"IMBJR" <no### [at] spamhere> wrote in message
news:46tm40lu1etlovuj52rs4v4f6bj1eknef9@4ax.com...
> http://www.imbjr.com


<total hack of the bs.>

Junior, I've now seen you insult some of the sharpest people on this group,
and those that understand POV to the point that is far beyond your
capability of learning.  Rune, Thorsten, many others.  No, you're not a pace
setter, and you're trying to be the tail that wags the dog.

To those that have posted and shared good information, here's a concept for
you to think about.  On other groups I frequent, they use the concept of the
shun.  The troll is not killfiled, and he knows he is not killfiled.  He
also knows that he can post until his fingers fall off and nobody will
respond other than a newbie, who is promptly informed of the shun via email,
not in the thread.  The result is always the same, for a while, the
frustration of the troll is amusing, and becomes quite strident.  It
normally takes something like two weeks before the troll decides that his
efforts are only providing amusement for others, and he quits.

If someone would like to call the shun, I'm not the one to do it, I'm a
newbie here my damn self.  Myself, I'm a little tired of hearing all the
supposed merits of a format, and seeing people called lazy from one that is
supposedly pushing new technology while posting with a dialup.

Post a reply to this message

In article <ll8n405168ae1v0rmkdv2qettbocvejrii@4ax.com>,
 IMBJR <no### [at] spamhere> wrote:

> I think you will find I understand quiet alright thank you very much,
> but quoting the AUP in regards to a file format is definately dumb.

Since you can't seem to figure it out yourself: he was quoting it in 
regards to your behavior, which has been rude, annoying, obnoxious, and 
hostile. Again, this is not USENET, this is a private server. If you 
want to post here, you are expected to follow certain rules.

In addition, the images group is for posting images for discussion, it 
is not your personal gallery space. By posting there, you are inviting 
comments. If you don't want comments, don't post there...it's that 
simple. Posting in a format that the majority of people can not read 
will result in complaints...if you don't want to hear them, post in a 
more common format like JPEG or PNG. Otherwise, shut up.

-- 
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: <chr### [at] tagpovrayorg>
http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 15:55:16 -0800, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>
wrote:

>IMBJR wrote:
>> On the format side
>> of things, all you have to do is download and install a new viewer.
>
>Tell that to the numerous people for whom Real screwed up their system 
>so badly they had to reinstall the OS from scratch to recover.

That's what you get when you use spyware-laden crap. Don't label all
software the same way, chump.

>
>Such a thing only happens to me a couple of times before I'm willing to 

It does? you must really struggle with your computer? Perhaps try
starting with Fisher Price next time.

>say "You know, I don't really have that much of an urge to see the 
>pictures from a foul-mouthed insulting artist." I mean, heck, I can tune 
>in Howard Stern if I want that.

If you think Stern is an artist you really have some issues.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 08:04:11 -0600, "Mike Raiford"
<mra### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:

>"IMBJR" <no### [at] spamhere> spewed forth:
>
>> Keep the fuck up. Did I not say elsewhere that if I wanted comments I
>> would ask for them? I post them because I have something to post. This
>> is a POV-Ray newserver is it not? I wish to let people look at my work
>> if they so wish, I don't expect or require comments.
>
>Then why waste the POV-Team's webspace with your images? You have your own

This is a newserver not a web server. Dear me, if this is how you
start your rant you've already lost major respect-possibilities.

>website, place your images there until your face turns blue.

I did not realise that the use of an FTP server made one's face go
blue. Can you demonstrate this for me?

>
>Honestly, my feelings are this:

"Honestly" - the hallmark of a liar.

>
>1) You're being rude, and you continue to be rude on these groups,
>disrespecting every single indvidual on here. You're a self-centered
>foul-mouth twit.

You know full well why I am rude. I have numerous (now) of my images
adulterated by rude people. I also notice I am not the only person who
get's rude treatment here. Read the following:

-- quote begins

In article <404b0fa5@news.povray.org> , "Ian Shumsky" 
<ian### [at] outerarmdemoncouk> wrote:

> I've been lucky enough to get hold of a second flat-panel LCD monitor for my
> PC, but the colour profile is quite different from my main monitor. Does
> anyone have any recommendations for getting them to match?

You have to calibrate both, isn't that obvious?  The simplest way is
to use
whatever tool came with your graphics card or (if it was expensive)
LCD
display to do gamma correction.  That will get you somewhat close.
However,
for proper calibration you will need to rent (or buy, with serious
ones
starting not below US$200) an external calibration device.  It will
build a
color profile of your display, and then you of course need a graphics
card
(or display, if it was expensive) to make use of that calibration
data.

    Thorsten

-- quote ends

That first line just smacks of sheer rudeness. It's not obvious to
some so try being a bit more generous in tone. What follows after that
is some ridulous fob off with reference to some expensive equipment.

