Posts made by Jason

Starting after thanksgiving all IT will be hourly here. Legal has review the laws and determine that only software developers not network and systems administrators. Any other companies decided this recently? too bad since they found it to be illegal for us to be salaried now we don't get back pay for all those 18hr days.

Fight or flight? haha no we are all just tired of your shit here and spiceworks. You do realize there are chat rooms just talking about how insane you are being. You bring this site down by your need to be right at all costs even when you are wrong..

YOU ARE THE ONE WHO CONFUSED FRAME RATE AND REFRESH RATE - I Corrected you multiple times.

But whatever the all knowledgable Scott knows everything in the world.

@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:

@Jason said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:

@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:

What people see is that things shot at 24p commonly have blur added for cinematic effect and things shot at 30p tend to have less and things shot at 60p tend to have far less. But it's "how people commonly use the framerate" not caused by the framerate.

That's not true. I've worked in the film industry and have credits in several films. Sure some people add blur but shotting in 24p and with fast motion alone will cause blur. The fact that you can take a still image and have it not be blurry is in no way related.

It's absolutely related. Still footage is just a really slow framerate and there can be zero blur. Take still images and move them to 1fps, still no blur. 2fps, still no blur. Blur only comes from other things, never framerate.

Dude just shut up. This whole thread is obvious you have no clue what the hell you are talking about but contuie to make up stuff, like always.

@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:

Here is the proof: still images are the lowest possible frame rate... 1/infinity. And you can make a still image that is crisp or blurry. So with a still image we can easily demonstrate that the blur from low framerate always comes from the image, not the framerate.

Images with motion can be capture without blur because they do not have to stay within a specific shutter angle for the framerate. They can set it however they wish to get a very short or long exposure. This is not the case with film, frame rate dictates shutter angle.

@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:

What people see is that things shot at 24p commonly have blur added for cinematic effect and things shot at 30p tend to have less and things shot at 60p tend to have far less. But it's "how people commonly use the framerate" not caused by the framerate.

That's not true. I've worked in the film industry and have credits in several films. Sure some people add blur but shotting in 24p and with fast motion alone will cause blur. The fact that you can take a still image and have it not be blurry is in no way related.

wasn't this one hacked before or was that something else? never mind.. I was thinking of that Ashley Madison site.

@JaredBusch said in Microsoft Licensing... Old Agreements...:

OVS is super rare in the SMB.

It's rare anywhere it's only allowed for networks with up to 250 computers.

@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:

If you know what the frame is, you'd understand why no frame rate can create blur, it's just impossible.

That's not true. Frequencies of the TVs to not create blur but frame rates indeed can. The standard cinematic cadence is using 24p and indeed 24p has motion blur compared to the 60i of broadcast which is smooth motion.

@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:

@art_of_shred said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:

@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:

@Jason said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:

Sure LEDs are known to do it but it's based on pixel response. most likely you get a higher refresh rate tv that cost more and it will have better response times but it's not related to the refresh rate directly.

Right, exactly. Just because the 60Hz TVs you are talking about have a bad pixel response doesn't imply that it is the 60Hz that is causing the blur. The two are unrelated. No one is saying that you aren't seeing blur, or that it is happening on some 60Hz TVs....only that there is no direct correlation between the two and cannot be.

To be fair though, if pixel response can keep up with 50Hz frame-rates but not 60Hz, and the human eye can't detect the difference, you'd actually be functionally better off with a 50Hz frame-rate television. So, there IS a correlation between the two, but it's not a function of the frame-rate; it's more of an "if-then" relationship.

A 60Hz TV can do 50Hz, though. So that would not be an issue. The 60Hz is just the top speed. In reality, anything over 30Hz isn't really useful for broadcast stuff.

That's not true at all. This is PAL vs NTSC.

If you have two DCs I'm not sure why you wouldn't setup DHCP failover it's a 5min setup. You already have DNS on both so why not protect from issues?

All of ours are loadbalanced/failover

Sure LEDs are known to do it but it's based on pixel response. most likely you get a higher refresh rate tv that cost more and it will have better response times but it's not related to the refresh rate directly.

@scottalanmiller said in Cheap TV or A Pretty Good Price For $399???:

There is a reason that television, youtube and such doesn't make anything over 30Hz, because it just isn't very important.

Content is not made in Hz. It's frame rates. the only affect it has on that is that it has to be divisable by it hence why their is PAL and NTSC for 50hz and 60hz broadcast systems respectively.

those artificats are caused by interlaced video more than anything else.

@art_of_shred said in Devices not reaching the DHCP server... bad switch gateway to blame?:

I was having a brain fart when I said the gateway was the dhcp server. The primary dc is the server. It ended up being that it was set up to failover to a secondary dc (dhcp, that is) but the config wasn't completed on the second dc. It must have tried to failover and got stuck. It would renew leases just fine, but no new leases handed out. Removed that config and it recovered instantly. Problem solved.

It's easy enough to have them sync their configs to keep failover setup. works great for reboots and such.

@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Licensing... Old Agreements...:

As Jared said, SA gives you special upgrade and support rights, it is not the licensing for the OS itself. I know of no MS OS license that "expires", it just stops being available for updates.

Server 2017.. just wait..

@Dashrender said in Video Editing/Production Workstation - Questions:

@travisdh1 said in Video Editing/Production Workstation - Questions:

@Jason said in Video Editing/Production Workstation - Questions:

@travisdh1 said in Video Editing/Production Workstation - Questions:

I wouldn't cheap out on one by putting rust in for scratch/temp work space. Transcoding was always storage bound when I was working on video for me. Getting an SSD for that, if not a PCIe based card, would be my only recommendation besides what you're already looking at.

The Bottle Neck for transcoding is almost never the disks. For live playback maybe, but not transcoding that's CPU/GPU

Hrm, I remember swearing at something while transcoding. I thought it was the drive performance after GPU was enabled. I could be wrong, it's been years.

Maybe Jason is just used to working on machines with RAID arrays that remove the disk performance issues for him. Definitely wasn't the case in my home or small workstation setups. Single drive solutions for work/scratch. Considering the price of SSD these days, there's just no reason not to do it.

as I said it can help with playback, but transcoding doesn't even process at real time, Disk isn't the bottle neck.

I have an LG 37" 1080p hosplatility grade tv that is probably from 2010. I ordered one of these now and I'm picking it up from best buy this evening.

@scottalanmiller said in Devices not reaching the DHCP server... bad switch gateway to blame?:

@Dashrender said in Devices not reaching the DHCP server... bad switch gateway to blame?:

tried restarting the DHCP service - Gene said it's on the same device as the gateway, so probably not a windows box.. so might require a reboot of the whole gateway.

It's not. It's on the main AD server along with AD and DNS.

how is a DC the default gateway?

Maybe sure the Whitelist isn't enabled on the DHCP server.

@Dashrender said in Devices not reaching the DHCP server... bad switch gateway to blame?:

What does STP have to do with this? Clearly the PC isn't a loopback to the switch.

by default STP on most switches puts ports in blocking mode then in fowarding mode after it checks it. RSTP does a better job of handling and fowards first then checks and blocks if need. if you don't enable rapid-pvst on most cisco switches you will have issues with DHCP once in a while but you will always have issues with PXE etc.