Any tips for filming mobile phone using cagers?

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 07:32:49 GMT,
Pob wrote:

"Tim Woodall" wrote in message
. uk...
http://www.woodall.me.uk/journey/20080715/avi_0003.mpg

was my "adventure" with a driver with more than half his concentration
on his phone conversation today. Rather depressing given todays news
headlines.

Unfortunately, all I've got is the reflection off his window. Anyone got
any tips for getting a picture next time? I don't have a car to practice
with.

A polaroid filter will remove reflections, at the cost of a stop of
aperture.

If your camera doesn't have a filter screw on the front, a DIY solution you
could try would be buying a Cokin, or similar modular, filter. These are
simple squares that fit an adaptor, but they're big enough so you can cut
them down and tape them in place.

Or buy a sheet of polaroid filter gel, from stage/film lighting suppliers
(google), this is a simple plastic sheet that can be cut to size. This
would probably be the most expensive option though

Thank you for this idea. I feel a bit of a fool for not thinking of it
myself. Quite when or if I'll get around to trying it I don't know.

I'm also sorry this thread has degenerated into a flame fest. That 8Mb
clip has generated 1.2Gb of traffic on the 16th and another 300Mb on the
17th. I'd have to go digging through backups to check but I wouldn't be
surprised if that is more traffic that I'd had for everything I've ever
posted to the web (not counting paid work for other people) prior to
this thread.

The spring loaded centre punch idea also made me laugh. I'm pretty sure
the highway code doesn't prohibit it ;-)

Tim.


--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t,"
and there was light.

http://www.woodall.me.uk/ http://www.locofungus.btinternet.co.uk/

"judith" wrote in message
...
And there was me thinking that you could be prosecuted for something
like Driving Without Due Care and Attention, Inconsiderate Driving,
Dangerous Driving, Careless Driving if you carried out actions
against advice of the Highway Code.

I don't doubt it happens everyday, I know it does, but it is just laziness
on behalf of the PF/sheriff/whatever. There are specific laws that cover
abusers of the road(for want of a better phrase), many booklets refer to
them in kind, and in addition, offer advisory techniques. The highway code
is exactly this but is adopted by the general public as the only such
document. There are a few more recognised works out there, covering cycling,
motorcycling, HGV's, perhaps even pedestrian(admittedly I don't know of such
a booklet!).


--
!Speedy Gonzales!

Remove the SPAMTRAP to reply

On 18 Jul 2008 20:53:33 GMT, Ian Smith wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008, judithsmith wrote:

Judith, two things:

Number one: along with saying stupid things and having double
standards (I note you still demand everyone else provides cast-iron
cites for everything, but you yourself still neglect to, for example,
support your assertion that anyone has ever been prosecuted only for
failing to comply with the HC)

Driver who killed pensioner jailed for 30 months
A banned driver who killed a pensioner while driving with his
windscreen misted up has been jailed for 30 months. James McGuire, 23,
was turning right at a T-junction when his car struck Alexander
Donegan, 77, who was crossing the road to get a prescription. An
earlier court hearing heard how McGuire had paid £50 for a Ford Fiesta
and drove off just minutes before the fatal incident in Rowan Street,
Paisley. He was convicted of driving dangerously with the windscreen
obscured and admitted a further charge of failing to stop after the
crash.
http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=675

there is one nearly-infallible
indicator of a troll: they frequently change their posting address to avoid filters and
killfiles.

I intentionally and obviously changed my address on this one occasion
so that the specific person of whom I was asking the question would
definitely see it. I note you use the word "frequently".

snip


To many regular and knowledgeable cyclists, you just made yourself
look ignorant again. Your credibility (such as it is) will be less
damaged if you drop this line of debate now.

regards, Ian SMith


I know it goes against the grain for URCs to explain further - but
please do so re "you just made yourself look ignorant again."

