Mercury, Gemini, Apollo
Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 11:21 pm
Imagerotate.com works wonders with my Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo signatures. 



Visit remnantmods.com for more information
http://www.halomods.info/
IndeedTural wrote:They're all pretty dull and really are nothing more than a cropped image.
It would be incredibly low resolution, and be filled with tons of noise if it was just cropping...Tural wrote:They're all pretty dull and really are nothing more than a cropped image.
Relevance? You said they weren't just cropped, which I assume you're doing because you're taking every statement I make as absolutely literal. Blurring an image in some areas does not constitute any significance over just cropping an image, and is not even worth noting as part of your process. You say they would be incredibly low resolution and filled with noise if it was just cropped, but that's what they are... so... you're arguing with yourself?..MarsMartianMan wrote:Maybe thats because most of the photos are from the 1960's.
Really.Tural wrote:10) I think you made this, it certainly looks too inaccurate to be a real photograph. Very noisy and the blur is way off.
Why the fuck would I argue with myself, thats just plain fucking moronic. I said if they were JUST cropped, but they are more than JUST cropped. Only 4 have minor noise, none are completely filled with it.Tural wrote:You say they would be incredibly low resolution and filled with noise if it was just cropped, but that's what they are... so... you're arguing with yourself?..
Yeah, I don't know how DoF should look in 40 year old pictures.Tural wrote:I see a pattern here. All I really notice from these images, collectively, is that you aren't really sure how DoF should look.
k.MarsMartianMan wrote:Really.
They are barely more than just cropped, as I explained before you even posted. I don't know why you're arguing with yourself, so don't ask me. I'm pointing out that cropping and blurring parts of a picture does not constitute any real graphical skill, and on top of that, the blurring that was done is inaccurate, as I mentioned. You should mask off the areas you're going to blur, not just go crazy with the blur tool.MarsMartianMan wrote:Why the *** would I argue with myself, thats just plain *** moronic. I said if they were JUST cropped, but they are more than JUST cropped. Only 4 have minor noise, none are completely filled with it.
Apparently you do not. Time period really is irrelevant, as the DoF isn't something that really changes over time. In fact, based on that statement, I'm going to infer that you do not have the slightest clue what DoF even is or how it should look at all. I do, however, thank you for giving me that amusing statement.MarsMartianMan wrote:Yeah, I don't know how DoF should look in 40 year old pictures.
Hey, shut up. I'm not a pro at photoshop Just like everyone else, and if I didn't know what DoF was you'd see crappy drawings made out of crayons & markers on construction paper instead of poorly photoshopped photos of my heros.Tural wrote: I'm going to infer that you do not have the slightest clue what DoF even is or how it should look at all. I do, however, thank you for giving me that amusing statement.
That really didn't make any sense. Really, it's not worth being defensive over, and the more you go on claiming you know what it is, the more you prove that you do not.MarsMartianMan wrote:if I didn't know what DoF was you'd see crappy drawings made out of crayons & markers on construction paper instead of poorly photoshopped photos of my heros.