I have to disagree, because as soon as any kind of tone-mapping is involved you change the respective relationship between two intensities in a photograph, and that will never look right.
I have to concur, even with proper tone-mapping, after a while you just realise that it's not a good idea to compress a high range into a smaller one. It's very analogous to compression in music where you take a sound with a dynamic range of perhaps 90 dB and compress it so it takes less than 60, or even fisheye photography where you'd shoot with a FOV of 180 degrees and view it with less than a 40 degrees FOV. Both are helpful if you really need to view the whole dynamic range at once within a smaller dynamic range, but in general you don't want to do that.
HDR in consumer and professional photography has a future but tone-mapping not so much, as it's good to be able to adjust exposure after the shot (the real use of HDR) but you don't want to squeeze the dynamic range.
And according to another study, Blackberry owners are 'big stoopid doo doo heads', while the same study finds that Android users are smooth, cool and 230% more likely to have sex with more than one partner a week.
If you knew anything at all about exoplanet discovery you'd know that most discovered planets orbit awfully close to their star and as a result have a revolution of only a few days, mostly when it comes to observing transits. You're not gonna observe a transit of any planet in the solar system from any other random system (you'd probably never get a single transit because you wouldn't be aligned with the solar system's plane to begin with).
And then I believe that by "same distance" you meant "same revolution", or perhaps you also ignore everything about how gravity works?
No it fucking doesn't. Just because there's something you don't like doesn't mean you can pretend like it's not really there. "And their analysis shows an excess of extinctions every 27 million years, with a confidence level of 99%.". We're talking about hard statistical analysis, there's absolutely nothing that goes in the way of your bullshit "anomaly/bias/incomplete data" explanation.
If your interpretation of Occam's Razor is "if I can't see why things are the way they are then they mustn't be like this" you need to do some reading.
What I really don't get is people like you. We live in an age where we can almost make cars drive themselves through traffic. For a VTOL like a sci-fi flying car, it would be even more trivial to have a system that would take off vertically from a point, reach a specific altitude, follow a specific set of paths and land vertically on a programmed spot.
This would be relatively trivial to achieve, so can you tell me of any single damn reason why an eventual flying car should require more input than "take off and take us to school"?
Yeah, so basically any form of 3D display is useless to you. The only thing that'd any good to you would be something that'd track the position of your watching eye to modify the display accordingly. In a way you've got it good, it's technologically simple for you to be fooled into thinking what you see is like real 3D.
lol, I figured as much (usually when you see "1=0" your maths troll detector should go off), it's just that usually when you see that it's from a real head scratcher, this one would just keep someone busy for 10 seconds and then dismiss it as idiotic. Or perhaps I was trolled into expecting something clever to instead find the opposite?
Off topic : I just want to point out that your signature is stupid. You can't do that with a non-monotonic function like square, because you can find more than one possible values by reversing the function.
The article is thin on details, so I was wondering if it wasn't about the same thing except with depth information (as in, a depth map) instead of an unprocessed image.
If you hear a depth map it'll be a hell of a lot more useful to navigate through a crowd than raw images.
Wouldn't that be E Pluribus Pluribum? Never mind me, I'm French, we may not have spelling bees, but we learn Latin. And English. And Spanish. And German. I think you get my point.
Another perhaps more meaningful way to put it is that it's the same volume as a sphere with a diameter of 1366 km (roughly the size of Iapetus), knowing that the Moon has a diameter of 3476 km, which means a sphere with 16.5 less volume than the Moon.
Oh please, guiding missiles is fairly trivial, mostly compared to this. When you're far beyond stall speeds it's just a matter of comparing your vector with where you want to go and adjusting where your nose is pointing accordingly.
Here what's done is non-trivial because of how hard it is to even simulate accurately the slide. Actually they're pretty much just using a replay so when you think about it that's somewhat unimpressive.
