text:
Home › Forums › Off Piste › Photography › My thoughts on the SONY RX1…a little review
Dec 25, 2012 at 3:11 pm #1297356
Hi everyone,
I have been shooting with the Sony RX1 for about 3 weeks now and decided to do a little review.
First let me say this is a great little camera, if you have $3,000 sitting around (check the couch cushions) go buy it. The image quality (IQ) coming out this thing is insane, and it has some nice little extras that will appeal to UL backpackers. However it's not without its problems and if, like the rest of us, you don't enjoy that kind of financial liquidity you have a decision to make. Ultimately this decision will boil down to one question: how much do I value image quality vs. size and weight?
Lets start with the numbers: It has a 24mp full-frame (FF) (35mmx23mm) sensor housed in 112mm x 65mm x 70mm body. The lens is a fixed 35mm f/2 Zeiss. All this tips my scales at 516g (that's operational weight-incl. batteries, SD Card, lens cap, and UV filter). At first glance that really isn't THAT amazing (a canon G-series comes in right around 400g) so what's the big deal? Well, as far as IQ goes the RX1 can only really be compared the FF giants (1kg+) from Canon and Nikon, as well as the wallet-busting FF Leica. There is simply nothing like it on the market, period. But the small form factor is not the only thing to be excited about. For UL backpackers (UL Alpinist in my case) there are some features that might make the price tag a little more palatable. Firstly, the batteries are 22g a piece compare this to at least double that for a comparable camera. But the real exciting part is that the RX1 is capable of charging its internal battery via USB. That means I can charge my camera over-night via a solar USB set-up on the mountain without any other chargers, this is not possible on any FF canon or nikon camera and is still very rare on smaller cameras.
Now, there exists a very well represented (on this and other photography forums) portion of people who, for whatever reason, have a visceral, emotional response to…well, cameras (google canon vs. nikon). And with the announcement of the Sony RX1 those people came out in droves. Is the RX1 the perfect camera? Absolutely not. But nor is any other camera out there. However I do have some complaints, technical and otherwise, about the RX1. First, to perfectly honest, it's too small. It's practically just a lens with lcd on the back. Handling this camera is tough, there's just not that much there to grab on to (although attaching the thumb grip and Sony leather case make it substantially easier to hold but also heavier and more expensive). Piggybacking on that, they should have built-in an EVF. I get it Sony, you were trying to make this thing as small as possible. I think they went a little overboard. The exposure compensation dial is a little awkwardly placed, I have accidentally changed it a couple times while picking up the camera to shoot. The placement of the focus distance ring around the lens is also a little annoying. The only other real technical issue I have with the RX1, is that if you want to use the exposure compensation dial the camera has to be set to AUTO ISO. More of a theoretical annoyance, it hasn't affected any images so far. Apart from those minor issues I think the biggest problem is the price-not the price of the camera-but the price of accessories. I would have loved to be in the meetings where these Sony suits decided to price a lens hood at 200 american dollars. What could they have possibly been thinking? The packaging is also disappointing, I mean seriously Sony I just dropped 3k on niche camera and it arrives in little more than a box? Sony needs to learn to pamper their high-end products.
Either way you look at it the Sony RX1 is a huge step forward for backpackers who take their photographs seriously. As with the NEX-series, I don't think Sony expected there to be much of a market for a camera like the RX1 (I believe this might have contributed to the outrageous accessories pricing). I think the major photog companies are going to take notice and start investing more into this segment of the market. Hopefully that means smaller, lighter AND cheaper!Dec 25, 2012 at 4:52 pm #1938178
Nick GatelBPL Member
@ngatelLocale: Southern California
At 1/5 the cost maybe the RX100 might be better for us mere mortals. Smaller, lighter, zoom lens, and shares a lot of the RX1's technology. No accessories. Only has a 1" 21mp sensor though. :)Dec 29, 2012 at 1:15 pm #1939109
Post some photos Dan!
Without seeing your photos though, my thought is that the RX1 isn't worth it. I have a Sony NEX-6 which I think makes better trade offs for the photography-interested backpacker. Similar weight, similar image quality, interchangeable lenses (if you want that), and a litany of features that the RX1 doesn't include such as a tiltable screen, electronic view finder, optical image stabilization (imperative for video), built-in time lapse photography, etc. All this for thousands less.
Right now, the RX1 is a wonderful proof of concept. If you're rich and don't care about wanting to buy another camera in six months, fine. For us mere mortals, wait a year when the full-frame interchangeable mirrorless cameras come out, or buy into one of the existing systems that are better photography systems such as micro four thirds or the NEX system.
What's the point of an awesome full-frame sensor if you can't take an ultra-wide-angle landscape or capture a photo of a herd of elk across a drainage from you?Dec 30, 2012 at 1:56 pm #1939376
I think the major question here is: are you a photographer who backpacks, or backpacker that likes taking pictures? Because if your the later (which i imagine most everyone, including you @kylemeyer, on this forum is) then spending anything more than $500 on a one-camera quiver is totally unnecessary. That's not meant to be a put-down of any kind, Im just saying different strokes for different folks. I want to take pictures to sell and print and hang as art, as opposed to just having them on your HD and posting them to your FB or IG.
And while the NEX series is great (i have an NEX-7), the NEX-6 isnt even in the same conversation. First, after you get some decent lenses (ie the Zeiss 24mm, the 50mm 1.8) you have already spent at least 2k. So the nex-6 is NOT "thousands less"…its A thousand less. Ill tell you what's "thousands less"…a canon s110, a nikon p7700. These two powerhouses truly do have "similar image-quality" to the NEX. On that note, saying the NEX and RX1 have similar IQ is just wrong. Try blowing up a NEX RAW image to 100% and see what happens. Again the RX1 (as far as IQ goes) can only be compared to other FF sensors ie 5MkIII, Leica, etc.
"…if your rich and dont mind buying another camera in six months…wait a year…" So is it a year or six months that this new FF interchangeable camera is coming out that no brand has announced or heard of or mentioned ever? But your right im sure when that FF mirrorless comes out it'll be soooo much cheaper than $3k. WRONG! Not to mention the current NEX series lenses dont cover a FF sensor, so that means that a new line of lenses need to be manufactured and bought. Obviously, SONY will release an "RX2" within two years. But it wont have a removable lens, it will most likely come in a zoom lens configuration.
What's the point of having a picture of an ultra-wide angle landscape or a heard of elk that has such poor IQ that you can't print or crop it?
While not a terribly amazing shot these images will demonstrate what only a couple cameras (RX1, 5dMkIII, some Leicas) are capable of. The second image is 100% crop of the first image that i took with my RX1 by Mammoth, notice the limited loss of detail (definitely good enough to post to your profile).
Original: http://500px.com/photo/21897651
100% cropped image: http://500px.com/photo/21897653Dec 31, 2012 at 2:08 pm #1939680
Hi Dan,
Appreciate your thoughts and input, especially as somebody who's had one "out there." And your samples–yeow, that's some detail packed into that frame–good flare control too.
The little RX1 is the first digial equivalent to my favorite backpacking camera, the Contax T3–in many ways they're nearly identical, save for the Sony's extra stop and vast feature set. I bring this up in part to note we're about ten years since release of the N Digital–the first full frame digicam. The RX1 provides an interesting historical bookend.
I suspect Sony didn't anticipate the demand for what's in many ways an engineering exercise that was probably only greenlighted for production to serve as a halo camera for their other lines. Virtually everybody else has been caught flatfooted, but certainly others will follow. But for today, it's a one-pony race.
I get why non-photo enthusiasts don't understand the RX's appeal and as long as they don't tote a $600 cuban shelter I'll stay on the sidelines when they whinge about the price. ;-)
Looking forward to your further input as you get out more.
RickDec 31, 2012 at 4:12 pm #1939707
I'm a somewhat-professional photographer with at least one wedding already booked this summer. I'm also a nerd—a software developer by day—that definitely keeps up with and understands the technical underpinnings and optical principles behind modern photography. Simply put, what you're showing in your (beautiful) photo isn't the result of a full-frame sensor, but rather a quality lens. Modern sensors consistently allow better resolutions than the lenses in front of them—with the exception of truly quality glass.
