Messages

Are you sure it's gone?

Ctrl-alt-del ->
Applications tab ->
New task button ->
type explorer
[enter]

Sometimes when my machine hangs (icons go away) - like after bad game crash, explorer closes. Since I'm too impatient to wait while it restarts (and rarely it will not), I restart explorer manually, like described above -- to avoid reboot

Seems like installation wants to install something before explorer is started, but it's f-d up somehow.

If you DO get explorer running, start->run->type msconfig, go to startup tab and uncheck anything that could be that evil patch... probably some rundll32 or msiexec thing. If you get problem solved, start switching things back to be sure you eliminated only the problem and not - audio drivers startup for example.

Every tree might be different but increator's technique can would for any sort of tree I think

Well, with this I agree and can prove it too:


Only exception is maybe pine (pine? sorta) - First, instead of one base color, I made something gradient-like, and second - the root and trunk shading is reworked with a soft brighten brush. Also, I changed custom brush size here and there, but this applies to all three.

But for rest 95%, the technique is same, simply with bit more effort.... only a bit.
Use less density on foliage, and you get a dead tree.

One fault here is that brighten/darken doesn't work well with all colors, better with greens and okay with blues and totally awful with reds. This is well seen on birch - neither brightening nor darkening did much good to orange color, and result still feels quite flat.

Only thing I wouldn't make with this tech are really strange trees, like stereotypical palm trees.

Cannot draw properly with Razer Krait! Gaming mice ain't for pixel drawing...

Well, there's a reference, isn't it?
The tree tombom62 made?

Looking at it now, drawn 12 minutes after waking up, it looks quite horrid to myself...  Especially leaves (too flat) and palette choice.

Drawing a bit better custom brushes and putting more care to it - while doing everything as shown - is still how I make a tree.
So, the technique is exactly correct, simply this tutorial doesn't show the best that can be done with the technique.

It's awful.

Here's a 7-minute tutorial for you:

It really DID take 7 minutes. Using an hour, I could make 10 trees!

All you need is a program that allows you to draw custom brushes(Gimp, Photoshop,whatever... I used ArtGem!), spraypaint them, and use brighten/darken as processor. Ability to have layers - I used 3 - would help also greatly! If not - magic wand selector is a must.

1. Freehand a tree. Used brown color + pencil, not line tool. It gives more jagged and natural look.

2. Add branches. Branches tend to grow upwards on most trees. Fill with tree base color.

3. Now make custom brush, simply few vertical lines. I made them a bit messy to get more natural result
Then, use brush as spray, and processor as brighten/darken 3%, and paint over tree trunk. More in the middle to get cylindrical shading, darken on edges.

4. Make layer under trunk layer. Make a brush that looks like leaves. Make sure to connect them in the middle so there would be no "floating", not connected leaves. Spray them with base leaf color.

5. Using same brush, brighten-darken on base color leaves to shade them. Be gentle, those will be background leaves

6. Add another layer of leaves, this time infront of branches. Don't cover branches wholly, let some be visible. Rework with brightness processor, be more aggressive this time. Aim for cylindrical shading, brightening in center/upper side, darkening edges. Use 5% darkening leaf tool on trunk, slightly under leaves to make some shadows.

Then adjust everything, like brightness, saturation, contrast to get best result. Add about 3-6% monochromatic noise to fake some additional detail

7. (Not in tutorial) - fix all flat areas with 16px soft, 5% darkening brush, like roots and branches to make them less flat and give them more shape/round/realistic shade

Writing this post took more than drawing this tree!

Watchable.

Unfortunately, there's very little of episodes on Youtube and TV is something that.... wastes valuable computer time so I haven't watched really for years. Not even with a TV card.

Well, as much I've learned from my camera - it's looks like it's built for moving things, low light and texture-related stuff. It's a little bit unusual to not have LCD preview of what camera "sees" - like ordinary digital cameras - because DSLR/mirror cameras don't work quite that way, but I'm getting used to it.
For example, I managed to catch a droplet moving at freefall speed, in quite low bathroom light...


Not very sharp though, but it was one of starter images. I've done different experiments, with moving cars and such, and if you're quick and can move camera along with object, it will be fully focused and "frozen", like bullet-time stuff.

Only thing at all that I cannot "catch" is my cat's eyes. While people are too slow to blink at the flash on this camera, my cat somehow isn't. Damn those reflexes! 



...
What I especially like - and what helps with textures, is good focusing/depth of view. Low detail and blurred background apart from focused stuff lets me get textures for plants, trees and so on, and afterwork - removing background - will be much easier due background blurring.

An example of webcam and my crazy wallpaper (about 20-cm behind the webcam)


Click below for full 3888x2592 image - excellent detail!
http://www.increator.pri.ee/i/pull/nemesis.jpg

Now, If I had to remove wallpaper to make it transparent, it really wouldn't so hard as it was with my old camera which didn't blur out-of-focus stuff.

And yay, RAW format is also well supported, and there's even RAW+JPG kind of thing, a mixed version.

