompt #2 enter "tt8" so it will play a 8 second random sample 
at prompt #2 enter "ww" to start screen saver mode
at prompt #3 enter "photo" (the default search string) it exists on every catalog line.

The random 8 second segments begin to play and play and play. Hit enter to hear the whole song. After the full play SSDS goes back to random sampling

 Why would I want to do that?  

SpectateSwamp:

 

SSDS lets you jam your computer. See what your computer can do! start 3 rapid slide shows going, maybe random video as well.

I like to see my computers doing useful stuff. Like solving engineering problems or doing business applications. Not running random videos and slide shows.

 

SpectateSwamp:

See how fast you can be in and see the last page in a huge text file (your merged text) and close out completely.

I already have the tail command to do that for me.

 

SpectateSwamp:

Programs that aren't fast, won't be used.

 Nor will crap programs which expect users to know random commands. On command-line interfaces we have consistent, documented commands. I can type man command or command -? (or -h, or --help) on my Linux terminal and get information about the command. I'd expect the Windows command line to have similar feature.

 

SSDS doesn't have that, except if your sorry excuse for source code (hell, I have done quite a lot of VB a few years ago, and even though I wasn't a good programmer, my code didn't suck like yours) IS the documentation.

Also, command-line apps are simple and fast. They just do their jobs, unlike SSDS which tries to be everything but fails.

Renan_S2:

I'd expect the Windows command line to have similar feature.

 

 

Haha, you actually expected the windows command line to do something.

bob171123:

 

Haha, you actually expected the windows command line to do something.

On a rare rare occasion i'll "sort"  text data extracted using SSDS (unrandomizing stuff)

C'mon, c'mon...don't keep us in suspense. What is Step 2?!?!?!?

 

Lol, this made me laugh out loud in this thread.

SpectateSwamp:

On a rare rare occasion i'll "sort"  text data extracted using SSDS (unrandomizing stuff)

What has that got to do with SSDS?

 

Maybe the diehards will never reach step 2. (using the greatest tool on the planet) But 100's 1000's even millions of Swampies will wonder why not?

Most programmers haven't programmed anything. They have just reworked existing code and complained and complained about the old coding habits. Never having created anything themselves. Just what did your program do? Or did you work on a tiny tiny section of a big elegant mess. Good programs do good things. Just like SSDS. I'll dig out my #2 program of all time and post that source here. No explanations needed. It will easily transfer to c or any other language. Just to get some of you off and jamming in what ever language you want. Here comes some key source code.

Lets just say my coding grammer isn't what it should be. But I do work hard at keeping things simple. So I can understand what is going on when I look at the code later. Lots of deactivated display info, is a sure sign of a program that has been jammed. Maybe more than any program on the planet. SSDS has been jammed a lot. There is Code that was never activated and other minor dumb things that should be taken out. And a couple hundred "todo" items that would smarten SSDS right up.

say you are a Newspaper Editor and wanted a random headline displaying in your window. Random Christmas wishes. Random ToDo list... Using the Delayed print "'feature'" How easy is this. Mmmm maybe the random todo list will get me motivated.

Again use SSDS to check the source code for "cmd(77" There was no reason not to add this option when it was this easy.
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/stonedan/source.txt

Use the "help" option to display the control.txt elements along with their details. Cmd(77 is near the end.

Delayed print is a nice feature. When you have a text screen without it. That screen could change in a flash leaving you still reading. With delayed print you know where in the display it is and that's good. Some times computers just need to be slowed down. Thanks SSDS.

Changing the control.txt settings more quickly.

Enter "ccc" at prompt #2 that switches you to control1.txt values. I find it just as easy to create a new folder and run a second copy of search.exe there.

The following VB program would display the customer info for a given Telco conversion. The screen is a very close replica to what they see on the old system. I did similar dumps using SMG back on the old VAX computers.