This is exactly my point. The Sony RX1 is a resolution monster that takes great photos. Unfortunately, it's high technology mated to a fixed lens, where it's potential is limited to a single field of view. I'd rather have a 60% smaller sensor (APS-C) but have more flexibility in composition, enabling creativity and the capture of moments that the RX1 simply can't.
At base ISO, any NEX camera is capable of equivalent resolution to the photo you posted (given quality glass) and by switching lenses, would crush your 100% crop. It's silly to talk about the RX1 and NEX cameras like there's a huge gulf between them. There's not. You're just furthering the full-frame snobbery by saying that point-and-shoot cameras (which are only 13% the size of an ASP-C sensor) have similar quality as the NEX, but the RX1 is in a league of it's own.
An RX1 with a lens hood and an EVF is $3,400. A NEX-6 with the Zeiss 24mm is $1950. For an additional $1500, you could buy a litany of truly quality lenses to mate with it. And a year from now, when sensor technology is leaps and bounds better, you can spend another $850 to upgrade your camera body and keep the $2000 you invested in lenses.Dec 31, 2012 at 4:39 pm #1939715
Last point I'll make —
The NEX-6 has a 16 megapixel sensor while the RX1 has a 24 megapixel sensor. That's 33.3% less pixels.
The NEX-6 has a sensor area of 328.6mm while the RX1 has a sensor area of 864mm. That's 62% smaller.
The difference between the size and number of photosites dictates the ultimate per-pixel resolution. The photosites are approximately 28% smaller in the NEX-6 according to this math. While significant, it's not as big a deal as one might think. At least, until high ISOs where the differences are significant.
To get to the same pixel "quality", one would need to scale the 16 megapixel photo from a NEX-6 to 9 megapixels, which is fine to print at great quality at up to 8×10.
So to conclude—if you want to take photos at night and print poster-sized images, get the RX1. Otherwise, get the NEX-6.Dec 31, 2012 at 5:35 pm #1939730
Chris TownsendBPL Member
@christownsendLocale: Cairngorms National Park
Interesting discussion. As I take photos for publication in books and magazines and occasionally sell fairly large prints image quality is important for me – I need to keep publishers happy apart from wanting good results anyway. I've also always wanted the lightest camera gear that would get me those results. With sensors APS-C is the smallest that's okay, which used to mean a DSLR. Megapixels comes next. My first DSLR had 6mp – images from it appeared in a photo book last year along with ones from follow-up cameras of 8 and 12mp. These were Canon cameras and most images were taken with the 18-55 kit lens. They all look fine, regardless of which camera was used.
Recently I changed to the NEX system because of the low weight and bulk. I started with the NEX 5 and now have the 6 and the 7. The latter is 24mp, which is useful for images that will be cropped – which I take with that intention. The NEX 6 is slightly better in low light. Images from all three NEX cameras are higher quality than those from my Canon DSLRs.
The RX1 looks a great camera but the fixed lens puts me off and I'm not convinced it would actually produce much better quality images than the NEX 6 or 7.Jan 1, 2013 at 10:18 am #1939895
Jon LeibowitzBPL Member
@jleebLocale: 4Corners
"So to conclude—if you want to take photos at night and print poster-sized images, get the RX1. Otherwise, get the NEX-6."
Or get an OM-D instead of both those options and have an incredible selection of native glass, IBIS, and a weather proof body. :) Come on, you Sony people can't have all the fun.Jan 1, 2013 at 11:22 am #1939915
That's a whole different set of math :]
A micro four thirds sensor area is 243mm—72% smaller than full frame and 26% smaller than APS-C. Seeing as the sensor is also 16 megapixels, the photosites are even smaller.Jan 1, 2013 at 11:58 am #1939927
And yet, the E-M5 has better high-ISO noise characteristics than the NEX cameras, including the 6, demonstrating the folly of picking cameras solely based on arithmetic.
Like the man said, the E-M5 is a fantastic backpacking camera.
RickJan 1, 2013 at 3:57 pm #1939982
Jon LeibowitzBPL Member
@jleebLocale: 4Corners
Just for the sake of conversation, I have to add…….If you are going to argue that there is practically no difference in IQ between a FF and an NEX, it is ludicrous to contend there is any difference between a OM-D and an NEX.
The OM-D won camera of the year at DPReview, Sansmirror…just sayin :) And like you said above, it's all about the glass.
Anyways, both the NEX6 and the OM-D are great cameras. Neither come close to the quality you can get out of a FF, IMO, especially if you want to crop pictures and/or blow them up big.Jan 1, 2013 at 4:18 pm #1939986
Actually, there are two things at work there. First, there is noise reduction applied to the photos from the E-M5 that Steve Huff posted, but not any from the other cameras. The second is that the E-M5 actually lies about it's ISO; at ISO 3200, you'll need to use a roughly 50% longer shutter speed to get the same exposure compared to any of the Sony cameras, which rate their ISO sensitivities much more accurately. At ISO3200, the E-M5 is actually only at ISO1489, which is a full stop discrepancy and one of the largest lies currently on the market in the camera world.
There's zero folly in using science to choose a better photographic instrument. Don't get me wrong—the OM-5 is an excellent camera, but don't go basing opinions based on a nonscientific, mistaken test.
All that said, I agree that it's a great camera :)Jan 1, 2013 at 4:35 pm #1939989
@rick Dreher: I agree completely. I used to have a Contax too! What a great little camera THAT was!
I think the RX1 was always meant to appeal to photographers with a full Canon/Nikon rig, as opposed to people looking to upgrade.
@Kyle Meyer: Obviously if you add up all the obscenely priced accessories, that you don't need to maximize IQ, its going to be more expensive. I was just trying to point out that one would also need to invest a considerable amount of money to get the best IQ out of the NEX system.
However, i do disagree with you about the "gulf". I think there is indeed a huge difference between the RX1 and the NEX-7 (which I own, I cant speak to the IQ of the 6). If nothing else, the IQ gulf is certainly bigger between the NEX and the RX1, than the NEX and something like the S110 or RX100 (both of which I also have).
I also will take issue with your claim that "…any NEX camera is capable of equivalent resolution to the photo you posted (given quality glass) and by switching lenses, would crush your 100% crop". Im not sure I understand what your trying to say here. If your saying that ANY (3, really?) NEX camera (with this theoretical quality glass) is capable of coming anywhere close to the IQ of the RX1 your smoking the good stuff. If, on the other hand, your saying that you can buy glass for the NEX in a longer focal length that will have better results than the 100% crop then that may be true….I would invite you post such a picture. Because with my NEX-7 and the best glass currently available (canon "L" series lenses mounted with a NEX adapter), the NEX is still miles behind the RX1.
It's interesting, i have heard this reference to "full-frame snobbery" a lot lately (and always by someone that doesn't own a FF camera). I dont understand why by stating a fact (ie. "everything else being equal, FF sensors will always outperform smaller sensors") that's considered "snobbery" (if I drop the money for a ferrari you better believe i'm going around and making fun of everyone in a porsche boxter). Its funny, because i am actually a huge photo snob…but not about FF cameras. Rather, i have found that people who get into photography without working with film, can not (in any way), contribute to a meaningful discussion about the art of photography. I'm sorry but a film-based background is crucial. And I think this where a lot of backlash for the RX1 comes from…ie photogs that buy a $1k+ rig and call themselves professionals. Again, not trying to put anyone down (or include you in that group), but it seems that this group is the most vocal when it comes to the focal length issue. When I first got hired at ESPN magazine, they forced all the rookies to go out on their first shoot with a fixed-focal length film camera (everyone grumbled, except me, I had a huge smile and pulled out my A-1). I would suggest you do the same thing. You might find that focusing on what your camera CAN do and forgetting about what it can't will make you a better photographer.
Look, Im def not the king of all photography. And im def not saying that the RX1 is the perfect camera (there's no such thing). These are just my opinions, which are based on 10 years of my personal experience as a professional staff photographer.Jan 1, 2013 at 5:42 pm #1940008
Chris TownsendBPL Member
@christownsendLocale: Cairngorms National Park
I shot film for well over 20 years (mostly low ISO transparency film) and I agree that this teaches you a great deal, especially when you start, as I did, with a fully manual camera and a separate light meter. However there's a whole generation appearing that has grown up with digital. Their views on the art of photography are just as valid as those of us who started with film.
