A post that belong in the Drunk Thread, if there ever was one! [Archive]

Mr. Anderson

Oct 9, 2004, 09:37 AM

I'd like to know how they did it

Quite simple actually - at least it seems so.

Here's my guess:

Each artist is in charge of one or more pics....all have a middle section blanked out. Using flash, it loads all the images and possibly masks to make the transition seamless.

One thing, it might be a cumulative effort in the sense that the first guy does his, passes it along to the next guy and he makes the seamless transition, etc.

Pretty damn cool....

I think it could be easily replicated and if you'd like to give it a go, I'd love to try a 3D version....

D

munkle

Oct 9, 2004, 11:02 AM

I think it could be easily replicated and if you'd like to give it a go, I'd love to try a 3D version....

D

A 3D version would definitely blow my mind!

yellow

Oct 9, 2004, 11:22 AM

That's the most innovative and artistic thing I've ever seen flash do.

Mr. Anderson

Oct 9, 2004, 11:30 AM

A 3D version would definitely blow my mind!

I've given this some thought and I think I've figured out how to code it in Action Script...so I'm going to go ahead and make a template using simply constructed 3D scenes and then add the new images in later.

This could be very cool and one thing these guys missed out on was allowing for animation in the images...if done correctly its quite possible.

This might take a week or longer, so I'll post something when I have it figured out.

D

Jalexster

Oct 9, 2004, 12:18 PM

I hate to break this to you all but:

That isn't flash,

It's Shockwave, but not Shockwave flash. Shockwave is harder to use, but can do alot more. Like actual 3D with the right coding.

yellow

Oct 9, 2004, 12:26 PM

I hate to break this to you all but:That isn't flash

Not being a web designer, I don't care what it is.
But it remains quite impressive, nonetheless.

rainman::|:|

Oct 9, 2004, 12:52 PM

i wonder how many hours that guy wasted doing that....

so do you think all art is a waste of time, or just interactive media art?

anyway, i thought it was very cool. Someone needs to make one with scenes from the Dark Tower series, that's what it reminded me of... just follow the beam... OK most of you don't know what the hell i'm talking about... heh...

paul

homerjward

Oct 9, 2004, 01:01 PM

that would be awesome as a screensaver

Archaeopteryx

Oct 9, 2004, 01:42 PM

on this page :

http://zoomquilt.nikkki.net/

they show an artist by artist run of what each one drew....

Its quite a pimp little thing they did...

Mr. Anderson

Oct 9, 2004, 02:22 PM

on this page :

http://zoomquilt.nikkki.net/

they show an artist by artist run of what each one drew....

wow, a few more images than I expected, but damn cool.

I think you can do it in Flash and I'm still going to try.

D

wdlove

Oct 9, 2004, 02:39 PM

I found it to be an enjoyable ride. Reminded me of being on an amusement park ride. A very clever job. I agree 3-d would really be nice.

BakedBeans

Oct 10, 2004, 03:44 AM

so do you think all art is a waste of time, or just interactive media art?

paul

im not sure if your getting all defensive or not, but i cant understand why your asking me if i think all art is a waste of time.....in fact i think its a ridiculous statement... i said THIS was a waste of time.....

i think its a waste of time making a painting out of horse manure and seamen and calling it art, that however doesnt mean that i think the mona lisa or the scream was a waste of time... get real :)

virividox

Oct 10, 2004, 03:56 AM

this is reall nifty

virividox

Oct 10, 2004, 04:00 AM

that would be awesome as a screensaver

any ideas how to make it a screen saver?

agreenster

Oct 10, 2004, 09:40 AM

i think its a waste of time making a painting out of horse manure and seamen and calling it art, that however doesnt mean that i think the mona lisa or the scream was a waste of time... get real :)

Wow. I'd like to see a painting made out of seamen. I've already heard of one out of SEMEN, but not SEAMEN! WOW! Wonder if they volunteered or if W. made them do it.

