Message digest for news.povray.org

[Warp] Re: A question about Java generics (not a flame) [30 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 13:16:07 GMT

Fredrik Eriksson <fe79}--at--{yahoo}--dot--{com> wrote:
> >   I have to admit I don't know if the C++ standard requires the  
> > environment of the instantation of the template when compiling the
> > template function or not.

> When parsing the template definition, only non-dependent names are looked  
> up. Dependent names are looked up at the instantiation point; at that  
> point both contexts are needed.

  Actually that's not what the C++ standard says. This is the relevant
part of the standard:

    A specialization for a function template, a member
    function template, or of a member function or static
    data member of a class template may have multiple points
    of instantiations within a translation unit. A
    specialization for a class template has at most one
    point of instantiation within a translation unit. A
    specialization for any template may have points of
    instantiation in multiple translation units. If two
    different points of instantiation give a template
    specialization different meanings according to the one
    definition rule (3.2), the program is ill-formed, no
    diagnostic required.

  In short: If the context causes a template instantiation to produce
different results, the program is ill-formed. In other words, the
result is undefined behavior, and the compiler can do whatever it wants.

  I understand this to also mean that the compiler is allowed to compile
an export template just once even if it's instantiated at several places,
using the context of one of those places.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

[Stephen] Beta26 GUI Extensions [52 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 12:54:14 GMT

I installed Beta26 over Beta25 and was given a warning (?) to install
it with the /INSTALL option. I did this and although Bishop3D starts
pvengine-sse2.exe it will not run the generated pov file. I
reinstalled Beta26 in a separate directory and I am still using
Beta25.
OK. I know that using two Beta programmes is not the best idea in the
world. But Beta25 did render even if it did not send the image back to
Bishop3D.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

[Stephen] Re: Valid solution or evil hack? [1 hour and 35 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 12:10:59 GMT

On Fri, 16 May 2008 09:19:07 +0100, Invisible <void [at] devnull> wrote:

>Stephen wrote:
>
>> He said "more" reliable. Have you heard of tolerances?
>
>Yeah.
>
>Did you know 10% resistors show a curios bimodel distribution?
>
>Wanna guess where the 5% resistors come from? ;-)
>
>[And they charge you more for that stuff...]

When I worked in the semiconductor industry (CMOS chips) the sorting
was done by individual sampling after the ICs were encapsulated.
Resistors and caps were by materials used in manufacturing. But that
was when the Ark was new :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

[Phil Cook] Re: Small Crymod contest [1 hour and 53 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 11:53:38 GMT

And lo on Fri, 16 May 2008 11:53:30 +0100, scott <scott [at] scottcom> did  
spake, saying:

>>     Yes, good idea! I'm thinking of maybe something like these:
>>
>>      http://www.pbase.com/eldarrio/image/80781159
>>
>>     http://www.coloradomountainman.com/mountainscenery.html
>>
>>     What do you think? I quite like that first link.
>
> Yes, I do too, but maybe the judges will be looking for something that  
> shows off the CryEngine more, ie something with more trees :-)

On the other hand that's what everyone else might think and the judges  
will be flicking through hundreds of shots of trees and foliage, on the  
other other hand people might realise that and thus produce lots of rocky  
type shots; on the other other other hand though... :-)

The third photo on the second link I'd think impressive to duplicate,  
trees, ground, sky, water and a structure.

Oh and break a leg.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

[Phil Cook] Re: shake reduction -66KB [2 hours ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 11:45:57 GMT

And lo on Thu, 15 May 2008 20:47:11 +0100, Jim Henderson  
<nospam [at] nospamcom> did spake, saying:

> On Thu, 15 May 2008 08:52:42 -0400, Warp wrote:
>
>> Jim Henderson <nospam [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>> composite the pictures together.
>>
>>   Somehow I have never liked that type of post-processing in
>>   photography.
>> It gives me the feeling that the photo has been faked.
>>
>>   It's a bit like you took an image rendered with povray and then added
>> some lens flare effect with photoshop and then called it a "povray
>> image". Yes, part of the image was made with povray, but part of the
>> effect has been "faked", so it's not a pure povray image. It feels kind
>> of cheating.
>
> I think it depends on how well the compositing is done - most people
> don't do a good job with it, though, so it tends to look faked.
>
> But if not a composite, then what would be the way to get rid of the
> bloom in the window without losing the details in the darker parts of the
> image?

You can try and fake it to an extent from the one image. Here I created a  
gradient mask centred on the lighter building and then tweaked the  
histogram levels to match it in tone to the surroundings while keeping the  
struts visible. It was only a quickie about two minutes tops, with more  
time and more tweaking it would be possible to do more. Does it look  
fake/better/worse?

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

[Rarius] Problems with help [2 hours and 39 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 11:07:17 GMT

I have just installed Beta26 just the same as I did Betas 20-25 i.e. I 
copied the contents of the ZIP over the top of the previous \bin directory.

While 3.6.1c still works (I renamed the exe before installing any betas) and 
beta25 worked fine, beta26 exhibits the following issue:  Pressing the help 
buttons ("POV-Win" or "Scene") on the toolbar dont do anything.

I checked the registry key and it is pointing to the correct directory 
(C:\WinPov)

Anything else I should check?

Rarius

[scott] Re: Small Crymod contest [2 hours and 53 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 10:53:31 GMT

>     Yes, good idea! I'm thinking of maybe something like these:
>
>      http://www.pbase.com/eldarrio/image/80781159
>
>     http://www.coloradomountainman.com/mountainscenery.html
>
>     What do you think? I quite like that first link.

Yes, I do too, but maybe the judges will be looking for something that shows 
off the CryEngine more, ie something with more trees :-)

[St ] Re: Rocket Man [4 hours and 42 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 09:04:02 GMT

"Phil Cook" <phil [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote in message 
news:op.ua8nidmac3xi7v@news.povray.org...
> And lo on Fri, 16 May 2008 09:25:46 +0100, St. <dot [at] dotcom> did spake, 
> saying:
>
>> "Phil Cook" <phil [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote in message
>> news:op.ua8lpiz6c3xi7v@news.povray.org...
>>> And lo on Thu, 15 May 2008 18:05:14 +0100, St. <dot [at] dotcom> did spake,
>>> saying:

>>    Yeah, I thought it might be a little late. He was saying that he 
>> wanted to launch from some mountain somewhere,
>
> Base jumping with a 'rocket pack', yee ha!

