What if a plane crashes into a building and you have no close by news source?
Well, if I'm near the building where the plane crashed, I kinda already know what's going on, what do I need CNN.com to tell me about it? Not to mention that a flaming cascade of debris is going to command my attention a hell of a lot more than getting the news from a web site. Dunno about you, but I'd be running away too fast to browse or even care about the news.
And if I'm nowhere near that building, thank god, and I can wait to get home to see horrendous suffering replayed over and over and over and over again on my big TV screen instead of wondering how much that guy is really bleeding on my small PDA/phone screen.
What a flat panel LCD monitor lacks in resolutions, it makes up for in display consistency.
True, they're very consistent in smearing and ghosting my mouse pointer whenever I move it more than 1/4" at a time.
There is no pincushioning, no color seperation problems, the picture fills the entire screen perfectly, a horizontal or vertical line of pixels is perfectly straight and there is absolutely no flicker.
Nor do CRTs suffer these problems, if you spend a whopping 30 seconds to adjust any of these abnormalities that might appear. Certainly none of them are permanent, and once they are set you never have to touch them again.
BTW, with a CRT you DON'T have a single dead pixel here and there like an LCD has. I have yet to see one laptop or one LCD flat panel that doesn't have at least one dead pixel, and ALWAYS in the center of the screen. And I don't know about you, but I can ALWAYS see the RGB pixel pattern on an LCD, and it's incredibly distracting.
So glad they are producing the feature in the same medium and not moving to the computerized version of W & G. Stop motion animation has such a great feel to it.
I totally agree! I think George Lucas needs to sit down with Nick Park and learn from Nick how to infuse an animated character with personality and performance in a way that engages the audience. Simply using CGI to show off the latest whiz-bang Flame/Maya/Photoshop plugin that renders Yoda's hair with the appropriate translucency is not a substitute for character...especially considering that Frank Oz made the "old technology" Yoda puppet far more convincing than the CGI version was.
SQL Server 7.0 and 2000 now have an 8K page size, and the max. row size is 8096 bytes. With v7.0 the Sybase code base has been eliminated (meaning they didn't deliberately port any old code, but there are probably lots of similarities in the new code base)
Uh moron, exactly how do the "concerned mothers" pass themselves off as genuine researchers? How exactly is their opinion more valid? If a mother actually had a college degree WTF is she doing on a talk show?
For all we know, none of them have kids either; they provided just as much "evidence" as Jenkins did. And for the ones that do have kids, 80% of them are buying these games for their kids. And the ones that aren't, and their kids have them anyway, aren't doing their fucking job as parents.
Mr. Jenkins is.
And your whole statement about media circus and informed debate is actually the point of the article...did you even read the fucking thing? The "Childish Intellectuals" have actually recognized that this type of discourse is horseshit and doesn't accomplish anything useful. You and Phil Donahue haven't realized this yet. It's just a "whupping in a public debate".
I love the irony of a U.S. organization (RIAA) suing U.S. corporations (ISPs) for NOT doing something they're NOT required by law to do, thereby destroying the ISPs potential revenue (!), just because they're NOT blocking a site in a Communist, totalitarian country! (with whom the U.S. is spending a great deal of time, money and effort in opening new trade and business relationships)
At a constant 1G acceleration, you'd hit Mach 7.6 in about 4 minutes and travel about 260 KM. The Space Shuttle goes supersonic within 75 seconds of liftoff, so it really doesn't take too long. I think by the time the boosters drop off (2-1/2 minutes) it's doing Mach 3 or better.
The X-15 hit Mach 6.72, and its maximum burn time was under 5 minutes (it was a rocket plane though), so it makes sense for something like a hypersonic engine to be used for real flights, even NY-LA would be practical...under 1 hour door-to-door, no need for a crappy airline meal! The SR-71 has already done NY-LA in about 1 hour at Mach 3.5.
I can't wait for someone to patent the English language, or to put a shrink-wrap license around a dictionary. It's gonna make it really hard to fight the case in court using only sign language.
----- Ebottish: Ebonics spoken with a Scottish accent
...cause if you do, you can modify it to full automatic, just like any other (respectable) gun.
Take the two halves apart (one screw) and find the plastic stopper underneath the sprocket wheel. Two minutes with some sandpaper should take it off. Put it back together and load it up. You lose the click-stop so it'll load a little differently, but NOTHING beats the ability to fire 6 rubber bands with one trigger pull!
