Paintball

[raehl]

Originally Posted by Gabe

The whole pull and release thing seems a bit outdated as we now walk the triggers of guns. If one finger is still down on the trigger when the other comes down then you don't get a shot. A touch pad trigger would allow the gun to fire even if the other finger was still down.

As long as the gun fires once every time a finger forcefully touches the firing interface then what's the big deal?

Yes, that would let you fire faster.

So does ramping.

We don't need anything that lets people fire faster. And if you think we do, why bother with a touchpad when ramping will do?

The other problem with a touchpad is regulating how many shots can queue up - and what counts as a touch. If I have on a glove with a ridge on my fingertip, do I now get two shots per touch, for example?

- Chris

[Nicad]

Originally Posted by manike

Great stuff Colin! Wanna come visit me in NJ so I can film it? I might have some other good stuff to talk to you about too following on from our previous conversations... Heck come up for a weekend and we'll go fishing in the spring. Or I might be coming to Houston for the PSP?...

How light is your trigger? If you point it at the sky and shake the gun does it fire?

I know when you point it at the ground it will ... I still owe you for shooting me in the foot you bugger.

p.s. I've also been wanting to visit Hawaii. Maybe I need to make that trip this year.

Would love to come visit sometime.. maybe soon if I can ever get a break!! Yes I managed to shoot you in the foot. I would say I am sorry, except that I am proud of it, so HA! That was also like... 72 years ago?? heheh
The hAir trigger mag did not shoot by itself when bumping the gun, pointing up, down, or... west.

Having watched the slow-mo of the mini trigger pulling, it is quite amazing how much physical bouncing the trigger and fingers do when "slammed" into the backstop.
I am suppose to visit Clare sometime this year too. Too much to do, too little time. Maybe we can all go hang out in Hawaii? I like that idea.

[Sir Brass]

Originally Posted by drg

The Nyquist rate really has tangential application here, as we are not interested in alias-free signal processing. Regardless, the rate Manike is suggesting we look for -- 13 trigger pulls per second -- is well within the 2x/frequency question of the 30 fps/60i video, and obviously well within the 44,000 samples/sec audio.

Actually, we ARE. We're trying to absolutely show the correlation between finger pull, trigger activation, valve cycle and output rate. Basically, find the correlation between the trigger PULL rate and the marker's output rate.

I think zak's method of audio analysis and manike's method of high speed video analysis are fantastic. I'm partial to both. Analysis using dsp methods is just downright FUN.

<----engi-nerd and proud of it

Though your assertion that we NOT care about aliasing belies that you don't understand what aliasing can DO to the visual data: it obscures it, or otherwise makes for serious scientific DOUBT as to what you're trying to prove.

With that said, though, I'd love to see a marker fired PRECISELY at 30 fps. It'd be great to see the aliasing of the pball stream: thinking you see balls moving backwards and forwards in the "ball stream" and all that.

drg, you're among the peerage of engineers and other detail-oriented folk. We're also known for being both obstinate, and even worse......RIGHT. Combine those two, and you'll never win the argument

[drg]

Originally Posted by Sir Brass

Actually, we ARE. We're trying to absolutely show the correlation between finger pull, trigger activation, valve cycle and output rate. Basically, find the correlation between the trigger PULL rate and the marker's output rate.

False. We are looking for the trigger pull rate. Period.

Originally Posted by Sir Brass

I think zak's method of audio analysis and manike's method of high speed video analysis are fantastic. I'm partial to both. Analysis using dsp methods is just downright FUN.

<----engi-nerd and proud of it

Though your assertion that we NOT care about aliasing belies that you don't understand what aliasing can DO to the visual data: it obscures it, or otherwise makes for serious scientific DOUBT as to what you're trying to prove.

With that said, though, I'd love to see a marker fired PRECISELY at 30 fps. It'd be great to see the aliasing of the pball stream: thinking you see balls moving backwards and forwards in the "ball stream" and all that.

drg, you're among the peerage of engineers and other detail-oriented folk. We're also known for being both obstinate, and even worse......RIGHT. Combine those two, and you'll never win the argument

So, does frequency ever increase when you undersample?

What's that, no?

Take your engineering elitism and ... apply it.

[CamoDeafie]

BPS is directly correlated to the number of balls shot per second, correlated to the number of times a trigger is pulled, so yes the poster above you, and all of the engineering guys are pretty much right. now, im not gonna get back into this thread because you have your opinion set in worse than a rock in a mountain. guys i think we can close this because in all 24 pages, NO amount of arguing, fact finding, hot air is going to change drg's mind.

[drg]

Originally Posted by CamoDeafie

BPS is directly correlated to the number of balls shot per second, correlated to the number of times a trigger is pulled, so yes the poster above you, and all of the engineering guys are pretty much right. now, im not gonna get back into this thread because you have your opinion set in worse than a rock in a mountain. guys i think we can close this because in all 24 pages, NO amount of arguing, fact finding, hot air is going to change drg's mind.

Which would mean something if we were measuring balls per second. We're not. We're measuring trigger pull frequency. So yeah your assumptions and lack of big-picture thinking, like those of all the engieering types above you, make you wrong, or at best no more right than what I am saying.

[CamoDeafie]

1) whats the topic title of this thread?