     LOL!  :o)


>> and try for the full loop. So he
>> must have some extra power available because I don't think he'll do it at
>> 186mph.
>
> I was going to say I thought'd he done that already, but it was a roll 
> instead; try that in a powered hang-glider :-P

    No way! I'll leave that to Tom Galvin! :)

    ~Steve~



>
> -- 
> Phil Cook
>
> --
> I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
> http://flipc.blogspot.com

[St ] Re: Small Crymod contest [4 hours and 47 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 08:58:59 GMT

"scott" <scott [at] scottcom> wrote in message news:482d30e2@news.povray.org...
>>
>>
http://www.crymod.com/thread.php?threadid=27580&sid=1c2ef1d092306facd49667bb71bb2871
>
> I don't understand why they can't get the contrast/brightness correct in 
> computer games, the contrast is always way too low and often not bright 
> enough (compared to a photo).  In the first CryMod shot on that page, if 
> you load it into PaintShop and fiddle with the levels you can easily get 
> something that looks way more realistic.

      Yes, I noticed this too. Strange really because you can change 
brightness and contrast within the actual game itself, so that's where my 
shot will come from instead of inside the editor. ;)


>
>>   I'm going to have a go at this as I think I might have a chance. 
>> Interesting challenge though.
>>
>>    Wish me luck Povers! :)
>
> Good luck!

      Heh, thanks. :)


>
> PS - if you're not allowed to mod the CryMod shots, mod the photo first so 
> that it matches the brightness/contrast of the CryMod shot :-)

     Yes, good idea! I'm thinking of maybe something like these:

      http://www.pbase.com/eldarrio/image/80781159

     http://www.coloradomountainman.com/mountainscenery.html

     What do you think? I quite like that first link.

     ~Steve~

[Phil Cook] Re: Rocket Man [5 hours and 10 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 08:36:32 GMT

And lo on Fri, 16 May 2008 09:25:46 +0100, St. <dot [at] dotcom> did spake,  
saying:

> "Phil Cook" <phil [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote in message
> news:op.ua8lpiz6c3xi7v@news.povray.org...
>> And lo on Thu, 15 May 2008 18:05:14 +0100, St. <dot [at] dotcom> did spake,
>> saying:
>
>>>      Hmm, you probably missed that, but I bet he's on the telly  
>>> tonight.
>>> It's hot on the 'net apparently.
>>
>> Yep I'd just powered everything off to go home, didn't catch the news
>> either as I went out pretty much straight after.
>
>    Yeah, I thought it might be a little late. He was saying that he  
> wanted to launch from some mountain somewhere,

Base jumping with a 'rocket pack', yee ha!

> and try for the full loop. So he
> must have some extra power available because I don't think he'll do it at
> 186mph.

I was going to say I thought'd he done that already, but it was a roll  
instead; try that in a powered hang-glider :-P

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

[St ] Re: Rocket Man [5 hours and 20 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 08:25:58 GMT

"Phil Cook" <phil [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote in message 
news:op.ua8lpiz6c3xi7v@news.povray.org...
> And lo on Thu, 15 May 2008 18:05:14 +0100, St. <dot [at] dotcom> did spake, 
> saying:

>>      Hmm, you probably missed that, but I bet he's on the telly tonight.
>> It's hot on the 'net apparently.
>
> Yep I'd just powered everything off to go home, didn't catch the news 
> either as I went out pretty much straight after.

   Yeah, I thought it might be a little late. He was saying that he wanted 
to launch from some mountain somewhere, and try for the full loop. So he 
must have some extra power available because I don't think he'll do it at 
186mph.

    ~Steve~


>
> -- 
> Phil Cook
>
> --
> I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
> http://flipc.blogspot.com

[St ] Re: Bombed! [5 hours and 22 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 08:24:08 GMT

Well, it stopped about midnight last night at just under 4000. Thankfully, 
nothing this morning!  :o)

   ~Steve~

[Invisible] Re: Valid solution or evil hack? [5 hours and 27 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 08:19:07 GMT

Stephen wrote:

> He said "more" reliable. Have you heard of tolerances?

Yeah.

Did you know 10% resistors show a curios bimodel distribution?

Wanna guess where the 5% resistors come from? ;-)

[And they charge you more for that stuff...]

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

[Invisible] Re: Valid solution or evil hack? [5 hours and 28 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 08:18:05 GMT

> The tiny plugs/sockets that are used inside laptops and mobile phones 
> etc often have a designed lifetime of just *ONE* operation!  It means 
> everything can be made much smaller and thinner and hence cheaper, but 
> of course you wouldn't use one of these if you were expecting to 
> actually use the plug regularly.

I think my grandparents have used up the one connection on their mobile 
phone. It is simply no longer possible to get a reliable USB connection. 
You have to try about 8 or 9 times. The connector is just useless...

>> I'm just wondering whether they actually did anything different at all 
>> for the extra money, that's all.
> 
> Well they must have done if they are guaranteeing it for critical use.  
> If they didn't they risk being in a lot of trouble when things do fail 
> (or maybe there is even some law that is relevant, I don't know).  Are 
> they ISO 9000 accredited?

That's the thing. I don't *think* the company in question is actually 
guaranteeing it will work. They're just charging lots of money. We're 
the ones who do all the calibration checking and so forth.

>> [Seriously - WTF does a mass spectrometer even have in it? It's just 
>> an empty tube, some vacuum pumps, an electrode and some magnets. So is 
>> my TV! Well, apart from the vacuum pumps anyway... And yet, my TV 
>> doesn't cost more than a small housing estate. Wuh??]
> 
> How many TVs do you think have been made in total?  How many mass 
> spectrometers?

If you were asking "particle accelerators", it would be a different 
story. ;-) Mass spectrometers are fairly rare, but not all that rare. 
Although obviously rarer than TVs.

> What do you think is the tolerance on TVs?  Would you care if the green 
> on the UK weather map looks a slightly different shade to your neighbour?

That might have something to do with it...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

[Warp] Re: I don't know what's worse ... [5 hours and 32 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 08:14:43 GMT

Invisible <void [at] devnull> wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

> > I wonder if Bill Gates can code his way out of a paper bag nowadays?

> You think he could originally??

  Bill Gates was a computer programmer in the 70's and participated in
developing, among other things, a BASIC interpreter.

  (However, how *competent* as a programmer he was is another question.)

> As I understand it, every product his name has ever been associated with 
> was actually stolen from somebody or other...

