On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:06:14 +0100, "Rune" <run### [at] runevisioncom>
wrote:

>IMBJR wrote:
>> "Rune" wrote:
>>> ...or post images to p.b.i without any interest
>>> in getting feedback or
>>
>> Keep the fuck up. Did I not say elsewhere that if
>> I wanted comments I would ask for them?
>
>Yes exactly. And on several occasions you did not ask for comments, so
>that would make my statement correct. How the fuck is that not keeping
>the fuck up?

Well you certainly seemed to have not kept the fuck up that's for
sure. Keep up.

>
>> 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.
>
>Good for you.

Damn straight. Glad that there's at least one person that seems
capable of understanding what seems such a simple concept, but here
amongst this lot seems to fry the mind.

>
>>> even if other people can see the images. I expect
>>> that we'll be seeing quite some more JPEG2000
>>> images there now - oops, "seeing" was not a well
>>> chosen word... ;)
>>
>> You've so sharp ... yadda, yadda.
>
>I have sharp yadda yadda? Whatever.

Yeah. Get to a doctor. Or get them blunted.

>
>> Pointless too - what a paradox in your head.
>
>Really? I love paradoxes!

Look into my eye ...

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

Post a reply to this message

IMBJR wrote:
> Well you certainly seemed to have not kept
> the fuck up that's for sure. Keep up.

Things are not always like they seem.

>>> You've so sharp ... yadda, yadda.
>>
>> I have sharp yadda yadda? Whatever.
>
> Yeah. Get to a doctor. Or get them blunted.

I already did long ago. Keep up.

>>> Pointless too - what a paradox in your head.
>>
>> Really? I love paradoxes!
>
> Look into my eye ...

I looked into your eye and beyond, but there was nothing to be found.

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
rune|vision:  http://runevision.com **updated Jan 29**
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

IMBJR <no### [at] spamhere> wrote:
> On 7 Mar 2004 15:12:16 -0500, Eamon Caddigan <eca### [at] uiucedu>
> wrote:
>
>>IMBJR <no### [at] spamhere> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 20:48:50 +0100, "Thorsten Froehlich"
>>><tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <404b7a76@news.povray.org> , Lutz-Peter Hooge <lpv### [at] gmxde> 
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Unlikely, I doubt there is any sigificant market for graphics viewer
>>>>> utilities even on windows. So I don't think support for jpeg2k will
>>>>> be brought to other systems by commercial software.
>>>>
>>>>Actually, on Mac OS QuickTime supports it.  So in just about any decent Mac
>>>>OS newsreader and web browser one can view the image inline.  Still, there
>>>>is no value added by it being JPEG 2000 and in 16 bits per color component.
>>>
>>> The value is in the better compression.
>>
>>And the 640x480 filesize limitation imposed by your favorite plugin!
>
> It's not my favourite, it's a suggestion. I use Photoshop. Lordy, why
> don't you try to keep up?

Sorry, my list of software you use was apparently out-of-date. Also,
which socks were you wearing last Wednesday? I can't find it in my
records.

-Eamon

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:25:00 +0100, "Rune" <run### [at] runevisioncom>
wrote:

>IMBJR wrote:
>> Well you certainly seemed to have not kept
>> the fuck up that's for sure. Keep up.
>
>Things are not always like they seem.
>
>>>> You've so sharp ... yadda, yadda.
>>>
>>> I have sharp yadda yadda? Whatever.
>>
>> Yeah. Get to a doctor. Or get them blunted.
>
>I already did long ago. Keep up.

Well I can't watch you 24-7.

>
>>>> Pointless too - what a paradox in your head.
>>>
>>> Really? I love paradoxes!
>>
>> Look into my eye ...
>
>I looked into your eye and beyond, but there was nothing to be found.

That's because you looked beyond. Esp' if you do that from your
current view you will merely see the nothingness that's inherent in
this place.

>
>Rune

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

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 13:31:09 -0800, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>
wrote:

>Tim Nikias v2.0 wrote:
>> It's simple: the JPEG2000 format isn't integrated in many newsreader,
>
>And apparently it's a sufficiently difficult format to get right that 
>even commercial software does a halfway job of doing it right. The 
>commercial program I have that claims to read and write jpeg2000 images 
>showed me yours in greyscale.