 c:\program files\microsoft visual studio\vb98\frmmytest.frm append start
 VERSION 5.00
 Begin VB.Form frmmytest
    BorderStyle     =   0  'None
    ClientHeight    =   10125
    ClientLeft      =   0
    ClientTop       =   0
    ClientWidth     =   14190
    LinkTopic       =   "Frmmytest"
    ScaleHeight     =   10125
    ScaleWidth      =   14190
    ShowInTaskbar   =   0   'False
    WindowState     =   2  'Maximized
    Begin VB.CommandButton Command1
       Cancel          =   -1  'True
       Caption         =   "Command1"
       Height          =   195
       Left            =   11040
       TabIndex        =   0
       Top             =   13840
       Width           =   135
    End
    Begin VB.Image Image1
       Height          =   11500
       Left            =   0
       Stretch         =   -1  'True
       Top             =   0
       Width           =   15500
    End
 End
 Attribute VB_Name = "frmmytest"
 Attribute VB_GlobalNameSpace = False
 Attribute VB_Creatable = False
 Attribute VB_PredeclaredId = True
 Attribute VB_Exposed = False
 Public ddd As String
 Public infile As String
 Public outfile As String
 Public cnt As Integer
 Public rrr As Double
 Public ppp As String
 Public aaa As String
 Public Sub form_initialize()
 Dim reclength As Long
 BackColor = QBColor(0)      'black background
 frmmytest.Show
 Call text2_chg
 End Sub
 Public Sub text2_chg()
 '   SpectateSwamp
 '   29 July 2002
 
 On Error GoTo errors_31000
                         'has been created the first time......
 infile = FreeFile
 Open "c:\spectateswamp\cust_info2.txt" For Input As #infile
 ForeColor = QBColor(15)     'white
 
 Font.Size = 18
 Print ""
 Print " IQ0001S5"; Tab(30); "Customer Inquiry"; Tab(72); "SO"
 Print Tab(65); "8/09/02 16:30:13"
 Print ""
 Print " Phone#:";
 Print Tab(24); "Name:"
 Print ""
 Print " ----------------------------------------------- Service Information ------
 ---------------------------------------"
 Print " Type of Service:"; Tab(60); "Effective....:"
 Print " Service Class....:"; Tab(60); "In Date......:"
 Print " Service Status...:"; Tab(60); "Out Date...:"
 Print ""
 Print " ----------------------------------------------- Customer Information
  -----------------------------------------"
 Print " NPA/NXX/Line.....:"; Tab(34); "Tie-to...........:"; Tab(61); "Sort Zip.........:"
 Print " Charge Taxes?....:"; Tab(34); "Rest. PIN.....:"; Tab(61); "Un-Rest PIN.:"
 Print " State......................:"; Tab(34); "County.........:"; Tab(61);
  "City................:"
 Print " Dist-1.....................:"; Tab(34); "Dist-2...........:"; Tab(61);
  "Dist-3............:"
 Print " # Directories.........:"; Tab(34); "Directory.....:"; Tab(61); "DA Exempt...:"
 Print " SSN.......................:"; Tab(33); "Spouse SSN:"; Tab(61); "BNS Code....:"
 Print " Certificate.............:"; Tab(34); "Dep.Date....:"; Tab(61); "Dep. Amount:"
 Print " Billing Cycle.........:"; Tab(34); "Foreign.......:"; Tab(61); "Toll Limit......:"
 Print " Hearing Impaired:"; Tab(31); "Credit Class.....:"; Tab(61); "Disc Reason:"
 Print " Print Detail...........:"; Tab(31); "Race Code.......:"; Tab(61); "Late Exmpt...:"
 'the above prints were screen captured and saved as a bmp so I could display over it below
 'the following input allowed me to do a printscreen and save it in paint for the background
 'aaa = InputBox("testing only", , , 9850, 9550) 'activate this line to do the prtscreen and save of above display
 ForeColor = QBColor(10)  'green 2, 6, 10
 Set Picture = LoadPicture("c:\spectateswamp\mytest0001.bmp")
 
 
 '    Line Input #infile, aaa         'what the hey added this above next input
 
 next_display:
 
 ddd = InputBox("phone to display " + CStr(rec_pos), , , 9850, 10550)
     If Len(ddd) = 1 Then
         GoTo end_it_30000
     End If
     If Len(ddd) = 4 Then
         ddd = "349" + ddd       'the vast majority are 349
     End If
 next_customer:
 
 
 
 
     Input #infile, a1, a2, a3, a4, a5, a6, a7, a8, a9, a10, a11, a12, a13, a14, a15,
  a16, a17, a18, a19, a20, a21, a22, a23, a24, a25, a26, a27, a28, a29, a30
     If ddd = "" Then
         ddd = Trim(a2) + Format(Val(a3), "0000")
     End If
    If Len(ddd) = 7 Then
     If ddd <> Trim(a2) + Format(Val(a3), "0000") Then
         GoTo next_customer
     End If
    End If
 
