Re: GP3 article - scanned, cropped, photoshoped......maybe shouldn't have bothered.

Will this thread ever finish I wonder? Well then, where do I start ... Probably with the marvellous belittling reply from Dave. There is of course no intention to make enemies within this newsgroup but I seem to have set the ball rolling, hopefully this can all blow over & we can all get back to normal. My comments were simply to reassure Ian that I at least appreciated his postings. My reference to 'pedantic' individuals may have been a little rash, and, as Ian has done I also apologise if this offended anyone. I knew that he had also posted them in the binaries group but like so many others could not access all his postings. I do also have the vision to see the consequences should a multitude begin posting sizeable files to this group & then, I agree, it would become more than a nuisance in terms of download times. I hardly think I have invited hordes of such people to do so & as Ian's posts were relevant to current discussions I feel his contributions were valuable. Thank you also for such wonderful assumptions as to my logic of postings and apparent laziness in sifting through postings on binary newsgroups. My thoughts as to posting files here were solely in consideration of this single instance, and that those who do contribute do not deserve to be flamed out of the group and certainly not judged as to their character. Whilst I could reply to other comments made about me it would really be a fruitless task which would only carry on the obvious ill feeling that exists right now. I don't think I'm alone in saying that this is all very 'handbags at dawn' & completely not what r.a.s is all about. I may have contributed to this situation but at least I have made an apology for such actions. I'll be off to VROC and get back to my usual uncivil self. There's only so long that one can respond in this manner before sounding too much like royalty ;-) Cheers, Colin (a prick apparently)

Steve Ferguson wrote: > snip

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > So thanks. Don't worry too much about the UK folks who bleat the same > nonsense every time a binary pops up here. I can count on my fingers the > number of times a binary has been sent here. And of those, most have been > interesting for a broad audience. With all the fuss, one would think > people are still using 1200baud modems. It's not like the newsgroup is > getting 10 binaries a day...

Well, who cares about ONE binary post, but if you don't tell newbies not to post binaries everytime they do it, soon you will have binaries every day in this ng. Then most guys (including providers) will have something against it. -- l8er ronny Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change to take effect. Reboot now? |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

Steve Ferguson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:892n6v$a9l$[email hidden]... > I learn something new every day... our digital camera at work saves to > jpeg format. I have a Canon Powershot S10 which offers three levels of JPG. The finest setting usually gives you a 1600x1200 image of around 400~500K with no discernable artifacts. That would be nice, but you often want to tweak the image a bit, cropping, color correction, etc. and that introduces another JPGing when you save it. You could also just do the twiddling without saving it and print it directly, then *don't* save the changes (or save it to an uncompressed format) > So, if I open this image in a contemporary image editing > program and just want to rotate it 90 degrees and resave, then I lose > additional information if I save as jpeg, due to a second > compression? Yep, unless you match the compression exactly (not easy if you have changed the image at all). > What if I choose maximum quality in Photoshop? Is this > still lossy? Not very, but you don't get much compression that way, either. That's fine if you are just storing it for your own use, but if you intend to send it anywhere or use it on a web page you are defeating the purpose. >Is the software you mentioned the only one with lossless > jpeg saving? The newest version of ACDSee (great program) does lossless horizontal and vertical flipping, but not rotation. The JPEG Wizard claims to be the only program to do lossless rotation, AFAIK. Grab it!..it's free and is fully functional except for the batch processing which adds a watermark. Registering (50$) removes the watermark. > This could explain a lot of the perceived quality problems with > images. Doh. I subscribed to rec.photo.digital and cull lots of useful tidbits of info from it. You might pick up a few tips there. ~daxe

Really? Well, bugger me! Sorry. -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==---------- http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

On 24 Feb 2000, Steve Ferguson wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I learn something new every day... our digital camera at work saves to > jpeg format. So, if I open this image in a contemporary image editing > program and just want to rotate it 90 degrees and resave, then I lose > additional information if I save as jpeg, due to a second > compression? What if I choose maximum quality in Photoshop? Is this > still lossy? Is the software you mentioned the only one with lossless > jpeg saving?

