David Hingtgen

A HUD does not need a separate combiner glass, it is easily projected directly on the canopy. The difference is, without a combiner glass, you need a special type of glass for the canopy. F-14A's (and most F-14B's) (and my car) project their HUD directly onto the windscreen. F-14D, and F-15/16/18/20/22 etc have the more common combiner glass style of HUD. I'd guess the reason for a combiner glass is that it's much easier to make a small flat plate of the right type of glass, than an entire windscreen.

I asked because that's only the second time I've seen swords like that, but the function is so similar I imagined there must be a real design. Or maybe they just copied hers: http://sakasagami.deviantart.com/art/Shiki...pirits-60415070 (fan-art, but shows her swords better than anything official I could find)

Semi-related question: What's the term for a sword with a "ring" in the middle, like in the first pic?

I asked again about the mask because Toboro just said he got one 4 posts ago.

Does the newest CC have a chrome mask? I've been waiting for someone to actually get one and/or photograph it from less than 10 feet away.

Almost no kit in the world is truly pre-painted. They can however, be molded in numerous small colors so that they can have intricate patterns, yet still require no painting. Think of say, a Yamato 1/48 Milia. It's molded mostly in red, with a lot of white parts. Most of it has no paint. Just a bit here and there where needed to "correct" the scheme. If you removed all the paint a 1/48 Milia has, it'd still have roughly the correct scheme, since the plastic is molded fairly close to the right colors to start with. A modern high-end Bandai MG kit is molded with even more attention paid to colors---even small bits are often a separate piece with a separate inherent color. All the little yellow vents on a Gundam? A good kit will have every one of them a separate little yellow piece, to have the proper "color accent" against the blue and white parts. A lesser kit would have them molded onto the "background" piece, and you'd have to paint them yelow.

I'm guessing you need an amazingly smooth, super-new road to be able to do that at over 2mph...

I really wanted a gunmetal PS3, but not for 600 bucks.

Side view of battroid: Also, Hasegawa seems to be releasing VF-1's with different (semi-canon) markings. Here's the best pic I found. I could also tell from the background of another pic that there will be a similar one with markings based on VF-21. (It's possible you'll get decals for all)

VF-31 and VF-213's final cruise it looks like. All F-14D's.

No, can't afford those, plus they're more conspicuous. When photographing airliners nowadays, security/cops frown upon people with BIG cameras with BIG lenses. (and even MP's at airshows) One of the nifty features of mine is that the zoom is "internal" so that even at 12x zoom, the lens doesn't protrude any further than when the camera's zoomed out. Much less "imposing" than 3+ inches of lens sticking out. It's a "large compact", which is just below the mini-SLR category. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_s3is.asp I'm probably one of the few people that has "needs to look like a common tourist with a typical family-photo camera" as a requirement.

There is the "evil" in CG in that it allows "tweaking". Most notably, the Enterprise-E was modified between movies. (Well, the CG model was, the "real" one wasn't). Nacelles were moved back and up, with the pylons re-shaped to accomodate. It's supposed to "look better" but it totally violates all sense/canon to do so. Plus the saucer extensions which remove the possibility of saucer separation. (the E was designed to separate, plenty of drawings from its creator showing such) Real models are of course modified, but only with good sense/reason, since you have to physically go and make the changes. You don't change the tilt of a large part of it by 2.4 degrees to "look" better just because you can do it with 2 mouse clicks.

You want DPreview.com They are insanely detailed in their reviews. Seriously, 20+ pages on "notable" cameras. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonsd870is/ http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonsd1100is/ I also like imaging resource: http://www.imaging-resource.com/MFR1.HTM?view=Canon_reviews Info on sensor size: http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=sensor%20sizes

