I didn't know you've been "working with vectors and pixels for a couple of decades", and I'm not expected to. I just read your post. For all I know, you're a clever AI bot.
In any case, when people (at least in the graphic design field) use the terms "vector-based" or "raster-based" they're not talking about the most common output method. Besides, as far as I know, your claim that most 3D programs are vector/raster hybrids is highly unusual.
On the one hand, you're correct on them being different and complimentary. There is no "vector vs. raster" flamewar going on in professional circles. Graphic designers/digital artists use both.
On the other hand, I don't get your claim about 3d programs being both vector and raster. As you pointed out, more or less all of the output devices are raster based. Does it mean that all vector-based programs are both vector and raster? Or maybe it just means that the terms "vector" and "raster" mean something different than you think?
Well, considering that in the end, at least in Windows and Mac OS X, the icons are raster images, scalability is not that much of an issue. On the other hand, if you want to use complex reflection/shadow effects, or use photographic elements (such as in Mac OS X's Preview icon), you're better off with Photoshop rather than Illustrator. It depends more on the kind of icon you want to make.
As for 3d programs, they do share more with vector drawing programs than with raster based ones, but they are considered to be a separate category. You rarely hear people say "Vector based programs (like Illustrator, Freehand or Maya) or raster based programs (such as Photoshop or Painter)". Btw, I said "3d or raster" in my original comment. I never claimed that the two are the same.
1. Icons are far from always created in vector programs. Many of the OS X were obviously created using 3d or raster programs (in fact, they have this tutorial where they show how they made one of their icons, using photoshop). So were, as far as I remember, Firefox's main icon and default theme. It's easier to achieve certain things with raster programs, especially when it comes to photo-realistic icons.
2. It's pretty simplistic to claim that artists "create" in vector programs, and "edit" in raster programs. Corel Painter is a raster program, and it's certainly not for "editing". On the other hand, one of the most common uses for vector programs is to manipulate blocks of text, which is closer to "editing" than "creating" (pre-made text, pre-made fonts).
You use vector programs to make precise, scalable graphic elements, and you use raster programs to make photorealistic, or otherwise blurry graphics. In the end, they all edit in some way, and they all create in another. It really depends more on the job than on the tool.
As a Photoshop (and, occasionally, GIMP) user, I would be glad to know of what, in your opinion, is a good photo editing application for professionals? Am I missing out on something?
Your opinions piracy aside, copyright infrigment and theft are completely different things, legally speaking. So it's only "theft" by (flawed, outragous) analogy.
If we're at it, why not call it murder? The pirates are killing the artists' livelihood!
Ah, you keep mentioning RGB/CMYK and resolution like they're some kind of arcane knowledge only Real Designers know. To me, it's something you learn in a 28-day Photoshop course.
Design is about knowing stuff like color theory, composition, typography, and using them properly. I should note that while they're a dying breed, some great designers don't really know how to use the computer at all (they have underpaid geeks that do it for them).
Anyway: knowing about RGB/CMYK and resolution and believing in the undisputed superiority of Photoshop are not "design skills", just as knowing TeX isn't a "math skill". Actually making a good design (even in PaintshopPro) is a completely different thing.
The fact is that true child pornography is *extremely* rare anywhere, both in the internet and the physical world. Children just aren't sexy. They don't have the bodies for being sexy.
Most people would say that about antropomorphic animals as well, but furry porn is (unfortunately) quite easy to find. The reason that real child porn is relatively rare is because (suprise, suprise) it's highly illegal in most countries, and not because it is such a rare perversion.
Now this doesn't mean that a new Win API message couldn't be created something like WM_DROPONTASKBAR, but that wouldn't enable you to drop onto the task bar button of applications that do not specifically support that.
Applications that do not specifically support that? Well, Windows 3.11 applications don't support a whole bunch of things. Remember, that with Windows 95, Microsoft overhauled the API and UI, and if they designed something like a WM_DROPONTASKBAR message, all applications today would support it.
This, combined with the fact that something very similiar to dragging on the taskbar (the dock in OS X) does work, indicates that this was clearly a design flaw.
As far as I can remember, the verse said something about Moses "glowing", and "glowing" ("Koren") is exactly the same word as "horn" ("Keren"). Not only are these words closely related (rays of light in Hebrew are literally "horns of light"), in the vowel-less ancient Hebrew, they are written exactly the same way.
In practice, this is not how a [modern Western] military unit operates. Instead, they condition soldiers to obey orders and not question.
Oh come on, do you even know how Israeli soldiers are trained, or are you just relying on your political views of Israel? The IDF prides itself on being a "small and smart" army - that's obviously disputable, but it certainly not an "army of drones" strategy. Now, if you have any concrete examples to the contrary (regarding the training of the soldiers), I would like to hear them, but for now, it just seems that you're making this up (or heavily extrapolating).