 
     Cls
     DoEvents                 'allow for other tasks to run
 
 next_print:
 Print
 Print
 Print
 Print
 Print Tab(9); a1; "-"; a2; "-"; Format(Val(a3), "0000")
 Print
 Print
 Print Tab(71); a21
 Print Tab(71); a27
 Print
 Print
 Print
 Print Tab(18); a1; "-"; a2; "-"; Format(Val(a3), "0000")
 Print Tab(19); a4
 Print Tab(46); a9
 Print
 Print Tab(74); a28
 Print Tab(19); Left(a15, 3); "-"; Mid(a15, 4, 2); "-"; Right(Trim(a15), 4)
 Print Tab(21); a17
 Print Tab(19); a24; Tab(46); a25
 Print Tab(46); a5
 Print Tab(46); a29
 cnt = cnt + 1
 
 
     Input #infile, a1, a2, a3, a4, a5, a6, a7, a8, a9, a10, a11, a12, a13, a14, a15,
  a16, a17, a18, a19, a20, a21, a22, a23, a24, a25, a26, a27, a28, a29, a30
    If Len(ddd) = 7 Then
     If ddd <> Mid(aaa, 7, 3) + Format(Val(Mid(aaa, 13, 4)), "0000") Then
         GoTo next_display
     End If
    End If
 
 
 aaa = InputBox("testing only " + CStr(rec_pos), , , 9850, 10550)
 ppp = ""
     If Trim(aaa) = "" Then
         GoTo next_customer
     End If
 If Len(Trim(aaa)) = 7 Then
     ppp = aaa
     GoTo next_customer
 End If
     Cls
     GoTo next_print
 
 end_it_30000:
 Unload Me
 Set frmmytest = Nothing
 End
 
 errors_31000:
     Print "error number "; Err.Number; " "; Err.Description
 aaa = InputBox("testing only", , , 9850, 7550)
 GoTo end_it_30000
 End Sub
 
 
 c:\program files\microsoft visual studio\vb98\frmmytest.frm append end

 

When training some conversion team members one stated. Everything is a print/dump program. She was right. I'd create dumps for every conversion text file. Then it was a matter of combining these dump programs in some form or another to do the inital ETL conversion data loads 

I could sit and hold my finger down on the enter key and watch just one data field to see what the ranges were. Right off the bat I would be creating these dump programs. Getting important stuff done even before I knew what was in the files.

SpectateSwamp:

c:\program files\microsoft visual studio\vb98\frmmytest.frm append start
 <actual code snipped>
 
 c:\program files\microsoft visual studio\vb98\frmmytest.frm append end

 

That is a fantastic sample of everytihng wrong with SSDS distilled into a much smaller number of lines. Global variables used, piss poor variable names, using labels to emulate line numbers, goto instead of decent loop constructs, lack of option explicitand the somewhat inexplicable method of naming the main routine of your program text2_chg -this really is the essence of SSDS.

Your usage of punctuation is questionable:

SpectateSwamp:

When you have a text screen without it. That screen could change in a flash leaving you still reading.

SpectateSwamp:

"'feature'"

SpectateSwamp:

Maybe more than any program on the planet. SSDS has been jammed a lot.

SpectateSwamp:

Lots of deactivated display info, is a sure sign of a program that has been jammed.

SpectateSwamp:

But I do work hard at keeping things simple. So I can understand what is going on when I look at the code later.

SpectateSwamp:

They have just reworked existing code and complained and complained about the old coding habits. Never having created anything themselves.

 

dhromed:

Your usage of punctuation is questionable:

Dhromed oh poor DhromedSwamp. Have you not learned anything. If he doesn't have to think about punctuation. SpectateSwamp can concentrate better on more important things. Like maintaining the greatest software in existence. Or teaching us poor sobs. How to use. It.

spenk:

That is a fantastic sample of everytihng wrong with SSDS distilled into a much smaller number of lines. Global variables used, piss poor variable names, using labels to emulate line numbers, goto instead of decent loop constructs, lack of option explicitand the somewhat inexplicable method of naming the main routine of your program text2_chg -this really is the essence of SSDS.

#2 program of all time - customer file dump

When you are jamming it don't worry about the itsy bitsy language details. Even be a little inefficient on purpose just to slow things down. Ignore the jackass rules and go. After all computing is simply extract, sort and report.

I'd better create a few test records for the #2 all time program. Then do one of my famous screen reshoots demoing this simple but powerful dump program. It would be pretty easy to change it a bit and have the program update those records wouldn't it? Keep a dumbed down version to update customer balances etc. I could be jamming that change in a minute.

All your records in plain text files that you could edit with notepad. No big software learning curve to hold you back.

Come on come on show me a routine you have that would be any easier. You must have done the odd text file dump of some kind? Important - This has been a true work world example.

 

SpectateSwamp:

#2 program of all time - customer file dump

wtf? How can this thing be classed as the number 2 program of all time?

