povray.binaries.images.temporary

Post a reply to this message

Which would have a expiration date of course and then we could all agree
to only put finished images in pbi

    ( too quick with the <alt+s> )

Post a reply to this message

Seems reasonable. There would bere some controversy though about what to post
where. I have yet to produce an image that I would call finished, so p.b.i.
would be off-limits for me?
Not that I post a lot anyway, but still.

Margus

Bill DeWitt wrote:
> 
>     Which would have a expiration date of course and then we could all agree
> to only put finished images in pbi
> 
>     ( too quick with the <alt+s> )

Post a reply to this message

Margus Ramst wrote:
> 
> Seems reasonable. There would bere some controversy though about what to post
> where. I have yet to produce an image that I would call finished, so p.b.i.
> would be off-limits for me?
> Not that I post a lot anyway, but still.
> 
> Margus
> 
> Bill DeWitt wrote:
> >
> >     Which would have a expiration date of course and then we could all agree
> > to only put finished images in pbi
> >
> >     ( too quick with the <alt+s> )

Good for stuff you know to be of transient interest though, illustrating
a question for instance.

PoD.

Post a reply to this message

"PoD" <pod### [at] merlinnetau> wrote :
>
> Good for stuff you know to be of transient interest though, illustrating
> a question for instance.
>

    Right, I was thinking of suggesting that we start using p.o.t. for that,
but why not make a new group?

    Hmm... first reason, would anyone frequent it if they knew it only
contained test images?

Post a reply to this message

In article <38c1165c$1@news.povray.org>, "Bill DeWitt" 
<the### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:

> Right, I was thinking of suggesting that we start using p.o.t. for 
> that, but why not make a new group?

Hmm, it might be a good idea, if it doesn't end up being redundant 
somehow...


>     Hmm... first reason, would anyone frequent it if they knew it only
> contained test images?

I think there are some people who would frequent it *because* it only 
contained test images. :-)

-- 
Chris Huff
e-mail: chr### [at] yahoocom
Web page: http://chrishuff.dhs.org/

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 04 Mar 2000 09:10:33 -0500 Chris Huff <chr### [at] yahoocom>
wrote:

>Hmm, it might be a good idea, if it doesn't end up being redundant 
>somehow...

  Maybe. Bill's got an interesting idea that I've considered in the
past, also. But, would it end up being a depository for a someone's
series of ten 100k test images? If it did, I'd probably end up pulling
the plug (unsubscribing) on that group due to the online time necessary
to retrieve that stuff. Ideally, an binary.images group should be
unrestricted since it'll scroll in short order anyway but, in practice,
a group that is over-satuated with big file, test renders wouldn't be
popular for long for folks with modem access.

-- 
Alan - ako### [at] povrayorg - a k o n g <at> p o v r a y <dot> o r g
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer

Post a reply to this message

In article <bib2css0e7eksoi7dh6lmu1kgqsfo6aq93@4ax.com>, Alan Kong 
<ako### [at] povrayNO-SPAMorg> wrote:

>   Maybe. Bill's got an interesting idea that I've considered in the
> past, also. But, would it end up being a depository for a someone's
> series of ten 100k test images? If it did, I'd probably end up pulling
> the plug (unsubscribing) on that group due to the online time necessary
> to retrieve that stuff. Ideally, an binary.images group should be
> unrestricted since it'll scroll in short order anyway but, in practice,
> a group that is over-satuated with big file, test renders wouldn't be
> popular for long for folks with modem access.

I have a modem connection. :-)
Not a particularly good one either, I have a 56K modem which never goes 
above 33.6, and usually stays under 28.8. But I see what you mean, if 
people misuse the group by posting tons of pictures it won't be very 
popular. Maybe just a general rule not to post more than 4 versions at a 
time, or keep the total size of all images below 500K. This would be 
"regulated" by just warning people when they post excessively.

Or maybe...would it be possible to set things up so that you can post a 
message to povray.binaries.images with the subject starting with 
something like "TEMP:", and have all threads starting with one of those 
messages automatically expire in a week or so? This wouldn't solve the 
modem speed problem, though. In fact, some people would consider it 
worse, since they can't weed out those images(by just not subscribing to 
the .temp group) unless their software supports a way to selectively not 
download those images. And it might be needlessly complex(it would be 
easier to remember to post to the .temp group than to prefix every 
message subject).

-- 
Chris Huff
e-mail: chr### [at] yahoocom
Web page: http://chrishuff.dhs.org/

Post a reply to this message

Hmm.. just thinking, if we used peer pressure to get most renders to
povray.binaries.images.temporary and made a tradition of only putting images
in p.b.i. when someone replied to a test image with the phrase, "This one's
a keeper" or "I'd like to see a finished render of that" or some such thing.

Not to the extreme of 'By Invitation Only' but along those lines anyway...

Post a reply to this message

It wouldn't be perfect, nothing is.  It would provide a break-away group of
"take a look at this, plus questions" postings which would be much more
appropriate for referrals to the other groups as was said.  In being that,
however, it would necessitate more permanence so as to be around for the
pointers coming from those other message postings elsewhere, i.e.
povray.text-scene-files example images.
Another thing to consider might be to have a much lower file-size limitation (I
can hear grumblings already), say 250KB; I'd even think that to be large for
such a temporary thing if downloading is the concerned anyway.  But then maybe
not temporary is the way to go for reasons stated, such as questions and answers
+ images need to be around to learn from.

Bob

"Bill DeWitt" <the### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message
news:38c14bdb@news.povray.org...
| Hmm.. just thinking, if we used peer pressure to get most renders to
| povray.binaries.images.temporary and made a tradition of only putting images
| in p.b.i. when someone replied to a test image with the phrase, "This one's
| a keeper" or "I'd like to see a finished render of that" or some such thing.
|
| Not to the extreme of 'By Invitation Only' but along those lines anyway...
|
|

Post a reply to this message