OK, so in other words we don't know shit, some nutjobs just agree to speculate on shit they know nothing about without any way to test/verify them, and nothing in your previous post can even qualify as things we know. Furthermore you seem to accept reports of alien abductions as more than a psychological phenomena whereas even though the good faith of the people who report them is hard to doubt there's no physical evidence for their claims and everything seems to indicate that people who report abductions do so as a result of being suggested so by therapists. Sounds like a case of "I want to believe" to me, which means no one will be able to reason you due to your selectivity in the things you will accept.
I accept your apology. Besides, if you believe alien do abductions but that they'd destroy us if they met us, why aren't they in the process of genociding us? I'm sure you have a fascinating theory about this that would wield more insights into the way you think than anything else. Nevermind, I just read something you wrote in the first comment : "Aliens have been here since the dawn of history and simply remain hidden because they exist in a higher energetic state. We are trees to their people, and with our vastly limited perceptive abilities as compared to theirs, we are nothing more than a crop awaiting harvest." lol... So, tell me more about the forthcoming alien apocalypse according to you. Should we drink your Kool Aid and commit collective mass-suicide?
some semi-related experience in energy and spirit work
Am I the only one to think that it's senseless for games to be measured in hours of gameplay they offer? They're games, not movies or books. How many hours is SimCity 2000? 1 hour? 1000 hours? See it doesn't make any sense for such a game because unlike a lot of modern single player games it's not an interactive movie, it's a game, it doesn't have a story, it has mechanics.
Less stories, more mechanics. And stop designing loosely connected individual maps, create a world and make everything happen in it, like GTA does.
Slashdot Mirror
I have to disagree, because as soon as any kind of tone-mapping is involved you change the respective relationship between two intensities in a photograph, and that will never look right.
I have to concur, even with proper tone-mapping, after a while you just realise that it's not a good idea to compress a high range into a smaller one. It's very analogous to compression in music where you take a sound with a dynamic range of perhaps 90 dB and compress it so it takes less than 60, or even fisheye photography where you'd shoot with a FOV of 180 degrees and view it with less than a 40 degrees FOV. Both are helpful if you really need to view the whole dynamic range at once within a smaller dynamic range, but in general you don't want to do that.
HDR in consumer and professional photography has a future but tone-mapping not so much, as it's good to be able to adjust exposure after the shot (the real use of HDR) but you don't want to squeeze the dynamic range.
Another way to put it is that it's high-pass filtered (actually part of how it's achieved), hence the glow in the sky around dark buildings.
And according to another study, Blackberry owners are 'big stoopid doo doo heads', while the same study finds that Android users are smooth, cool and 230% more likely to have sex with more than one partner a week.
If you knew anything at all about exoplanet discovery you'd know that most discovered planets orbit awfully close to their star and as a result have a revolution of only a few days, mostly when it comes to observing transits. You're not gonna observe a transit of any planet in the solar system from any other random system (you'd probably never get a single transit because you wouldn't be aligned with the solar system's plane to begin with).
And then I believe that by "same distance" you meant "same revolution", or perhaps you also ignore everything about how gravity works?
No it fucking doesn't. Just because there's something you don't like doesn't mean you can pretend like it's not really there. "And their analysis shows an excess of extinctions every 27 million years, with a confidence level of 99%.". We're talking about hard statistical analysis, there's absolutely nothing that goes in the way of your bullshit "anomaly/bias/incomplete data" explanation.
If your interpretation of Occam's Razor is "if I can't see why things are the way they are then they mustn't be like this" you need to do some reading.
There's a slight distinction between engineers who create things and users who use things. Your analogy is worse than a car analogy.
What I really don't get is people like you. We live in an age where we can almost make cars drive themselves through traffic. For a VTOL like a sci-fi flying car, it would be even more trivial to have a system that would take off vertically from a point, reach a specific altitude, follow a specific set of paths and land vertically on a programmed spot.
This would be relatively trivial to achieve, so can you tell me of any single damn reason why an eventual flying car should require more input than "take off and take us to school"?
Am I the only one who read "GOATSE with pushpins" and thought that it sounds a lot more painful than the regular goatse?