SpectateSwamp:

When you are jamming it don't worry about the itsy bitsy language details. Even be a little inefficient on purpose just to slow things down. Ignore the jackass rules and go. After all computing is simply extract, sort and report.

You really have no concept of what good coding entails. Giving things sensible names takes very little effort and makes the code far more maintainable. What is the Extract, Sort and Report you keep babbling about? I am fairly sure computing also involves the creation and entry of data as well.

SpectateSwamp:

Then do one of my famous screen reshoots demoing this simple but powerful dump program.

If by famous you mean 'laughably bad and unwatchable with wacky camera autofocus and hand wobble' then yes.

SpectateSwamp:

All your records in plain text files that you could edit with notepad. No big software learning curve to hold you back.

Only useful if your data never needs to be maintained or contain formatting or maintain internal structures in any way. 

 

SpectateSwamp:

But 100's 1000's even millions of Swampies will wonder why not?

 And then realize they can do the same with decent tools with a smooth learning curve, or even something with a steeper curve but with good documentation (that is, not the source code). 

 

SpectateSwamp:

It will easily transfer to c or any other language

 Why would I want to port your mess of a program to C? Keep it confined to VB5, which will eventually stop working.

 

SpectateSwamp:

Maybe more than any program on the planet. SSDS has been jammed a lot.

Why would that be a good thing? Good software projects aren't jammed, they use a source code management system.

 

SpectateSwamp:

Lets just say my coding grammer isn't what it should be. But I do work hard at keeping things simple.

As if using tons of gotos and nondescriptive labels, using an obsolete development environment, and using meaningless commands was keeping things simple.

SpectateSwamp:

say you are a Newspaper Editor and wanted a random headline displaying in your window. Random Christmas wishes. Random ToDo list... Using the Delayed print "'feature'" How easy is this. Mmmm maybe the random todo list will get me motivated.

If I need so, I can do it easily using a program like fortune, or even the shuf command.

derula:

Yeah, tell us about your holey stones again. Did you save the world yet, Swampy?

 

UFO's are nearby. A local told me of seeing a typical UFO on 03Dec2009. Shiny object looking like inverted soup bowls. This sighting is 1/2 mile south of the video of 11Nov2009 where I noticed a shiny object right at the end of the video clip. Anyway I will do more video of that area in the next while. Making sure to not get too close. 15 x zoom and I can be a mile away. Playing video back in slow-mo is the best way to find these fast flyers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDvtP40vC4o&feature=email

Check out the weird video. Start and stop the video and see for yourself.

 

SpectateSwamp:

UFO's are nearby

 

We have just entered the twilight zone.

dhromed:

SpectateSwamp:

UFO's are nearby

We have just entered the twilight zone.

Or Norway.

SpectateSwamp:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDvtP40vC4o&feature=email

Check out the weird video.

Okay.  Did you see that flyer that came right in front of the screen at about 0:18?

SpectateSwamp:

Start and stop the video and see for yourself.

No.

SpectateSwamp:

This sighting is 1/2 mile south of the video of 11Nov2009 where I noticed a shiny object right at the end of the video clip.

 

I presume that the location is half a mile closer to the airport, right?

SpectateSwamp:

Most programmers haven't programmed anything. They have just reworked existing code and complained and complained about the old coding habits. Never having created anything themselves. Just what did your program do? Or did you work on a tiny tiny section of a big elegant mess.

 

Please provide the source where you got that information from. I say this is bullshit. I would say that every programmer has at least once been required to work on an old program or (like me at the moment) turn some old shit into something new - and yes, there may be a lot to complain about (see The Daily WTF :-)). But how on earth do you get to say that most programmers don't program anything new? I'm doing it 70% of my time, the other 30% consist of

• enhancing stuff I've made myself (occasionally laughing about myself and how I did things 3 years ago)
  
• enhancing stuff that collegues did (regularly laughing about them and how they tend to do things)
  
• converting old stuff (VB6) to new stuff (C#) (seldomly laughing, but shaking my head, being glad that sooner or later I'll move on to other tasks)

Most of the time there's neither time nor money to make a total cut and program things new, so you have to work on old stuff, too. But knowing about how elegantly things can be done today, we have all the right and all reasons to laugh at how stupidly things were done (had to be done) 15 years ago. For example line numbers... well, we've had that one already. In 15 years time we will most probably laugh about how we do things today, but that's another story.

Thing is: people like you, who have never kept up with latest technology still claim that everything was easier in the past, for example by declaring spaghetti coding a valid coding standard, which it is not. But that is not because things were actually easier, it is because these people fail to keep up and just don't know what's going on anymore. And they know it very well.