When it comes to cameras I'm sure that the differences between APS-C and Micro Four-Thirds cameras isn't that great and that any of these cameras, whether DSLR or compact, can take excellent quality images. I've chosen Sony NEX because it seemed the best for my needs and I liked the ergonomics (I spent some time handling cameras – one was quickly rejected because it was so hard to hold firmly I was afraid I'd drop it). If I'd chosen Olympus or Panasonic or Fuji or Samsung I'd probably be just as happy. I've gone from a DSLR to a CSC because of the weight and bulk not because I expected better quality images – I just wanted the same quality from a smaller, lighter camera. If a full frame camera with interchangeable lenses at the same weight and size as the NEXs appears then I'll be interested. As it is FF cameras are just too heavy so I've never considered one, just as I never considered Medium Format when I shot film. The RX1 obviously isn't heavy or bulky but that 35mm lens would be just too limiting for me.
When it comes down to it composition, lighting, knowledge of a camera's limitations and capabilities and care in getting the right settings are all more important than whether you have an OM-D or a Sony NEX or ………….Jan 1, 2013 at 6:15 pm #1940019
This thread is starting to make me cringe.
Dan, you realize that the RX1, behind the Zeiss 35mm ƒ/2 lens, is simply an analogue device that collects light, right? Now would you believe me if I said that it's the same technology that drives the NEX-6, NEX-7, and RX1 (and the NEX-5R, NEX-5N, and Nikon D7000 for that matter) with simple differences in the size of the photosites and the ultimate dimensions of the sensor?
Further, you understand that while a sensor dictates maximum potential resolution (e.g. 16 megapixels), it has very little to do with the ultimate clarity of the photograph taken, right? The fact remains that most lenses do not resolve detail to the level that modern sensors are capable of resolving.
The RX1 is the combination of a high-end lens mated to a high-end sensor—there's nothing more to it. My entire argument is that the NEX range of cameras is just as capable as any of resolving detail, whether or not you've found that in practice with your subset of lenses.
And then you devolve to an ad hominem attack about not owning a full frame camera or being too young and not having shot film. I've shot a 5D Mark II professionally for years. I own fully manual 35mm film cameras and use them. I also own a Fuji X100 and understand the appeal folks have for the RX1. None of this matters though.
The argument I'm making is that you're simply wrong about there being a large difference between the RX1 and a CSC camera. You're quantitatively, scientifically, incorrect about your assertion that there is a bigger difference between the RX1 and a NEX-7 then there is between a NEX-7 and a compact camera with a 1/1.7" sensor.
You're just arguing partisan photographer nonsense to make any such claim and you do a disservice to those trying to better understand this incredibly complex world of modern, lightweight photography.Jan 1, 2013 at 7:46 pm #1940049
"This thread is starting to make me cringe."-Well, at least we agree about one thing.
You're doing a disservice to readers by boiling down the "…incredibly complex world of modern, lightweight photography" to a math equation (I like the "modern" part, like I have no idea what im talking about…im 29 btw).
Its the ART of photography, not the MATH of photography.Jan 2, 2013 at 1:51 pm #1940259
You might have missed this above the samples:
These are from RAW with ZERO Noise Reduction and no sharpening at all:
"First, there is noise reduction applied to the photos from the E-M5 that Steve Huff posted, but not any from the other cameras."
Noise is clearly better managed on the E-M5–more critical if one shoots at higher shutter speeds in dim conditions. Effective IBIS and fast native primes do
allow one to shoot longer exposures to keep ISO lower, of course.
Enough thread drift for now.
RickJan 2, 2013 at 2:48 pm #1940281
I know it says there is zero noise reduction applied, but that is in fact noise reduction applied. He's mistaken. You can tell by the complete lack of color noise that's visible in the photo at ISO6400.
Here's a real test of the OM-D's noise levels at ISO6400 in a controlled environment:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews_data/oly_em5/boxshot/p1010017.acr.jpgJan 2, 2013 at 7:11 pm #1940385
So…Steve Huff is deluded or a liar. Got it.
I think you have exactly the right camera. Carry on.Jan 4, 2013 at 11:15 am #1940800
Jesus Christ, can't people be civil on this forum?
People (even Steve Huff, shockingly) make mistakes. I gave you proof that the comparison was incorrect. Look at the color noise in the above linked photo. Look at the metadata. Here, I'll make it easier: http://cl.ly/image/0Q3r3f3Q3D0D
Believe it or not, my whole point of contributing to this thread was to help people reading the photography forum on BPL. I'm not here trying to espouse my philosophy, but rather trying to provide an analytical, science-based, look at the technologies being discussed here. This perspective may sound familiar because that is what all of BPL is based on.
The fact that you guys act so petty and derisive serves to further ruin this community, and I'd plead that you consider being nicer. I'm actually trying to help folks, not belittle your choice of expensive toys.
The RX1 is a great camera. Any NEX camera is a great camera. The E-M5 is a great camera.
Sorry for trying to contribute.Jan 4, 2013 at 11:38 am #1940806
Bob GrossMember
@b-g-2-2Locale: Silicon Valley
Geez, back in the old days, the only way we could get a decent camera argument going was if it was Nikon versus Canon. Now the contagion is spreading to Sony and the rest.
–B.G.–Jan 4, 2013 at 3:06 pm #1940845
Franco DarioliBPL Member
@francoLocale: Tarptent
The NEX-6 has a 16 megapixel sensor while the RX1 has a 24 megapixel sensor. That's 33.3% less pixels.
The NEX-6 has a sensor area of 328.6mm while the RX1 has a sensor area of 864mm. That's 62% smaller.
Another way to look at that is to say that the RX1 has 50% more pixels and a 263% bigger sensor.
But I must remember that when someone complains about an $850 tent, I'll tell them that the $330 version is really only 60% less expensive.
Anyway I don't recall in 30 years of retailing having ever had a professional customer pull out the calculator to work out the difference in quality to them between say Canon L 70-210 F2.8 lens and the Pentax F 70-210 4.5/5.6 or whatever…
" say Franco, should I pay 18.75x more for this Leica CL compared to my Trip 35 ? Anything else you can show me ?"
"Yes sir , the door"Jan 4, 2013 at 3:53 pm #1940854
Rick MBPL Member
delJan 6, 2013 at 1:58 pm #1941241
Ted GMember
@tedg540Locale: Nothern VA
For those who like off camera flash, the leaf shutter is a plus. I just did a flash test at 1/3200 with an Einstein Flash unit at full power.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


text:
Felice Frankel
In the mid- to late-1960s, Oscar Miller and Barbara Beatty developed a technique at Oak Ridge National Laboratory to "see" genes during transcription. Their technique was later used to obtain information about structural aspects of genetic activity and genome replication in a wide variety of cell types, from human to bacterial. Dr. Miller, now Professor Emeritus in Biology at the University of Virginia, and I recently had some wonderful conversations about this remarkable visualization achieved years ago.
F. F. Before we get to the question of how you actually made the image, I wonder if you remember your reactions when you finally saw the results for the first time?
O. M. Oh yes! I can vividly remember finding the right area of the carbon film in the electron microscope and focusing on it. There they were! The genes for ribosomal RNA spread out in all their glory. I leaned back from the scope with a chilling thrill, clasped my hands on the back of my neck, closed my eyes and said to myself, "We finally did it." Then, I immediately thought, "Take a picture quickly before the film breaks. No one will ever believe we have done this unless we have pictures!" And then, of course, there was the thrill of telling Barbara to come see the genes!
F. F. So tell us, how did you make the sample?
O. M. Biochemical evidence from other labs indicated that the compact nucleoli of cell nuclei contain rRNA genes coding for the molecules that are involved in the structure of the protein-synthesizing apparatus of all cells. In our attempts to visualize genes in action, Barbara Beatty and I were fortunate to be working with the best cell type available, the amphibian oocyte—in this case, a newt oocyte. Unlike most cell types, which have one or more nucleoli attached to specific chromosomes, the very large amphibian oocyte nucleus typically also has hundreds of extrachromosomal nucleoli. To visualize the rRNA genes we first manually isolated the contents of the oocyte nucleus using jewelers' forceps, then carefully removed them with a pipette and placed them in a small drop of distilled water. The nucleoli rapidly came apart, allowing the genes to disperse from their normal compact state. Next we whirled the sample with fixative in a microcentrifugation chamber in order to deposit it on a thin carbon support film for the electron microscope specimen grid.