Yup, sounds like it may not support 16-bit.

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

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 13:38:48 -0800, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>
wrote:

>IMBJR wrote:
> > get over it and listen to the arguments instead of
>> finding yet more execuses to not bother with them.
>
>This is very common.  "You disagree with me, hence you must not 
>understand what I'm saying."  It is quite possible that everyone 
>understands exactly what you're saying and nevertheless continues to 
>disagree with your conclusion. It's not the case that people here 
>disagreeing are not listening.

No. Re-read, you will find these people were coming up with uprelated
crap - no actual counter-argument. They were not "listening".

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

Post a reply to this message

Lutz-Peter Hooge <lpv### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> But jpeg has been there for a long time now, and there are LOTS of
> implementations so it is highly unlikely that you get sued if you
> make yet another implementation.

  One acronym comes clearly to my mind: GIF.

  Do I have to say more?

-- 
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

On 7 Mar 2004 16:30:39 -0500, Eamon Caddigan <eca### [at] uiucedu>
wrote:

>IMBJR <no### [at] spamhere> wrote:
>> On 7 Mar 2004 15:12:16 -0500, Eamon Caddigan <eca### [at] uiucedu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>IMBJR <no### [at] spamhere> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 20:48:50 +0100, "Thorsten Froehlich"
>>>><tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <404b7a76@news.povray.org> , Lutz-Peter Hooge <lpv### [at] gmxde> 
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Unlikely, I doubt there is any sigificant market for graphics viewer
>>>>>> utilities even on windows. So I don't think support for jpeg2k will
>>>>>> be brought to other systems by commercial software.
>>>>>
>>>>>Actually, on Mac OS QuickTime supports it.  So in just about any decent Mac
>>>>>OS newsreader and web browser one can view the image inline.  Still, there
>>>>>is no value added by it being JPEG 2000 and in 16 bits per color component.
>>>>
>>>> The value is in the better compression.
>>>
>>>And the 640x480 filesize limitation imposed by your favorite plugin!
>>
>> It's not my favourite, it's a suggestion. I use Photoshop. Lordy, why
>> don't you try to keep up?
>
>Sorry, my list of software you use was apparently out-of-date. Also,
>which socks were you wearing last Wednesday? I can't find it in my
>records.

Such childish rejoiners point to someone who is as lazy as the rest of
the people here and cannot find the correct counter-arguments so they
go off-track.

>
>-Eamon

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

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 21:53:17 +0000, IMBJR wrote:

> On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 13:38:48 -0800, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>
> wrote:
> 
>>IMBJR wrote:
>> > get over it and listen to the arguments instead of
>>> finding yet more execuses to not bother with them.
>>
>>This is very common.  "You disagree with me, hence you must not 
>>understand what I'm saying."  It is quite possible that everyone 
>>understands exactly what you're saying and nevertheless continues to 
>>disagree with your conclusion. It's not the case that people here 
>>disagreeing are not listening.
> 
> No. Re-read, you will find these people were coming up with uprelated
> crap - no actual counter-argument. They were not "listening".
> 
> --------------------------------
> My First Subgenius Picture Book:
> http://www.imbjr.com

The fact that it's a royal pain and the ass to track something down to
view the images with (Quite possibly IMPOSSIBLE on my platform) isn't a
valid counter-argument?  

That's like saying the fact that you live in a state that for some reason
doesn't have any has stations that sell diesel isn't a valid argument for
not buying a diesel-engined vehicle.

Post a reply to this message

IMBJR wrote:
> Don't be so silly. How the fuck does posting a new format and then
> trying to get a serious debate going about it make for a a flame war?

When you descend to insults, profanity, and fail to address in any 
serious way the arguments against your preferred solution, it stops 
being a serious debate and starts being a flame war.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA USA (PST)
   I am in geocentric orbit, supported by
   a quantum photon exchange drive....

Post a reply to this message