I have no idea if it's just a bad translation, or if they just really have no clue that there are other fantasy role playing games other than Dungeons and Dragons, so they're using it as a generic term.
Both, more or less. Israelis often use the term RD&D to describe LARPs, and the translators decided to drop the "R".
Actually, it's the fault of the people who translated the original (Hebrew) article. The original piece mentioned RD&D, or "Real D&D", which is a general Israeli term for LARPs.
That this interesting piece of.. uh.. information.. was a comment in a code snippet that did just that - generated a 7Hz tone. I think it was to demonstrate Turbo C's PC-Speaker capabilities.
I wonder if the people who wrote this example really had something against chickens.
Just like with gay sex and open-source software, its easy to think that just because its fun and enjoyable, pirating music is okay, and should be permitted. But thats the wrong answer.
God hates fags... and open source developers?! Is it some kind of new pact between Microsoft and the Catholic Church? Am I missing something?
At least that's what, as far as I understand, game-testers (and QA people?) do. From what I've heard, being a programmer is both more interesting and financially rewarding, so I don't know why you'd love doing that.
I went to OpenSecrets and I saw no donations from Israel. I don't think that Israel is allowed to contribute (even 'soft' money). Do you think that US's pro-Israeli policies are because of campaign contributions from The State Of Israel? If so, may I have what you're smoking?
Or maybe you were talking about corporations that are headed by Jews, such as Saban Entertainment.
Re:Bitch'n moan about the UI...
on
Blender Is GPL
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps the reason you find blender difficult is you lack a foundation in 3d to base your knowledge upon.
...
The other camp that complains about the UI is the Lightwave and Max crowd who are comparing this relatively small program to a full featured suite.
Hmm. Most of the people I saw here complaining seemed to have experience with professional 3d packages. I might've miseed something (maybe browsing at -1 could help), but most of the people I've noticed belong to the "other camp".
And about that "other camp". As far as I understand, the main problem they have with Blender, is that it is actually more complex and harder to learn then the professional tools you've mentioned while being able to do much less.
Anyway, I don't think that Blender has this interface because easier interface are just so hard to invent. In fact, I'd say that more thought was invested Blender's keyboard/gesture oriented interface than in most professional tools. They tried to be original. To re-invent the wheel. Unfortunately, they chose to make it square.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great thing that Blender is free now, but I think that re-doing the interface from scratch is the right direction. 3d modeling is hard to learn as it is. There's no reason to make it any harder.
The point is that the pirates just pirate the version that doesn't need activation - there's no reason NOT to put such a version on your WAREZ site (or KaZaA shared folder, or a black market CD, whatever), instead of the crippled one that's being sold to the poor home users.
Thus, no piracy is being stopped, and the paying home users are being punished.
I have no idea why Microsoft are doing this. Maybe so they'll look like they're fighting piracy, to hide the fact that they use it as a part of their business strategy. Ideas, anyone?
Sometimes I just don't get the Slashdot crowd... Many of us use Linux and have given up on using Microsoft stuff, but when it comes to the latest crappy mainstream music, we whine that we can't pirate it?
Ah. But music is not like software. You can't just buy "a comparable free alternative". If you happen to like The Rolling Stones*, you don't find a band that's "the same as The Rolling Stones, but free" the same way you can do with, say, an OS.
Music is art. Art is unique. Software is replaceable. If you don't like a particular program, you could use a similiar program that does the same thing, and not lose anything. On the other hand, would you consider saying "Oh, The Beatles*? Never listened to them. Nope. Don't listen to Monopoly-owned bands. It's all mainstream crap, anyway"?
The problem is not "The big companies are making expensive music with restrictive licensese", but rather "The big companies keep us from listening to the music we like".
* Replace that with your favorite "mainstream" band, if you find The Rolling Stones and The Beatles too old/not enough disco-oriented/whatever. Using a newer band would bring a lot more discussion about it being "mainstream shite".
(btw, I really hope that you're trolling, and that the people that modded you up were very very drunk, as my opinion of the "slashdot crowd" just sunk to a new low)
Slashdot Mirror
In any case, when people (at least in the graphic design field) use the terms "vector-based" or "raster-based" they're not talking about the most common output method. Besides, as far as I know, your claim that most 3D programs are vector/raster hybrids is highly unusual.
On the other hand, I don't get your claim about 3d programs being both vector and raster. As you pointed out, more or less all of the output devices are raster based. Does it mean that all vector-based programs are both vector and raster? Or maybe it just means that the terms "vector" and "raster" mean something different than you think?
As for 3d programs, they do share more with vector drawing programs than with raster based ones, but they are considered to be a separate category. You rarely hear people say "Vector based programs (like Illustrator, Freehand or Maya) or raster based programs (such as Photoshop or Painter)". Btw, I said "3d or raster" in my original comment. I never claimed that the two are the same.