SpectateSwamp:

say you are a Newspaper Editor and wanted a random headline displaying in your window.

I'd be a pretty bad newspaper editor. There's nothing random about newspaper headlines. I know quite many people working for the press and they all are sure of one thing: creating a proper headline is the hardest thing about writing for the paper. You should just stop talking about things you don't know about.

SpectateSwamp:

With delayed print you know where in the display it is and that's good.

Proper systems use scroll bars for that. You know? Scroll bars? These useful bars that indicate not only where in the document I'm navigating, but also indicate the size of the document and allow me to navigate down and even up at the speed that I like?

SpectateSwamp:

Some times computers just need to be slowed down. Thanks SSDS.

How does that match your earlier claim that SSDS gets faster and faster with processor speed? I like my computer to perform its tasks as fast as possible, not slowed down by some piece-of-shit software.

 

 

SpectateSwamp:

Most programmers haven't programmed anything. They have just reworked existing code and complained and complained about the old coding habits. Never having created anything themselves. Just what did your program do? Or did you work on a tiny tiny section of a big elegant mess.

 

That actually explains a lot about SSDS. You gotta remember that this guy actually believes his program is useful and that "most programmers" use it. So whenever he says "most programmers," just remember he is really talking about himself only.

belgariontheking:

[Okay.  Did you see that flyer that came right in front of the screen at about 0:18?

The 2 at between 4 and 5 seconds look just like my tobacco leaf flyer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKMTSDzU1Z4

There were 1.6 million views of this other Sichuan posting. It took ol Swampie to notice these stinkers. They look like my tobacco leaf flyer. See demo85_pict7

I'll do a screen reshoot then slow that down. Then do a second reshoot showing all the action. I'll post those as a video reply. SpectateSwamp exposing aliens. Obviously the World needs SSDS

SpectateSwamp:

The 2 at between 4 and 5 seconds look just like my tobacco leaf flyer.

I beg to differ, your tobacco leaf flier looked suspiciously like a leafbeing blown by the wind (as leaves are wont to do), these look far more like your traditional compression artefacts.

SpectateSwamp:

There were 1.6 million views of this other Sichuan posting. It took ol Swampie to notice these stinkers. They look like my tobacco leaf flyer. See demo85_pict7

See above regarding the leaf thing. The other possibility is that if 1.6 million people didn't see anything and only you did then perhaps you are seeing things that either aren't there or have other logical explanations - like compression artefacts.

SpectateSwamp:

I'll do a screen reshoot then slow that down. Then do a second reshoot showing all the action. I'll post those as a video reply. SpectateSwamp exposing aliens. Obviously the World needs SSDS

Oh god no, please don't do another god awful screen re-shoot - introducing another level of compression will just make things even worse you buffoon. 

SpectateSwamp:

SpectateSwamp exposing aliens. Obviously the World needs SSDS

I am convinced!

 

.... that I need a new signature

spenk:

 I beg to differ, your tobacco leaf flier looked suspiciously like a leafbeing blown by the wind (as leaves are wont to do), these look far more like your traditional compression artefacts.

 

You have to get outside more. Wet leaves don't blow around and dry leaves don't bend and twist about.

Sure was hoping against hope that somebody here in lazy forum would get the jump and post the reshoot themselves. Don't be afraid of the criticism. I'll be here to praise you double.

SpectateSwamp:

You have to get outside more. Wet leaves don't blow around and dry leaves don't bend and twist about.

Damp leaves, or wet leaves in a strong enough wind do. Alsothe leaf in question doesn't actually seem to be twisting, just changing it's orientation relative to the camera.

SpectateSwamp:

Sure was hoping against hope that somebody here in lazy forum would get the jump and post the reshoot themselves. Don't be afraid of the criticism. I'll be here to praise you double.

Nobody else but you is interested in the whole stupid reshoot hing anyway, sane people would just use a video editing tool. This forum isn't actually lazy, we just choose to channel our efforts into taking the piss out of idiots and fools....

 

SpectateSwamp:

You have to get outside more. Wet leaves don't blow around and dry leaves don't bend and twist about.

Yes they do. Hell, airplanes even bend and twist about in the wind, and people design them to best minimize that.

SpectateSwamp:

Sure was hoping against hope that somebody here in lazy forum would get the jump and post the reshoot themselves. Don't be afraid of the criticism. I'll be here to praise you double.

I can't believe you have the nerve to say we're lazy when you're asking us to reshoot your own video.

RHuckster:

I can't believe you have the nerve to say we're lazy when you're asking us to reshoot your own video.

