"Charles C" <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht 
news:web.49c86c017d588e14cac4259f0@news.povray.org...
> PS, no you're not the only one who hasn't set up a web page and isn't keen 
> on
> posting to youtube.

Me neither... :-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Kenneth wrote:
> but I'd rather not upload my
> stuff onto Youtube;

I might add that Youtube re-encodes files after uploading, and video 
quality usually suffers noticeably.

Youtube is great for sharing your family outings; it sucks for showing 
the finer details of your new textures.

-- 
William Tracy
afi### [at] gmailcom -- wtr### [at] calpolyedu

[ISO 9660] Years begin to count at 1900, which means that CD-ROMs will 
suffer from a Y2156 problem because the year following 2155 will be 
1900. This problem could have been delayed by defining the origin time 
to be 1988 (the year the standard was adopted). Had that been done, the 
problem would have been postponed until 2244. Every 88 extra years helps.
     -- Andrew Tanenbaum, _Modern Operating Systems_

Post a reply to this message

Chris Cason <del### [at] deletethistoopovrayorg> wrote:
> I think we can do this, we have new hard drives (thanks to the folks who
> purchased them for us, whoever you are!). I probably ought to review the limits
> on everything actually.

Woohoo! Thanks!
Charles

Post a reply to this message

The limit should now be 5000k. I haven't tested it (though I am sure
someone will:)

-- Chris

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 20:29:03 +1100, Chris Cason
<del### [at] deletethistoopovrayorg> wrote:

>The limit should now be 5000k. I haven't tested it (though I am sure
>someone will:)
>

I tried to post a 4537K file to p.b.a 

Server Povray rejected post to newsgroup p.b.a : Articles may not be lager than
1000000 bytes.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 11:54:20 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 20:29:03 +1100, Chris Cason
> <del### [at] deletethistoopovrayorg> wrote:
> 
>>The limit should now be 5000k. I haven't tested it (though I am sure
>>someone will:)
>>
>>
> I tried to post a 4537K file to p.b.a
> 
> Server Povray rejected post to newsgroup p.b.a : Articles may not be
> lager than 1000000 bytes.

Remember that the server has to convert the file to uucoded text, so the 
file size on the server likely will be larger than on disk.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
>> I tried to post a 4537K file to p.b.a
>>
>> Server Povray rejected post to newsgroup p.b.a : Articles may not be
>> lager than 1000000 bytes.
> 
> Remember that the server has to convert the file to uucoded text, so the 
> file size on the server likely will be larger than on disk.

4/3'rds the size. But it's rejecting a 5 meg file because it'll only accept 
1 meg posts. There's just a second setting somewhere that's not right, or 
something like that.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 11:40:31 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> 1 meg posts

Actually, a little smaller than that. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 30 Mar 2009 11:03:02 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

>On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 11:40:31 -0700, Darren New wrote:
>
>> 1 meg posts
>

So what is 1000000 bytes in the real world?
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:52:44 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> So what is 1000000 bytes in the real world?

About 976 KB.

(Divide by 1024).

Jim

Post a reply to this message