Two problems arose. Very thin carbon films were used to support our specimens in the EM beam. However, the surfaces of carbon films are typically very hydrophobic, so our specimens precipitated when dried on the untreated film. To prevent this, we made our support film hydrophilic. The other problem was surface-tension distortion during drying. We solved this by carefully rinsing the grid that held the partially attached, dispersed nucleolar genes (after centrifuging) with a very dilute solution of Kodak Photo-Flo, a surface-tension reducer used in photography. This allowed the genes to dry straight down and completely attach to the support film surface in two dimensions without any surface-tension distortion. Finally we stained the sample, attaching heavy-metal ions to increase its electron density in the electron beam. This was sort of the "icing on the cake" step.
F. F. Were you concerned that the process of making the various samples for these new imaging investigations might produce artifacts and that you were misinterpreting what you were seeing? Did anyone ever raise questions about your technique?
O. M. In the Dark Ages of our labors, when preparations were precipitated or distorted by surface tension, there were a number of disbelievers. But when the two "magic" steps, plus the "icing the cake" staining, were put together, the results looked so similar to what one might expect from all the biochemical evidence available that the disbelievers suddenly disappeared. Of course, as soon as one disturbs the normal living state of a cell, artifacts are always introduced. Knowing this, we very carefully monitored the results of each step with either phase-contrast light microscopy or electron microscopy as appropriate. So we felt confident that we could extrapolate from our final "artifacts" back through each preparative step to draw useful conclusions about what was going on in the nucleoli of living cells.
Community Guidelines: Disqus Comments
The Art and Science of Communicating Science
American Scientist Classics
Women in Science
Purchase a Back Issue
2014 Annual Index
The Age of Nuclear Weapons
25 Years in North Carolina
Of Possible Interest
Letters to the Editors: Mosquito Vectors of Zika
Feature Article: The Challenge of Survival for Wild Infant Baboons
Engineering: Traffic Signals, Dilemma Zones, and Red-Light Cameras
© 2016 Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Important: Taking care of yourself in a time of unrest
By Ashley Harris
Public Affairs Specialist
(April 17, 2007)--As the thoughts and prayers of UTSA students, faculty and staff go out to those affected by the tragic events at Virginia Tech University, many also have begun to look for positive methods to resolve their emotional discomfort.
"It is normal for individuals to feel a sense of unrest after a difficult event such as this," said Elizabeth Stanczak, UTSA executive director of health and counseling services. "What is important is to validate your feelings, express your thoughts, ask questions and acknowledge the psychological and physical changes that can occur."
Today's headlines
- La Prensa Foundation is newest member of UTSA Lone Star Society
- UTSA alumna Jordan Kaufmann wins $50K for new stent-graft start-up
- UTSA begins new way-finding sign installation this summer at Main Campus
- USA Today: UTSA long jumper Tyler Williamson rescues three-year-old boy
Article tools
Common reactions to distressing events include shock and disbelief, sadness and anger, trouble falling asleep, sleep disturbances, nightmares, fatigue, headaches and irritability. Also, be aware of other adjustment reactions including the need for information, frustration and powerlessness as well as anger and suspicion. Students are encouraged to contact UTSA Counseling Services if these feelings persist or disturb daily functions. UTSA employees can seek help through the Employee Assistance Program.
"Individuals need to be aware of not only the psychological effects that events like this can generate, but also the physical effects," said Stanczak. "Physical reactions can include loss of appetite, lethargy, headaches and difficulty concentrating."
Proactive steps that individuals can take to offset these feelings include eating well, exercising and interacting with others who have similar feelings. Stanczak recommends that students use resources available through Student Health Services to counteract these physical reactions.
Other important steps to mental well-being include reconnecting with family, visiting with friends and reaching out to those directly affected by providing assistance in various forms to victims and survivors.
"Tragedies of this magnitude affect each of us on many different levels and in many different ways," concluded Stanczak. "It is important that we acknowledge their profound effect on us, participate in self-care and express care and concern for those around us. With these steps, the healing process can begin."
UTSA student resources
UTSA Counseling Services, (210) 458-4140
University Center Room 2.01.04, 1604 Campus
Monday, Thursday and Friday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.
Tuesday and Thursday, 8 a.m.-7 p.m.
Buena Vista Street Building Room 1.308, Downtown Campus
Monday-Wednesday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.
Thursday, 8 a.m.-4 p.m.
Recreation Wellness Center, 1604 Campus
Monday-Thursday, 8 a.m.-7:30 p.m.
Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Buena Vista Street Building Room 1.308, Downtown Campus
Monday and Tuesday, 8 a.m.-5:30 p.m.
Wednesday and Thursday, 8 a.m.-4 p.m.
Friday, 8-11:30 a.m.
UTSA employee resources
Employee Assistance Program
Available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
(210) 299-2400
1-800-442-0024 (after hours or in case of emergency)
Employee Assistance Program (EAP) services are available at no charge to regular, benefits-eligible UTSA employees and their dependents. They are eligible to receive up to 8 free counseling sessions per year. EAP provides confidential, professional assistance to help employees and members of their households resolve problems that affect their personal lives or job performance. Calls and visits are confidential.


text:
The following are short descriptions of individuals, places and events which have contributed to the shaping of African American history. These encyclopedia entries serve as a starting point for much more inclusive descriptions and discussions that appear in other sources. For additional information please consult the print or website sources cited in the entry.
View Encyclopedia Entries By: All | People | Places | Institutions | Events | Groups and Organizations
|Entry Title
|Entry Type
|Younge, Samuel ("Sammy") Leamon, Jr. (1944-1966)
|Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Inc. (1920- )
|Zimmerman, Matthew Augustus, Jr. (1941– )
BlackPast.org is an independent non-profit corporation 501(c)(3). It has no affiliation with the University of Washington. BlackPast.org is supported in part by a grant from Humanities Washington, a state-wide non-profit organization supported by the National Endowment for the Humanities, the state of Washington, and contributions from individuals and foundations.


text:
Mileage: 15.7
August mileage: 246.8
Temperature upon departure: 59
A year of growing older
A day in the sun
happy day of birth (a day late) Jill!
i came back from vacation today, and read the saga of the last week or so all in one swoop.
If i may be so bold as to send a comforting hug. Words seem to fail to offer the same level of comfort as a genuine hug. Pretend its from some one else other than a stranger, that's the emotion i'd like to share.
Things will turn around. I made a scary transition a year ago. You are not alone in the agony of the excess that comes with a transition.
In time it will be better. For now all i can offer is a hug and birthday wishes - even if both are virtual and remote.
Congrats on another year older, wiser, better!ReplyDelete
Happy Birthday, Jill!
I'd sing it for you, but if I did, you'd be overrun in Juneau with lovelorn moose cows! ::GRIN::
Happy Birthday, Jill.
Thanks for the window into your journey.
Moving to Juneau without a comfort-based plan, living in a tent down by the river (while working a respectable job), gleeful acceptance of your budget motel room for a season. Lone wolf on the dark highway.
These are the experiences that set you apart from everyone who's never trusted their fate to the universe.
Happy Birthday Jill -- I don't know all that much about the older and wiser parts -- mine a couple of days ago mostly just felt ... older.ReplyDelete


text:
Stay connected with us to get the latest health and fitness news, innovative workouts, healthy recipes and wellness tips.
Change Location
ACE Fit Share
This recipe is an example of a favorite Italian trick--getting two dishes out of one. The chicken is served as an entree, and its sauce is tossed with pasta. While it is traditional to serve the pasta as the first course of the same meal, either chicken or sauce could be saved for another night.
Nutrition Profile:
Diabetes Appropriate
Gluten Free Diet
Healthy Weight
Heart Healthy
High Fiber
High Potassium
Low Calorie
Low Carb
Low Cholesterol
Low Sat Fat
Low Sodium
Serves 4
Prep Time 35 min
Total Time 60 min.
Step 1
Char bell peppers over a low gas flame or under a broiler, turning often, until skins are evenly blistered, 5 to 10 minutes. Place the peppers in a bowl, cover and let stand for 10 to 15 minutes. Remove skins and seeds of the peppers with a paring knife. Cut the peppers into wide strips, saving any juices accumulated in the bowl. Set aside.
