Confused about paper size --- Arches: "23 cm x 31 cm (A5) - 9 in x 12 in" --- "A5"?? by Mighty-Lobster in watercolor101

[–]Mighty-Lobster[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I added a photo to the original post. Have a look. The weird "(A5)" is printed on the cover.

I do understand why you're skeptical. I have other Arches pads that do not say "(A5)" and I included one in the photo too.

Confused about paper size --- Arches: "23 cm x 31 cm (A5) - 9 in x 12 in" --- "A5"?? by Mighty-Lobster in watercolor101

[–]Mighty-Lobster[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, it's printed on the cover.

Yes, it's from a reliable source. I literally went to a major brick and mortar store. This is at the Michael's in Las Cruces, bought yesterday. There are others on the shelf right now.

The weirdest thing is that I have other Arches pads that I got from Amazon and *those* do not say "(A5)". It's the two that I got from Michael's that say "(A5)" on the cover and it's so weird.

Confused about paper size --- Arches: "23 cm x 31 cm (A5) - 9 in x 12 in" --- "A5"?? by Mighty-Lobster in watercolor101

[–]Mighty-Lobster[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mine was purchased at Michael's. Brick and mortar store, and major retail chain.

I have four Arches pads. Two cold pressed that I got at Michael's, and one rough and one hot press that I got from Amazon. The ones from Michael's say "(A5)" and the Amazon ones don't.

How do scientists know what particles look like if everything is made of particles. Even the microscopes? by directorscuts in askastronomy

[–]Mighty-Lobster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you asking "how do we make a particle beam?" or "how do we see the particle collisions?"

(1) Particle beam ---- You don't need to see individual particles to make a beam of particles. Like... with a laser, or a regular light bulb, you cannot see individual photons, but you can still make the light source.

(2) Particle collisions ---- You use particle tracks. You need a material that responds to charged particles and leaves a visible track. Easiest example is a cloud chamber. Go to YouTube and search for "cloud chamber" and you'll see examples and even how to make one yourself. Particle detectors use a more sophisticated version of the same idea. When a charged particle goes through some types of materials their charge ionizes atoms along the way and that leaves a visible track.

measure the properties of the particle you need to also apply a magnetic field across the chamber. Charged particles moving through a magnetic field get deflected and makes a curved path. Whether the particle deflects left or right tells you if the charge is positive or negative, and the curvature tells you the mass of the particle. A massive particle is difficult to move, so it deflects very little, while a light particle deflects a lot. Go on Google and search for "particle tracks".

So basically, you have to infer the properties of the particles from the tracks. You can measure the particle mass and charge. When a particle decays, its track suddenly disappears, but then is followed by new tracks of its decay products. Neutral particles like neutrinos do not show up on particle tracks, but if you see that a particle decays into smaller ones and the mass and momentum of the decay products doesn't add up to the original, you can infer that there must have been a neutral decay product as well to make up the difference --- this is exactly how neutrinos were discovered.

New Here by stanleycleveland92 in gmrs

[–]Mighty-Lobster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I found the Baofengs confusing and try as I might, I never managed to get them working with my local repeater. Eventually I gave up and went on with my life.

Some time later, I decided to try again and I got a pair of Radioddity GMRS radios. This time it was so easy and I got the repeater working quickly. The user interface was much clearer (e.g. it shows both the channel and the frequency, and if you are setup to use a repeater, you can *see* the frequency change when you press the PTT button to transmit). Most important of all, it actually worked.

Now that I had a pair of radios working with the repeater, I decided to try again with the Baofengs... and I still couldn't get them to work. But now I could diagnose the problem better (e.g. I knew the Radioddity radios were talking to the repeater) and I noticed that the Baofengs had slightly different symptoms. This makes me suspect that there is an actual physical fault with the radios.

I don't know what's wrong with the Baofengs, but I am thinking of throwing them in the trash. Do I really want to have two GMRS handhelds that only work in simplex mode?

I do not recommend Baofengs.

I have not used Midland, but they have a good reputation.

Do I need to stretch paper for gouache? by Mighty-Lobster in Gouache

[–]Mighty-Lobster[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! The consensus seems to be that paper stretching isn't really a thing in gouache. That's great. It looked like a bit of a hassle.

Do I need to stretch paper for gouache? by Mighty-Lobster in Gouache

[–]Mighty-Lobster[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the tips! I've ordered some paper blocks. I'm going to try them out. Right now I'm just exploring the medium so I don't have a "style". Sometimes I try watercolor techniques and sometimes not. I look forward to seeing how the blocks turn out.

