On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea that
> this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer shitty
> but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <davidkna...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a
>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in framerate...
>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away with
>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up and
>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the idea
>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG and
>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get in on
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.