|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
4858c728@news.povray.org...
> ...and if somebody didn't recognise this particular reference, would it
> matter?
>
The question is whether this somebody wants to fit in and be part of the
local culture or not.
If the answer is "I don't care", then it doesn't matter: it's a perfectly
respectable choice to remain out of the loop. But when that somebody also
expresses dismay at finding himself excluded and unable to relate to other
people in a significant way, then it does matter. One cannot refuse to fit
while still wanting to fit at the same time.
Note that it's not a true dichotomy - nobody is able to grasp every single
bit of common knowledge lying around and there are variable levels and
scopes of "fitness" anyway - but it's up to everyone to make this kind of
choice, consciously or not.
G.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
>> ...and if somebody didn't recognise this particular reference, would it
>> matter?
>>
>
> The question is whether this somebody wants to fit in and be part of the
> local culture or not.
Actually it was more a question of whether you have to be able to "get"
every single individual cultural reference to understand a conversation,
but sure, you could frame it that way.
> Note that it's not a true dichotomy - nobody is able to grasp every single
> bit of common knowledge lying around and there are variable levels and
> scopes of "fitness" anyway - but it's up to everyone to make this kind of
> choice, consciously or not.
Well then, I guess what I need to do is somehow find a group of people
who actually like the same kind of things as me. [A problem that doesn't
appear to be unique to me...]
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>
> The file happened to be laying around on my HD. It's actually meant to
> be watched at 22 frames/second - but the MPEG headers say 25, which is
> why it looks so damned fast.
Nah, I ment that the steps are so big that there's no MPEG-style motion
blur.
> But I tried freeze-framing it in a few
> places, and nothing really serious was evident.
Yep, nothing serious, but still visible.
> Certainly this video looks miles better than anything Mencoder has so
> far managed to produce for me. Every time I try with Mencoder, I get
> huge blocks of rainbow colours appearing here and there, and sometimes
> really ugly DCT artifacts as if the file is actually corrupted somehow...
Yep, this does look good, certainly the best MPEG-1 I've ever
seen...Hey, wait a minute, I just watched it again and found out why it
looks so good:
Selected video codec: [ffmpeg2] vfm: ffmpeg (FFmpeg MPEG-2)
So I re-checked:
aero@groath ~ $ file ~/Example.mpg
/home/aero/Example.mpg: MPEG sequence, v2, MP@ML progressive Y'CbCr
4:2:0 video, LD-TV 640P, 30 fps
Seems that the MPEG-header on the file I got says it's MPEG-II with 30fps.
>
> Well OK, but you have to look pretty damned hard to find them. Certainly
> compered to the chewed up mess Mencoder gives me, these look flawless!
>
I even saw them on the first time I watched it - my eyes are getting
cranky about those :(. I think I'll need to watch overcompressed JPEG's
and FLV's for few months to get back to reality.
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethis zbxt net invalid
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |