It's Friday! Where's my comic????
*gnaws on Jim's elbow*
Rar! Hungry! Want fuzz!!
*glomps off to find other sustenance*
Rar!
Rar!
~Gloria~
-
The Overseer
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:05 am
Oh come now. She not only knows, apparently on sight, who Tristan is and where he lives- and well enough to beat him home and get into his apartment/studio ahead of him... and she's gonna fall for the old wait here while I get the other roll of film trick?
The transparent handrail's kind of cool though.
Yah, PC problems can pull a high vacuum, can't they... Just out of curiosity, you mentioned cut-and-pasting a section of scanned hand-shaded image... Do you really cut-and-paste it or did you convert it to a "flood fill" graphic? Just click to fill a certain line-defined area?
I use Paintshop, and the time it takes to convert it to something you can use for the flood fill app is well worth the effort. Might- assuming you don't do it that way already- save you a little time.
Rennen
The transparent handrail's kind of cool though.
Yah, PC problems can pull a high vacuum, can't they... Just out of curiosity, you mentioned cut-and-pasting a section of scanned hand-shaded image... Do you really cut-and-paste it or did you convert it to a "flood fill" graphic? Just click to fill a certain line-defined area?
I use Paintshop, and the time it takes to convert it to something you can use for the flood fill app is well worth the effort. Might- assuming you don't do it that way already- save you a little time.
Rennen
Yes.Rennen wrote:Oh come now. She not only knows, apparently on sight, who Tristan is and where he lives- and well enough to beat him home and get into his apartment/studio ahead of him... and she's gonna fall for the old wait here while I get the other roll of film trick?
..okay, perhaps not.
(Sighs.) Everything good I do is a mistake. (But sadly not vice versa.)Rennen wrote:The transparent handrail's kind of cool though.
I do something vaguely similar. To start with, I fill in the required areas with several pre-defined shades of grey which match my 'carpet samples', then paste a bed of each over the picture, select its corresponding area, and delete the 'opposite'. Saves time and gives an impression of what the result would look like. I wouldn't be surprised if Photoshop can do what you describe, though. (I might well ask it to - your method sounds yet quicker.Rennen wrote:Yah, PC problems can pull a high vacuum, can't they... Just out of curiosity, you mentioned cut-and-pasting a section of scanned hand-shaded image... Do you really cut-and-paste it or did you convert it to a "flood fill" graphic? Just click to fill a certain line-defined area?
I use Paintshop, and the time it takes to convert it to something you can use for the flood fill app is well worth the effort. Might- assuming you don't do it that way already- save you a little time.
)Computer problems are yuck, and have made me feel rather less than 100%. I'm probably going to have to buy a whole new set of software. On the upside, I can get ridiculous discounts as soon as I can use my Cambridge e-mail...
I know the "glass handrail" was an artifact of a work-in-progress.
I simply happen to be afflicted with flaucinaucinhilipificatism, and thus can't help but point out flaws in things I run across. I keep it under control with a strict regimen of medication and regular beatings.
I'm not sure I follow the process you describe for filling in the shading, but it does indeed sound a little more labor intensive. Of course, now that I think about it, I've entirely forgotten how to convert a texture to a flood-fill pattern in Paintshop... I'll need to blow the dust off the book and figure it out again.
I'm sure the procedure is different for Photoshop anyway. Look for flood-fill textures, or maybe something like "picture tube" textures. If I run across it, I'll let you know.
Rennen
I simply happen to be afflicted with flaucinaucinhilipificatism, and thus can't help but point out flaws in things I run across. I keep it under control with a strict regimen of medication and regular beatings.
I'm not sure I follow the process you describe for filling in the shading, but it does indeed sound a little more labor intensive. Of course, now that I think about it, I've entirely forgotten how to convert a texture to a flood-fill pattern in Paintshop... I'll need to blow the dust off the book and figure it out again.
I'm sure the procedure is different for Photoshop anyway. Look for flood-fill textures, or maybe something like "picture tube" textures. If I run across it, I'll let you know.
Rennen
F*** YOU, C***FACE!!! (Yes, it is actually).
And, apparently, by spelling the first part of the word "flauci" instead of "flocci"Rennen wrote:I simply happen to be afflicted with flaucinaucinhilipificatism, and thus can't help but point out flaws in things I run across. I keep it under control with a strict regimen of medication and regular beatings.
If you're into the etymology, that part comes from Latin phrase "flocci non facio" which means, in Australian, "I don't give a f*** about it" or as our teachers tried to convince us "We didn't care a snowball for". Or something. The second part's 'pauci' too, meaning very little. In fact, the whole word is comprised of the words for nothing, very little, nothing and well, nothing. So it's a very complex way of saying how worthless something is. Of course the effect only comes off if you spell it right. Pardon my brash criticism, but I'm afflicted with the same thing .. which I daren't try to spell now because I'll know I'll get it wrong. If you never try, you never fail.
n/k
<A HREF="http://needleandthread.keenspace.com" TARGET=_blank>Needle & Thread</A>: It's Wacky, 24/7.
Why you little... !
Actually, I feel I did rather well, considering I essentially spelled it phoenetically, and that upon hearing it spoken- and repeated, slowly- on a single occasion about two years ago.
I used to type it as "Flaucinaucinhililipilipificator" in chatrooms just to show off.
And yes, then immediately some unoriginal wag would reply with "Supercalifragil..." oh, HI, Gloria! I didn't see you there.
The definition I was given was "one who finds fault in everything", which is, I believe, the definition- more or less- that Asimov (or was it Clarke?) used in one or two of his sci-fi novels.
The irony, however, in pointing out my misspelling of the word, is not lost on me.
J-Rob: Are you, in fact, a photographer? You seem quite familiar with the darkroom procedures. I'm not sure why Tristan rewound the film in a light-box, but I'm sure there's a reason. High school photo labs were a great many years ago.
Rennen
Actually, I feel I did rather well, considering I essentially spelled it phoenetically, and that upon hearing it spoken- and repeated, slowly- on a single occasion about two years ago.
I used to type it as "Flaucinaucinhililipilipificator" in chatrooms just to show off.
And yes, then immediately some unoriginal wag would reply with "Supercalifragil..." oh, HI, Gloria! I didn't see you there.
The definition I was given was "one who finds fault in everything", which is, I believe, the definition- more or less- that Asimov (or was it Clarke?) used in one or two of his sci-fi novels.
The irony, however, in pointing out my misspelling of the word, is not lost on me.
J-Rob: Are you, in fact, a photographer? You seem quite familiar with the darkroom procedures. I'm not sure why Tristan rewound the film in a light-box, but I'm sure there's a reason. High school photo labs were a great many years ago.
Rennen