The Sichuan 2008 video needs reshooting. Nobody can do it as easily as ol Swampie. Just set SSDS to play back the 8 sections of interest from the first screen reshoot at 1/7 speed. Video that playback in and upload it to YouTube. The other search engines don't seem to have this feature. Slow motion and freeze frame are important. Exposing this video to the World with SSDS is important.

Sorry about the lazy comment. Typing doesn't count as activity. Nor does whining and complaining. I'm getting my camcorder ready. I have the 8 sections of the 2008 quake video that I want to examine. This should be easy and extremely low tech.

SpectateSwamp:

The Sichuan 2008 video needs reshooting.

No it doesn't. There has never been a video that needed reshooting - editing maybe (after all reshooting is just a moronic way of editing a video).

SpectateSwamp:

Nobody can do it as easily as ol Swampie.

Nobody else has ever wanted to reshoot a video you moron.

SpectateSwamp:

Just set SSDS to play back the 8 sections of interest from the first screen reshoot at 1/7 speed. Video that playback in and upload it to YouTube.

Wonderful way to reduce the qulaity even further - so the video is already compressed and has artefacts, play it on a monitor which can introduce screen flicker and record this to introduce further compressoin artefacts before uploading to youtube where it will be compressed again introducing further compression artefacts. This really is the most moronic way to do things I could possibly imagine.

SpectateSwamp:

The other search engines don't seem to have this feature. Slow motion and freeze frame are important. Exposing this video to the World with SSDS is important.

That is because this is a feature of a media player and not a search engine you buffoon, search engines should allow you to search for files you imbecile.

SpectateSwamp:

Sorry about the lazy comment. Typing doesn't count as activity. Nor does whining and complaining. I'm getting my camcorder ready. I have the 8 sections of the 2008 quake video that I want to examine. This should be easy and extremely low tech.

We are not being lazy by refusing to do stuff nobody but you cares about, we are simply channelling our energies into making fun of you and your idiotic ideas.

Dumb old re re reshoot video is now posted. Hurray I'm first. Nothing can beat SSDS for exposing aliens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKMTSDzU1Z4

 

 

SpectateSwamp:

Dumb old re re reshoot video is now posted. Hurray I'm first. Nothing can beat SSDS for exposing aliens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKMTSDzU1Z4

As expected nothing more than a crappy, in and out of focus, blurred mess with hideous screen flicker and crappy red lines drawn over the compression artefacts.

SpectateSwamp:

The Sichuan 2008 video needs reshooting

What?

SpectateSwamp:

Nobody can do it as easily as ol Swampie. Just set SSDS to play back the 8 sections of interest from the first screen reshoot at 1/7 speed. Video that playback in and upload it to YouTube.

Shouldn't you get ahold of the original video first?  The one on YouTube has compression artifacts out the ying yang.

SpectateSwamp:

The other search engines don't seem to have this feature.

And why should they?

SpectateSwamp:

Slow motion and freeze frame are important.

Oh.

SpectateSwamp:

Exposing this video to the World with SSDS is important.

For strange definitions of important, I guess.

SpectateSwamp:

Dumb old re re reshoot video is now posted. Hurray I'm first. Nothing can beat SSDS for exposing aliens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKMTSDzU1Z4

That's the same damn video!  Where's the random?  Where's the ENTER ENTER ENTER?  Where's the slow mo?

belgariontheking:

SpectateSwamp:

Dumb old re re reshoot video is now posted. Hurray I'm first. Nothing can beat SSDS for exposing aliens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKMTSDzU1Z4

That's the same damn video!  Where's the random?  Where's the ENTER ENTER ENTER?  Where's the slow mo?

Don't forget that this already took him 11 hours to create.

bjolling:

Don't forget that this already took him 11 hours to create.

I got them so they will randomly show on my computer. How good is that. All my Alien video and pictures all nicely sorted and cataloged like nobody else on the planet. Thanks SSDS

The re re shoot really took the beauty out of the best clip. Much better on my laptop the time before. The TLF's Tobacco Leaf Flyer's seem to fade in and out when the original reshoot is slowed down. The other 6 active sections I looked at were alright. I sure would like to have the original video. Then slowing them down and watching would be at it's best.

 And, of course, you only respond to my lazy argument and not the "planes shake and move in the wind" because you have no answer to that.

SpectateSwamp:

I got them so they will randomly show on my computer. How good is that. All my Alien video and pictures all nicely sorted and cataloged like nobody else on the planet. Thanks SSDS

That is not good, that is quite possibly one of the furthest things from good anyone could do with their time that doesn't actually cause harm to other people.