Step 2
Pat chicken dry and season with salt and pepper.
Step 3
Heat oil in a large skillet or Dutch oven over medium heat. Add garlic and crushed red pepper and cook, stirring, until golden, about 1 minute. Add the chicken and cook until browned on all sides, about 6 minutes. Transfer the chicken to a plate.
Step 4
Add wine to the pan and increase heat to high, scraping up any browned bits. Stir in tomatoes and one-third of the roasted peppers and their juices.
Step 5
Add the chicken. Reduce heat to low, cover and simmer, turning once, until chicken is no longer pink in the center, 25 to 30 minutes. Add remaining bell peppers and cook until heated through, 3 to 5 minutes more. Adjust seasoning with salt and pepper.
Step 6
Tilt pan and spoon off any surface fat from sauce. Adjust seasoning with salt and pepper. Transfer chicken and vegetables with a slotted spoon to a warm serving bowl. Reserve 3 cups of sauce for another use. Spoon the remaining sauce over the chicken and vegetables. Serve hot.
Featured Workouts
Check out our 12-week fitness plan designed to boost your strength, endurance, muscle definition, energy level and overall health.
Flatten your stomach and build strength in the muscles that provide stability and mobility for the spine, pelvis, ribs and hips.
Focus on pulling, rotating and building strength with workouts created alongside Olympic Gold Medalist Dominique Dawes.
This workout provides a challenging total-body workout that can be done from the comfort of home with no equipment other than bodyweight and space.


text: Wow... They are trying to demonize the nra because I think they are very frightened of that ad. I really hope that the nra can make more ads like that, not too over the top and right to the point. I REALLY LIKE THAT AD!!!! Im sending the nra more money today, in the mail tomorrow, there in a few days to fight the good fight!


text:
Exhibitions & EventsCalendar Item
Image Details
Thursday, February 21, 2013
This year, for the first time, we're happy to present a program of all of this year's Academy Award® nominated short documentary films (in addition to the short live-action and animated films, which are playing separately). Feature-length documentaries have for the past several years enjoyed a higher profile than ever among moviegoers, but just as with the live-action and animated short film categories, short documentaries have been far more difficult to find than features, especially in theaters. This is a great chance to take in all of the nominated short docs prior to the Oscars® being handed out on February 24th. (approximately four hours including intermission)


text:
"This isn't a story about black people - it's a story about the Left's agenda to patronize blacks and lie to everyone else."
For decades, the Left has been putting on a play with themselves as heroes in an ongoing civil rights movement - which they were mostly absent from at the time. Long after pervasive racial discrimination ended, they kept pretending America was being run by the Klan and that liberals were black America's only protectors.
It took the O. J. Simpson verdict - the race-based acquittal of a spectacularly guilty black celebrity as blacks across America erupted in cheers - to shut down the white guilt bank.
But now, fewer than two decades later, our "postracial" president has returned us to the pre-O.J. era of nonstop racial posturing. A half-black, half-white Democrat, not descended from American slaves, has brought racial unrest back with a whoop.
The Obama candidacy allowed liberals to engage in self-righteousness about race and get a hard-core Leftie in the White House at the same time. In 2008, we were told the only way for the nation to move past race was to elect him as president. And 53 percent of voters fell for it.
Now, Ann Coulter fearlessly explains the real history of race relations in this country, including how white liberals twist that history to spring the guilty, accuse the innocent, and engender racial hatreds, all in order to win politically. You'll learn, for instance, how:
Going where few authors would dare, Coulter explores the racial demagoguery that has mugged America since the early 70s. She shines the light of truth on cases ranging from Tawana Brawley; Lemrick Nelson; and Howard Beach, New York; to the LA riots and the Duke lacrosse scandal. And she shows how the 2012 Obama campaign is going to inspire the greatest racial guilt mongering of all time.
©2012 Ann Coulter (P)2012 Penguin Audio
"I'm Fully Converted to the Right."
After reading Coulter's book, I'm pretty much ashamed I was ever apart of the Liberal Party. I'm proud of being a black American and I'll never look at the media in same light again.
I spin my own wool and knit. Listening to audiobooks while I craft is one of my favorite things. I'm hooked.
"Politically Devisive but Factual"
I'm not as interested in the politics of race relations as I am in the social impacts, but often the two are inseparable in regards to this subject. So I found this book informative and interesting. Ann Coulter is, of course, a Fox News anchor and an obvious Republican, and quite a bit of this book was aimed toward slinging insults at the Democratic party. Fair enough in this case, although she does skip over some of the Republican transgressions in this area. However, I knew this would be the format of the book when I bought it, so I can't complain. Besides, by and large, I do agree with her that the vast majority of harm in the area has been done by left leaning liberals.
Being a media personality herself, Ann does concentrate quite a bit on the media's role in agitating racial "problems" that didn't exist until the media declared it was a problem and whipped up sentiment to that effect. She brings up a plethora of legal cases, weighing the real evidence and court findings against the liberal media's coverage and "community" reaction based on media coverage. Much of this was new information for me, and I enjoyed her insight. She was also surprisingly funny at times, and that was a bonus.
My problem with this book is simply that it will probably not be enjoyed by those with liberal/Democrat political leanings, and they are the very ones who need to be made aware that pandering does no one any good, least of all those who are being pandered to. In that respect, she will be, by and large, preaching to the choir with this book, since most of her readers will be prepared to believe (or already know) her subject matter. She is so antagonistic toward liberal Democrats that I can't see any of them sitting through this book with an open mind.
If the subject of racial demagoguery interests you, and you want to hear the facts from a somewhat less politically motivated writer, I would suggest reading Thomas Sowell's brilliant book "Black Rednecks and White Liberals" which takes the history of the problem back further and goes into more depth. It doesn't concentrate quite so much on media involvement and more on the historical and social aspects leading up to more current events. Mr. Sowell also has the added credibility of being a black man from Harlem and a world renowned economist. Ms Coulter does reference this book a few times, as the material is very similar in nature.
Ann Coulter did a good job of reading her own material, though not perfect, although I think that the few (very few) faults I found in her performance would not have been an issue with better editing.
Overall, a very good book, but if you don't already lean toward conservatism, it probably isn't for you.
I am a 30 year old over-the-road truck driver. I listen to A LOT of audiobooks!
"Eyeopening and frank look at race relations"
I rather enjoyed the book. It shows how the left media manipulates the people into a self-loathing state and perpetuates a false image of minorities and caucasians in typecasted rolls of "the oppressed victims" and "the oppressive perpetrators" respectively.
"Too Opinionated with Half Truths!"
Book was very informative.
She captures and holds her listeners as with TV interviews.
Amazed to learn that Al Sharpton was in an FBI Cocaine Sting and that Black Muslims got away with brutal attack on New York police officers.
Ann Coulter is not a racist, but can understand why most Blacks would believe so according to this book. The police shootings were too one-sided with no cases where the black victims were innocent, and there are plenty. Her continued statements about illegitimate black birthrates made blacks appear immoral when she stated that something is wrong with a people who behaves in that manner. And as if so-called Black-on-Black crimes gives license to police to murder innocent black men without any complaints from the black community. There is no such thing as black on black crimes. Ordinary black people don't kill each other. These are crimes committed by young gang members fighting over drug turf. Get rid of the drugs and we'd get rid of the black on black crimes. MS. Coulter meant well, but this book is simply too one-sided with many facts left out.
"Painful, didn't make it past chapter 3"
Less repetition
Chapter 2
After Chapter 2 the entire book seems to be case after case of black Americans getting away with murder, not something I want to listen to for hours on end.
"An Uncomfortable History of Democrat Coruption"
Ann Coulter lays bare the "liberal's" history of using race to gain power. This is an uncomfortable history our nation has yet to come to grips with. How could it when nearly all the means of telling the story are in the hands of those who would see a loss of power of these things were widely known.
Old Fart 1960 (some day....)
"Ann knows how to deliver"
Mugged ranks in the top half of all the audiobooks I've listened to so far.
Ann's delivery and voice really make this audiobook come alive.
Yes, I've heard Ann narrate other books. She's in fine form here.
