LadyCrimson

Fifty quatloos that bodiless brains would be enThralling.

Hehe, I like that ninja one. My current pic is of a sunset-silhouetted cowboy on horseback.

That's pretty awesome. I don't think I'd have much use for it, but on the cool scale, that's a 10. :D

This is the side of science that I like. I wonder about the feeling heat part mentioned in the blurb when you enlarge the photo...ie, does it produce enough sensation for her to notice then pull away from a heat source, or is it more of a technical 'heat feeling' at this point. Great thing tho...

I think the size of the sensor is more important than jpg vs RAW in terms of the original picture quality. Smaller sensor, lesser quality. RAW's advantage has to do more with the much greater ability to fine-tune picture/WB settings after the picture has been shot than picture quality. If you set a custom white balance (assuming that's possible on your camera) to get a consistent color, medium/large jpg's are fine for the original shot. Most consumer digicms today do what...around 2000+ or so resolution jpgs? That's more than enough for most folks.

2,3,4,5,6,12,14

Oh, on that page, click on the actual name, not the red shop button, to get the review. It's a little confusing.

I like Canon's. In that price range, the Canon Powershot. http://www.steves-digicams.com/best_cameras.html (scroll down to "4 Megapixel" and "Entry Level") I'd like to add that megapixels here is not the main thing to be looking at. All that pretty much means is that you can have images at larger resolutions. 4megapixels is really all you need on consumer digicams. Edit: In the price range, brand isn't that big a deal anymore - pick one that feels comfortable in your hand and where the controls and their locations feel ok to you. In terms of the jpg compression thing - I kinda doubt it'll be too big a deal for most of the things you might use it for, as long as the image resolution is high enough. Just always keep the original and work from a copy or crop, if that makes sense, thus preserving the original jpg's quality every time you edit it.

Yeah, some older games do that with the newer screenshot programs or printscreen. It's a directx/glide thingie, or something like that - maybe connnected to windows or driver updates too; I don't pretend to understand the tech side of it. It's why I use Hypersnap...it has a capture function to help get around that issue.

Interesting premise. At least it's finally a movie trailer that doesn't make me go 'bleh' and click away... :D

on Rome: I've read here and there that they're making the 2nd season but they announced the won't be making a third. Perhaps that's what he/she meant by 'cancelled.' Of course, they could always change their mind mid-2nd season. We can hope.

Yes, it's very dasteredly.

I feel like it's been that way for a while now. They have a deadline for mass-producing and marketing, and they shove them out the door, with the idea that the programmers etc. can keep on working during the time it takes for that process, and then release the patch. Reminds me a bit of the way walkthough books are out-of-date because they had to print before final version to be profitable. At any rate, Gothic3 is a game I'll have to check out. I'm not sure if I'll like it or not, but it seems worth trying, anyway.

4 epidsodes of Rome watched. I can now say I love this show. Intelligent and full of scheming and plotting. A little too much of the love drama sideplots but...definitely worth watching. It contains quite a bit of off-hand nudity tho; fair warning for anyone who doesn't like such in their shows.

http://forums.obsidianent.com/index.php?showtopic=41038 First entry might be the answer/problem?

Computer stats? Perhaps your video card or system RAM aren't sufficient? Drivers up to date?

I've never seen that before. Leonard, oh Leonard, why, why?

Oh? Not cancelled? Goody....

I sure don't. Or Clooney either.

After gazing aghast at the $90 for 12 episodes price tag, I grudgingly bought ROME. For the price one seems to largely be getting a heavy duty box. Sigh. Only watched the first 2 episodes so far, but it seems pretty decent. Definitely high production values. Some of the actors stand out, including the young man/boy playing Octavius and the guy playing Caesar. A little slow paced, kinda like most HBO series tend to be imo (they move like the late 70/early 80's mini-series) but so far, seems to me to be a big shame they canceled it. I love Rome and it's history.

Star Wars, theatrical version, DVD, yay. Odd how most of it seemed to be 'cleaned up' but they missed some frames here and there.

Should I have put down non-metric value? That'd be 4' 10.5". I remember calling about a used car once, and I asked about pedal and seat distance/height, and the guy said his wife was "really" short. She was 5' 4". I giggled. The tallest person I personally know is my brother - he's close to 6' 5". But skinny as a rail. Maybe one of my hubby's co-workers was a bit taller, don't remember. Edit: Nutrition may have to something to do with things, but genetics and selection probably have a larger role.

Gazes upwards from her 149 cm. vantage point. All you tall people, I have some lightbulbs that need changing.

Not a bad day, more like an annoying moment: When you walk to your desk chair and as you sit down, your barefoot steps in something cold and gushy. You look down and discover one of your cats threw up and you just stepped in it. I love cats, really I do.

I woke up early, that's always the start of a good day. MrCook subscribed back, which is mildly flattering even if it doesn't really mean anything.