inforfun wrote: » Now this is just beautifull
Isambard wrote: » Fully agree, people don't do it anymore, granted it's not easy to see over your shoulder in some cars, I do it all the time in my Cortina though.
inforfun wrote: » Now this is just beautifulhttps://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/7450261/6d7d975c/fietsmeneer_steelt_zijn_fiets_terug.html
wonski wrote: » Looking over your shoulder doesn't mean you have turn around 180 degrees. The blind spot isn't that big ;
Lad gets arrested. Justice prevails.
Zatoichi wrote: » Why do I find that so hard to believe? Speeding through a residential neighbourhood, potentially killing any child who stepped out behind any of those cars, then knocks the thief off the bike using his car. If he were a cop he'd probably be facing disciplinary action at best.
inforfun wrote: » Same in Holland. parallel park, hill test, 3 point turn. And all that without power steering, electronic handbrakes and **** like that.
Isambard wrote: » Plus reversing around a corner
chewed wrote: » I could never understand the "reversing around a corner" move. Personally I find this dangerous! I'd rather pull into a driveway and reverse the car or do a 3 point turn, rather than blindly reverse around a corner.
Paranoid Bob wrote: » My drive has a narrow gate and opens over a footpath onto a narrow but busy road. Reversing out the gate is an absolute no-go (too dangerous for pedestrians and for traffic) so I have to reverse while turning to bring the car into the drive. I was driving around Scotland last year; there are plenty of roads in the highlands (even those marked on the map as 'A' roads) that are single track with passing places. Reversing into a passing place wile not reversing to a ditch was necessary sometimes. It is a useful skill to have.
fritzelly wrote: » Got a bit of a fish eye look to that image and looks to be pointing right if it is on the passenger side Also more than 50% of that image is the sky so you will get focusing issues and end up with dark video on sunny days
josip wrote: » So what do ye think, was this a drunk driver or not? Be warned, it's 3 minutes of your life you're not going to get back. .
inforfun wrote: » https://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/7453715/be9737aa/appmeisje_op_de_fiets.html
josip wrote: » Same as this. Point the camera more down so that there's around 20% less sky in the frame
Green_Martian wrote: » Cheers guys. Yeah it has 160 degree lens so that's why it prob looks a bit fish eye. It is point slightly to the right, just wanted to make sure it got the full width of the car/windscreen. If I point it down more to get rid of some of the sky will that not just show more of the interior dash etc. ?? Sorry if that's a stupid question
What Username Guidelines wrote: » Not a stupid question. Even if it shows more dash, it will then expose correctly. As most cameras take the average light over the whole image and adjust accordingly, if there’s a majority of sky, during bright days the stuff you want to see (cars, road, etc) will become very dark. Given it’s such a wide angle, you’re going to have extra “space” top or bottom either way and pointing it down a little won’t obscure/remove the road from view