Okay...anyway

You're entitled to your opinion, but this concept is really interesting! Maybe it wasn't executed as well as it could have been, but the idea opens itself up to many possibilities--the most obvious one including animation somehow.

Mr. Anderson

Oct 10, 2004, 10:23 AM

You're entitled to your opinion, but this concept is really interesting! Maybe it wasn't executed as well as it could have been, but the idea opens itself up to many possibilities--the most obvious one including animation somehow.

Exactly - that's what I was thinking. You could have elements that move in the scenes. It would be tricky, but if its coded well with the right scaling, it shouldn't be a problem....

D

BakedBeans

Oct 10, 2004, 12:52 PM

Wow. I'd like to see a painting made out of seamen. I've already heard of one out of SEMEN, but not SEAMEN! WOW! Wonder if they volunteered or if W. made them do it.

yes yes.... funny funny

Okay...anyway

You're entitled to your opinion, but this concept is really interesting! Maybe it wasn't executed as well as it could have been, but the idea opens itself up to many possibilities--the most obvious one including animation somehow.

i know im entitled to an opinion but it was the fact that you questioned my whole liking of art about...well that (imo) waste of time ;)

redAPPLE

Oct 10, 2004, 01:30 PM

why was the thread titled as it is?

agreenster

Oct 10, 2004, 02:04 PM

i know im entitled to an opinion but it was the fact that you questioned my whole liking of art about...well that (imo) waste of time ;)

It wasn't me.

munkle

Oct 10, 2004, 03:27 PM

why was the thread titled as it is?

In tribute to the infamous drunk thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=6144&highlight=drunk+thread) and cause the picture is a bit trippy. That's all :)

themadchemist

Oct 10, 2004, 06:32 PM

You're entitled to your opinion, but this concept is really interesting! Maybe it wasn't executed as well as it could have been, but the idea opens itself up to many possibilities--the most obvious one including animation somehow.

Honestly, I don't think that animation would make it better. Part of the beauty of this entire scene is its simplicity and its stillness as the viewer travels through. It makes it a little more eerie, I think. I fear that animation would clutter the scene and detract from the experience.

3D might be ok, but again, I think part of the charm of zooming through IS that each scene is flat. If it the scenes were 3D, then the novelty of traveling through would be less, in my opinion.

Of course, I could be wrong, and you guys could put together something incredible with 3D and animation. However, there would still be something to say for the style that these artists chose.

I don't think it's necessarily fair to say that these guys didn't execute it as well as they could have. More features and more widgets isn't necessarily better when it comes to art. I think, for the style that this group chose, they did a magnificent job. Moreover, they deserve great commendation for the concept itself (if it was theirs).

Anyway, a bloody brilliant work, if you ask me.

JLS

Oct 10, 2004, 07:21 PM

Art is only a waste of time if nobody sees it, or nobody talks about it.

Mr. Anderson

Oct 10, 2004, 08:22 PM

Honestly, I don't think that animation would make it better. Part of the beauty of this entire scene is its simplicity and its stillness as the viewer travels through. It makes it a little more eerie, I think. I fear that animation would clutter the scene and detract from the experience.

3D might be ok, but again, I think part of the charm of zooming through IS that each scene is flat. If it the scenes were 3D, then the novelty of traveling through would be less, in my opinion.

Of course, I could be wrong, and you guys could put together something incredible with 3D and animation. However, there would still be something to say for the style that these artists chose.

Reserve judgment until you see what I put together. And I'm not trying to say what they did was less than fantastic.....I just saw a great way to do the same thing in 3D - not that it would be any better...

As for animation, I have a few ideas on that and its probably not what you think. Wait and see :D

D

agreenster

Oct 10, 2004, 08:57 PM

I don't think it's necessarily fair to say that these guys didn't execute it as well as they could have. More features and more widgets isn't necessarily better when it comes to art. I think, for the style that this group chose, they did a magnificent job. Moreover, they deserve great commendation for the concept itself (if it was theirs).