Mostly covered by other people, but I'll consolidate them here:
1. Cost Savings
One of the things that was (and still is) heavily lauded about digital effects is the savings in cost vs. "traditional" effects. Nowadays every movie with even a moderate effects loads cost near $100 million, and have 300 effects artists working on it. Phantom Menace and AOTC had over 1,000 digital artists working for over 2 years on it. And LOTR...3 films filmed as one production, effects all done at one company, all done in NZ which is far less expensive than the U.S., and it still averages over $90 million per film.
Exactly where are the costs savings?
2. Image Quality
I've noticed that the CG supporters say digital is better, image quality is better, but most CG work is being done at 2K resolution, and it shows in films. I remember reading that TRON had some scenes rendered at 4K, and that was 20 years ago! I haven't seen any digital effects on IMAX, maybe I didn't notice, but there's no way it can equal the image quality of film at anything less than 12K resolution, or 4K on normal 35mm.
I'm thinking that the industry is moving towards the unification of video and film to the detriment of image quality. HDTV will hasten this. Then everyone can shoot at 2K on their HDTV cameras and *maybe* rez up to 3K or 4K if they want to show it in IMAX.
I can't see why CG can't be done at higher resolutions, even if the difference "won't be noticed by most people". It's amazing that Lawrence of Arabia and 2001: A Space Odyssey still blow away today's films after 35-40 years of time, even with all of the advances made since then. Look at AOTC: whether digital or film projection, it *looks* like a computer generated/animated film! I wish George Lucas would simply dispense with the live actors and just make Episode 3: Shrek vs. Anakin, and stop saying how "realistic" the effects are.
I'm tired of hearing about the "limitations" of film quality; go see Lawrence, 2001, or Spartacus. Better yet...BLADE RUNNER. Then tell me exactly how AOTC & CGI looks better.
Does anyone in the effects industry feel the same way? Are there any efforts being taken to improve image quality substantially, at least to the maximum potential of film quality?
Whooopie! Convert it into a.WAV file and then convert it back into an.MP3. Do it correctly and you'll lose less than 1% of the audio signal and 100% of the watermark data. Put the.MP3 on your favorite P2P network and keep your watermarked copy for yourself as a backup.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I noticed that all those dragons that used to be in the middle of the Atlantic are nowhere near there anymore.
Well, if I'm near the building where the plane crashed, I kinda already know what's going on, what do I need CNN.com to tell me about it? Not to mention that a flaming cascade of debris is going to command my attention a hell of a lot more than getting the news from a web site. Dunno about you, but I'd be running away too fast to browse or even care about the news.
And if I'm nowhere near that building, thank god, and I can wait to get home to see horrendous suffering replayed over and over and over and over again on my big TV screen instead of wondering how much that guy is really bleeding on my small PDA/phone screen.
True, they're very consistent in smearing and ghosting my mouse pointer whenever I move it more than 1/4" at a time.
There is no pincushioning, no color seperation problems, the picture fills the entire screen perfectly, a horizontal or vertical line of pixels is perfectly straight and there is absolutely no flicker.
Nor do CRTs suffer these problems, if you spend a whopping 30 seconds to adjust any of these abnormalities that might appear. Certainly none of them are permanent, and once they are set you never have to touch them again.
BTW, with a CRT you DON'T have a single dead pixel here and there like an LCD has. I have yet to see one laptop or one LCD flat panel that doesn't have at least one dead pixel, and ALWAYS in the center of the screen. And I don't know about you, but I can ALWAYS see the RGB pixel pattern on an LCD, and it's incredibly distracting.
I totally agree! I think George Lucas needs to sit down with Nick Park and learn from Nick how to infuse an animated character with personality and performance in a way that engages the audience. Simply using CGI to show off the latest whiz-bang Flame/Maya/Photoshop plugin that renders Yoda's hair with the appropriate translucency is not a substitute for character...especially considering that Frank Oz made the "old technology" Yoda puppet far more convincing than the CGI version was.
no way this can ever be as good as the anime. there's something about anime that just can't be done right with live-action and real actors
Probably the ungodly tits and the saucer eyes, and the noses too small for even mosquitoes to breathe through...but that's just a WAG.
SQL Server 7.0 and 2000 now have an 8K page size, and the max. row size is 8096 bytes. With v7.0 the Sybase code base has been eliminated (meaning they didn't deliberately port any old code, but there are probably lots of similarities in the new code base)
Uh moron, exactly how do the "concerned mothers" pass themselves off as genuine researchers? How exactly is their opinion more valid? If a mother actually had a college degree WTF is she doing on a talk show?