  Do you have any hard evidence of this? For example on that BASIC
interpreter.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

[Phil Cook] Re: evil TV commercials [5 hours and 33 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 08:12:59 GMT

And lo on Thu, 15 May 2008 20:41:13 +0100, Jim Henderson  
<nospam [at] nospamcom> did spake, saying:

> On Wed, 14 May 2008 23:12:11 -0400, Sabrina Kilian wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 May 2008 23:58:45 -0400, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>
>>> This is true of many drugs in general, IMHO.
>>>
>> Yup, at least here in the USA. Every drug has a theme and a catchy new
>> name for a disorder that's been around for a long time. But the one with
>> the catchiest words gets prescribed.
>
> Yeah, and that's a huge societal problem.

Just because the people being advertised at have no ability to make an  
objective choice over these medications doesn't mean they shouldn't be  
advertised in the same way as shampoo or washing powder. Just as for them  
if the product doesn't work for you just switch; no harm done right?  
[cough]

>>> Just look at the number of Ritalin scripts written in the 90's in the
>>> US.  Many of the kids who this (or other ADD-"fighting" drugs) was
>>> prescribed for didn't actually need it.
<snip>
> My wife wanted to bitch-slap her for that....How can you not hug your own
> kid?

At times you have to wonder how many of these 'disorders' are parentally  
caused.

<snip>
> But the thing that really disturbs me is the advertising "ask your
> doctor if Vaxodrine is right for you" - why SHOULD I?  Is that why my
> DOCTOR is my DOCTOR?  He's the one who went to medical school, not me.

Ah but your doctor may be in the pay of an evil anti-Vaxodrine company,  
it's your choice, nay right, to be given the medication that spends the  
most on advertising.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

[Invisible] Re: I don't know what's worse ... [5 hours and 36 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 08:10:20 GMT

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

> I wonder if Bill Gates can code his way out of a paper bag nowadays?

You think he could originally??

As I understand it, every product his name has ever been associated with 
was actually stolen from somebody or other...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

[Phil Cook] Re: Rocket Man [5 hours and 45 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 08:01:49 GMT

And lo on Fri, 16 May 2008 00:25:32 +0100, M_a_r_c  
<jacquier.marcNOSPAM [at] wanadoofr> did spake, saying:

>
> "Darren New" <dnew [at] sanrrcom> a &#195;&#169;crit dans le message de news:
> 482c839c$1@news.povray.org...
>> In principle, a Honda Civic is the same as an Indy 500 Formula 1, too.
>> One's just more exciting than the other, I guess. :-)
>>
> Which one? :p

Mmm Honda Civic [drool] :-P

But yeah I think the 141+ mph difference would mark it as distinctive from  
a powered hang-glider in the same way a F14 is distinct from a Sopworth  
Camel.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

[Phil Cook] Re: Rocket Man [5 hours and 49 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 07:57:04 GMT

And lo on Thu, 15 May 2008 18:05:14 +0100, St. <dot [at] dotcom> did spake,  
saying:

> "St." <dot [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:482c6446@news.povray.org...
>
>> Phil, the guy is talking about it on radio 2 right now!
>
>      Hmm, you probably missed that, but I bet he's on the telly tonight.
> It's hot on the 'net apparently.

Yep I'd just powered everything off to go home, didn't catch the news  
either as I went out pretty much straight after.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

[scott] Re: Small Crymod contest [6 hours and 47 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 06:59:46 GMT

> 
> http://www.crymod.com/thread.php?threadid=27580&sid=1c2ef1d092306facd49667bb71bb2871

I don't understand why they can't get the contrast/brightness correct in 
computer games, the contrast is always way too low and often not bright 
enough (compared to a photo).  In the first CryMod shot on that page, if you 
load it into PaintShop and fiddle with the levels you can easily get 
something that looks way more realistic.

>   I'm going to have a go at this as I think I might have a chance. 
> Interesting challenge though.
>
>    Wish me luck Povers! :)

Good luck!

PS - if you're not allowed to mod the CryMod shots, mod the photo first so 
that it matches the brightness/contrast of the CryMod shot :-)

[scott] Re: Valid solution or evil hack? [6 hours and 53 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 06:53:12 GMT

> A women approaches a company that make bespoke wooden doors for a new 
> front door. She can't buy an off-the-rack for &#194;&#163;100 because they're two 
> inches too narrow, they quote her a price of &#194;&#163;250. She blows her top 
> shouting "You're charging me &#194;&#163;150 for those two extra inches" and storms 
> off never to return.
>
> The moral, of course, is that she wasn't be charged an extra &#194;&#163;150 she was

> being charged &#194;&#163;250 to have workmen create for her a uniquely sized door 
> from scratch.

Hehe, or a more extreme example would be wandering into PC World and saying 
you want a 1921x1200 resolution monitor custom made.  Ermm, that will be 
several million pounds sir.

[scott] Re: Valid solution or evil hack? [6 hours and 55 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 06:50:58 GMT

> This somewhat implies that normal stuff is designed to be UNreliable. ;-)

Of course it is, everything has a designed lifetime, even the on/off button 
on the front of your computer.  Why put a switch that is guaranteed to have 
a minimum of 1 million operations over -40 to 100&#176;C on an ordinary PC?  Some 
situations call for this sort of reliability though, and you pay for it.

The tiny plugs/sockets that are used inside laptops and mobile phones etc 
often have a designed lifetime of just *ONE* operation!  It means everything 
can be made much smaller and thinner and hence cheaper, but of course you 
wouldn't use one of these if you were expecting to actually use the plug 
regularly.

> I'm just wondering whether they actually did anything different at all for 
> the extra money, that's all.

Well they must have done if they are guaranteeing it for critical use.  If 
they didn't they risk being in a lot of trouble when things do fail (or 
maybe there is even some law that is relevant, I don't know).  Are they ISO 
9000 accredited?

> It's like when you order stuff online. You can pay &#163;2, and they tell you 
> it'll take up to 15 days to arrive. But actually it arrives within 12 
> hours. Or you can pay &#163;15 to have it guaranteed to arrive within 12 hours. 
> And it still arrives within 12 hours. Do they actually do anything 
> different? Or is it just a tax on stupidity?

Again, paying extra is guaranteeing next day delivery, it means more work 
for them, more work for the delivery company, and hence is more expensive. 
Of course if they happen to have space on the truck they'll probably fill it 
up with non-next-day orders - but it's not guaranteed.  If the truck is full 
and they still have next day orders to ship, they get another truck over, 
which isn't free.

> [Seriously - WTF does a mass spectrometer even have in it? It's just an 
> empty tube, some vacuum pumps, an electrode and some magnets. So is my TV! 
> Well, apart from the vacuum pumps anyway... And yet, my TV doesn't cost 
> more than a small housing estate. Wuh??]