>
>2) JPEG2000 may very well be a better JPEG, obviously very few companies and
>individuals have adopted this format. People are having difficulties viewing
>the images.

No, only the lazy ones and the unfortunate that have wandered into an
unsupported format ghetto.

>
>3) Someone, in a misguided act of kindness decided to post your image in JPG
>format so everyone can see it, since this is what you wanted, then why whine
>about it so much?

Because it was and is an extremely rude thing to do. No permission was
given to have this done. People are wasting even more HD by posting
inflated badly-artifacted replicas of my work. They are ruining them
in effect.

>
>Contrary to what you might believe, you might be wrong sometiems, and other
>people may actually be right.

Well, duh. I've already come to the conclusion that the 16-bit aspect
of this is probably a non-starter.

> This is not a question of whose opinion is
>valid, but more of a question of what would be the proper thing to do?

The proper thing to do is let me post what I like within the
guidelines. If necessary I will explain viewing solutions to those who
reply that they cannot see the image. But more realistically, the FAQ
perhaps needs updating to mention JPEG2000.

The improper thing to do is repost my butchered work.

>
>BTW, in p.b.a I posted an animation that no one seemed to be able to view, I
>promptly followed up with one that was viewable by the majority. I didn't
>start an argument, I didn't jump down anyone's throat, I corrected the
>problem. Of course, people like you can do no wrong.. so I don't expect you
>to understand how one can corrct one's on mistakes.

Was it actually a problem or was it more as per here, a new format? If
it was a problem then your comparison is void.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 20:56:46 -0600, "Fernando G. del Cueto"
<fcu### [at] yahoocom> wrote:


>news:iq3n401hi3fcssalickm9vl69go9uqavup@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 14:36:27 -0600, "Fernando G. del Cueto"
>> <fcu### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
>
>> Indeed. People here really need to get off their arses and stop
>> wallowing in the past.
>
>Even though I agree with your willingness to adopt JPEG2000, I don't think
>you should take it so personally. 

Dear me, I dont take the crusade to use JPEG2000 personally. I take
butchery of my work personally.

>Everybody has their right and their
>reasons to agree and disagree on the adoption of this format in this group.

Yes, and I respect them I really do - but I shall give rudeness to
those who will treat me rudely or such a tone that smacks of rudeness.

>
>I also prefer to go to some troubles to see JP2 images and avoid those ugly
>JPG artifacts. Some people don't. Some people prefer comfort and stability.
>I think that's absolutely respectable.

I agree.

>
>I understand you may feel frustrated by the response of the majority. But I,
>for one, think that getting along is much more important than the usage of
>any format in the group. Of course, that's my debatable opinion.

Getting along is not worth it when those around seem hell-bent on
rudeness.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 15:57:55 -0800, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:


>When news servers are networked together they are part of a users
>network of news servers (usenet). A stand alone news server, that
>is not networked with other news servers, is just a news server.
>The differences are subtle but they are there. Last I'll say on
>the subject.

I doubt it. You are just unthinkingly repeating yourself - or at least
someone else - again. And you will probably do it again in the future.
I will ring the bell and along you will come to pant out your little
paragraph again.

Just because this is a single node, does not make it any less a part
of usenet. If your mind cannot conceive of such a topology, think of
this place as a zit that stands alone from the head of the network. 

Like the UK is still part of Europe, Alaska is a part of the USA, this
server is part of usenet.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message

On 08 Mar 2004 06:15:30 +0200, Artis Rozentals <art### [at] aaaapollolv>
wrote:

>IMBJR <no### [at] spamhere> writes:
>
>> PNG is still bulky compared with JPEG/JPEG2000.
>
>For the sake of it I installed JasPer, converted your "marbles" image
>to PNG and pngcrushed it. A whooping 8kB larger than the JPEG2000 you
>posted on p.b.i. It's 8bit per channel though, but I had to reduce the
>color depth to view the image anyway.

8k is still significant to those on dial-up. At least you did stoop to
post it.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 10:32:51 -0600, "GreyBeard" <r.b### [at] sbcglobalnet>
wrote:

>
>"IMBJR" <no### [at] spamhere> wrote in message
>news:46tm40lu1etlovuj52rs4v4f6bj1eknef9@4ax.com...
>> http://www.imbjr.com
>
>
><total hack of the bs.>
>
>Junior, I've now seen you insult some of the sharpest people on this group,

Sharp? Really? You have really got to be pulling my leg. All I see is
rude people and people who have their little "arguments" down pat so
they don't have to think at all.

>and those that understand POV to the point that is far beyond your
>capability of learning. 

Try not to make such bizarre generalisations. You don't know enough
about me to make that statement.

> Rune, Thorsten, many others.  No, you're not a pace
>setter, and you're trying to be the tail that wags the dog.