I'm still learning, but fiddling with aperture size, ISO speeds and shutter delay isn't as difficult as I initially thought and I have quite a lot of successful photos taken by now.

Only problem I have with this camera is that my eyes often fail to see electronic text in viewfinder, often it becomes blurry (should I go see doctor?) and it's kind of stupid that you have to press your nose against LCD to look into viewfinder.

Also, it's kind of crazy, the evidence on photos. I never knew people's skin looks so sick close-up and there's so much scratches and dust around us... It's... incredible. Everything looks clean and nice to naked eye, and on a photo, it's like a universe of mess and dust. ..
Take this webcam image, for example. On embedded image here, on 1280x1024 desktop resolution, it's about 125% of real life size. I mean, real camera is a bit smaller than on the image. You barely notice any dust. Even less on real camera since it's smaller.

But on the hi-res image I photographed/linked above... opens a whole new dimension, eh?
I wouldn't want to photograph surgery tools...

Hm. to hell with rules.

There's a joke one co-worker always told when he got tipsy...
This one's russian origin, best if spoken in russian and it's hard to internationalize/translate, but I'll try my best, and be polite
--
A small girl walks on the street, passes a waiting taxi.
"Hey girl, want me to do you?" a horny taxi driver asks.
Girl gets scared and runs home.

"Mom, taxi driver wanted to 'do' me. What does it mean?"
Mom decides to not tell the truth.
"Oh, this means he wants to drive you in his taxi."

Some time later, mother, little girl, her grandmother and their dog Rover are going to visit some relatives.
"Go to the street and ask a taxi driver how much will the fare be", mother says to a girl.

Girl runs out and asks taxi driver:
"How much would it cost to do me, mom, grandma and Rover?"

Taxi driver scratches head:
"Well, I would do you for free, $50 for mom, and grandma..."
"Eh, well, let Rover do grandma!"

Ah thanks thanks thanks, Buckethead!

That was exactly what I was looking for. Simple answers for simple question.
And that brief texturing PDF had a link at the end which brought me to many other good, similar tutorials!

If there's any other gold of knowledge, this thread isn't closed, of course, but I got my most critical answers.

Not to spoil the ending, but infact, every single AGSer is a female, even CJ, and Mittens was nothing but meeting of AGSers' boyfriends, forced to play their AGSer girlfriend... With few exeptions where AGSers really did attend (female mitteneers) and kept an eye on boyfriends so they wouldn't stray from their act.

Everything's a female conspiracy!

Here's my christmas present:


A Canon Rebel XS / EOS D1000 - tech stuff below
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0806/08061002Canon1000D.asp

Really neat, huh? 

Well, I plan to take up amateur photography and aside everyday shooting, use this hell machine to make some nice textures for 3d. I believe the machine is more than enough for this.

Problem is - I know ditto about modern digital photography. All those f/s whatever shutter speeds, image stabilizers, ISO thingies, digital noise - I know nothing, or just enough to connect the term to photography, but not much else. 

And this camera is FULL of buttons! Buttons, buttons everywhere! It took a while to even find shoot button!

Well, and it's quite difficult to find a way to learn. Google gives everything, but most of this everything I found is too much for a beginner, including wikipedia entries.

The camera had 4 manuals, none of which were english or estonian, or even russian (languages I could read). No PDF format manual or user guide on driver disc neither However, I aquired it from Canon homepage.

I'd like to have those terms and stuff explained in a nutshell, dumbed down enough for me to make direct connections how this and that actually makes better or worse picture. Like what ISO does. What shutter speed does, which numbers should be high and what do I have to use/observe if I want a picture in low light or close-up, etc. I'm sure I don't even need half of the possibilities, but I need to know ones that benefit in getting a good photo.

Can anyone provide a link for stuff I need? As I explained, simple enough to understand? BUT practical. I don't care much for theory, if it doesn't give me practical results. I mean, good pictures and textures.
Maybe something that helped yourself much?

The ones I found are similar to modelling tutorials: you can't use some, because you're not advanced enough, even though it's a tutorial.

Help me!

Remove template'ish stance.
It's so overused.

Wheelchair will NOT save you from animating.
Instead, it will work horrible with 4-direction views.

Best laptop is no laptop.

That's my recommendation.
Those machines were sent directly from seventh layer of hell. Or from heaven, to punish mankind for their sins.
I got few people with fairly new laptops around and all I do is repair them & solve mysterious, unexplained and illogical problems. One day, USB is not working. Another, wifi simply disappears. Third, screen goes black out of nowhere. Then, the battery isn't recharging. Then, <insert some stupid hardware shit that repairs itsself after few days>. Atleast one-two times per week.

So,
Best laptop is NO damn laptop.

Had multiple pirate versions of NES before computers, subor, zhiliton and some others whose name I cannot recall.
Those tend to break quickly so, there.

But after this... after getting my first PC...
Not having a console.
Never will.

Got loads of various emulators & games though.

Take a store-purchased music CD. Go somewhere without any background noise.
Wear headphones.
Listen... carefully. Not as usual "music is my wallpaper", but really - pay attention.

Now listen same thing on mp3.