Anyway, a bloody brilliant work, if you ask me.

Definitely! Very cool stuff. I just thought the drawings were a little amateurish, and not very polished, thats all. It's still very cool.

I would just like to see subtle animation, like the guy on the swing swinging back and forth, the shrubs blowing in the wind, clouds, etc etc. Nothing over the top. Just something that makes it seem alive.

Doctor Q

Oct 10, 2004, 10:01 PM

I can imagine another level of sophistication that could be added without going to 3D. Wouldn't it be possible to allow the viewer to have choices to move to the right or left with arrow keys, where a choice of openings or tunnels appears? Then you could choose your own path through a web or maze of paths and discover new scenes as you view the "choose your own adventure" world.

cb911

Oct 10, 2004, 10:44 PM

whoa, that is pretty trippy. :eek: :D some really creepy images in there as well... could definitely send you nuts if you're drunk or otherwise mentally impaired.

can't wait to see what you're cooking up Mr A. :D

also, what am i supposed to do with a .dcr file? ;)

themadchemist

Oct 10, 2004, 11:42 PM

Reserve judgment until you see what I put together. And I'm not trying to say what they did was less than fantastic.....I just saw a great way to do the same thing in 3D - not that it would be any better...

As for animation, I have a few ideas on that and its probably not what you think. Wait and see :D

D

Right, you are, I'm sure what you'll put together is really cool and I can't wait to see it. Sorry if I condemned the 3D to failure before it was even composed. I'm interested to see how you put it together. As you said, it's almost definitely not what I'm thinking.

Definitely! Very cool stuff. I just thought the drawings were a little amateurish, and not very polished, thats all. It's still very cool.

Yeah, that's the thing...I kind of like that the drawings aren't terribly polished--I think the style is very appropriate to the concept, although it's not the only style that would be appropriate, I imagine.

I would just like to see subtle animation, like the guy on the swing swinging back and forth, the shrubs blowing in the wind, clouds, etc etc. Nothing over the top. Just something that makes it seem alive.

That could be really cool. Are you planning on putting it together? Some of the other stuff you've posted was really cool and I'd like to see what you and D put together.

My point, if put a little harshly, was just that the simple, even simplistic or rudimentary, nature of the drawings "fit." Of course, others things could definitely fit, as well.

munkle

Oct 11, 2004, 01:24 AM

russed

Oct 11, 2004, 04:05 AM

that is rather cool. i didnt realise until about the second time around that i was going around in circles!

BakedBeans

Oct 13, 2004, 02:37 AM

It wasn't me. sowwy :)

Mr. Anderson

Oct 13, 2004, 06:58 PM

wdlove

Oct 13, 2004, 08:10 PM

Ok, just playing around and setting up a simple 3D environment with 3 levels - I'll add more once I get the flash to work.

This was painful, so unbelievably painful..... modeling and rendering on my 450 MHz G4.....ugh.....when I get a new machine things will be oh so much better, but I have to wait on that, in the mean time I'll be applying the thumb screws.

I'll try and get a larger version rendered tonight as a .mov file.

D

I didn't realize that we have the same type of Power Mac Mr. Anderson. ;) Sorry to hear that you have a difficult job. I greatly admire the results. It just goes to show how much a professional can get out of any Mac. How soon and what type of Power Mac do you plan to purchase? I wrestle with the same decision.

Mr. Anderson

Oct 13, 2004, 08:13 PM

I didn't realize that we have the same type of Power Mac Mr. Anderson. ;) Sorry to hear that you have a difficult job. I greatly admire the results. It just goes to show how much a professional can get out of any Mac. How soon and what type of Power Mac do you plan to purchase? I wrestle with the same decision.

I've mentioned this before, but I'm planning on getting the top of the line when I finally sell the house in DC....two mortgages are not fun.....

