Can the gimp open a 600 mb layered image plus a bunch of extra images to be inserted into it when it has only 300 mb to work with? (I am really curious if it can)
I know photoshop can when I do my photocollages/photoshop art. And I do not trust a windblows computer to do that either, but I might be a bit biased towards Apple;)
This is one of the most funny articles I have seen about the birth of the internet. For those who did not take the time to RTFA/RTFS (and most of u who posted here obviously did not) it is about the internet being born from steam technology in the early 19th century. Especialy the part about the pings is crude (ping: child of about 6 payed to crawl through steam pipes to clear them and often forgotten when the network was repressurized again)
And for the expected flood of responses saying, "You can do this with SVG+DHTML+SMIL+etc,etc"... bollocks. Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's practical.
The Apple handheld, the Newton Messagepad, had several ways of doing a tap on an icon/taskbar button or in an editing window. Tap, double tap, tap and hold (and scrub top erase it). Other programs added gestures and one half of an icon performing another function as the other half. We are talking 1994 to 1997 here.
I work on 300-600mb files having 20+ layers and photoshop uses 250 of my 512 mb memory (yes I should be getting more RAM). And you know what: it works fine.
Maybe I am a really old school kinda guy - but I do not trust running photoshop in a virtual environment AND being able to do the stuff I need it to do,
Sorry.
I totally agree. It will tak e several years to bring Longhorn to the market. In the mean time all Macromedia products should be proted to linux. This will hopefully create a momentum for linux and MS will start to feel some real heat.
I read an earlier draft of the Matrix 1 Script. There are some subtle differences, but these differences make it much more convincing.
In the earlier draft it is Trinity who says: let's go in and save morpheus. In the final version the choice Neo makes to go in is an important step on his path to becomming the one. He made a choice, all you ask yourself after you have seen him doing it: what will happen because of that?
There is not much about suspense, surprise etc in my post. Matrix 1 is no Hitchcock, it is no Memento, it is no Dark City. But what I do see is that during the making of part 1 they knew how to tell a story. Probably they hired some script expert who made subtle changes. When they made part 2 and 3 I guess they never went through that process. It is all about the visuals.
Same here:) Well, I had seen part of the trailer and thought Trinity was some kind of robot because of the way a program was downloaded into her over phone.
Suspense IS by definition that you know something more than the people who play their part in the movie. Hitchcocks favorite supsense mechanism was a story about a man being accused of something he did not do. The audience knows this and as a result feels for the hero. It is a very economical way of telling a story that is also used in the first Matrix to keep the audience with the story and explain some complicated stuff to them.
Suspense is never about 'is he the one?' but more about 'how will he get to realize he is?'
Compare the way the Matrix is explained to us to the way Spielberg explains jurrasic parc to us. Spielberg needs an hour or so and bores us to death because he gives a lecture. In the Matrix this is done in less time but because a mixture of suspense and surprise is used we don't want to miss a second of it.
Suspense is a game of creating expectations and fulliling them most of the time, and sometimes surprising us. And that game makes want to watch a movie untill the very end. In the first Matrix that game is played very well, whereas in the second and third Matrix only surprise is used in combination with breathtaking special effects. The fun part is however that these special effects are percieved as being boring by most of the viewers that left a testemony here. And in my opinion that is caused by the lack of suspense. If they had used suspense they could have done with a little less CG (but needles to say I LOVE CG) and they could have had a far better result.
People need to believe what they see with their heart and their brain first. Eyes come second because the brain can tell the eyes they have seen something that was not there. And suspense helps us to see that. Or - in some cases - a good psychosis.
Hitchcock would have loved the first one because of the clear cut way they told the story and used suspense to tell it.
'No officer, your men are allready dead' and after that you get the fight. It is a classic example of creating suspense like Hitchcock used it, but faster.
But Hitchcock would have hated the sequels. The story has no starting point, instead it follows the Hollywood formula of all sequels: just let the same events happen in roughly the same order (Trinity opens with a fight and someone dies and is resurected). It is like they forgot how to deliver a complex story to an audience. Instead it became a vehicle for stunning special effects. And that is something that continues in the third episode with for instance the use of rain. There is no better way to show your quality as a CG master than with the use of rain isn't there?
No. this one has 'hire me' signs all over it. Just like the second one. They did not start a new CG company for nothing. This is just a big trailer sponsored by those visiting the cinema and buying the DVD.
The should have started part two with an introduction on the use of keys and being a program. Just like they did in number one with the use of special forces.
As a parent of two I know what a burdon a game with not enough save points can be especially when it is time for the other child to play (or time for homework or bed)
Games without an easy save system are simply banned.
