Forum

Good day!

Tell me, can anyone have experience in comparing the 2 devices?

As far as I understand, the GDV camera and Chronostop light photography, the functionality of these devices is similar. Technical base of chronoscope at the time was borrowed from GDV and improved. Chronostop making the video, and then averages the values that allows you to more accurately get results.
But on the other hand, the developers of the GDV needs to be a more reliable research base, which in theory should be better reflected in the results.

Devices GDV camera and Chronoscope the same purpose, but differ in technical execution. Technical base of Chronoscope developed hardware-independent LPS, and common solutions almost does not matter.
GDV camera is going at a higher technological level. however, in the absence of any research work since the late 90s, the technology of photography have not made any amendments that led to a radical conceptual backwardness of technologies of registration of LPS from the detection techniques of crownscopy, expressed in gross hardware errors occur during registration. http://biorezonans.3bb.ru/viewtopic.php ... p=8#p99582
Details can be found here: http://biorezonans.3bb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=48

Дмитрий В. wrote:Chronostop making the video, and then averages the values that allows you to more accurately get results.

Makes the device a few shots or one, does not depend on devices and software.
Soft Bioentek provides dynamic concept. And from a number of crowngrams turns out, not only the average but also the change in the parameters of the crown in the dynamics that reflect the response of organism to.
But this only applies to full versions of the software, Chronostop light, for example, makes only one picture, so the possibility of obtaining results in this complex is limited to the same options that have GDV camera, although it is exactly the GDV camera is superior.

Hello!

V., have You carried out as an experiment diagnosis of the same patient and on Chronoscope, and the GDV Camera, and A-Scan?
If so, how are the results?

Истерн wrote:Hello!

V., have You carried out as an experiment diagnosis of the same patient and on Chronoscope, and the GDV Camera, and A-Scan?
If so, how are the results?

I did on Chronoscope and GDV and subsequent testing frame from cosmoenerget.
With Chronoscope insights on 90% coincide with the frame. From the GDV the match by 60%.
It all depends on how you obtained the result will dispose of. I think, and GDV would be enough.
Chronoscope is cal. adaptation, I think is their trick.
Chronostop a week before the symptoms showed the customer the problems with the rectum, in 3 months have another customer with the prostate, were diagnosed as strong deficits in the energy centers that healers are called hexes, and so much more...

Дмитрий В. wrote: I did on Chronoscope and GDV and subsequent testing frame from cosmoenerget.
With Chronoscope insights on 90% coincide with the frame. From the GDV the match by 60%.
Chronostop a week before the symptoms showed the customer the problems with the rectum, in 3 months have another customer with the prostate, were diagnosed as strong deficits in the energy centers that healers are called hexes, and so much more...

On GDV it was seen too?

Cosmoenerget frame is to be regarded as the standard?

After removing the damage did diagnostics again to verify that the damage actually taken?

Истерн wrote:

Дмитрий В. wrote: On GDV it was seen too?

Cosmoenerget frame is to be regarded as the standard?

Also seen, the devices are similar.
About the benchmark it is better to ask a psychiatrist )))

And what GDV showed weaker than chronostop?

Истерн wrote:And a GDV showed weaker than chronostop?

I think he is weaker in accuracy. When it is discharge, you can see that the picture is often not stable. Sometimes the area just abruptly collapses due to the reaction of the body. Chronostop takes the average values, plus a separate section for the analysis of adaptation.
Here is an example from the report:

I got when testing on Chronoscope adaptation coefficient -8,86, at least the green zone showed the type of never better.
But all the indicators in the table of allocation in the red, in the black nothing.
Yes, mostly in the normal range, but many close to the lower limit of normal ( -0,6 ).
While such a high adoption rate -8,86.
Don't understand how this could be.

The adjustment coefficient shows the condition of the body, and the willingness/ability of an organism to adapt to the changing conditions.
I.e., coefficient adaptation, this current body's ability "to hold blow"

Does the diagnosis result of the fact that the operator several times asked to reshoot some fingers due to the fact that there are supposedly “breakdown”?
Some of the fingers he asked to re-shoot 3-4 times while they get the picture without breakdown.
But the breakdown could be the right result?

Of course influences. Registration, especially long-term (dynamic) - exposure.
In order not to reshoot, you have a touching care about the cleanliness of the electrode prior to registration. A more correct-use the correct methods of registration that excludes such incidents.

Викторович wrote:And correctly-use the correct methods of registration that excludes such incidents.

What are the correct methods? Testing was Chronoscope.

Истерн wrote:What are the correct methods? Testing was Chronoscope.

Modern equipment LPS does not provide a valid registration from the settings and design features.
And about you read. ) http://biorezonans.3bb.ru/viewtopic.php ... 11#p139783 http://biorezonans.3bb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=48
On Chronoscope it can be done. but to comment on how to do it, I will not, so as not to violate copyright.)
Although, in the current version, if to monitor the cleanliness of the electrode - it turns out well. (better than the equipment LPS)

Дмитрий В. wrote:When it is discharge, you can see that the picture is often not stable.

The accuracy of the picture depends on the duration of the camera exposure and the frequency of the pulse generator. So for reliability there is no difference between a large number osrednjimi images with low frequency pulse generator and a single picture at slow shutter speeds and sufficient frequency of the generator.
..
The problem is that the equipment KTI neither of sufficient frequency nor of averaging, but there is excess voltage. Cm. about the streamers: http://biorezonans.3bb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=48#p4609

A tricky question to everyone: is able and willing to participate as a programmer in creating a software GDV-complex? My hand graphics, design, algorithms, and hardware.