How many TVs do you think have been made in total?  How many mass 
spectrometers?

What do you think is the tolerance on TVs?  Would you care if the green on 
the UK weather map looks a slightly different shade to your neighbour?

[Warp] Re: A question about Java generics (not a flame) [7 hours ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 06:46:09 GMT

Warp <warp [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> foo.cc:
> export template<typename T>
> void foo(T t) { bar(t); }

> a.cc:
> export template<typename T>
> void foo(T t);

> void bar(int i);

> void a() { foo(5); }

> b.cc:
> export template<typename T>
> void foo(T t);

> void bar(long i);

> void b() { foo(5); }

>   I see how that could make some difference.

  Actually this isn't as simple after all. I made some tests with gcc,
and I'm getting rather curious results.

  In one file I have this:

// ----- file1.cc -----
#include <iostream>

template<typename T>
void foo(T t)
{
    bar(t);
}

void bar(int i) { std::cout << "int: " << i << std::endl; }

void b();

int main()
{
    foo(5);
    b();
}
// --------------------

  And in another file I have this:

// ----- file2.cc -----
#include <iostream>

template<typename T>
void foo(T t)
{
    bar(t);
}

void bar(long i) { std::cout << "long: " << i << std::endl; }

void b()
{
    foo(7);
}
// --------------------

  When I run this program I get the expected result:

int: 5
long: 7

  However, this happens because gcc is inlining the template function in
both cases. If I stop it from being able to inline the function, curious
things happen. This can be done, for example, by adding a static variable
inside the function, so that the function becomes, in both cases:

template<typename T>
void foo(T t)
{
    static int count = 0;
    std::cout << "count: " << ++count << std::endl;
    bar(t);
}

  Now, what do you think the output is? Rather surprisingly:

count: 1
int: 5
count: 2
int: 7

  Which one of the two instances of foo() is called depends on which .cc
file is specified first. The other one is ignored.

  This is even so if the implementations of foo() are different (which answers
that question). For example, if I make the one in the first file like this:

template<typename T>
void foo(T t)
{
    static int count = 0;
    std::cout << "count(1): " << ++count << std::endl;
    bar(t);
}

and the second one like this:

template<typename T>
void foo(T t)
{
    static int count = 0;
    std::cout << "count(2): " << ++count << std::endl;
    bar(t);
}

the output will be:

count(1): 1
int: 5
count(1): 2
int: 7

  Only the first foo() function is used, the second one is completely
ignored.

  I have to admit I don't know if gcc is behaving correctly here. However,
I can see how this could be the case also with export templates: Even if
the context of the instantiation changes, it might not matter. It may still
be so that only one instantiation is used throughout the program (and thus
the export template has to be compiled once even if it's instantiated several
times).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

[Warp] Re: shake reduction [7 hours and 41 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 06:05:35 GMT

Jim Charter <jrcsurvey [at] msncom> wrote:
> Hmmm, I suppose, but I also thought that the lines of people ready to 
> muse upon truth and artifice in photography were wide and deep. Analogue 
> cameras were bad enough, but now that the capture is digital and 
> probably filtered digitally from the start, at least that is what I 
> assume my camera's different shooting 'modes' are,...it seems that 
> 'faked' is an increasingly relative term.

  I still consider there to be a difference between, for example, a white
balance filter and, for example, compositing an image from several source
images. There's a drastic difference between those two. The latter has
something the camera didn't "see" (at least not at one single shot), so
it has a sense of "faking" to it.

  A very wide panoramic image which has been composed of several images
taken in quick succession is a rather border case. Personally I consider
it "faked, but it doesn't bother me too much".

-- 
                                                          - Warp

[Warp] Re: MCPov web page (montecarlo path tracing patch) [7 hours and 50 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 05:56:29 GMT

fidos <fidos [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
> - It uses a fast high-quality RNG as provided by Wrap.

  Who?-)

  (Btw, it would be interesting to see some side-by-side comparisons,
to see if there's any visual or rendertime differences compared to the
older version.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

[Sven Littkowski] Re: bulging icosphere (76k jpg) [8 hours and 47 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 04:58:52 GMT

Not bad - it looks even somehow atmospherical.

Sven



"stbenge" <stbenge [at] hotmailcom> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:482a503d@news.povray.org...
> Hi again,
>
> Today I figured out how to populate an arbitrary triangular region in
> space with a definable density of spheres. This allowed me to create the
> image here. It's basically a geodesic sphere, but with the spherical
> component exaggerated for each sphere patch.
>
> Questions and comments are always welcome~
>
> Sam
>

[Nicolas Alvarez] Re: shake reduction [8 hours and 52 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 04:54:40 GMT

Darren New wrote:
> Personally, I find the lens far more important than anything else. A
> JPEG shot thru a 68mm lens is going to look better than a RAW shot thru
> a 7mm lens no matter how good the postprocessing, methinks.

And to think 7mm is a lot compared to most cellphone cameras :D

[Darren New] Re: shake reduction [9 hours and 33 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 04:13:47 GMT

Jim Charter wrote:
> present the result as truth.  And can we really say it isn't?

Considering your eyeball does about 4 layers of preprocessing before the 
image even gets to your optic nerve, it's hard to say that anything you 
actually photographed could be considered "faked". :-)

An interesting and almost relevant article:

http://www.scientificblogging.com/news_releases/our_visual_system_has_future_seeing_powers_study

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

[Darren New] Re: shake reduction [9 hours and 34 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 04:12:09 GMT

Jim Charter wrote:
> Yes I discovered that limitation almost immediately, in fact, when I 
> tried using the camera to document some drawings I'd done. 