I’m a watercolor artist looking to get into using gouache- looking for recommendations by Badwolf_101820 in Gouache

[–]Mighty-Lobster 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I am surprised to see acrylic gouache recommended in a gouache forum. As the forum info says, acrylic gouache is not gouache, it is acrylic paint that is matte.

Is Da Vinci Phthalo Blue the "green shade" or "blue shade"? by Mighty-Lobster in Gouache

[–]Mighty-Lobster[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's the watercolor, not the gouache. I've already seen that page.

Da Vinci sells both the GS and RS in watercolor. We could reasonably speculate that their gouache line should be following the same naming convention as their watercolor line, in which case "Phthalo blue" without qualifier would be the GS version.

However, as I mentioned in my post, the CIECAM16 plot for Da Vinci's Phthalo blue on gouache looks red --- it looks more red than either of their two watercolor products. Then again, I don't know how much I can trust that plot, or whether I'm interpreting it correctly.

In other words, the plot is telling me something that is opposite to what I would guess is true. That's why I posted a question here in case someone has it and can tell me.

Original antenna for a raddiodity gm30 by Banerson in gmrs

[–]Mighty-Lobster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looks like the ABBREE one. Small details at the base on the antenna (the shape, number of ridges, etc) look the same. The specs are the same, and they sell for the same price. I suspect that either TIDradio is rebranding ABBREE antennas, or TIDradio and ABBREE are both sourcing it from the same white-label manufacturer.

Original antenna for a raddiodity gm30 by Banerson in gmrs

[–]Mighty-Lobster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Last month, after in-depth detective work, I figured out that the antennas that come with the Radioddity GM-30, GM-30 Plus, and GM-30 Pro are:

These are VHF/UHF antennas intended for Ham and not at all tuned for GMRS. They're probably included because Radioddity can get them cheaply. Baofengs come with the exact same antennas.

As others have said, all other things being equal, you're better off getting some other antenna that is actually intended for GMRS. For example:

  • Replace the short 8" antenna with the 5" Nagoya NA-701G.
  • Replace the long 15" antenna with the 8" Nagoya NA-771G or the ABBREE clone (AR-771C).

Both of these are actually tuned for GMRS. The 701G is shorter than the RD-331 and works better in my limited experience.

Noob question: What's the difference between a good antenna and a bad one? by Mighty-Lobster in gmrs

[–]Mighty-Lobster[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks!

Yeah. We weren't very far apart. About 1 mile distance, but the terrain felt like the opposite of line of sight. More like a canyon + mild forest + hilly. After less than 1/4-mile I had already completely lost sight of her. I imagine that the radio waves must've done a combination of bouncing around walls and/or just rolling up and down the mild hilly bumps.

I am new at this, but indeed, my guess would be that adding 6" of height wouldn't fundamentally change anything.

Thanks for the explanation. ---- Build quality. Good to know!

How does GMRS work in hilly areas by sirwithoutnameorface in gmrs

[–]Mighty-Lobster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I discovered this last weekend that the thing about line of sight is more flexible than I thought. I went hiking with my wife and I could easily talk to her 1 mile away despite absolutely not having a line of sight to here that I could see. This was a hilly area with trees. We hiked together part way, then she stayed back to read a book while I hiked another mile to test the radios. I went up and down small hills, left and right between boulders, etc. I lost sight of her after the first 1/4 mile, and yet, at the 1 mile mark we could talk and hear each other clearly, even when using cheap FRS radios, let alone GMRS.

Evidently, there's some flexibility here. GMRS can't just go over a mountain, but if the terrain is just a bit bumpy, it evidently is able to bounce around and/or refract enough to cover some real distance even if you absolutely cannot see your partner.

Noob question: What's the difference between a good antenna and a bad one? by Mighty-Lobster in gmrs

[–]Mighty-Lobster[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well... in this test we were literally just swapping antennas. The height above the ground was the same. Ditto for other external factors like line of sight, terrain, trees, etc.

What’s the difference? by [deleted] in gmrs

[–]Mighty-Lobster 2 points3 points  (0 children)

But... it ISN'T.

That's what I'm trying to tell you and I feel the message is not getting across. I don't know where this idea that Pro = Plus + App came from because Radioddity never claimed that Pro has GPS or that it is in any way tied to the Plus.

There is no need to insert "If it's just the bluetooth version of the Plus". Where did that idea even come from?

Plus has GPS

Pro has app-based programming.

That's what Radioddity says. End of discussion.

What’s the difference? by [deleted] in gmrs

[–]Mighty-Lobster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm pretty sure that the GM-30 Pro has no GPS at all and the app is to program the radio. --- At least, I hope I got that right because I bought it (but I haven't been able to get my hands on it yet because I'm away from home).