SpectateSwamp:

The re re shoot really took the beauty out of the best clip.

I assume this your way of saying 'caused the video quality to plummet even further due to increased compression artefacts and constant changes in focus'. After all if you take the beauty you are removing the beauty from the video - therefore making it ugly and painful to look at.

SpectateSwamp:

The TLF's Tobacco Leaf Flyer's seem to fade in and out when the original reshoot is slowed down.

This is because the video is suffering from artefacts caused by compression - enough people have mentioned this so you should be starting to get the message.

spenk:

I assume this your way of saying 'caused the video quality to plummet even further due to increased compression artefacts and constant changes in focus'. After all if you take the beauty you are removing the beauty from the video - therefore making it ugly and painful to look at.

I am sure you all could have produced the perfect showing for that 4-5 earthquake entity. But you didn't do anything. Sometimes waiting for perfect never happens.

Boo to this: A lot more talk - less action group. Boo perfectionists. I don't much like artefacts or compression in my videos either.

 

SpectateSwamp:

I am sure you all could have produced the perfect showing for that 4-5 earthquake entity. But you didn't do anything. Sometimes waiting for perfect never happens.

Other than the fact the original is just showing compression artefacts there is nothing anyone could have done. However given the original source (assuming it is of sufficient quality) then a decent video editing tool could have extracted the relevant scenes and applied a slow motion effect.

SpectateSwamp:

Boo to this: A lot more talk - less action group.

We just have no inclination to do do the mad things you seem to spend your time doing, none of us are wasting our time with your UFO obsession.

SpectateSwamp:

Boo perfectionists. I don't much like artefacts or compression in my videos either.

Yet you choose a method of 'editing' that does everything possible to maximise them.

spenk:

Yet you choose a method of 'editing' that does everything possible to maximise them.

 

What you fail to realize, grasshopper, is that video editing is the worst you can do (see here). The only (I repeat: the ONLY) way of capturing the relevant parts of a video is to play-back the video using SSDS in slow motion while pointing your camcorder to the screen and videoing the playback! There's a lot you need to learn, grasshopper...

tdittmar:

spenk:

Yet you choose a method of 'editing' that does everything possible to maximise them.

What you fail to realize, grasshopper, is that video editing is the worst you can do (see here). The only (I repeat: the ONLY) way of capturing the relevant parts of a video is to play-back the video using SSDS in slow motion while pointing your camcorder to the screen and videoing the playback! There's a lot you need to learn, grasshopper...

QFT. Thanks, TdittmarSwamp.

On my display that last crappy video is about 4 times better. No extra reshoot and no upload to flash or whatever. So when I go viewing videos on the net. I can look for artifacts and compressions. I know with SSDS I can easily investigate and check it out. I'm sure other video of that days' earthquake anomalies; would confirm the TLF's.

Is nobody else checking net video out! Or do I have to do all the searching and finding with SSDS.
 

SpectateSwamp:

On my display that last crappy video is about 4 times better. No extra reshoot and no upload to flash or whatever.

WTF are you on about? You are making even less sense than usual.

SpectateSwamp:

So when I go viewing videos on the net. I can look for artifacts and compressions. I know with SSDS I can easily investigate and check it out. I'm sure other video of that days' earthquake anomalies; would confirm the TLF's.

WTF are you on about? How does SSDS have anything to do with watching a video on the web?

SpectateSwamp:

Is nobody else checking net video out! Or do I have to do all the searching and finding with SSDS.

We are not looking at compression artefacts and calling them aliens, How are you apparently searching internet videos with SSDS when I couldn't even get it to search for a file! 

spenk:

WTF are you on about? How does SSDS have anything to do with watching a video on the web?

We are not looking at compression artefacts and calling them aliens, How are you apparently searching internet videos with SSDS when I couldn't even get it to search for a file! 

 

Maybe, old Swampie once wrote some code, compiled it, and saw that he made a program. Immediately afterward, he discovered the result of all his downloading and clicking and found a file manager, image/video editor, etc. He couldn't remember how he got those programs, so he assumed he created them. And that was how SSDS was born. It's all a figment of SS's imagination.

SpectateSwamp:

I can look for artifacts and compressions. I know with SSDS I can easily investigate and check it out.

Er... I think someone told you before, but artifacts aren't a sign of a supernatural being, a conspiracy or aliens. It is just a technical thing that happens if you compress videos. To improve their visibility (what sane people tend to call "reduce video quality"), you can simply save them at a higher compression rate. No editing or "re-shooting" required at all.