Personally, I find the lens far more important than anything else. A 
JPEG shot thru a 68mm lens is going to look better than a RAW shot thru 
a 7mm lens no matter how good the postprocessing, methinks.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

[Jan Dvorak] Re: halo command error [10 hours and 5 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 03:41:45 GMT

james lake napsal(a):
> Alain <electro.punk [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>> james lake nous illumina en ce 2008-05-14 19:41 -->
>>> "Tim Attwood" <timothyea [at] comcastnet> wrote:
>>>> //----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> // A thin blue media, becoming lighter as it approaches
>>>> // the planet's surface.
>>>> //----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> #declare PlanetAtmosphere = sphere { <0,0,0>, 1
>>>>    hollow
>>>>    material {
>>>>       texture {
>>>>          pigment { rgbt <1,1,1,1> }
>>>>       }
>>>>       interior {
>>>>          media {
>>>>             emission <0,0,2>
>>>>             density {
>>>>                spherical
>>>>                color_map {
>>>>                   [0 rgb 0]
>>>>                   [0.05 rgb 1]
>>>>                   [1 rgb 1]
>>>>                }
>>>>             }
>>>>          }
>>>>          media {
>>>>             emission <2,2,0>
>>>>             density {
>>>>                spherical
>>>>                color_map {
>>>>                   [0 rgb 0]
>>>>                   [0.05 rgb 0.25]
>>>>                   [1 rgb 1]
>>>>                }
>>>>             }
>>>>          }
>>>>       }
>>>>    }
>>>>    scale 1.05
>>>> }
>>> I tried this and it works, but now the Earth is a solid white sphere.  Is there
>>> another command that must accompany these?  Or should I change the settings?
>>>
>>> Thanks for the help!
>>>
>>> James Lake
>>>
>>>
>> You put that object around your earth, scaled 5% larger than the size of the
>> earth sphere.
>>
>> --
>> Alain
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> You know you've been raytracing too long when you've ever "lost" a Julia fractal
>> because you're not quite sure how to align things in four dimensions.
>> Dylan Beattie
> 
> I did that but it still generates a solid white sphere.  It is not transparent,
> and does not fade at the edges.  There must be another setting or command that
> has to change.  The planet and the atmosphere get put together with this:
> 
> #declare Planet = union {
>   object { PlanetSphere }
>   #ifndef (Quick)
>     object { PlanetCloudSphere0 }
>     object { PlanetAtmosphere }
>   #end
> }
> 
> Is this a good way to do it?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> James
> 
> 
Try greatly reducing the media density. The density required is very 
dependent on your earth size.
Simply add another density block inside the media, like:
density{
  ...
}
density{
  rgb 1e-5
}

-- 
You know you've been raytracing too long when...
you ever saw a beautiful scenery and regretted not to take your 6" 
reflective ball and a digital camera, thinking "this would have been a 
perfect light probe"
		-Johnny D
Johnny D

[Jim Charter] Re: shake reduction [10 hours and 10 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 03:35:53 GMT

Sabrina Kilian wrote:

> A quick googling says the A30 doesn't shoot in RAW format. There might 
> be a firmware hack somewhere, but it seems this is the main Pentax 
> camera, and if none of them have RAW capabilities then it isn't likely 
> this one would either.
> 
Yes I discovered that limitation almost immediately, in fact, when I 
tried using the camera to document some drawings I'd done.  Once apon a 
time I had a pretty good routine and adequate lighting equipment for 
documenting my paintings, but now I don't.  Without hot enough lights, 
the point and shoot fell well short of adequate for that task, and the 
limitations of jpg only worsened the problem.  I *thought* I'd seen that 
some other format from jpg was supported when I was shopping the camera, 
but I was obviously mistaken.  Well maybe I can find some adequate 
lights for cheap.

[Jim Charter] Re: shake reduction [10 hours and 33 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 03:12:58 GMT

Warp wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nospam [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>>composite the pictures together.
> 
> 
>   Somehow I have never liked that type of post-processing in photography.
> It gives me the feeling that the photo has been faked.
> 
Hmmm, I suppose, but I also thought that the lines of people ready to 
muse upon truth and artifice in photography were wide and deep. Analogue 
cameras were bad enough, but now that the capture is digital and 
probably filtered digitally from the start, at least that is what I 
assume my camera's different shooting 'modes' are,...it seems that 
'faked' is an increasingly relative term.  I'm surprised there isn't 
already a camera that would perform such compositing automatically and 
present the result as truth.  And can we really say it isn't?

[Jim Charter] Re: Bad Visual Pun Thread [11 hours and 7 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 02:39:39 GMT

Gawd I hate sports metaphors.

Nothing obtuse here, just bad.

(And I think I know where to find the fork.)

[james lake] Re: halo command error [11 hours and 21 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 02:25:00 GMT

Alain <electro.punk [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> james lake nous illumina en ce 2008-05-14 19:41 -->
> > "Tim Attwood" <timothyea [at] comcastnet> wrote:
> >> //----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> // A thin blue media, becoming lighter as it approaches
> >> // the planet's surface.
> >> //----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> #declare PlanetAtmosphere = sphere { <0,0,0>, 1
> >>    hollow
> >>    material {
> >>       texture {
> >>          pigment { rgbt <1,1,1,1> }
> >>       }
> >>       interior {
> >>          media {
> >>             emission <0,0,2>
> >>             density {
> >>                spherical
> >>                color_map {
> >>                   [0 rgb 0]
> >>                   [0.05 rgb 1]
> >>                   [1 rgb 1]
> >>                }
> >>             }
> >>          }
> >>          media {
> >>             emission <2,2,0>
> >>             density {
> >>                spherical
> >>                color_map {
> >>                   [0 rgb 0]
> >>                   [0.05 rgb 0.25]
> >>                   [1 rgb 1]
> >>                }
> >>             }
> >>          }
> >>       }
> >>    }
> >>    scale 1.05
> >> }
> >
> > I tried this and it works, but now the Earth is a solid white sphere.  Is there
> > another command that must accompany these?  Or should I change the settings?
> >
> > Thanks for the help!
> >
> > James Lake
> >
> >
> You put that object around your earth, scaled 5% larger than the size of the
> earth sphere.
>
> --
> Alain
> -------------------------------------------------
> You know you've been raytracing too long when you've ever "lost" a Julia fractal
> because you're not quite sure how to align things in four dimensions.
> Dylan Beattie

I did that but it still generates a solid white sphere.  It is not transparent,
and does not fade at the edges.  There must be another setting or command that
has to change.  The planet and the atmosphere get put together with this:

#declare Planet = union {
  object { PlanetSphere }
  #ifndef (Quick)
    object { PlanetCloudSphere0 }
    object { PlanetAtmosphere }
  #end
}

Is this a good way to do it?

Thanks,

James

[Chambers] Re: Exploring Julia [11 hours and 30 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 02:16:13 GMT

Warp wrote:
> Chambers wrote:
>> RGB 1 background, lit by radiosity.
> 
>   I think it would have been more impressive with just regular lighting
> and a fancy surface finish.