Theoretically, if you are simply doing image rotation, you shouldn't lose significant quality if you choose the same compression ratio as the original (although there are ways to rip the compression out of the header, its easier just to play with the compression % until you hit the right file size). The reason for this is that JPG compression is based on frequency information, using a discrete cosine transform, and since simple rotation *shouldn't* affect frequency coefficients all that much, the information you are losing during the second compression should be very minimal, since it was already removed during the first. On the other hand, if you are doing more complex modifications, such as splicing images, resizing, and adding text, etc.. the new compession WILL most certainly affect the final quality. Areas of high spatial frequency will be blurred, meaning lines, text, and sharp edges will be of somewhat lower quality. Regarding lossless JPG, it certainly does exist, but the file size is too large to even bother with - GIF will give comparable if not much better results. In regards to the original question regarding scanned magazine articles - GIF will give better quality for the same file size, if the colour depth is kept small - ie, convert the image to 4bit grayscale before saving. regards, Andrew +-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+ | Andrew Busch | email : [email hidden] |+ PhD Student | + | Research Concentration in Speech, | Just when you think something is |+ Audio and Video Technology | idiot-proof, somebody builds a + | QUT, AUSTRALIA | better idiot. |+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+

hmm, next topic in line would be "quoting" ;)) File-size was 8k, Bruce :) cya Maaki

To Ian: If you can send him messages, then why don't you attach the binaries to your personal mails? To the others: There are lots of offline newsreaders available (some free) that let you first download the subjects of the messages, select the interesting ones offline and download only those messages. The complaints are useful since before you know it, things can get out of hand with everyone starting to post binaries here... JoH ======================================== Jo Helsen EDP Operations BF Belgium [email hidden] ========================================

Bruce Kennewell wrote: > > Well, bugger me! Ehhhh....no thanks. I don't swing that way. BB

Colin.......... (big sigh) I'm one of those pedantic twats you mentioned and I really shouldn't bite at your statements thereby extending this thread any further.. BUT I can't help myself....... why??? probably becos I'm a pedantic twat..... So in response to your somewhat strange comment stating that basically you can't be BOTHERED to look thru the headers in a binaries newsgroup....which BTW isn't there just to be awkward or to confuse you Colin, its there for people to upload binaries too.... you feel that anyone in R.A.S. who objects needs to be called a twat...... hmmmmmmm...... Ok mate, imagine this... imagine Ian isn't the only one who decides he gonna send binaries here, imagine that lots of ppl decide its ok and R.A.S. becomes full of megabytes of piccies of N3 crashes and Rally Chanpionship 2000 sunsets and GPL screenshots of some bloke beating Hill over the line in pro mode at Zandvoort... or pictures of some guy from Skegness who's made his own racing frame in the back bedroom of his mams house or..... oh well *hopefully* you get the idea.......... I don't think i'll be alone in my method of grabbing my ras postings, my method is to d/load all new headers and bodies and then read thru them off line... If this became a binary laden n/group that wouldn't be possible not unless i was willing to sit and wait and pay for meg after meg of unwanted pics.... if i want that i'll subscribe to........ can u guess........well i think you've guessed but than maybe i'm giving you too much credit........ To Ian....... I appreciate your intentions mate, but as you are now aware it was the wrong way to do things, your apology was very mature, gratefully accepted by all and immediately defused any flame war that could of started, please, please don't take any notice of this prick who can't be bothered to "Wade thru gallons of shite" (HE who hasn't yet realised that all that *shite* would be on R.A.S if we all used his logic)...... thanx and keep up the good scanning, but remember to link it ;)) Dave aka Davey_Willo_uk (VROC slowpoke) Colin McSkimming <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:88u68v$qio$[email hidden]... > Ian mate, I'm with you on this one. Much appreciated too. > > Whilst I have access to binary groups I loathe having to wadethrough > gallons of shite to get what I want. Pedantic twats that don'twant anything > other than text in r.a.s because it doesn't have the magical.binaries. > included in the title can take a running jump. > > You did us a favour mate. I'm in the UK too so I know the painof phone > bills too, but really 40 odd pence is hardly gonna keep you inchocolate > biscuits for five minutes these days. It's hardly a lifeshattering expense

Quoted text (7 lines)