1. Icons are far from always created in vector programs. Many of the OS X were obviously created using 3d or raster programs (in fact, they have this tutorial where they show how they made one of their icons, using photoshop). So were, as far as I remember, Firefox's main icon and default theme. It's easier to achieve certain things with raster programs, especially when it comes to photo-realistic icons.
2. It's pretty simplistic to claim that artists "create" in vector programs, and "edit" in raster programs. Corel Painter is a raster program, and it's certainly not for "editing". On the other hand, one of the most common uses for vector programs is to manipulate blocks of text, which is closer to "editing" than "creating" (pre-made text, pre-made fonts).
You use vector programs to make precise, scalable graphic elements, and you use raster programs to make photorealistic, or otherwise blurry graphics. In the end, they all edit in some way, and they all create in another. It really depends more on the job than on the tool.
As a Photoshop (and, occasionally, GIMP) user, I would be glad to know of what, in your opinion, is a good photo editing application for professionals? Am I missing out on something?
If we're at it, why not call it murder? The pirates are killing the artists' livelihood!
Design is about knowing stuff like color theory, composition, typography, and using them properly. I should note that while they're a dying breed, some great designers don't really know how to use the computer at all (they have underpaid geeks that do it for them).
Anyway: knowing about RGB/CMYK and resolution and believing in the undisputed superiority of Photoshop are not "design skills", just as knowing TeX isn't a "math skill". Actually making a good design (even in PaintshopPro) is a completely different thing.
You know, comments like the grandparent's really give you a feeling of how old this flamewar is.
I think the reason is that there's simply not enough video games with alien protagonists.
Where are the cowboys in Hellsing? As far as I can remember, it has a modern setting, a la Vampire The Masquerade or Underworld.
Kudos for the ^_^ after "torturing hoboes". Probably the most disturbing thing I've seen this month.
This, combined with the fact that something very similiar to dragging on the taskbar (the dock in OS X) does work, indicates that this was clearly a design flaw.
As far as I can remember, the verse said something about Moses "glowing", and "glowing" ("Koren") is exactly the same word as "horn" ("Keren"). Not only are these words closely related (rays of light in Hebrew are literally "horns of light"), in the vowel-less ancient Hebrew, they are written exactly the same way.
Actually, it's the fault of the people who translated the original (Hebrew) article. The original piece mentioned RD&D, or "Real D&D", which is a general Israeli term for LARPs.
I wonder if the people who wrote this example really had something against chickens.
God hates fags... and open source developers?! Is it some kind of new pact between Microsoft and the Catholic Church? Am I missing something?
At least that's what, as far as I understand, game-testers (and QA people?) do. From what I've heard, being a programmer is both more interesting and financially rewarding, so I don't know why you'd love doing that.
What we see here is infinite recursion. This is neither a buffer overflow nor a segmentation fault. It's clearly a STACK OVERFLOW.
Or maybe you were talking about corporations that are headed by Jews, such as Saban Entertainment.
The other camp that complains about the UI is the Lightwave and Max crowd who are comparing this relatively small program to a full featured suite.
Hmm. Most of the people I saw here complaining seemed to have experience with professional 3d packages. I might've miseed something (maybe browsing at -1 could help), but most of the people I've noticed belong to the "other camp".
And about that "other camp". As far as I understand, the main problem they have with Blender, is that it is actually more complex and harder to learn then the professional tools you've mentioned while being able to do much less.
Anyway, I don't think that Blender has this interface because easier interface are just so hard to invent. In fact, I'd say that more thought was invested Blender's keyboard/gesture oriented interface than in most professional tools. They tried to be original. To re-invent the wheel. Unfortunately, they chose to make it square.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great thing that Blender is free now, but I think that re-doing the interface from scratch is the right direction. 3d modeling is hard to learn as it is. There's no reason to make it any harder.
Thus, no piracy is being stopped, and the paying home users are being punished.
I have no idea why Microsoft are doing this. Maybe so they'll look like they're fighting piracy, to hide the fact that they use it as a part of their business strategy. Ideas, anyone?
Ah. But music is not like software. You can't just buy "a comparable free alternative". If you happen to like The Rolling Stones*, you don't find a band that's "the same as The Rolling Stones, but free" the same way you can do with, say, an OS.
Music is art. Art is unique. Software is replaceable. If you don't like a particular program, you could use a similiar program that does the same thing, and not lose anything. On the other hand, would you consider saying "Oh, The Beatles*? Never listened to them. Nope. Don't listen to Monopoly-owned bands. It's all mainstream crap, anyway"?
The problem is not "The big companies are making expensive music with restrictive licensese", but rather "The big companies keep us from listening to the music we like".
* Replace that with your favorite "mainstream" band, if you find The Rolling Stones and The Beatles too old/not enough disco-oriented/whatever. Using a newer band would bring a lot more discussion about it being "mainstream shite".
(btw, I really hope that you're trolling, and that the people that modded you up were very very drunk, as my opinion of the "slashdot crowd" just sunk to a new low)