I wish Ann would narrate all of her books. A listener can get Ann's true meanings by listening to the original author's inflections and intonations. Third party narrators usually can't accomplish this feat, but some do come close.
"Racism in the north"
Yes I would, but only if your friend loves New York
Being reminded of what the race hustlers have been doing for such a long time
No, but the entire book made me angry
"Interesting and scathing"
Well, it's Ann Coulter. Her voice is strident, her tone scathing, and this book becomes an endurance test to see if you can get to the end before you gouge out your ears. The overall theme is that liberal politicians have used racial issues to bolster their political positions without regard to actual social outcomes of their policies. She cites multiple historical examples as well as statistical evidence in her argumentation, some of which is interesting and some of which is hard to sit through (for example, she breaks out which "Goldwater states" supported which presidential candidates over the last 40 years). This book is interesting if you're conservative and probably intolerable if you're liberal.
Verbum Domini Manet In Aeternum. Jesus Christus Dominus Est. I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do these things to others, and I require the same from them.
"Another Coutler book that begged to be written..."
Ann Coulter refutes the myth that Republicans are racist, and the Republican party, is the party of racism. She does this by recounting much of the actual history of the civil rights movement in America, from Reconstruction through the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Coulter's thesis is that, far from being the party of racism and bigotry, the Republicans are responsible for the advancement of civil rights for Blacks in America since the Civil War. It was only after the Democrat party realized that losing the Black vote would consign them to irrelevance that they moved from their position of opposition and obstruction to civil rights legislation, to embracing it, beginning with the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Coulter makes the case that, because Republican Barry Goldwater voted against the 1964 legislation (on purely progressive grounds, having supported prior civil rights bills), Democrats were able to seize on that opposition and spend the next 30 years painting the Republican party as the party of racism. She goes on to make that case that the Democrat party has always been the party of institutionalized racism, and makes a lucid, compelling, well-documented case for her thesis. The history is there, and verifiable, but largely unknown by the general public, who seems to only be able to digest 30 second sound bytes. Of course, fans of Ann Coulter will cheer when they hear her make her case using the sharp tongue and cutting jabs for which she is known. Coulter also narrates the book herself, and her argument is therefore delivered in a natural and convincing style, as opposed to previous Coulter audiobooks, which sounded less authentic because of their use of a professional narrator. Love her or hate her, if you are a person who will investigate facts apart from your biases presuppositions, Mugged gives lots of facts to investigate.
""The rest of the Story", what the Media left out."
This book give you great Insight to what media leaves out, and what parts of the story it wants you to focus on. The Media edits out what does not fit the Liberal agenda.
Report Inappropriate Content
If you find this review inappropriate and think it should be removed from our site, let us know. This report will be reviewed by Audible and we will take appropriate action.


text:
Saw a stat going into this playoff where Eli's post season passer rating was better than his brother and Tom Brady.
Added to that is Eli's 8-3 playoff winning percentage...more remarkable given the 8 wins are on the road.
Peyton Manning considered one of best "regular season" QBs of all-time...has a losing record in the playoffs.
I make that distinction because the there is an interesting dichtomy with the Mannings....one is regarded as one of the great Qbs of all time and the other a very good Qb who some will say is very inconsistent.
Yet, in the playoffs it is the total reverse...one is dominant and the other has a mediocre record.


text:
Even mainstream media stunned, skeptical over Nobel Peace prize
posted at 9:30 am on October 9, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Many of us assumed that the mainstream media outlets would cheer Barack Obama's Nobel Peace Prize award today, but as Byron York notices, they seem as stunned as everyone else — and also as skeptical. For instance, the Washington Post reminds readers that two other sitting American Presidents have won the Nobel, but only in their second terms, and only after they'd, er, actually achieved something:
Obama is the third sitting U.S. president–and the first in 90 years–to win the prestigious peace prize. His predecessors won during their second White House terms, however, and after significant achievements in their diplomacy. Woodrow Wilson was awarded the price in 1919, after helping to found the League of Nations and shaping the Treatise of Versailles; and Theodore Roosevelt was the recipient in 1906 for his work to negotiate an end to the Russo-Japanese war.
In contrast, Obama is struggling over whether to expand the war in Afghanistan, preparing to withdraw from Iraq, and searching for ways to build momentum to restart Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and assemble an international effort to stop Iran's nuclear program.
On Twitter, a number of people are making reference to Jimmy Carter's award in 2002 for nothing more than speaking out against the policies of George Bush. However, Carter had a legitimate shot at it in 1978 for his work on brokering a peace agreement between Israel and Egypt only a few years after their last war — and didn't get a share in the Nobel awarded to Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat for those efforts. Has Obama done anything remotely significant in foreign affairs, let alone as significant as that agreement, which still continues today?
The New York Times should also be cheering, but instead it also questions the thought process of Nobel voters:
Reporters at a news conference to announce the prize pressed the committee's chairman, Thorbjorn Jagland, to explain the reasons Mr. Obama had prevailed over other candidates who included human rights activists in China and Afghanistan and political figures in Africa.
Specifically, reporters asked whether Mr. Obama might not become mired in a war in Afghanistan as Lyndon B. Johnson was in Vietnam.
But the committee said it wanted to enhance Mr. Obama's diplomatic efforts so far rather than anticipate events in the future.
What diplomatic efforts "so far"? He gave a speech in Cairo and … and … and … gave a few in Europe, too. That was the point of those questions from reporters; Obama has done little so far. He has mostly followed the Bush policies in two wars that the Nobel committee appeared to detest over the last few years, as Allahpundit pointed out in his post this morning. Obama did make a big show of appeasing Iran during its election crisis. Perhaps they should change the award's name to the Neville rather than the Nobel.
Finally, Matt Lauer apparently hit the nail on the head with his assessment, according to TMV's Joe Windish:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
LAUER: There are no major foreign policy achievements to date … In some ways he wins this for not being George W. Bush.
GREGORY: That's an inescapable conclusion.
That's actually the only reason. He won for getting elected. It's no more significant than that, and even the normally fawning American media know better.
Update: Peter Beinart says this only reinforces the conservative argument that Obamamania is all about style over substance, calling the award a "farce":
I had always thought the way these things worked was that you helped bring peace or democracy to some corner of the globe first, and then you won the Nobel Prize. But this year, the Nobel Committee has turned that logic around: It clearly likes what Obama is trying to do: on nuclear disarmament, climate change and Middle East peace—and so, in a "preemptive" strike, it's giving him the award now, in hopes that doing so will boost his chances of success later. It's an interesting idea. Perhaps next they'll start giving Oscars not to the people who have made the best movies of last year, but to the people who have the best chance of making the best movies next year. After all, once you've already made the movie, you no longer need the encouragement.
I like Barack Obama as much as the next liberal, but this is a farce. He's done nothing to deserve the prize. Sure, he's given some lovely speeches and launched some initiatives—on Iran, Israeli-Palestinian peace, climate change and nuclear disarmament—that might, if he's really lucky and really good, make the world a more safe, more just, more peaceful world. But there's absolutely no way to know if he'll succeed, and by giving him the Nobel Prize as a kind of "atta boy," the Nobel Committee is actually just highlighting the gap that conservatives have long highlighted: between Obamamania as global hype and Obama's actual accomplishments.
Personally, I prefer this "major award". It's just as tacky, but at least it does something:
Update II: Jazz Shaw calls it Freaky Friday.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air
Report: Kushner wanted to set up secret communications channel with the Kremlin (Update: …to monitor Syria)
"Everything is in play": White House shake-up coming soon — and legal team may start vetting Trump's tweets
Hillary Clinton still blames her problems on a vast right-wing media conspiracy
- Northern Thoughts And Reflections
- Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize in less than two weeks | Radio Vice Online
- Catmman
- Depends on their definition of "Extraordinary" « Obi's Sister
- OCTOBER SURPRISE: OBAMA WINS NOBEL PEACE PRIZE…FOR WHAT'? | Right Voices
- Bookworm Room » Obama wins the Peace Prize *UPDATED*
- Barack Obama Wins The Nobel Peace Prize For Not Being George Bush
- Ace of Spades HQ
- Maybe he'll walk over and get it - Pinkie
- The Angry White Guy » Blog Archive » Where is my NOBEL PEACE PRIZE… I haven't done anything either.