Yeah, so basically any form of 3D display is useless to you. The only thing that'd any good to you would be something that'd track the position of your watching eye to modify the display accordingly. In a way you've got it good, it's technologically simple for you to be fooled into thinking what you see is like real 3D.
If you have a lazy eye aren't you screwed whatever the technique? How can you see in 3D if you only use one eye?
All of our email, web and telephone traffic is monitored by the state.
Yeah? Tell Americans about that.
As for our "free" health care - it's not free, we pay it through taxes.
Hahahaha. You can't really that dumb, can you?
lol, I figured as much (usually when you see "1=0" your maths troll detector should go off), it's just that usually when you see that it's from a real head scratcher, this one would just keep someone busy for 10 seconds and then dismiss it as idiotic. Or perhaps I was trolled into expecting something clever to instead find the opposite?
Off topic : I just want to point out that your signature is stupid. You can't do that with a non-monotonic function like square, because you can find more than one possible values by reversing the function.
The article is thin on details, so I was wondering if it wasn't about the same thing except with depth information (as in, a depth map) instead of an unprocessed image.
If you hear a depth map it'll be a hell of a lot more useful to navigate through a crowd than raw images.
Wouldn't that be E Pluribus Pluribum? Never mind me, I'm French, we may not have spelling bees, but we learn Latin. And English. And Spanish. And German. I think you get my point.
Is it me or does this summary make no fucking sense whatsoever?
Another perhaps more meaningful way to put it is that it's the same volume as a sphere with a diameter of 1366 km (roughly the size of Iapetus), knowing that the Moon has a diameter of 3476 km, which means a sphere with 16.5 less volume than the Moon.
Oh please, guiding missiles is fairly trivial, mostly compared to this. When you're far beyond stall speeds it's just a matter of comparing your vector with where you want to go and adjusting where your nose is pointing accordingly.
Here what's done is non-trivial because of how hard it is to even simulate accurately the slide. Actually they're pretty much just using a replay so when you think about it that's somewhat unimpressive.
lol... translation "no I'm not a nutjob, aliens abduct us and you're closed minded for not accepting that despite a lack of compelling evidence".
lol, if you think I'm gonna read all of that you must be seriously deluded. Oh wait, you are!
OK, so in other words we don't know shit, some nutjobs just agree to speculate on shit they know nothing about without any way to test/verify them, and nothing in your previous post can even qualify as things we know. Furthermore you seem to accept reports of alien abductions as more than a psychological phenomena whereas even though the good faith of the people who report them is hard to doubt there's no physical evidence for their claims and everything seems to indicate that people who report abductions do so as a result of being suggested so by therapists. Sounds like a case of "I want to believe" to me, which means no one will be able to reason you due to your selectivity in the things you will accept.
I accept your apology. Besides, if you believe alien do abductions but that they'd destroy us if they met us, why aren't they in the process of genociding us? I'm sure you have a fascinating theory about this that would wield more insights into the way you think than anything else. Nevermind, I just read something you wrote in the first comment : "Aliens have been here since the dawn of history and simply remain hidden because they exist in a higher energetic state. We are trees to their people, and with our vastly limited perceptive abilities as compared to theirs, we are nothing more than a crop awaiting harvest." lol... So, tell me more about the forthcoming alien apocalypse according to you. Should we drink your Kool Aid and commit collective mass-suicide?
some semi-related experience in energy and spirit work
lol gtfo
Too bad Mussolini never said this. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Benito_Mussolini
Their nipples and cunts are showing. sauce
Am I the only one to think that it's senseless for games to be measured in hours of gameplay they offer? They're games, not movies or books. How many hours is SimCity 2000? 1 hour? 1000 hours? See it doesn't make any sense for such a game because unlike a lot of modern single player games it's not an interactive movie, it's a game, it doesn't have a story, it has mechanics.
Less stories, more mechanics. And stop designing loosely connected individual maps, create a world and make everything happen in it, like GTA does.