I spent quite a while researching my camera. As photographing planes up in the air was a high priority, I put a lot of weight in "biggest zoom I can afford". Having read stuff, IMHO the most important factor in "image quality" is actually "how many megapixels are SQUEEZED into a given sensor size". Fewer is better. The $5000 cameras of the world? They are not "34 megapixels" for their excellent pic quality. They are like 5 or 6 megapixels, but on a BIGGER SENSOR, for fewer pixels on a given sensor size. Trying to squeeze a zillion pixels onto a small sensor is what makes noise. (I went with big zoom, and fewest pixels----my choice was borne out by the latest revised model of my camera being nigh-identical to mine, except one more megapixel---and the overall pic quality of the new model went down because of it---they squeezed too many pixels on that sensor--but it sells better because the masses like that 1 extra megapixel listed on the box) The main differences between those two Canons (I have an S3IS btw) are the zoom and megapixels. Sensor size is the same. The 870 has a better zoom (3.8 vs 3) but slightly more "pixels on the sensor" (8 vs 7). If I had to guess, I'd say the 1100 would take slightly higher quality images. But a 3.8 zoom is a decent step over 3. The short version of digicamera buying? Get the biggest CCD/sensor you can combined with the lowest megapixel count for that sensor size. That'll give raw quality. Plus--big lens. More glass is better. Just go by sheer looks--what camera "shows the most glass" when you look at it from the front? More glass=more light=more quality.

Gah, if they would just hurry up and RELEASE the Street Fighter figs. We've seen pics of them for months. But I think they're being held back until the game's done.

787 seems more "production issues" than "design". While the majority of airliners get to "first flight" without anything needing re-design, it's not that uncommon. 737 and A330 both needed their rear spars redesigned/strengthened, so the 787 needing its center wing box (basically the front and rear spar connection) strengthened is not unusual---it's the most common "fix" needed for a new airliner. I think the 787's real issue is still lack of quality/assembly from the subcontractors. Design is fine on 99% of the plane, they're just not building it right. Plus the infamous "fastener shortage". A380 is still mostly "backlog" AFAIK---nothing much more to redesign, but it still has to be implemented---just a trillion man-hours of labor to re-do what's been done (mainly wiring-wise), and it's slowing down the whole line.

Saw Premium Prime, Megs, Blackout today. Still planning on getting a JP Prime. I need chrome. Blackout---toy's gimmicks still hinder the figure too much. And the coloring's still really wrong. Both Barricade and Blackout could have had significantly better toys given their price-point, if their gimmicks didn't compromise the Transformation. Note concept BB---no gimmick, and he's awesome. Blackout just has WAY too much "non-transforming tail kibble" in robot mode. Barricade has the entire sides of the car as his arms. Barricade is almost certain to return, and thus will get/deserve a new toy. Blackout--maybe/hopefully.

I've always found it funny that of all media/things in the world, the GI Joe line is one of the few that seems to realize people with blond and red hair have matching eyebrows.

Quick confirmation/question: What color hair does Wave 9 Hawk have?

It's the TV. Just IMHO. From reading a zillion posts about various Sony/Toshiba/Samsungs before buying---weird HDMI audio issues that "fix" themselves with resets etc. A lot of the time, updated firmware fixes it. Though many Sonys cannot be updated without a service call, etc. As for component---1080p is possible, however---many TV's won't accept it, and Hollywood etc won't allow it for many things----kind of like how a TV won't output more than 2 channels from itself to a HTS even if it's getting a 5.1 signal through HDMI--it may be perfectly capable, but it's not allowed. And remember the "won't upscale via component due to HDCP" debacle? I'm pretty sure a PS3 won't allow 1080p via component, even though it is physically possible. (Because HDMI allows secure/encrypted stuff, while component is not so easily "controlled" by the studios) It's all about how the studios don't want you upscaling/converting anything you own. Because according to them, you don't own it.

On that note, this TV has WAY better speakers than the old one, even though they are downwards-facing/hidden (as is the trend---pointless, as it's purely aesthetics but can't be good for sound). A bit tinny, tweaking that too. (TV has an adjustable equalizer, but it's hard to check "all sounds" at once) Maybe I'll just wait until someone at AVS posts some sound tweak settings.

Well, I got my TV yesterday, but didn't even have time to try it out on anything more than a DVD player until today. Been tweaking backlight/brightness constantly trying to optimize it. (Did use SW Ep 3, now using Mass Effect) No hot/stuck pixels (they're easy to spot), haven't found any dead ones yet. I got a BRAND new one, they were literally re-stocking them off the truck when I got there, so mine is an April build. It seemed HUGE when I first got it in my room (seemed so much smaller when I measured things, actually being there in 3D makes a big difference) but it seems more "normal" now.

And brunette is the new black...

Target report: WTF. Same as last week, which is the same as the week before that. 6x Scarlett comic packs, not a single thing else. Yeesh.

But as a "just started" person, I don't have any of the figs in the DVD set.