> for quality merchandise is it. > > Cheers, > (Climbing into the flame-proof bunker) > Colin > > PS. Ian, you up for a GPL LAN sometime, by the look of it your

not a million > miles away from my end of the country. Good excuse for apiss-up too (spot > the Scotsman) > >

But I dont want to mess about logging on, downloading, logging off, checking headers, deciding what I want to read then logging back on to download what I want. Besides if people dont post binaries theres no problem as I can dl all my NG's and email within the minimum cost of a call (5p for about 2 mins on peak) If I have to log on twice it doubles my cost, but if someone posts several MB of binaries I'm online for about 20 minutes (or about 50p) Not to mention all the thousands of servers which are unnecessarily clogged by people posting attachments to groups which shouldn't carry them. That's how we lose the newsgroups from the servers. Anyway, the original poster apologised, thanks:) Anyone can make an honest mistake / oversight and I'm sure many people did appreciate the content of the posts if not the method and size of delivery ;) On another note, if anyone does want to post any image files that are related to this group, there are many of us who have active websites and would be willing to host the pics. Just don't mail them before checking as I use a different mail address for large files that I only download off peak ;) -- Ian Parker [email hidden] UKGPL League http://members.xoom.com/ukgpl == Jo Helsen <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > To Ian: > > If you can send him messages, then why don't you attach the binaries > to your personal mails? > > To the others: > > There are lots of offline newsreaders available (some free) that let > you first download the subjects of the messages, select the > interesting ones offline and download only those messages. > > > The complaints are useful since before you know it, things can get out > of hand with everyone starting to post binaries here... > > JoH > > ======================================== > Jo Helsen EDP Operations BF Belgium > [email hidden] > ========================================

Now, if you'd just cut out all the words, it would be perfect! BB Bruce Kennewell wrote: > > gigantic > > see im even cutting out uppercase and punctuation to keep the size down

-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==---------- http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

gigantic see im even cutting out uppercase and punctuation to keep the size down -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==---------- http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

LOL Jens On Wed, 23 Feb 2000 00:54:57 GMT, [email hidden] (bb) wrote: > >sorry...i missed that. could you re-post it? >:) > >Bo --------------------------------------------- [email hidden] Remove "NOSPAM" before using my email-address Visit my webpage at http://members.xoom.com/JensSchu/ for some serious stuff concerning: Radio controlled airplanes Racing simulation, esp. GPL Classic cars, esp. Morris Minor

Ian P <[email hidden]> wrote: : On another note, if anyone does want to post any image files that are : related to this group, there are many of us who have active websites and : would be willing to host the pics. Just don't mail them before checking as I : use a different mail address for large files that I only download off peak : ;) Just curious. When you are reading offline, and a message contains a link to a website, do you remember the appropriate message to then go back later, log on, start up a browser and go to that link? That is the one thing I have hated in going from online browsing to offline... In the cas of the GP3 interviews, I gladly suffered the download to my newsreader, but I'm a hypocrite, because I would also get mighty upset if people started flooding the newsgroup with, as the other person said, their pictures of bargain HyperSimulator replicas etc. Maybe what we need is alt.binaries.autos.simulators.magazine.articles.that.we.want.to.read.but.can't Stephen

Markus, there are some unnecessary empty lines in your post, you're still wasting that precious bandwidth! Andre On Fri, 25 Feb 2000 01:24:00 +0100, "Markus Stiepel" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > > > > > > >

Bruce -- I think the header and Newsfeeds sig is still racking up a couple hundred bytes...;) BB

For pete's sake, you guys are brutal! I hope everyone here isn't as mean-spirited. As for downloading messages you don't want, how 'bout cancelling your auto DL and going manual, it takes less than 5 seconds. *Learn to use your newsreader!* Or get one that has some functionality. BT On Wed, 23 Feb 2000 00:25:21 +0100, Andre Warringa <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

>Dave, not including the text from all the previous posts in the thread >saves a lot of bandwidth too... > >Andre > >On Tue, 22 Feb 2000 19:31:43 -0000, "Force9" ><[email hidden]> wrote: > >>Ok Ian no probs mate......... >> >>Just expect my phone bill thru your letter box if you do it again >>;0) >> >>Dave >> > >The rest of the text <SNIPPED> to save that precious bandwidth