For all we know, none of them have kids either; they provided just as much "evidence" as Jenkins did. And for the ones that do have kids, 80% of them are buying these games for their kids. And the ones that aren't, and their kids have them anyway, aren't doing their fucking job as parents.
Mr. Jenkins is.
And your whole statement about media circus and informed debate is actually the point of the article...did you even read the fucking thing? The "Childish Intellectuals" have actually recognized that this type of discourse is horseshit and doesn't accomplish anything useful. You and Phil Donahue haven't realized this yet. It's just a "whupping in a public debate".
Like the Salem witch trials.
I love the irony of a U.S. organization (RIAA) suing U.S. corporations (ISPs) for NOT doing something they're NOT required by law to do, thereby destroying the ISPs potential revenue (!), just because they're NOT blocking a site in a Communist, totalitarian country! (with whom the U.S. is spending a great deal of time, money and effort in opening new trade and business relationships)
At a constant 1G acceleration, you'd hit Mach 7.6 in about 4 minutes and travel about 260 KM. The Space Shuttle goes supersonic within 75 seconds of liftoff, so it really doesn't take too long. I think by the time the boosters drop off (2-1/2 minutes) it's doing Mach 3 or better.
The X-15 hit Mach 6.72, and its maximum burn time was under 5 minutes (it was a rocket plane though), so it makes sense for something like a hypersonic engine to be used for real flights, even NY-LA would be practical...under 1 hour door-to-door, no need for a crappy airline meal! The SR-71 has already done NY-LA in about 1 hour at Mach 3.5.
I can't wait for someone to patent the English language, or to put a shrink-wrap license around a dictionary. It's gonna make it really hard to fight the case in court using only sign language.
-----
Ebottish: Ebonics spoken with a Scottish accent
...cause if you do, you can modify it to full automatic, just like any other (respectable) gun.
Take the two halves apart (one screw) and find the plastic stopper underneath the sprocket wheel. Two minutes with some sandpaper should take it off. Put it back together and load it up. You lose the click-stop so it'll load a little differently, but NOTHING beats the ability to fire 6 rubber bands with one trigger pull!
Mostly covered by other people, but I'll consolidate them here: 1. Cost Savings One of the things that was (and still is) heavily lauded about digital effects is the savings in cost vs. "traditional" effects. Nowadays every movie with even a moderate effects loads cost near $100 million, and have 300 effects artists working on it. Phantom Menace and AOTC had over 1,000 digital artists working for over 2 years on it. And LOTR...3 films filmed as one production, effects all done at one company, all done in NZ which is far less expensive than the U.S., and it still averages over $90 million per film. Exactly where are the costs savings? 2. Image Quality I've noticed that the CG supporters say digital is better, image quality is better, but most CG work is being done at 2K resolution, and it shows in films. I remember reading that TRON had some scenes rendered at 4K, and that was 20 years ago! I haven't seen any digital effects on IMAX, maybe I didn't notice, but there's no way it can equal the image quality of film at anything less than 12K resolution, or 4K on normal 35mm. I'm thinking that the industry is moving towards the unification of video and film to the detriment of image quality. HDTV will hasten this. Then everyone can shoot at 2K on their HDTV cameras and *maybe* rez up to 3K or 4K if they want to show it in IMAX. I can't see why CG can't be done at higher resolutions, even if the difference "won't be noticed by most people". It's amazing that Lawrence of Arabia and 2001: A Space Odyssey still blow away today's films after 35-40 years of time, even with all of the advances made since then. Look at AOTC: whether digital or film projection, it *looks* like a computer generated/animated film! I wish George Lucas would simply dispense with the live actors and just make Episode 3: Shrek vs. Anakin, and stop saying how "realistic" the effects are. I'm tired of hearing about the "limitations" of film quality; go see Lawrence, 2001, or Spartacus. Better yet...BLADE RUNNER. Then tell me exactly how AOTC & CGI looks better. Does anyone in the effects industry feel the same way? Are there any efforts being taken to improve image quality substantially, at least to the maximum potential of film quality?
Whooopie! Convert it into a .WAV file and then convert it back into an .MP3. Do it correctly and you'll lose less than 1% of the audio signal and 100% of the watermark data. Put the .MP3 on your favorite P2P network and keep your watermarked copy for yourself as a backup.