"judith" wrote in message
...
On 18 Jul 2008 20:53:33 GMT, Ian Smith wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008, judithsmith wrote:

Judith, two things:

Number one: along with saying stupid things and having double
standards (I note you still demand everyone else provides cast-iron
cites for everything, but you yourself still neglect to, for example,
support your assertion that anyone has ever been prosecuted only for
failing to comply with the HC)

Driver who killed pensioner jailed for 30 months
A banned driver who killed a pensioner while driving with his
windscreen misted up has been jailed for 30 months. James McGuire, 23,
was turning right at a T-junction when his car struck Alexander
Donegan, 77, who was crossing the road to get a prescription. An
earlier court hearing heard how McGuire had paid £50 for a Ford Fiesta
and drove off just minutes before the fatal incident in Rowan Street,
Paisley. He was convicted of driving dangerously with the windscreen
obscured and admitted a further charge of failing to stop after the
crash.
http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=675

"Highway Code" is not mentioned at all in this webpage. Dangerous Driving
is covered under the Road Traffic Act 1991 and the sentencing guidelines
revised under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. There is certainly no mention
here of someone being prosecuted for failure to comply with the Highway
Code.

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 21:19:32 GMT, "!Speedy Gonzales!"
wrote:

"judith" wrote in message
.. .
And there was me thinking that you could be prosecuted for something
like Driving Without Due Care and Attention, Inconsiderate Driving,
Dangerous Driving, Careless Driving if you carried out actions
against advice of the Highway Code.

I don't doubt it happens everyday, I know it does, but it is just laziness
on behalf of the PF/sheriff/whatever. There are specific laws that cover
abusers of the road(for want of a better phrase), many booklets refer to
them in kind, and in addition, offer advisory techniques. The highway code
is exactly this but is adopted by the general public as the only such
document. There are a few more recognised works out there, covering cycling,
motorcycling, HGV's, perhaps even pedestrian(admittedly I don't know of such
a booklet!).


What do you prosecute a driver with if he has driven with an obscured
windscreen - as I have posted elsewhere?

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 21:10:04 GMT, "!Speedy Gonzales!"
wrote:

"Judith" wrote in message
.. .
So "Filtering is passing stationary traffic in the space between the
lanes." is incorrect.

and "Filtering is passing through spaces between traffic." - even if
you are crossing lanes is correct

Not wishing to rock the boat Judith, but IMHO the traffic doesn't even have
to be stationary! Having just sat a motorcycle assessment under police
guidance(most forces offer such free tests) filtering is encouraged,
apparently you can filter through traffic, anything up to 20% of road speed
over the filtered traffic without drawing attention from plod, i.e THE LAW!
This means 6mph over the vehicle in front speed(up to the posted limit{which
doesn't apply to cycles}) in urban areas, about 15mph on motorways, etc. Off
course filtering should only be applied when wider vehicles cannot move at
posted limits due to congestion, or words to that effect.
These figures are NOT written down in law, these are figures used by people
that police our roads.
Before you (Judith) starting querying my figures, check other
forums/newsgroups on the general usage of such figures. I personally don't
filter as such on a motorbike as other road users, I find, tend to change
lanes without checking for filterers, why would they?


I am sure you're right - was the term filtering also used to describe
the action of driving between vehicles across different lanes - rather
than driving in the space between lanes. I had never heard that
action called filtering until I read it here.

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:34:28 +0100, "Colin Reed"
wrote:


"judith" wrote in message
.. .
On 18 Jul 2008 20:53:33 GMT, Ian Smith wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008, judithsmith wrote:

Judith, two things:

Number one: along with saying stupid things and having double
standards (I note you still demand everyone else provides cast-iron
cites for everything, but you yourself still neglect to, for example,
support your assertion that anyone has ever been prosecuted only for
failing to comply with the HC)

Driver who killed pensioner jailed for 30 months
A banned driver who killed a pensioner while driving with his
windscreen misted up has been jailed for 30 months. James McGuire, 23,
was turning right at a T-junction when his car struck Alexander
Donegan, 77, who was crossing the road to get a prescription. An
earlier court hearing heard how McGuire had paid £50 for a Ford Fiesta
and drove off just minutes before the fatal incident in Rowan Street,
Paisley. He was convicted of driving dangerously with the windscreen
obscured and admitted a further charge of failing to stop after the
crash.
http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=675

"Highway Code" is not mentioned at all in this webpage. Dangerous Driving
is covered under the Road Traffic Act 1991 and the sentencing guidelines
revised under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. There is certainly no mention
here of someone being prosecuted for failure to comply with the Highway
Code.

