How do you slip on loose gravel like it was smooth ice without moving a single rock? (that I can see at least)
I'm suspicious this is a fake.
The story, they took the garage door opener out of the car and left it in the garage, also makes no sense. Why would someone ever do that?
Then, why would they publicly share the video of themselves falling? And why is there an ADT logo on the video?
Highly suspicious.

I could speculate that it's because many European languages (including German) spell it that way? Even in English it was the dominant spelling until the 1890s (at least according to the google NGRA
M viewer.

Re the actual video, it takes a few cancelled trains before my line gets that crowded. It would be interesting to know if this was normal for this line.

Got to *promote something that goes so smoothly from "that wouldn't work" to "nice" to "ooh" to "euaaaaaaaaagh"'. These are literally my utterances over the past 5 minutes.

Without context the bodies in the hall add so much too.

Congratulations! Your video, Tom Cruise Hates Motion Smoothing, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 31 Badge!

The Space Pope is right! Motion smoothing sucks.

I think it was originally intended for sports broadcasts that were 1080i (interlaced), and fast left-right camera pans would create a lot of tearing.

I hate smoothing (soap-opera-effect) too.
I have a friend who likes it though, and got mad at me when I changed his TV settings to disable it.

Your video, Tom Cruise Hates Motion Smoothing, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 26 Badge!

I don't like the smoothing too.

There's a whole specialty field called "display calibration" that goes deep, deep down this rabbit hole. And yes, they (Tom Cruise and the guy whose name you can't hear because Tom interrupts him) are correct. Motion smoothing is violating image fidelity. It should be turned off.

We are stuck with 24 frames per second in movies, forever. Peter Jackson tried 48 frames per second with The Hobbit. It failed because it felt like the "soap opera effect".

But in almost all other video contexts, more FPS is better. Obviously in gaming more is better. YouTube supports up to 60 FPS, as does most decent recording software these days.

The blue shift that almost every TV has when on display is also a result of funky default settings. The human eye perceives a blue light as slightly brighter than a full spectrum light with the same intensity. So it works to sell TVs. And when you switch it off the default color scheme, you're first impression will be that the picture looks muted or even yellowish. This is because you are accustomed to seeing way to much blue.

If you are a true video aficionado, you'll get yourself a color meter for a few hundred bucks and do an amateur display calibration on your set.

If you are a video psycho (of if you sell faithful video experiences to an audience like in a theater) you'll hire a professional to come out with a high end spectrophotometer and calibrate each display input properly using a standardized video source.

YES! Whoever invented motion smoothing is a monster. It's the worst thing to happen to cinema since colorization. It wouldn't be so bad if it weren't turned on by default, which means that a whole bunch of people who aren't tech-savvy wind up leaving it on and then wonder why movies look so weird.

I got interested in the economics of that refurb.

Looks like a new Gressel vice of roughly the same type can be bought for 550 Francs, which is just very slightly more than 550 US Dollars.

Nothing specific is said about time spent on the repair, other than getting off that one plate took "30 minutes of hammering", which is cut down to roughly 10 seconds of video. I figure that was a particularly time consuming caper to end up being the only thing shown where time spent was specifically mentioned. Some tiny bits of what we saw were roughly real-time, where all the work spent on a specific item was shown 1:1 in the video. But, lots of other stuff was probably somewhere between that 10 seconds : 30 minutes and 1:1 range.

I think a very conservative guess would be that each minute of video represented at least 30 minutes of work. So, 17 minute video x 30 = 510 minutes. Divided by 60 = 8.5 hours. As an extremely conservative estimate -- could easily be five or ten times that, particularly with lawyer-type "billable hours" consideration on what constitutes "work time".

But with that conservative estimate, he worked for (at the very least) 8.5 hours to repair something that could have been replaced for $550. Not including the new replacement smooth grips, etc. That's about $65 per hour. For extremely skilled labor.

I'm not mocking that at all -- I actually agree that it was quite satisfying to watch. But I think that just reaffirms that there must have been some real passion for the work there to decide to go through that very fiddly and skilled labor for what was likely much more than 8.5 hours rather than buying a new one and calling it a day. Not much of that kind of work ethic left these days -- and I sure as hell include myself in that!

That United pilot was one with his plane. So smooth and soft, I bet it was a woman pilot.

Dayum! Give that guy some promotion! That was hella smooth!

What a pleasure to watch a video that's steady, smooth and clear. Although it's vertical I think it works with what's going on. Kudos to the cameraman!

Great title also!