And I can't update my machine with dual cpus, you already have duals - I got the very first G4 when it came out oh so many years ago.

D

yellow

Oct 14, 2004, 05:27 AM

Mr. Anderson,

I can give up processing time for rendering if you want.
I have some Macromedia apps. I'vew got dual 1.44GHz G4s, with plenty of RAM and scratch disk.

Mr. Anderson

Oct 14, 2004, 07:35 AM

Ha, thanks!

But I'm running Lightwave right now, so I don't think you'd be able to help. Once I get the animation cleaned up and I'll probably add a few more transitions, I'll take the still images and import them into Flash MX Pro. I'll use the 3D animation as a frame of reference to get the zoom steps correct - its a little tricky, I have to code a simple 3D algorithm in Action Script. Which has been done before, but the nice thing is that I'm only really worried about the Z dimension.

D

Jalexster

Oct 14, 2004, 08:50 AM

Mr. Anderson

Oct 14, 2004, 08:55 AM

Thing is, is that this zoom thing, didn't use flash. It used Shockwave.

Shockwave has native 3D support. It even supports hardware accelleration. Use Director to make Shockwave files, instead of Flash.

Flash is a cut down, easier to use version of Shockwave,

I realize that, but I don't have Director and wanted to try this using 3D imagery and Flash. Good coding and design challenge....

Back in school, I wrote a 3D/Animation standalone viewer in C on a Sun workstation. I think I remember enough to know what needs to be done. The trickiest part will be getting the seams of the images to display correctly - Flash can be a little quirky when you try and be precise.

Thanks,

D

yellow

Oct 14, 2004, 09:27 AM

Thing is, is that this zoom thing, didn't use flash. It used Shockwave.

Thanks. We remember this from when you posted it 5 days ago.

Mr. Anderson

Oct 14, 2004, 09:31 AM

Thanks. We remember this from when you posted it 5 days ago.

Well, don't be too harsh on him, he might have thought I didn't see it or remember - not a big deal regardless.

Didn't run a larger version last night...I want to change a few of the elements and add one more transition - I'll do that today.

It is much nicer when you see a larger, smoother stepped animation :D

And again, when I get this working, if anyone else wants to provide some imagery for the transitions, PM me and we'll coordinate.

D

Jimong5

Oct 14, 2004, 11:50 AM

I realize that, but I don't have Director and wanted to try this using 3D imagery and Flash. Good coding and design challenge....

Back in school, I wrote a 3D/Animation standalone viewer in C on a Sun workstation. I think I remember enough to know what needs to be done. The trickiest part will be getting the seams of the images to display correctly - Flash can be a little quirky when you try and be precise.

This is just me, but couldnt you just use tweens to draw the transition and program in a frame reference that changes the relative frame when a key is pressed?

Mr. Anderson

Oct 14, 2004, 12:19 PM

This is just me, but couldnt you just use tweens to draw the transition and program in a frame reference that changes the relative frame when a key is pressed?

Not unless you have a frame for every step. The way these guys did it was to zoom through the image. Now its straightforward to just plug in an algorithm that applies a zoom factor to each piece, but its getting the algorithm right that's the issue. Its basically a inverted parabola, where the zoom approaches 0 the farther you get away from the viewer. Its not linear at all.

I'll know more as soon as I start playing around in Flash.

D

Mr. Anderson

Oct 18, 2004, 11:43 PM

I changed my avatar, obviously, and I've made a series of 4 transitions, rendered in 3d into a small animation. Goes a little fast, I'll probably redo it tonight and fix a few errors and slow it down.

Then I'll do a flash version and do a comparison. There will be some trade offs and flash should be much more detailed and smaller in bandwidth.

I'm open to suggestions....

www.gone3d.com/mr/iz.html

Thanks,

D

Doctor Q

Oct 19, 2004, 01:12 AM

You've got quite a skill for this, D. You took the idea and ran with it!