MP3 format isn't generally worse than lossless algorithm. For human ear, there's nothing or very little "lost".

But the quality, especially stereo separation and overall cleanliness of sound -- if you really take a moment and full attention span to notice, is about 50% worse. With all my music needs satisfied with radio, youtube or mp3's, it's quite amazing to listen to CD's sometimes. The difference feels really strong. Especially with noiseless music genres, such as classical instrumental music or hip-hop. I don't think there's so much difference in dance music or heavy metal/etc.

I fail to see how the knowledge standard dude from modern time could actually kickstart Stone Age civilization.

See, they're living in caves. They eat only if thrown stone actually manages to hit a game and injure it enough to catch.

I see how basic knowledge of CPR and medicine, food & water preservation and simple pottery would benefit here. But...

Suggesting them to eat more C-Vitamin or wash on daily basis (they wouldn't anyway, grease, mud and dirt repels mosquitos) really won't protect them against mountain lions or hunger... And they don't have time to do numbers while they're starving. So,

How to make clothes out of cotton or sheep wool?
How to build a crossbow or longbow? (AFAIK, projectile based weapons are absolutely highest point of any civilization, dividing human and danger)
How to build a motte-and-bailey or any other defensive structure while stone ax is your only tool?
How is paper made? Using tools of this age? Or parchment or anything to write on?

I would still feel so dumb...
I could do clock though. Sundial! I'm into wilderness survival stuff, so I can read sun well enough to locate north and south (billion ways here), predict time and so on. Basic navigation too.

Oh, the transmitter/receiver idea would make the concept of a voodoo doll possible

Man, think BIG! Think gaming!!!!

A wireless spinal impulse controller! Like play Crysis and actually feel tropical breeze on your face, taste salt water and smell gunpowder... whoah! And coming back to porn... eh

Yeah, spot on, Andail.

What I'm thinking with this thread is that we could know things, but to even survive with them for a week, we need lessons from them first.

The most bizarre thing here I'm not Sherlock Holmes with deductive reasoning... What I mean is-

I know what mining and refining is, how steam engine works or how magnets make electricity in generators. But being dropped into Stone Age, i could build a steam engine, but I would need nails, iron, a hammer, a drill, etc. I don't know how to acquire them! I'm not really sure where to find a magnet or how to forge a copper nail or wire using tools of the age.

Like, we know the result, but not the path to the result, not the progress.
Look around in your room. Pick an item. Now, you're in the woods and have a stone hammer. How would you proceed to make that item you picked?

Thinking this way makes me feel really dumb... 

Thinking about it again, so that's what elementary school is for! Writing, reading and basic maths would benefit any civilization in any age.

...have just time travelled to 30000 B.C, Stone age.

Human beings live in small groups of 30-60. They wear animal skin and yield clubs, very primitive bows and stones. They are hunters. Most valuable resource is flint, which makes quite sharp weapons, yet is rare and hard to find.
They have no buildings to speak of and live in caves or lean-to's. When there's prey, they hunt and eat till there's food. If it ends, they go back hunting. They don't grow anything and rarely store any food for difficult periods. If game gets rare, they relocate to better hunting grounds, moving around often. They haven't domesticated dogs yet.
Most valuable thing is fire, which is guarded day and night and tied with beliefs of hunting luck of the tribe.

So, you arrived. An educated, advanced human from distant future. You've seen planes and TV's, internet and other planets.

They greet you kindly and are amazed by your clothing. You see how primitive and badly organized their life is. Your knowledge will surely prove useful.

-----------------
This is kind of thing i've been wondering sometimes. To be honest, I personally could do very little with all my space-age knowledge to provide practical help. Their tools would be way too primitive to build or mine anything, I wouldn't recognize crops or know how to grow them, I don't know how to build a crossbow or recognize most of ores.

* If we'd came upon iron-rich clay, I probably could handle building a little smelter and introduce them to metals.
* I do know a bit about basic principles of taming a horse.
* I could give some very basic tips about building a hut and introduce them to oven
* I can make fire with sticks. It was one of greatest discoveries and in this age, still very little known
* Fish nets can be made of animal intestines or strips of fur
* I know where and how to build a well

Still, coming from our time, this sounds like nothing.
---

How could you help them?
I mean, so it would be really doable?

My unanswered mystery of all time:

Is nerve impulse physical? I mean, is it an electric, bioelectric, anything material we could capture or transfer?
If so, can we redirect nerve impulse into something else? Like a wire? Third string of nerves, like animal ones?
I know that if you lose a finger, it can be sewn back and nerves too. So, it's likely. Why havent anyone then thought about...

-- Is is possible to connect nerves of two people so if one gets hammered onto toe, another one yells?

Also, another big riddle is - where could I actually get answers to questions like this? I mean, apart from having physics/anatomy/whatever professor as a friend? Internet might have everything, but sometimes seems to lack very basic knowledge of scientific progress. Wikipedia/howstuffworks/etc well-known sites are brief and other sites are either well hidden or non-existing.

Kind of sad that the flagship of information age can satisfy any crazy request for porn, but not knowledge...