- Reformed Chicks Blabbing
- Always To The Right
- Michelle Obama deserves Peace Prize, too! » The Anchoress | A First Things Blog
- Lauer on Obama Peace Prize: It doesn't help you get health care reform passed, or help you solve the problem of Afghanistan | Political Integrity Now
- Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize « BUUUUURRRRNING HOT
- Obama recieves the Nobel prize for hope-n-change. [Note by Dan] « POWIP
- BREAKING: Obama Wins Nobel 'Cause He's So Awesome « The Quantum Conservative
- Yoda Needs To Visit Oslo | Zero Sheep
- # FR Titles Tell The Tale… # By: Gunny G « -THE "G" BLOGS ~ Gunny G Online -
- President Obama Accepts Nobel "Peacemaker!" Brand « Natural Fake
- # FR Titles Tell The Tale… # By: Gunny G « -THE "G" BLOGS ~ Gunny G Online -
- Free Republic Posts Tell The Tale…By: Gunny G « -THE "G" BLOGS ~ Gunny G Online -
- Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize for …? « The Lady Patriot
- RichWatch.net | Obama doesn't have to DO anything to stay awesome
- Nobel Peace Prize now officially a joke after Obama selection « Wellsy's World
- The America They Want « Verus Politics: Truth and Reason
- Tel-Chai Nation
- Obama receives Nobel Peace Prize? For what, exactly? | Political Integrity Now
- The Rose Garden Nobel Speech Obama Should Have Given « My Blog (That goes without speaking)
- Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot. « The Underground Conservative
- Nobel Peace Prize Award Creates Stunning Confusion « Quipster


text:
Medical marijuana provider sentenced to five years
MISSOULA, Mont. - A medical marijuana provider who reached a plea agreement with federal prosecutors only after a jury found him guilty at trial has been sentenced to five years in prison.
U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen accepted the recommendation of Chris Williams' attorney on Friday and sentenced the former Helena marijuana provider to time served on a drug charge and five years for a weapons charge.
Williams was convicted of eight charges after a September trial in which he was not allowed to use Montana's medical marijuana law as a defense. He faced a mandatory sentence of more than 80 years in prison.
Prosecutors agreed in December to dismiss six charges as long as Williams didn't appeal convictions for possessing a firearm in connection with drug trafficking and possession with intent to distribute marijuana.
Protestors with the group "Journey for Justice" traveled across the country to attend the hearing and support Williams.
Before and after the hearing, they gathered in front of the federal courthouse in Missoula, holding signs and chanting, "Free Chris Williams!"
Organizer Kari Boiter said she believes five years is still an unjust sentence for Williams.
"Locking a man up who followed state law to a tee for 5 years... We're going to put somebody in prison, at a cost of about $50,000 a year, for 5 years, for obeying state law," said Boiter. "I'm frustrated. I'm frustrated that this is considered justice. A man is going to prison for over 5 years. He's been ripped away from his son, who's 16 years old and needs his father."
Once his prison sentence is served, Williams also faces 5 years of supervised release.


text:
I tried every algorithm in here (http://aras-p.info/t...rage.html#intro) but every time I get wrong normals.
Well except the basic one.
half4 encode (half3 n, float3 view) { return half4(n.xyz*0.5+0.5,0); } half3 decode (half4 enc, float3 view) { return enc.xyz*2-1; }
This works perfectly but my specular keeps jumping around. I guess that would be a precision issue because of the 8bit target.
Well so then I try the next easiest thing which is storing X&Y and reconstructing Z like this:
half4 encode (half3 n, float3 view) { return half4(n.xy*0.5+0.5,0,0); } half3 decode (half2 enc, float3 view) { half3 n; n.xy = enc*2-1; n.z = sqrt(1-dot(n.xy, n.xy)); return n; }
And it's error all over again. The lighting changes with my view direction. (where I look at)
I tried this with both an R8G8B8A8 and R16G16 format but no change.
How is it that every encoding method I try fails.
Any idea what I'm fundamentally doing wrong ?
Normals are calculated this way:
float4x4 WorldView = mul(World, View); // Output view space normals output.Normal.xyz = mul(input.Normal, (float3x3)WorldView);
Edited by lipsryme, 11 September 2012 - 11:42 AM.


text:
thanks for the 1v1's at GV tonight. i was actually traited wrong for most of them...but oh well, still fun. thanks all
thanks for the 1v1's at GV tonight. i was actually traited wrong for most of them...but oh well, still fun. thanks all
Lugbur, R11 Reaver ./. Guthfred, R9 Captain ./. Guthblade, R9 Chamption ./. Muzluck, R9 Warg + Various other toons of different rank and class.
A number of fun fights tonight while wandering around, thanks to everyone who faced me (Slyc, Creepyhealer, Lonewarg, Arcinor(sp?), and at least 2-3 more I can't remember names on). I'm sure its painfully obvious how stupidly powerful the 6 major warden DoTs are. Now that i'm at full aud (got the last piece after tonight's action) I'll see if I can refine some strats to lengthen fights and get myself competitive with the dps creeps without my DoTs (or heals).
Good luck out there everyone: I'm looking forward to more.
[center]Let our actions speak for themselves. Jinjaah has been pouring over every post in the Bullroarer forum. Please keep in mind that any experiences with previous LOTRO teams are not reflective of the current team, give us a chance[/center]
It is absolutely ridiculous that burglars can bleed my BA for ~2k everyone 2 seconds for 30 seconds from just one bleed skill, and let's not talk about the Warden bleeds. We shall not mention that here! :P
Hope they fix that soon.
Also, Yellow Captains you make me lag. :P
Haven't had any 1v1's yet on BA, but thanks to those out there who fight my R7, under-aud, non-p2w Warg without immediately calling in friends. :P
Yours truly,
Worst thing they was to the warg class. flayer was rendered useless if not stupid to use now. They said they were developing 2 playstyle for wargs. 1st being stealthy stalker using shadow stance. The other was more of a tank stance with great survivability with the flayer stance. flayer has no survivabiilty and horrible dps
Also, I really have no idea what i've been talking about. been kinda boozed and doped up this holiday weekend lol
Thanks for the 1v1s.
Still a bit rusty but hopefully by the time I get full Aud. I should have it figured out.
I want to thank all the freeps that have sparred me lately. Especially had fun and close fights (atleast they were fun for me)with Tarpelion, Brannir, Frum...., Isindri, Qris, Avalanchel and Desolates. Swagbaby/Blazon you make me cry lol ;(...well actually all good burglars make me cry atm haha.
R14 Defiler Ezmoding, R12 warleader Hydraah, R12 reaver Lubshag, R12 warg Landvaettir, R15 hunter Pewpewboom,
R10 guardian Baforin, R9 hunter Baflo, R9 captain Adalwic
Thanks for the 1v1s at TR ramp, Exploit. You hit hard, but fought me clean. Cheers
BromancesWithWargs, R10 WL, Dark Impulse, Brandywine
[COLOR="#0000FF"]Tbow, Simerian, Airlyn, Thunderblades, Thunderstaff, Creepingdeath, Cathdadhis, Optimal, Thunderspear[/COLOR]
[COLOR="#FF0000"]Pentacle, Thunderkiss-1, CharlottesWeb, Throatrip, FailFace, AllOverYourFace [/COLOR]
thanks for the 1vs1s creepyhealer ,idmel and flloyed. Lag wasn't really helping but still good fights
Second Marshall Tarpelion/Commander Huntarp/Master guardsman VindictoStainless
Very fun fights, Wargazmm. I haven't had a fun warg fight that lasted more than 30s in a LONG time. Lag was getting me pretty badly, but it looked like the same for you, so no excuses from me. Even with no DoTs I didn't think a flayer warg could beat me, but that isn't the case obviously. You must be running some solid phys mits, it felt like I was hitting you with a rolled newspaper most of the time.
[center]Let our actions speak for themselves. Jinjaah has been pouring over every post in the Bullroarer forum. Please keep in mind that any experiences with previous LOTRO teams are not reflective of the current team, give us a chance[/center]
I've had some great 1vs1's recently with pokerjoker, barklespinner, slyc, and Arrik. Reavers are tough on RK's with all the CC/slow immunity and impale but I've enjoyed the challenge with all said fights.