Slashdot Mirror
Can the gimp open a 600 mb layered image plus a bunch of extra images to be inserted into it when it has only 300 mb to work with? (I am really curious if it can) I know photoshop can when I do my photocollages/photoshop art. And I do not trust a windblows computer to do that either, but I might be a bit biased towards Apple ;)
This is one of the most funny articles I have seen about the birth of the internet. For those who did not take the time to RTFA/RTFS (and most of u who posted here obviously did not) it is about the internet being born from steam technology in the early 19th century. Especialy the part about the pings is crude (ping: child of about 6 payed to crawl through steam pipes to clear them and often forgotten when the network was repressurized again)
And for the expected flood of responses saying, "You can do this with SVG+DHTML+SMIL+etc,etc"... bollocks. Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's practical.
Exactly!
The Apple handheld, the Newton Messagepad, had several ways of doing a tap on an icon/taskbar button or in an editing window. Tap, double tap, tap and hold (and scrub top erase it). Other programs added gestures and one half of an icon performing another function as the other half. We are talking 1994 to 1997 here.
I work on 300-600mb files having 20+ layers and photoshop uses 250 of my 512 mb memory (yes I should be getting more RAM). And you know what: it works fine. Maybe I am a really old school kinda guy - but I do not trust running photoshop in a virtual environment AND being able to do the stuff I need it to do, Sorry.
I totally agree. It will tak e several years to bring Longhorn to the market. In the mean time all Macromedia products should be proted to linux. This will hopefully create a momentum for linux and MS will start to feel some real heat.
Ah, just dreaming away.
I read an earlier draft of the Matrix 1 Script. There are some subtle differences, but these differences make it much more convincing.
In the earlier draft it is Trinity who says: let's go in and save morpheus. In the final version the choice Neo makes to go in is an important step on his path to becomming the one. He made a choice, all you ask yourself after you have seen him doing it: what will happen because of that?
There is not much about suspense, surprise etc in my post. Matrix 1 is no Hitchcock, it is no Memento, it is no Dark City. But what I do see is that during the making of part 1 they knew how to tell a story. Probably they hired some script expert who made subtle changes. When they made part 2 and 3 I guess they never went through that process. It is all about the visuals.
Same here:) Well, I had seen part of the trailer and thought Trinity was some kind of robot because of the way a program was downloaded into her over phone.
Suspense IS by definition that you know something more than the people who play their part in the movie. Hitchcocks favorite supsense mechanism was a story about a man being accused of something he did not do. The audience knows this and as a result feels for the hero. It is a very economical way of telling a story that is also used in the first Matrix to keep the audience with the story and explain some complicated stuff to them.
Suspense is never about 'is he the one?' but more about 'how will he get to realize he is?'
Compare the way the Matrix is explained to us to the way Spielberg explains jurrasic parc to us. Spielberg needs an hour or so and bores us to death because he gives a lecture. In the Matrix this is done in less time but because a mixture of suspense and surprise is used we don't want to miss a second of it.
Suspense is a game of creating expectations and fulliling them most of the time, and sometimes surprising us. And that game makes want to watch a movie untill the very end. In the first Matrix that game is played very well, whereas in the second and third Matrix only surprise is used in combination with breathtaking special effects. The fun part is however that these special effects are percieved as being boring by most of the viewers that left a testemony here. And in my opinion that is caused by the lack of suspense. If they had used suspense they could have done with a little less CG (but needles to say I LOVE CG) and they could have had a far better result.
People need to believe what they see with their heart and their brain first. Eyes come second because the brain can tell the eyes they have seen something that was not there. And suspense helps us to see that. Or - in some cases - a good psychosis.
Hitchcock would have loved the first one because of the clear cut way they told the story and used suspense to tell it.
'No officer, your men are allready dead' and after that you get the fight. It is a classic example of creating suspense like Hitchcock used it, but faster.
But Hitchcock would have hated the sequels. The story has no starting point, instead it follows the Hollywood formula of all sequels: just let the same events happen in roughly the same order (Trinity opens with a fight and someone dies and is resurected). It is like they forgot how to deliver a complex story to an audience. Instead it became a vehicle for stunning special effects. And that is something that continues in the third episode with for instance the use of rain. There is no better way to show your quality as a CG master than with the use of rain isn't there?
No. this one has 'hire me' signs all over it. Just like the second one. They did not start a new CG company for nothing. This is just a big trailer sponsored by those visiting the cinema and buying the DVD.
The should have started part two with an introduction on the use of keys and being a program. Just like they did in number one with the use of special forces.
Oh man, I feel so sorrry for you I am blushing. Honestly!
As a parent of two I know what a burdon a game with not enough save points can be especially when it is time for the other child to play (or time for homework or bed) Games without an easy save system are simply banned.