You didn't use one idea from the original, and I wonder if you thought about included it: having something, a ribbon, line, string, wisp, etc. that runs through the whole set of scenes. Or what if you were riding railroad tracks through the whole ride?

Did you mean to have each scene start slowly and then accelerate?

There is a little jerk just as you arrive at the ocean/sky scene, as if a frame is missing just as you go through the triangle. Or maybe it's just me.

I like the variety of porthole shapes.

Why did I just think of the movie "Cube"?

yellow

Oct 19, 2004, 06:30 AM

That is pretty damn cool, Mr. A.

solvs

Oct 19, 2004, 06:54 AM

Cool. Freaky... but cool. And I'm not even high (not that I would be, not that I'd know anything about that). Just a little sleepy.

My thanks to the creators and the person that revived this thread, as I missed it the first time.

Mr. Anderson

Oct 19, 2004, 08:57 AM

Thanks, glad you guys like it.

I have a plan :D Q - didn't want it to be exactly like the one above, so no continuous thread thingy. I'm doing "Portals" and we'll see where that leads. I'm rendering a slower (more frames of animation) and a little higher res - that should be done tonight, I hope. My machine was chunking away all night and its still got a long way to go.....

The nice thing about the flash version is that I'll have 1 or two frames from each zone and render them at 1200x900 or so.

For the current animation, I eased in and eased out for the portals.

D

Mr. Anderson

Oct 19, 2004, 05:01 PM

Redid the animation, same link

www.gone3d.com/mr/iz.html

400x300 and twice as many frames. I'm now rendering the images at 1600x1200 and I'll do the flash version next - but its going to take a while to render the images - on the 400x300 some images (with the spheres) took upto 30 minutes for each one - these new images will take 16 times as long, so a couple will be 8 hours. The others should only take 2-4 hours, for a total of 9 images in all which will be about 2 days :D

I figured if I had a G5 it would only take about 4 hours for the whole thing :p

D

Mechcozmo

Oct 19, 2004, 06:43 PM

Redid the animation, same link

www.gone3d.com/mr/iz.html
I figured if I had a G5 it would only take about 4 hours for the whole thing :p

D

What are you crunching it on?
Do you now how to up the processor power to a particular task using "renice" in the terminal?
(You most likely do...but for the sake of it...)
AppleScript to do the hard work for you (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/9579) (Note: I have not tried this applescript, instead I do it via the terminal...google it yourself!)

Mr. Anderson

Oct 19, 2004, 06:49 PM

What are you crunching it on?
Do you now how to up the processor power to a particular task using "renice" in the terminal?

I'm using Lightwave on a single processor 450 MHz G4 (Sawtooth) with a gig of RAM - going on 5 years with the machine. Its painful but I can't do anything about it for now. I'll be getting a new machine eventually (dual 2.5 GHz G5 with 23" LCD and more) - might even be able to arrange a dual 1.25 G4 temporarily which would make a huge difference as well.

I basically only run Lightwave and I don't have to worry too much about nice-ing the app.

D

wdlove

Oct 19, 2004, 08:34 PM

Wow, good job Mr. Anderson. Moving to Indiana seems to have improved your creative skills.

Mr. Anderson

Oct 19, 2004, 09:52 PM

Wow, good job Mr. Anderson. Moving to Indiana seems to have improved your creative skills.

Thanks, but its not made a bit of difference as far as I see.... This is just playing around :D

D

Mechcozmo

Oct 19, 2004, 11:38 PM

I'm using Lightwave on a single processor 450 MHz G4 (Sawtooth) with a gig of RAM - going on 5 years with the machine.

Yikes! ;) My video production teacher used to have one of those on which he did huge, complicated, and massive Final Cut Pro projects on...some of the rendering jobs must have taken at least an hour for some rather basic stuff...