Loki - Voodoo - Cheezy
fun fights the last few times ateabag & lug, still trying to figure if fight on is lame or not. internet is questionable and has been fairly poor recently, so haven't had alot of chances to properly fight.
There may come a time for valor without renown, for those without swords may surely still die upon them.
tbh, i dont find fight on that lame. ive been trying to avoid using impale/dust too much too. and i think fight on evens things out a bit more.
lugbur R11 reaver /// guthfred R9 cappy /// beregon R8 hunter /// guthblade R9 champ + too many other things
Good 1v1s Tarp, you're way too strong now, I feel like you went easy in that 2nd 1v1 too.
Good to have a few 1v1's now and then when I'm back for a bit. Thanks
P.S.: Those two minis failing that hard made me lol. :3
And that was an accidental brand in the first (interrupted) fight that we had, which is why I just kinda stood there for 10 seconds until it wore off. xD
Geändert von Alakdae (14.01.2014 um 15:41 Uhr)
[size=3][color=#086A87]Dephailer - Draped in Disease[/size]
Rank 12 Defiler[/color] ~ ~ ~ [color=#B40404][/color]
RIP Nidor of Brandywine (1970-2012)
Some nice fights everyone, thanks for taking it easy on a poor Defiler.
Great fights the other day Elimination & Trompok, & also Stylen. I don't suggest holding back anything other than Wrath right now, I certainly can't afford to.
Also Idmel sorry for the sudden AFK's, they happen frequently later in the day.
There may come a time for valor without renown, for those without swords may surely still die upon them.
yeah, that is quite a bit. Typically it does about ~700 per pulse for me when I'm sitting at close to 21k morale. Considering you need to parse ~1,500 DPS to beat a reaver before the 2nd impale though it's difficult to parse even half that with a high amount of disarms and permanent dust and kiting required to even come close not to mention our DPS is dependant on toe-to-toe damage since we lose our -AD buffs if we haven't crit in 8s. Have been parsing only 1-200 DPS above the reaver if I'm lucky.
Pretty hard fight, regardless.
There may come a time for valor without renown, for those without swords may surely still die upon them.
Thank you for the 1vs1s bunny ( and yelk lol), lugbur, elvich, bloodbad, creepyhealer, xero, coronner and all others today.
And Trompok you completely destroyed me in our 1vs1s, guess i'll have to find a strat and see how i can beat you :P
Second Marshall Tarpelion/Commander Huntarp/Master guardsman VindictoStainless
thanks for the 1v1's frumy (guard version) it was a shame about the bugs, with me going linkdead the first time, and you getting skill locked the second time, which was particularly painful since I had to run you out of power which took several minutes... kinda surprised how tough you are that your power dropped before your hp got to half lol XD
Belolth Hisses with fury as venom drips from his maw, scorching the earth, "come manling, my brood hungers!"
Nice 1v1s yesterday most notably to Isi, Numion, Chopstix, Brannir and Wargazzm. Cheers.
Mihiraa-Fallarden ~ Situational Awareness ~ Arkenstone
Bunnytail ~ Terminus Venatus Triumphus
Original Challenger of Gothmog x2
Thank you all for the 1v1's lately. I'm still memorizing names and alts so it'll take me time to properly acknowledge everyone.
Mihiraa - Always up for a 1v1 anytime, looking forward to more regardless of the toon we're on.
Third Marshal Rubicon Guardian ~ Third Marshal Raae Minstrel
Commander Danceswithwargs Reaver ~ Taskmaster Whiskeytangofoxtrot Spider
Commander Verkaufsschlacker Lore-master ~ Lieutenant Rivaalan Hunter
~ No Mercy ~
Diese Formular-Sitzung ist abgelaufen. Du musst die Seite neu laden.Neu laden


text:
Avalanche danger could be worse than last winter
FRISCO, Colo. (AP) - Experts are warning that another dry start to this winter could mean increased avalanche danger in Summit County later on in the season.
Brian Lazar with the Colorado Avalanche Information Center tells The Summit Daily News that so far this year, a weak base layer has been topped with more snow than last season. That means avalanches could be bigger and just as easy to trigger.
No avalanche deaths have been reported in Colorado this winter, but several people have been caught in slides across the state. Last year, the first of seven total deaths did not occur until mid-January.
Lazar says people should educate themselves on current snowpack conditions by staying up to date on avalanche advisories.
An average of 25 people die in avalanches in the United States every year.


text:
The Urgent Need to Chart a New Course
Ranking Member Paul Ryan guest hosts CNBC's Squawk Box - Video Highlights
Let's get a grip on gov't spending
We are doubling down on this borrow and spend mentality. We are going in completely the wrong direction with our fiscal policy.
I put myself in the Chris Christie camp. States need to take this moment to finally fix their budget mess. Washington shouldn't continually bail them out and postpone the inevitable budget changes that need to happen. We're having this great debate about the 1930s -- and a lot of revisionist history is occurring. Hoover started with the stimulus spending. Hoover gave us tax increases, then FDR finished up and did the same thing.
What happened in the 1930s, I would argue, is higher tax rates, protectionism, demagoguing business with bank populism, and then more uncertainty in the economic climate, more uncertainty among economic producers and small businesses as to what's coming ahead. What do you think we're doing right now? We're doing all of those things. We're repeating the same mistakes that took a tremendous crash and a recession and turned it into the Great Depression.
What I worry about here is because of government policy, State and Federal, we may get our own lost decade scenario just like the Japanese got. Because of the carry trade, because of the Fed, and because of all of the dangerous fiscal policy -- higher taxes, more regulations, explosion in spending -- we could have our own slow-growth, no-growth, managed-decline lost decade scenario.
The response to the crisis, this $862 billion stimulus, didn't work. It was supposed to keep unemployment under 8%. It was supposed to create 3 to 4 million jobs. I think we would have been better off with entitlement reform to show we are getting our fiscal house in order. We would have better off with lower tax rates -- not an assault on capital; not an assault on producers; and not this takeover of health care, this takeover of financial regulation, this takeover of energy.
When you look at every major sector of the economy, one theme occurs: the government is inserting itself as the dominant player in the marketplace and that makes economic actors less confident to go forward and invest. What I really believe is government is doing now is making matters worse. That's the problem.
Look at the sovereign debt crises that are popping up around the world. What we are seeing is welfare states are sort of on their last legs. Welfare states don't work, they are economically unsustainable, and you eventually run out of other people's money to spend.
We see this when we look at Europe and our current government is doubling down in the same direction. That is scaring people. That is scaring businesses. That is scaring the economy. That to me is what is wrong with the current direction of government policies and all this so-called "stimulus" spending.
Alice Rivlin and Paul Ryan discuss the need to tackle the debt threat
A Choice of Two Futures and the Urgent Need to Act
Paul Ryan on the need to engage in the world economy, and spur jobs in America
If you're standing still in a global economy -- that means you're losing and slipping behind.
Is Washington's borrow-and-spend economic agenda working?
Paul Ryan and Jan Schakowsky debate Washington's failed economic policies.
Paul Ryan: We've lost 3.6 million jobs since the stimulus passed. Unemployment's hovering around 10 percent. This isn't working.
The budget we're living under, last year's Obama budget because we don't have one this year, doubles the debt in five years and triples our debt in ten years. More debt is accumulating under this administration than George Washington to George Bush combined.
We're on a tear here and it's going in the wrong direction. We're looking at Europe, and we're going farther in the direction that they've been going.
If it's not working, we shouldn't keep going in the same path. Let's give businesses certainty. Let's have low tax rates, sound money, predictable and transparent regulations: those are the kind of things that ought to be giving us real economic growth.
A Roadmap For America's Future
Small Businesses: Washington's Economic Policies are "scaring us to death"
Bill Dunkelberg, National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) Chief Economist
Future tax hikes, costs of the health care overhaul, "the deficits scare us to death" - everything Congress is doing - or thinking about - is not helpful for small business or the economy. This isn't "stimulus" - it's just drawing resources out and deploying them in the government sector not helping the private sector.
Stop scaring us to death with all this stuff that's going on. It really worries ordinary folks that the government isn't even going to have a budget, that they're just spending money, and we're worried where that is going to take us.