On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 21:30:55 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 23/12/2013 6:17 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 17:59:04 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> Getting a bit la-di-da, are we?
>>> I have a remedy for that. One you'll like, methinks.
>>>
>>> Valhalla.
>>> The brewery that is. The one in Baltasound, Unst.
>>
>> Moving out of turn?  That puts you in Huff for a round.
>>
>>
> It was that Black Night. I've not been myself since.

But would you know?

>> But hey, that's a good move, so I'll make it instead. :)
>>
>>
> Damn! It has got to be Stornoway. (In this weather.)

Hehehehehehehe.

But wait, you're in Huff.  So it's now John's turn.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 21:13:12 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 23/12/2013 6:15 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> >I heard that! Pardon?
>> You heard me.  You said so.;)
>>
> Sorry a quote from an 80's (?) TV comedy set in the North (With a
> capital N) called "I did not know you cared".

Lots of planets have a North.

But I may need to check it out.

>>> >Ah! The Christmas spirit! It has started.:-)
>> We're into the final stretch.
>>
>>
> Who are you calling a Stretch, Jimmy. ;-)

Sorry, Stevie, that was Samantha.

> 
>>>> >>Well then.  Euston Road.  And remember that the game/must/  last
>>>> >>until the 25th of December.;)
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>> >The way you two are playing. It will last forever.;-)
>> I don't see the problem there, do you?  Thinking you might feel a bit
>> knackered?
>>
>>
> OMG! Someone who thinks the journey is better than the arrival.

Well, it depends on the destination, usually.  But in this particular 
case, the journey's the point - because we all *know* the destination.

>>> >BTW Your (checks, yes your) Christmas Day or ours?
>> Mine, of course.  Since you asked.
> 
> I did ask but you don't think that I listen, do you?

Huh? Sorry, I didn't hear you.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 23/12/2013 9:50 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 21:06:53 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 23/12/2013 6:13 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> You would "un-man" Shakespeare.;-)
>>> Well, certainly if he criticized other people's use of the language and
>>> then made basic grammar errors.
>>>
>>>
>> That was more Johnson's forte.
>
> Certainly.  Pity Baldric burned Johnson's dictionary. ;)

Bugger! I meant Jonson as in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Jonson

Even if Baldric did so. There are plenty in America. It is used to help 
determine the meanings of the words at the time of your constitution.

>
>> I was referring to Cleopatra's love unmanning Anthony.
>> It is often used as an argument against the criticism of using a noun as
>> a verb.
>>
>> Please Sir! "Shakespeare did it."
>
> Ah, I must make a note to re-read Shakespeare.  Or in some cases, to read
> it. ;)
>

Better to see them, IMO.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 23/12/2013 9:51 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> But wait, you're in Huff.  So it's now John's turn.

Pedant!

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 23/12/2013 9:53 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 21:13:12 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> Who are you calling a Stretch, Jimmy. ;-)
>
> Sorry, Stevie, that was Samantha.
>
>>

My turn to use the "S" word again.

Jimmy is a signifier that someone is from Glasgow. Every second person, 
including women, is called Jimmy.

As long as you have a "y" or "ie" at the end of your name. It is okay.
Stevie is acceptable.


>>>
>>>
>> OMG! Someone who thinks the journey is better than the arrival.
>
> Well, it depends on the destination, usually.  But in this particular
> case, the journey's the point - because we all *know* the destination.
>


And that is?
>


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 23/12/2013 6:12 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Cycles is a pretty nice renderer, though - definitely worth a look.  But
> yeah, exporting to POVRay is also a good option - there is (or used to
> be) a POVRay export tool, in fact, but I think it was for 3.5.

I've used it a couple of times to see what it is like. The problem for 
me is that it is slow and grainy. I would rater use what little skils I 
have with materials in PovRay.

There is an exporter in development. I was helping to test it before I 
got too busy.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24/12/13 15:51, Stephen wrote:
> On 23/12/2013 9:53 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Well, it depends on the destination, usually.  But in this particular
>> case, the journey's the point - because we all *know* the destination.
>>
> 
> 
> And that is?
>>
> 

Umm ... The sofa in front of the telly with the Queen's speech - glass
of port in hand and nuts and nibbles arrayed?

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

On 24/12/13 15:46, Stephen wrote:
> On 23/12/2013 9:51 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> But wait, you're in Huff.  So it's now John's turn.
> 
> Pedant!
> 

Bond Street (last minute shopping)

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 15:54:59 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 23/12/2013 6:12 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Cycles is a pretty nice renderer, though - definitely worth a look. 
>> But yeah, exporting to POVRay is also a good option - there is (or used
>> to be) a POVRay export tool, in fact, but I think it was for 3.5.
> 
> I've used it a couple of times to see what it is like. The problem for
> me is that it is slow and grainy. I would rater use what little skils I
> have with materials in PovRay.

You have to increase the number of iterations to get it to look less 
grainy.  There's a setting for that, both in preview and in a final 
render.

Which is where an nVidia GPU comes in - it's capable of rendering the 
image to a high quality *very* quickly.  CPU rendering is incredibly slow 
by comparison.

> There is an exporter in development. I was helping to test it before I
> got too busy.

A new one?  Or an update to the old one?  URL?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 15:45:37 +0000, Stephen wrote:

>>> That was more Johnson's forte.
>>
>> Certainly.  Pity Baldric burned Johnson's dictionary. ;)
> 
> Bugger! I meant Jonson as in:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Jonson
> 
> Even if Baldric did so. There are plenty in America. It is used to help
> determine the meanings of the words at the time of your constitution.

Ah, well, you know how well *that* is working out for us now.  Words only 
mean what's convenient for our personal opinions and views these days.  
Free speech, for example, is for those who think everyone should say 
"Merry Christmas" this time of year, regardless of their personal 
beliefs.  It's not for people who wish others "Happy Holidays".

Or it's for people who say bigoted things, not for those who would make a 
value judgment and respond "hey, that's a bigoted thing, and free speech 
doesn't mean 'speech without consequences'."

>>> I was referring to Cleopatra's love unmanning Anthony.
>>> It is often used as an argument against the criticism of using a noun
>>> as a verb.
>>>
>>> Please Sir! "Shakespeare did it."
>>
>> Ah, I must make a note to re-read Shakespeare.  Or in some cases, to
>> read it. ;)
>>
>>
> Better to see them, IMO.

Well, yeah, but we don't exactly have the RSC here in Utah.  Though we do 
have an annual Shakespeare festival in the southern part of the state.

Jim

Post a reply to this message