Is this better?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhhBWge1KBk

...Chambers

[Jim Henderson] Re: evil TV commercials [13 hours and 41 minutes ago]

Fri, 16 May 2008 00:04:56 GMT

On Thu, 15 May 2008 16:05:29 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> can't keep their leg still under their desk (and thus "bounce" it).
> 
> I'm pretty sure that's not what "restless leg syndrome" is. :-)

I am as well, but I wonder how many people who do that think that that's 
what they've got - and how many of those people actually get their 
doctors to give them a script for it.

Jim

[M a r c] Re: Rocket Man [14 hours and 21 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 23:25:31 GMT

"Darren New" <dnew [at] sanrrcom> a &#233;crit dans le message de news: 
482c839c$1@news.povray.org...
> In principle, a Honda Civic is the same as an Indy 500 Formula 1, too. 
> One's just more exciting than the other, I guess. :-)
>
Which one? :p

Marc

[Nicolas Alvarez] Re: Bombed! [14 hours and 23 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 23:22:57 GMT

Darren New wrote:
> (It boggles my mind that people actually engage in referrer-spam,
> putting Viagra ads in the user-agent string and then reading bunches of
> web sites so curious web site operators will see the ads.)

That's not what they do it for. Some websites (particularly blogs) have a
dynamically-updating list of referrers ("these are the websites that linked
us!"), referrer spam tries to get there.

[M a r c] Re: New speakers [14 hours and 24 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 23:22:03 GMT

"St." <dot [at] dotcom> a &#233;crit dans le message de news: 
482c83eb$1@news.povray.org...
>
>     Well, yeah, the name kind of rung some bells, but I didn't know what 
> for.
>
They provided the speakers for Woodstock 69 festival... and a lot of movie 
theaters :-)
http://www.ominous-valve.com/altec.html

Marc

[Nicolas Alvarez] Re: I don't know what's worse ... [14 hours and 26 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 23:20:09 GMT

Invisible wrote:
> All I know is that The Daily WTF is *replete* with examples of companies
> where the MD or something wrote the original version of the company's
> product, but he can't actually code his way out of a paper bag, but he
> still likes to "show the beginners how a real expert does it" from time
> to time. And the real programmers end up going to extraordinary lengths
> to keep the bosses away from the build system.

I wonder if Bill Gates can code his way out of a paper bag nowadays?

[triple r] Re: Bad Visual Pun Thread [14 hours and 31 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 23:15:00 GMT

"Mike the Elder" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

> A second clue would be welcomed.  A few words and phrases are rattling around
> the crevices of the ol' cortex, but nothing has gone "click".

Just a book on a log.  Yep, a BOOK on a LOG...

Sorry it's not a better pun, but I really did run into this at about the time of
the first post.  The real thing is a tupperware container with a couple pens and
notebooks for people to write in.  I guess you have to be careful or else it
could get wet or covered in spider WEBs or something...

 - Ricky

[Darren New] Re: Bombed! [14 hours and 37 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 23:09:26 GMT

St. wrote:
>      Well, yes, I understand this at least, but what I was thinking of is 
> the fact that I have to weed out our genuine customers emails. So a change 
> of email address would at least be more manageable.

If you have normal customer emails coming to your postmaster address, 
you're probably doing something wrong even if you *are* an ISP. If 
you're not an ISP (and you're just a domain name owner), you shouldn't 
be getting messages to postmaster at all.

Basically, postmaster is for ISPs to talk to other ISPs.  As described 
in the email standards, it was originally the only email address that 
had to go to a real person. Nowadays, it's spam bait.

(It boggles my mind that people actually engage in referrer-spam, 
putting Viagra ads in the user-agent string and then reading bunches of 
web sites so curious web site operators will see the ads.)

>       Thanks for the info and advice.

Sure thing.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

[Darren New] Re: evil TV commercials [14 hours and 41 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 23:05:29 GMT

Jim Henderson wrote:
> can't keep their leg still under their desk (and thus "bounce" it). 

I'm pretty sure that's not what "restless leg syndrome" is. :-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

[Mike the Elder] Re: Bad Visual Pun Thread [15 hours and 31 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 22:15:00 GMT

"triple_r" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

> Clue:  Think portmanteau.
>
> (Note:  Might take another clue, but my last one was stupid-easy.  And this
> one's a true story; I run past this pun just about every day.)
>
>  - Ricky

A second clue would be welcomed.  A few words and phrases are rattling around
the crevices of the ol' cortex, but nothing has gone "click".

BTW, I agree that it is a very nice image, pun aside.

Best Regards,
Mike C.

[Stephen] Re: Valid solution or evil hack? [15 hours and 41 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 22:05:49 GMT

On Thu, 15 May 2008 22:10:07 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <void [at] devnull>
wrote:

>
>>> Why? Do they actually *do* something different with it?
>> 
>> Yes, it is designed to be more reliable, and they test it to prove this 
>> so they can write it in the specification of the device.
>
>This somewhat implies that normal stuff is designed to be UNreliable. ;-)

He said "more" reliable. Have you heard of tolerances?
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

[Jim Henderson] Re: I don't know what's worse ... [15 hours and 57 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 21:49:39 GMT

On Thu, 15 May 2008 22:15:19 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>> Hehe yeh, but it's not like every company where things Just Work write
>> to the WTF and say "hey, here's one more company that's running fine
>> thanks". The boss of my department has a PhD and numerous papers
>> published on the exact subject we work on, and is usually involved
>> directly in some of the more important customer projects as the expert.
> 
> Oh thank God - you mean there *are* companies that work properly? I
> truly hope to end up working for one. Preferably soon!

Well, people have a tendency to complain rather than praise, so yeah. ;-)

Jim

[Orchid XP v8] Re: I don't know what's worse ... [16 hours and 31 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 21:15:02 GMT

scott wrote:

> Hehe yeh, but it's not like every company where things Just Work write 
> to the WTF and say "hey, here's one more company that's running fine 
> thanks". The boss of my department has a PhD and numerous papers 
> published on the exact subject we work on, and is usually involved 
> directly in some of the more important customer projects as the expert.

Oh thank God - you mean there *are* companies that work properly? I 
truly hope to end up working for one. Preferably soon!

> People don't just "end up in management", they either are promoted or 
> recruited.  I presume the sort of people you talk about are directly 
> recruited, so I guess that's a failing in the recruitment process if 
> they're not very good.

My thoughts precisely.

If the people doing recruitment don't know anything about computers, how 
the hell are they supposed to hire good people?

OTOH, some get there through promotion [or being the person who 
originally founded the company]. These people are typically rubbish with 
computers, but excellent at politics...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

[Orchid XP v8] Re: I don't know what's worse ... [16 hours and 33 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 21:12:54 GMT

Warp wrote:

>   I have a theory: People with real talent (and experience) for programming
> are often very poor at politics and diplomacy, which is the reason why they
> seldom end up in high positions in a company. And vice-versa: People which
> are good at politics and diplomacy (read: good at speaking BS) are often
> not very talented nor experienced in programming.
> 
>   The typical "boss" is the latter type of person who, for some strange
> reason, thinks he is a talented programmer.

I agree. The current Director of IT is, IMHO, pretty rubbish with 
computers. But DAMN does he know exactly how to play the corporate 
politics game.

But hey, these people must get into management some how. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

[Orchid XP v8] Re: Valid solution or evil hack? [16 hours and 35 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 21:10:51 GMT

Eero Ahonen wrote:

> You weren't involved -> it's not your call -> you shouldn't stress about 
> it.

Oh, hey, I'm not *stressing* about this! I couldn't care less. ;-) I'm 
merely curios about the design of it...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

[Orchid XP v8] Re: Valid solution or evil hack? [16 hours and 36 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 21:09:51 GMT

>> I remember seeing how a metal cylinder costs about &#163;20, but a metal 
>> cylinder that you can put liquid nitrogen into costs &#163;500. Because 
>> somebody has to check it won't break or something when it gets that 
>> damn cold.
> 
> Exactly - someone has to check - and that costs money.

Well that at least makes sense. You're paying money *for* something.

>> Why? Do they actually *do* something different with it?
> 
> Yes, it is designed to be more reliable, and they test it to prove this 
> so they can write it in the specification of the device.

This somewhat implies that normal stuff is designed to be UNreliable. ;-)

>> Does the hardware itself have any actual physical differences to a 
>> cheap model?
> 
> Probably, if you're lucky you could get a *really* reliable one from 
> Maplin that lasted for 1000 years without any problems.  *Lucky* being 
> the key word here, try explaining to someone's family that they died 
> because some monitor failed, you can't say "we were unlucky".

I'm just wondering whether they actually did anything different at all 
for the extra money, that's all.

It's like when you order stuff online. You can pay &#163;2, and they tell you 
it'll take up to 15 days to arrive. But actually it arrives within 12 
hours. Or you can pay &#163;15 to have it guaranteed to arrive within 12 
hours. And it still arrives within 12 hours. Do they actually do 
anything different? Or is it just a tax on stupidity?

On the other hand, consider the printers example. Clearly something *is* 
actually different, because the printers really do perform differently. 
So in this case, you *are* getting something for your money.

I'm not sure which category this temparature monitor falls into.

>> Well, you're the engineer. But I wonder - if a mass spectrometer that 
>> you can't use for diagnostic procedures costs &#163;250,000... what the 
>> HELL does one you *can* use for diagnostic procedures cost?! o_O
> 
> Medical equipment is extremely expensive, precisely because there is so 
> much at risk when things go wrong.  The companies that make this stuff 
> need to do a huge amount of testing and robust design, way above what 
> most other industries require.  It all costs money.

Heh. And I thought a device that costs more than my house (!!) was 
already expensive. ;-)

[Seriously - WTF does a mass spectrometer even have in it? It's just an 
empty tube, some vacuum pumps, an electrode and some magnets. So is my 
TV! Well, apart from the vacuum pumps anyway... And yet, my TV doesn't 
cost more than a small housing estate. Wuh??]

BTW, wasn't there some famous disaster with a device for radiotherapy 
that accidentally overdosed a few people?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

[St ] Re: I don't know what's worse ... [17 hours and 23 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 20:23:21 GMT

"scott" <scott [at] scottcom> wrote in message 
news:482c400e$1@news.povray.org...
  And of course you don't fire them, you just don't give them
> any pay rise until they leave ;-)

     True, it would work in the end I guess.  :)

    Might take some time though as pay rises are not handed out frequently.

     ~Steve~

[fidos] Re: MCPov web page (montecarlo path tracing patch) [17 hours and 36 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 20:10:01 GMT

Hello,

I put in line (http://pagesperso-orange.fr/fidos/MCPov/MCPov.html) the version
0.0.2 of MCPov patch :
- it compiles now correctly under Linux.
- It uses a fast high-quality RNG as provided by Wrap.

Any feedback wellcome.

Regards,
Fidos.

[St ] Small Crymod contest [17 hours and 55 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 19:51:05 GMT

Crymod.com (the new Crysis game) announced a new end date for their "Crysis 
vs Reality" contest - 1st June. You have to supply any real image/photo and 
then you have to try to reproduce that image in Crysis (within the editor) 
as best you can.

  
http://www.crymod.com/thread.php?threadid=27580&sid=1c2ef1d092306facd49667bb71bb2871

   I'm going to have a go at this as I think I might have a chance. 
Interesting challenge though.

    Wish me luck Povers! :)

       ~Steve~

[Jim Henderson] Re: shake reduction [17 hours and 59 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 19:47:11 GMT

On Thu, 15 May 2008 08:52:42 -0400, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nospam [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> composite the pictures together.
> 
>   Somehow I have never liked that type of post-processing in
>   photography.
> It gives me the feeling that the photo has been faked.
> 
>   It's a bit like you took an image rendered with povray and then added
> some lens flare effect with photoshop and then called it a "povray
> image". Yes, part of the image was made with povray, but part of the
> effect has been "faked", so it's not a pure povray image. It feels kind
> of cheating.

I think it depends on how well the compositing is done - most people 
don't do a good job with it, though, so it tends to look faked.

But if not a composite, then what would be the way to get rid of the 
bloom in the window without losing the details in the darker parts of the 
image?

Jim

[Jim Henderson] Re: shake reduction [18 hours ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 19:46:10 GMT

On Thu, 15 May 2008 14:44:37 -0400, Sabrina Kilian wrote:

> A quick googling says the A30 doesn't shoot in RAW format. There might
> be a firmware hack somewhere, but it seems this is the main Pentax
> camera, and if none of them have RAW capabilities then it isn't likely
> this one would either.
> 
> I would be surprised if it did not have some way to automatically shoot
> bracketed exposures. Google again says it can shoot +-0.3 to +-2
> exposures automatically, somewhere in the drive menu options. Even if
> you don't composite the images, using that will make it easier to get
> the right exposure if you are just clicking off pictures.