OK - I can see this is difficult for you. I will try and spell it
out:

How was the fact that he was driving dangerously ascertained?
What was it that he did which was "dangerous driving"?
Where are you told not to do what he did?
Did he comply with the Highway Code?


(I'm sorry that some of those words have more than one syllable in
them)

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 21:15:46 +0000 (UTC), Tim Woodall
wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 07:32:49 GMT,
Pob wrote:

"Tim Woodall" wrote in message
. uk...
http://www.woodall.me.uk/journey/20080715/avi_0003.mpg

was my "adventure" with a driver with more than half his concentration
on his phone conversation today. Rather depressing given todays news
headlines.

Unfortunately, all I've got is the reflection off his window. Anyone got
any tips for getting a picture next time? I don't have a car to practice
with.

A polaroid filter will remove reflections, at the cost of a stop of
aperture.

If your camera doesn't have a filter screw on the front, a DIY solution you
could try would be buying a Cokin, or similar modular, filter. These are
simple squares that fit an adaptor, but they're big enough so you can cut
them down and tape them in place.

Or buy a sheet of polaroid filter gel, from stage/film lighting suppliers
(google), this is a simple plastic sheet that can be cut to size. This
would probably be the most expensive option though

Thank you for this idea. I feel a bit of a fool for not thinking of it
myself. Quite when or if I'll get around to trying it I don't know.

I'm also sorry this thread has degenerated into a flame fest. That 8Mb
clip has generated 1.2Gb of traffic on the 16th and another 300Mb on the
17th.


I apologise for that - I told a few mates that there were some good
examples of bad cycling to be seen.

judith wrote:
On 18 Jul 2008 20:53:33 GMT, Ian Smith wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008, judithsmith wrote:

Judith, two things:

Number one: along with saying stupid things and having double
standards (I note you still demand everyone else provides cast-iron
cites for everything, but you yourself still neglect to, for example,
support your assertion that anyone has ever been prosecuted only for
failing to comply with the HC)

Driver who killed pensioner jailed for 30 months
A banned driver who killed a pensioner while driving with his
windscreen misted up has been jailed for 30 months. James McGuire, 23,
was turning right at a T-junction when his car struck Alexander
Donegan, 77, who was crossing the road to get a prescription. An
earlier court hearing heard how McGuire had paid £50 for a Ford Fiesta
and drove off just minutes before the fatal incident in Rowan Street,
Paisley. He was convicted of driving dangerously with the windscreen
obscured and admitted a further charge of failing to stop after the
crash.
http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=675

"He was convicted of driving dangerously...
and admitted a further charge of failing to stop after the
crash"

Nothing there about about failing to comply with the HC

judith wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:34:28 +0100, "Colin Reed"
wrote:

"judith" wrote in message
...
On 18 Jul 2008 20:53:33 GMT, Ian Smith wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008, judithsmith wrote:

Judith, two things:

Number one: along with saying stupid things and having double
standards (I note you still demand everyone else provides cast-iron
cites for everything, but you yourself still neglect to, for example,
support your assertion that anyone has ever been prosecuted only for
failing to comply with the HC)
Driver who killed pensioner jailed for 30 months
A banned driver who killed a pensioner while driving with his
windscreen misted up has been jailed for 30 months. James McGuire, 23,
was turning right at a T-junction when his car struck Alexander
Donegan, 77, who was crossing the road to get a prescription. An
earlier court hearing heard how McGuire had paid £50 for a Ford Fiesta
and drove off just minutes before the fatal incident in Rowan Street,
Paisley. He was convicted of driving dangerously with the windscreen
obscured and admitted a further charge of failing to stop after the
crash.
http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=675
"Highway Code" is not mentioned at all in this webpage. Dangerous Driving
is covered under the Road Traffic Act 1991 and the sentencing guidelines
revised under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. There is certainly no mention
here of someone being prosecuted for failure to comply with the Highway
Code.

OK - I can see this is difficult for you. I will try and spell it
out:


What was the charge?