(If you didn't get the Yikes! pun...Yikes! was the codename for a G4, the original I believe.)

flyfish29

Oct 20, 2004, 12:57 AM

That was cool. I bet it was inspired by the low tech version of this which is a couple of books called Zoom and Re-Zoom. If you are in a library or bookstore check them out- very cool children's books. The same concept but even cooler- though would not be as cool drunk as this web site!

Mr. Anderson

Oct 20, 2004, 08:12 AM

Yikes! ;) My video production teacher used to have one of those on which he did huge, complicated, and massive Final Cut Pro projects on...some of the rendering jobs must have taken at least an hour for some rather basic stuff...

(If you didn't get the Yikes! pun...Yikes! was the codename for a G4, the original I believe.)

The Yikes! was a PCI video board and the Sawtooth was the APG one - the 450 was the best machine at the time - the 500 MHz was available to order, but didn't deliver until January of 2000.....and these models were all part of the downgrade fiasco at the time. Bleh....

But it was still the fastest thing at one time and it still does the job if a bit slow. I've actually rendered animations on it that have taken over 100 hours to complete :D

D

Mr. Anderson

Oct 20, 2004, 10:07 AM

Seems like the images rendered faster than expected :D

www.gone3d.com/mr/iz.html

I'll try and work on this a little over the weekend, but probably won't have time to get anything to show - most likely the flash version will be done later next week....

The images are just ok - I'll probably redo them once the flash is finished and swap them out (the lighting is way off) - I'll probably find some other issues getting them all to work, anyway, so it might need to be done eventually...

D

munkle

Oct 20, 2004, 12:26 PM

I am very impressed Mr Anderson, a lot of work has obviously gone into it. Only thing is that it could be more seamless. The transitions are a bit jerky and if the pictures were more linked the effect would be amplified.

But like I said I am very impressed, it's a lot better than anything I could manage! :)

yellow

Oct 20, 2004, 12:46 PM

Wes

Oct 20, 2004, 12:49 PM

Mr. Anderson

Oct 20, 2004, 01:02 PM

Agreed, 1280x1024 render please Mr. Anderson :)

Yeah, right....that's only going to take 200 hours (I'd need to quadruple the frames for smoother transition).

And this is just a test, the animation is sort of a frame of reference - the flash movie should be seamless...we'll see.

Then I have a plan for the whole thing which should be a lot of fun. :D

D

Doctor Q

Oct 20, 2004, 01:08 PM

I think this is an oportune time then to mention this MacOSXHints hint (http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20031024200346697) that lets you play a movie as your desktop image. That could be mega-trippy.Here's a trick I invented last year based on that tip. Take a movie of somebody familiar (friend, spouse, child) holding very still. Make sure they blink once. Then edit it down to the frame before they blink and the few frames of the blink. Duplicate/stretch the no-blink frame to make the movie a minute long. Finally, make the movie your desktop image.

The net result is that your desktop looks like a still photo, but once a minute the subject blinks. Since it will happen so fast and so infrequently, somebody who doesn't know the secret will do a double take and not be sure if they were imagining things! :D

Mr. Anderson

Oct 20, 2004, 01:34 PM

Here's a trick I invented last year based on that tip. Take a movie of somebody familiar (friend, spouse, child) holding very still. Make sure they blink once. Then edit it down to the frame before they blink and the few frames of the blink. Duplicate/stretch the no-blink frame to make the movie a minute long. Finally, make the movie your desktop image.

The net result is that your desktop looks like a still photo, but once a minute the subject blinks. Since it will happen so fast and so infrequently, somebody who doesn't know the secret will do a double take and not be sure if they were imagining things! :D

That's actually pretty damn cool - but what toll does it take on your CPU?

I'll set one up as soon as I'm happy with the images....