Yeah, it doesn't seem to be supported by CHDK either - My S50 isn't 
either, which was somewhat disappointing (not because I want RAW 
capabilities - the S50 has that - but there's some other stuff that might 
be nice to have as well).

im

[Jim Henderson] Re: evil TV commercials [18 hours and 5 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 19:41:13 GMT

On Wed, 14 May 2008 23:12:11 -0400, Sabrina Kilian wrote:

> On Tue, 13 May 2008 23:58:45 -0400, Jim Henderson wrote:
> 
>> This is true of many drugs in general, IMHO.
>>
> Yup, at least here in the USA. Every drug has a theme and a catchy new
> name for a disorder that's been around for a long time. But the one with
> the catchiest words gets prescribed.

Yeah, and that's a huge societal problem.  

>> Just look at the number of Ritalin scripts written in the 90's in the
>> US.  Many of the kids who this (or other ADD-"fighting" drugs) was
>> prescribed for didn't actually need it.
>>
>> [...]
>>
> I'm afraid that if I commented on this, I would end up ranting. I'll
> leave it as that I agree with you on this point, and lazy parenting
> seems to be a source of a lot of issues.

Agreed.  I have a pretty good rant about this as well - especially with 
the school Ken went to, a lot of the parents seemed to treat their kids 
as fashion accessories.  Those were the parents we weren't terribly 
friendly with.

One of Ken's friends came over to the house after a particularly bad day, 
and my wife went over and gave him a hug.  His reaction was fairly 
disconcerting - he basically locked rigid.  Turned out he *couldn't 
remember* the last time his mom hugged him.

My wife wanted to bitch-slap her for that....How can you not hug your own 
kid?

> Some people can't exercise, so I can see the use of the medication. On a
> bad day when I can't walk, my legs get that feeling. And when you can't
> walk with two canes and a decent level of opioid compounds in your blood
> stream, you just aren't going to get that exercise. On the up side, you
> don't notice "RLS" with that level of pain killers, so it doesn't often
> become an issue.

I suppose I could see that.  But like Darren suggested, the number of 
people who actually *need* it is probably far fewer than those who get 
it.  But the thing that really disturbs me is the advertising "ask your 
doctor if Vaxodrine is right for you" - why SHOULD I?  Is that why my 
DOCTOR is my DOCTOR?  He's the one who went to medical school, not me.

> 
> Diphenhydramine HCL(Benadryl) gives me the heebeejeebees, plain and
> simple. Past seeing spots, even the allergy dose has me seeing cats
> walking through walls. Probably why SSRIs give me trouble too, since
> Benadryl begot Prozac begot the rest of the whole mess.
> 
> 
> Also funny, seeing a doctor's face when the read 'Allergic to benadryl'
> on a form. They don't know how to process 'allergic to an anti-allergy
> medication'.

LOL, I may have to ask my allergist about that when I have my next 
appointment with him.  My reaction to taking a couple of the tablets 
isn't something I'd consider normal.

The only bad reaction I can remember having is hydrocodone - 
hallucinations, lack of sleep (hallucinating that I was sleeping was odd 
- and went on for a week).  Nasty stuff, apparently less than %0.01 of 
people who take it have the reaction I did.

Don't even remember what he replaced it with, but it was as effective for 
the pain (I had a broken leg at the time).

Jim

[Jim Henderson] Re: evil TV commercials [18 hours and 12 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 19:34:31 GMT

On Thu, 15 May 2008 09:09:32 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> it's ridiculous.  "Restless Legs Syndrome"?  Are you f-ing kidding me?
>> People who "suffer" from that sound to me like they need to go and get
>> some exercise.
> 
> My sister-in-law has this. It's apparently related to Parkinson's
> disease. I think the truth is that it's a real problem for many fewer
> people than the drug companies would lead you to believe.

Yes, and that's ultimately my problem with these new "diseases" - there's 
no doubt in my mind that some people do have this, but there's a big 
difference between something related to Parkinson's and people who just 
can't keep their leg still under their desk (and thus "bounce" it).  The 
latter IME is more related to the fact that as a society, we exercise 
less now than we ever have.

Jim

[Jim Henderson] Re: evil TV commercials [18 hours and 13 minutes ago]

Thu, 15 May 2008 19:32:54 GMT

On Thu, 15 May 2008 02:07:15 -0300, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> My stepson went to a school for gifted ADD and highly-distractable
>> students, many of whom were on various drugs for their conditions - and
>> while I'm no MD, it was clear to me that many of them were just very
>> active kids with parents who wanted their kids to be "less active".
>> There probably was a percentage who actually *needed* the drug, but I
>> wouldn't hesitate to say that all of them didn't need it - though I
>> certainly wouldn't be the one to decide who got it and who didn't.
> (grr, lost post half-written, no draft saved)
> 
> Kids are *always* hyperactive. And particularly annoying trying to
> always get the attention of their parents (ever seen a kid repeating
> "mommy look what I found!" until mommy looks, *literally* a hundred
> times if needed?). The problem is with parents distinguishing when it's
> normal and when it's really ADHD.

Yep.

One of the more interesting discussions I had was with one of Ken's 
friends as we were getting ready to move (closer to the school, actually) 
- Will had come over to help move things, and we got to talking about his 
ADHD.  He started describing what it was like living in his head, and how 
frustrating it made him that he couldn't focus on one thing at a time.  
That was an incredibly enlightening discussion.

> I guess my case is different because *I* notice *my* lack of attention.
> And talk to friends about "do you ever get distracted with X" to see if
> it's normal or my ADD. (*) I mean, sure, everyone gets distracted during
> a boring class at school. But I could spend several minutes during an
> exam playing around with the pen and thinking about *whatever*, without
> even "remembering" I'm at an exam. I just "wake up" and "oh yeah I'm
> halfway on an exam... where was I...". Or just anywhere else. Like
> spending an hour on the *shower*, who knows how much time actually
> washing and how much with my mind on the moon.

Well, Will also noticed his lack of attention, but he said that it took a 
significant amount of effort to focus his attention on anything.  It's 
been 7-ish years since that conversation, and unfortunately, I can't ask 
him about it again (sadly, he was killed in an ATV accident about a year 
ago).  I think for many of us, though, some of these experiences are 
fairly normal.  Mind wandering in the shower, for example - I get some of 
my best ideas in the shower because I just let my mind wander.  Even at 
work, though, I sometimes drift from thing to thing - partly because I've 
got a lot to do (yet I spend time reading/writing in newsgroups too).  I 
don't think it's ADD/ADHD or anything like that, more just how I'm wired.

> (*) at this point in writing this post, I spent like a whole hour
> reading forums, completely forgetting I had this post half-written
> behind the browser window.

BTDTGTTS. :-)

Jim