And friggen NO, birds can not see them, simply because THEY ARE NOT THERE before the video gets compressed in your camera.

Someone should buy swampy a camera which utilizes lossless compression methods. I can see him re-shooting, re-re-shooting and (re)³-shooting the same video, staring at the screen and slowly realizing that there might not be a hidden message behind lossy compression after all.

derula:

SpectateSwamp:

I can look for artifacts and compressions. I know with SSDS I can easily investigate and check it out.

Er... I think someone told you before, but artifacts aren't a sign of a supernatural being, a conspiracy or aliens. It is just a technical thing that happens if you compress videos. To improve their visibility (what sane people tend to call "reduce video quality"), you can simply save them at a higher compression rate. No editing or "re-shooting" required at all.

And friggen NO, birds can not see them, simply because THEY ARE NOT THERE before the video gets compressed in your camera.

Someone should buy swampy a camera which utilizes lossless compression methods. I can see him re-shooting, re-re-shooting and (re)³-shooting the same video, staring at the screen and slowly realizing that there might not be a hidden message behind lossy compression after all.

 

 

Yeah yeah. But what if other video of the Sichuan 2008 earthquake anomalies shows these Tobacco Leaf Flyers. Then what?

One of the other Sichuan segments showed a flight path with strikingly similar movements, to my TLF video.

 Even with the reduced quality that reshooting produces. I still get to see more that the rest of the viewers who don't have SSDS to replay it slowed down. It's easy to catalogue and view my favorite aliens in super slow motion with a freeze on that special frame.

 

SpectateSwamp:

Yeah yeah. But what if other video of the Sichuan 2008 earthquake anomalies shows these Tobacco Leaf Flyers. Then what?

Wow, you are right. That is a valid argument! ... for a two-year-old with serious brain damage and paranoia.

SpectateSwamp:

It's easy to catalogue and view my favorite aliens in super slow motion with a freeze on that special frame.

At least there's something you can enjoy in this crappy world. Maybe one day you'll be happily married to one of your favorite aliens and she'll give birth to a very special frame.

SpectateSwamp:

Yeah yeah. But what if other video of the Sichuan 2008 earthquake anomalies shows these Tobacco Leaf Flyers. Then what?

One of the other Sichuan segments showed a flight path with strikingly similar movements, to my TLF video.

From personal experience I am of the opinion that a leaf being blown by the wind behaves pretty much the same regardless of location, I would therefore assume a leaf was blowing in the wind on the Sichuan video just as I believe it was a leaf in your video.

SpectateSwamp:

Even with the reduced quality that reshooting produces. I still get to see more that the rest of the viewers who don't have SSDS to replay it slowed down.

You are only seeing things because of the reduced quality that reshooting introduces, if the quality wasn't so crappy there wouldn't be any artefacts to see. SSDS has bugger all to do with viewing a video in slow motion WMP that is included with Windows can play videos in slow motion with a simple and easy to use slider to control the speed - what benefit does SSDS offer with it's cryptic commands?

spenk:

From personal experience I am of the opinion that a leaf being blown by the wind behaves pretty much the same regardless of location, I would therefore assume a leaf was blowing in the wind on the Sichuan video just as I believe it was a leaf in your video.

 

Leaf maybe but what are all the other flyers in the video

http://www.archive.org/details/demo85-pict7

If you look real close in this original file. You'll see.

Use Nero or other video editor and check it out frame by frame. Maybe then you can tell me how fast that leaf was moving.

I use SSDS to catalog them for multiple plays of the same mini clip with different final freeze frames. Others just can't do that. I only keep the original files around, so no mess of mini clips unless they are reshoots.

 

 

SpectateSwamp:

Leaf maybe but what are all the other flyers in the video

http://www.archive.org/details/demo85-pict7

If you look real close in this original file. You'll see.

Going out on a limb here but I would say 'leaves' on the 'wind', due to the fact it is windy and they are leaves.

SpectateSwamp:

I use SSDS to catalog them for multiple plays of the same mini clip with different final freeze frames. Others just can't do that. I only keep the original files around, so no mess of mini clips unless they are reshoots.

Why not just edit the minute clip into one or two shorter clips that show the bits you are interested in, that video is 90% (probably more) of watching a wire blown by the wind with a couple of leaves blown past - the scenes with a leaf in are probably less than 5 seconds in total so editing would make sense (I know it doesn't make sense to you, I am just stating this for the record). Reshoots are a shit idea though as they reduce the quality far more than a decent editor would do.

spenk:

Reshoots are a shit an amazing idea though as they reduce the quality improve the visibility of those fliers far more than a decent editor would do.

FTFY.