|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1-2-2018 14:39, dick balaska wrote:
> On 02/01/2018 08:06 AM, Stephen wrote:
>> On 01/02/2018 12:38, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>
>>>
>>> So, unless POV-Ray: The Movie is going to be one of those...
>>>
>>
>> You won't even take on "the wise old man of the forest",role?
>>
>
> He could stand there and say "I am de Groot" in various inflections.
Yes, I think I could do that to right effect indeed. Which reminds me of
"Guardians of the Galaxy": "I am groot" ;-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 02/02/2018 07:40, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 1-2-2018 14:39, dick balaska wrote:
>> On 02/01/2018 08:06 AM, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 01/02/2018 12:38, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> So, unless POV-Ray: The Movie is going to be one of those...
>>>>
>>>
>>> You won't even take on "the wise old man of the forest",role?
>>>
>>
>> He could stand there and say "I am de Groot" in various inflections.
>
> Yes, I think I could do that to right effect indeed. Which reminds me of
> "Guardians of the Galaxy": "I am groot" ;-)
>
De Groot the Great has a ring to it.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> >>> You won't even take on "the wise old man of the forest",role?
I was thinking he'd be the cantankerous guy with the hoarse voice, dressing down
these fancy young whippersnappers.
"Back when I was your age, we used to raytrace the old fashioned way: with a
stick - in the sand, grain by grain. That was old school. _And we liked it._"
;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2-2-2018 21:14, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>
>>>>> You won't even take on "the wise old man of the forest",role?
>
>
> I was thinking he'd be the cantankerous guy with the hoarse voice, dressing down
> these fancy young whippersnappers.
>
> "Back when I was your age, we used to raytrace the old fashioned way: with a
> stick - in the sand, grain by grain. That was old school. _And we liked it._"
>
> ;)
>
Pshaw! That's what we did, didn't we? Grain by grain by grain. First
dressing the menhir down of course.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/02/2018 07:43, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 2-2-2018 21:14, Bald Eagle wrote:
>> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> You won't even take on "the wise old man of the forest",role?
>>
>>
>> I was thinking he'd be the cantankerous guy with the hoarse voice,
>> dressing down
>> these fancy young whippersnappers.
>>
>> "Back when I was your age, we used to raytrace the old fashioned way:
>> with a
>> liked it._"
>>
>> ;)
>>
>
> Pshaw! That's what we did, didn't we? Grain by grain by grain. First
> dressing the menhir down of course.
>
I'll stop you now. I've heard it. ;-)
This is the one where you meet up with Cohen the Barbarian and the
strange fellow with a traffic cone as a hat. Isn't it?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3-2-2018 10:13, Stephen wrote:
> On 03/02/2018 07:43, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 2-2-2018 21:14, Bald Eagle wrote:
>>> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> You won't even take on "the wise old man of the forest",role?
>>>
>>>
>>> I was thinking he'd be the cantankerous guy with the hoarse voice,
>>> dressing down
>>> these fancy young whippersnappers.
>>>
>>> "Back when I was your age, we used to raytrace the old fashioned way:
>>> with a
>>> liked it._"
>>>
>>> ;)
>>>
>>
>> Pshaw! That's what we did, didn't we? Grain by grain by grain. First
>> dressing the menhir down of course.
>>
>
> I'll stop you now. I've heard it. ;-)
> This is the one where you meet up with Cohen the Barbarian and the
> strange fellow with a traffic cone as a hat. Isn't it?
>
Yes Terry. ;-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/02/2018 07:39, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 3-2-2018 10:13, Stephen wrote:
>> On 03/02/2018 07:43, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> On 2-2-2018 21:14, Bald Eagle wrote:
>>>> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> You won't even take on "the wise old man of the forest",role?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was thinking he'd be the cantankerous guy with the hoarse voice,
>>>> dressing down
>>>> these fancy young whippersnappers.
>>>>
>>>> "Back when I was your age, we used to raytrace the old fashioned
>>>> way: with a
>>>> liked it._"
>>>>
>>>> ;)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Pshaw! That's what we did, didn't we? Grain by grain by grain. First
>>> dressing the menhir down of course.
>>>
>>
>> I'll stop you now. I've heard it. ;-)
>> This is the one where you meet up with Cohen the Barbarian and the
>> strange fellow with a traffic cone as a hat. Isn't it?
>>
>
> Yes Terry. ;-)
>
Alas not. :-(
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4-2-2018 9:18, Stephen wrote:
> On 04/02/2018 07:39, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 3-2-2018 10:13, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 03/02/2018 07:43, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> On 2-2-2018 21:14, Bald Eagle wrote:
>>>>> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You won't even take on "the wise old man of the forest",role?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I was thinking he'd be the cantankerous guy with the hoarse voice,
>>>>> dressing down
>>>>> these fancy young whippersnappers.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Back when I was your age, we used to raytrace the old fashioned
>>>>> way: with a
>>>>> we liked it._"
>>>>>
>>>>> ;)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Pshaw! That's what we did, didn't we? Grain by grain by grain. First
>>>> dressing the menhir down of course.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'll stop you now. I've heard it. ;-)
>>> This is the one where you meet up with Cohen the Barbarian and the
>>> strange fellow with a traffic cone as a hat. Isn't it?
>>>
>>
>> Yes Terry. ;-)
>>
>
> Alas not. :-(
>
>
Not?
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/02/2018 12:13, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 4-2-2018 9:18, Stephen wrote:
>> On 04/02/2018 07:39, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> On 3-2-2018 10:13, Stephen wrote:
>>>> On 03/02/2018 07:43, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>> On 2-2-2018 21:14, Bald Eagle wrote:
>>>>>> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You won't even take on "the wise old man of the forest",role?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was thinking he'd be the cantankerous guy with the hoarse voice,
>>>>>> dressing down
>>>>>> these fancy young whippersnappers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Back when I was your age, we used to raytrace the old fashioned
>>>>>> way: with a
>>>>>> we liked it._"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Pshaw! That's what we did, didn't we? Grain by grain by grain.
>>>>> First dressing the menhir down of course.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'll stop you now. I've heard it. ;-)
>>>> This is the one where you meet up with Cohen the Barbarian and the
>>>> strange fellow with a traffic cone as a hat. Isn't it?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes Terry. ;-)
>>>
>>
>> Alas not. :-(
>>
>>
>
> Not?
>
Yes, Not.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4-2-2018 13:35, Stephen wrote:
> On 04/02/2018 12:13, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 4-2-2018 9:18, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 04/02/2018 07:39, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> On 3-2-2018 10:13, Stephen wrote:
>>>>> On 03/02/2018 07:43, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>>> On 2-2-2018 21:14, Bald Eagle wrote:
>>>>>>> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You won't even take on "the wise old man of the forest",role?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was thinking he'd be the cantankerous guy with the hoarse
>>>>>>> voice, dressing down
>>>>>>> these fancy young whippersnappers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Back when I was your age, we used to raytrace the old fashioned
>>>>>>> way: with a
>>>>>>> we liked it._"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pshaw! That's what we did, didn't we? Grain by grain by grain.
>>>>>> First dressing the menhir down of course.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll stop you now. I've heard it. ;-)
>>>>> This is the one where you meet up with Cohen the Barbarian and the
>>>>> strange fellow with a traffic cone as a hat. Isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes Terry. ;-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Alas not. :-(
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Not?
>>
> Yes, Not.
>
>
Well, that is quite definitive indeed. Not even a little tiny bit of yes?
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|