D

munkle

Oct 20, 2004, 05:13 PM

The net result is that your desktop looks like a still photo, but once a minute the subject blinks. Since it will happen so fast and so infrequently, somebody who doesn't know the secret will do a double take and not be sure if they were imagining things! :D

Somebody (dont want to appear rude but just can't remember at the moment) has an avatar that does that...took a long time before it clicked! :p

iLikeMyiMac

Oct 20, 2004, 05:18 PM

Somebody (dont want to appear rude but just can't remember at the moment) has an avatar that does that...took a long time before it clicked! :p
Is it SilentPanda (http://forums.macrumors.com/member.php?userid=12339) ?

Mechcozmo

Oct 20, 2004, 07:49 PM

It seems very jerky, as in, you blast through an image, then wait...then blast through that image, then wait....etc.

It would be really neat, too, if the video was larger, physically. Set your G4 up to render it at whatever the new 30" displays go at, and then take a 2-week vacation. Then come back at let us see it. ;)

Overall, it is really freakin' neat.

Mike Teezie

Oct 20, 2004, 08:42 PM

That's awesome, Mr. Anderson!

munkle

Oct 21, 2004, 02:46 AM

Is it SilentPanda (http://forums.macrumors.com/member.php?userid=12339) ?

That's the one!! Thanks for reminding me! :)

Mr. Anderson

Oct 22, 2004, 09:12 AM

It seems very jerky, as in, you blast through an image, then wait...then blast through that image, then wait....etc.

I know, its quite jerky - I just don't have the time right now to set it up correctly and the movie really isn't the final result - I'm just taking the images from the movie and incorporating them in flash.....

It will be a lot smoother then....

D :D

Mechcozmo

Oct 22, 2004, 06:27 PM

But alas, when will you set it up at a million by a million resolution and take that two week vacation? Don't worry, you can still post from Borra-Borra ;) And if you can't then there is a Macintosh-addiction recovery ward there too. ;)

jsw

Oct 22, 2004, 06:50 PM

For one reason or another, I never clicked into this thread, even though the topic was one I'd normally look at immediately.

Tonight, however, I returned home, a bit tipsy after some drinks during dinner (and, no, I didn't drive). Seeing it for the first time in this condition, I have to agree that it would, in fact, have fit very nicely into the Drunk Thread. I understand what's going on, but, after the drinks, I don't care. It's quite a cool effect.

And Mr. Anderson's efforts seem to be maturing nicely.

Elan0204

Oct 22, 2004, 09:10 PM

I'm glad I finally clicked on this thread. I had noticed Mr. Anderson's new avatar elsewhere in the forum, and thought it looked really cool. Now I know the backstory. I can't wait to see what else you come up with!

Mr. Anderson

Oct 25, 2004, 09:03 AM

I've managed to 'borrow' a dual 1.25 G4 indefinitely - so needless to say I'll be able to do a little more involved imagery - I'll be adding at least one more transition to the animation and fixing a few of the issues with the current scenes.

D

Doctor Q

Oct 25, 2004, 11:52 AM

I've managed to 'borrow' a dual 1.25 G4 indefinitely... Ah, the Winona Ryder method. Wink wink nudge nudge say no more.

wdlove

Oct 25, 2004, 02:12 PM

Ah, the Winona Ryder method. Wink wink nudge nudge say no more.

I'm not sure that I understand Doctor Q. I do remember that Winona dated Bob Kerry, D former governor of Nebraska. It was while I live in Nebraska and he was governor.

Mr. Anderson you are very lucky to have such a nice benefactor. I also look forward to the benefits of this transaction.

Wes

Oct 25, 2004, 02:37 PM

I'm not sure that I understand Doctor Q.

See: http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/11/07/ryder/

Mr. Anderson

Oct 25, 2004, 02:53 PM

Ah, the Winona Ryder method. Wink wink nudge nudge say no more.

Not quite :D

I do need to get a monitor, though - I still haven't set it up. I'd love to find a cheap used 19" CRT so I can comfortably use 1280x1024, but there's not much around here unfortunately. I'll probably hook it up tonight, we'll see. It will be a pain, though, having to use the one monitor I have now for both machines - especially if I have to wait a while to get the second monitor....

D