Lordy, why must you people indulge in hyperbole? Pacesetter? What on
Earth gives you that impression? I merely posted a JPEG2000 image in
order to maintain some characteristics of an image I made - I then
find myself being poked at rudely so I decided that I had to argument
the case for JPEG2000. That's all. Not pace-setting stuff really.

>
>To those that have posted and shared good information, here's a concept for
>you to think about.  On other groups I frequent, they use the concept of the
>shun.  The troll is not killfiled, and he knows he is not killfiled.  He
>also knows that he can post until his fingers fall off and nobody will
>respond other than a newbie, who is promptly informed of the shun via email,
>not in the thread.  The result is always the same, for a while, the
>frustration of the troll is amusing, and becomes quite strident.  It
>normally takes something like two weeks before the troll decides that his
>efforts are only providing amusement for others, and he quits.

Believe you me that would not work with me. I've had that happen to me
in other places - again, due to the clique-gone-mad syndrome. I found
out one supposedly-secret place where they were actually planning
their slanging match against me (on a server like this one) - things
such as trying to find a picture of me so that they could childishly
deface it. I wish I could have seen the looks on their faces when I
revealed to the larger graphics community what those rude little
people were up to. You think they would have had the common sense to
make their sad little plans via e-mail. By the way, it was via a
tip-off that I found that place. Oh, yes. I do have allies who
occasionally agree with me and see that the community we post to has
something rotten at its core.

Such a ploy has never stopped me posting my images. I really don't
bother to post for comments - if I wanted them I would ask for them. I
post because I have something to show. If someone sees it, fine. If
someone does not, fine. If someone comments, fine. If someone cannot
see the image, fine. It's all water off a duck's bottom to me. I
really could care less if I was pouring my material into a supposed
void - because I would know that someone somewhere was at least
looking at it.

>
>If someone would like to call the shun, I'm not the one to do it, I'm a
>newbie here my damn self.  Myself, I'm a little tired of hearing all the
>supposed merits of a format, and seeing people called lazy from one that is
>supposedly pushing new technology while posting with a dialup.

You really think having a dialup is lazy? What kind of bent logic is
that? If you had bothered to get off your lazy ass you would know why
I am on a dial-up.
--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 10:26:04 +0100, "Hugo Asm" <hua### [at] post3teledk>
wrote:

>> Personally, as I said, I would really like to see this format accepted
>> for use in the image group. It seems that the arguments against it are
>> mainly related to people's inertia to install the required software,
>> but that personally smacks of laziness and allows the major software
>> vendors to sit on their hands. If you sit still, you are going to find
>> yourself more and more in difficulty trying to deal with what the rest
>> of the graphics community is up to.
>
>Even if the hardcore POV'ers decide to install jpeg2000, what about
>newcomers and guests who can't see the images and say "argh, stupid, I'm
>outta here". This isn't what we need. 

I would hope I could help them find a solution, or better still
newbies would at least be expected to consult the FAQ - which would
therefore need an updat.e

>These groups should not promote rare
>file-formats or provide a testing ground for file-formats. Jpeg2000 is still
>rare - your posts are my first encounter with the format, and I'm not going
>to install the buggy Irfanwiew again. Last time it messed up my computer.

I've had plenty of bitter experiences with software that has caused
mayhem with my machine - yet, I am still willing to have faith in the
future.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 08 Mar 2004 16:43:21 -0500, Christopher James Huff
<cja### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:

>In article <ll8n405168ae1v0rmkdv2qettbocvejrii@4ax.com>,
> IMBJR <no### [at] spamhere> wrote:
>
>> I think you will find I understand quiet alright thank you very much,
>> but quoting the AUP in regards to a file format is definately dumb.
>
>Since you can't seem to figure it out yourself: he was quoting it in 
>regards to your behavior, which has been rude, annoying, obnoxious, and 
>hostile. Again, this is not USENET, this is a private server. If you 
>want to post here, you are expected to follow certain rules.

No he was not. The context was in terms of file formats. Keep up.

Do I have to ring the bell again to make you pant that tired usenet
argument out again?

>
>In addition, the images group is for posting images for discussion, it 
>is not your personal gallery space. 

What on Earth makes you think it is? My what twisted brain-spasm-logic
came up with that idea?

>By posting there, you are inviting 
>comments.

No, I am merely posting. I did not ask. Re-visit my original posts and
you will find no text asking for comments. People of course are free
to reply, but I certainly do not ask for it or expect it.

> If you don't want comments, don't post there...it's that 
>simple. 

Don't be silly. I post here because I have some work produced by
POV-Ray. This is a newsgroup for displaying such works. Therefore I
post.

>Posting in a format that the majority of people can not read 
>will result in complaints...if you don't want to hear them, post in a 

Complaints of the lazy. How true.

>more common format like JPEG or PNG. Otherwise, shut up.

Parroting my responses is another sign of the unthinking that goes on
here.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message