2) theyre debating on how someone can claim to do 20+ on semi auto alone by their trigger finger, which is where the correlation is.

3) if it were advertised for FULL AUTO, no one would have a problem, right?

4) these engineers have more credibility than you and i do, and im just a machinist who passed college physics and understand some basic dynamics, but i would respect what the engineers says because theyve put in their knowledge into the topic, not just the big picture, which i believe would be, the big picture being, are the BPS as accurate as what people claim theyre doing or is it software, mechanical, gnome assisted??

[drg]

Originally Posted by CamoDeafie

1) whats the topic title of this thread?

2) theyre debating on how someone can claim to do 20+ on semi auto alone by their trigger finger, which is where the correlation is.

3) if it were advertised for FULL AUTO, no one would have a problem, right?

4) these engineers have more credibility than you and i do, and im just a machinist who passed college physics and understand some basic dynamics, but i would respect what the engineers says because theyve put in their knowledge into the topic, not just the big picture, which i believe would be, the big picture being, are the BPS as accurate as what people claim theyre doing or is it software, mechanical, gnome assisted??

This is the problem with coming into a thread late and acting like you know everything about a 20 page debate.

The question we have been talking about for all those pages is not the original statement -- which is not even in this thread; something like people can't shoot legitimately faster than 8-10 bps (which I think has been completely oblitterated as an assertion by now, but I'm sure some will say no).

Manike posed the question we've been discussing, which is that nobody can sustain 13 trigger pulls per second, sustain being stipulated as over a 150-ball string.

[CamoDeafie]

ive read every reply. you havent shown a better video, you havent shown a completely more detailed video with the audio clip that can show someone sustaining at least 13 per second over a 150 ball string with some lows and some highs. Manike however, has shown a whole load of data that we can interpret, which is simply that. interpretation. since im deaf, i dont know what 10+ feels like, but my Boo Yaah frame set at 15 per second on full auto only, i can feel the frequency, and then i set it down to 10, theres a noticable difference, but does that translate to 10 balls per second, i dont know, and i dont need to know. the thing is, these people have been telling you that in their years of experience, they dont see evidence for someone legitimately shooting 13 balls per second or more without mechanical assist, mouseclick sensitivity, or anything, on a purely trigger pull set up which varies in their defination, but generally being a complete pull AND release of the trigger, not just walking. (this is also the case for using a single finger to acheive higher rate of fire on certain triggers) now, i dont walk that well, even if im fluent in sign language, but i know my old 98 RT sweet spotted was just too sensitive for a complete trigger pull, isntead, its just a "twitch", very much like the microswitch acitivation, which would be considered software assist, (in the RT's case, mechanical assist via a pneumatic device) anyways, im outta this arguement.because its circular, with one side saying no, the other saying yes and so on ad infinitum.

[drg]

Originally Posted by CamoDeafie

ive read every reply. you havent shown a better video, you havent shown a completely more detailed video with the audio clip that can show someone sustaining at least 13 per second over a 150 ball string with some lows and some highs. Manike however, has shown a whole load of data that we can interpret, which is simply that. interpretation. since im deaf, i dont know what 10+ feels like, but my Boo Yaah frame set at 15 per second on full auto only, i can feel the frequency, and then i set it down to 10, theres a noticable difference, but does that translate to 10 balls per second, i dont know, and i dont need to know. the thing is, these people have been telling you that in their years of experience, they dont see evidence for someone legitimately shooting 13 balls per second or more without mechanical assist, mouseclick sensitivity, or anything, on a purely trigger pull set up which varies in their defination, but generally being a complete pull AND release of the trigger, not just walking. (this is also the case for using a single finger to acheive higher rate of fire on certain triggers) now, i dont walk that well, even if im fluent in sign language, but i know my old 98 RT sweet spotted was just too sensitive for a complete trigger pull, isntead, its just a "twitch", very much like the microswitch acitivation, which would be considered software assist, (in the RT's case, mechanical assist via a pneumatic device) anyways, im outta this arguement.because its circular, with one side saying no, the other saying yes and so on ad infinitum.

If that has been decided on as a definition of trigger pull, it's news to me. You obviously didn't read all the replies if you think the definition of trigger pull has ever been agreed upon in this thread.

Years of experience count for crap, honestly. If you're wrong you're wrong. I've been playing paintball for 18 years, and analysing web-quality trigger rate videos for going on 3 years now; does that convince anyone I know anything? I haven't even brought it up in this thread.

BTW are you really deaf? If so then you may be missing a huge huge component of the videos, the sound, which in the slow-motion video makes for a very, very convincing presentation (to anyone who actually thinks through the implications of what he is seeing).

What's more likely? That I am actually pulling the trigger, resulting in one shot per pull, or that I'm not really pulling the trigger and the gun is bouncing exactly in sync with my fingers? In either event, I am moving my fingers clearly at a frequency of clearly 13+ per second, so why is it so hard to believe someone can sustain 13?

If you cannot hear the sound, then I really don't know what evidence you are going on, as no one has presented an illustration of the video frames alongside the sound signature on a timeline. If you have done such an analysis, please post it up.

No offense to you, but deafness makes you ill-equipped to pass judgment on something like this.