These pictures make my teeth itch
Discussion
CanAm said:
SpeedMattersNot said:
good example of something being close to parallel, but train lines aren't parallel.
Because you're claiming there's some tolerance in the measurements?? (I'm excluding curves of course)How about a parallelogram then?
I'm happy to hear of an example to prove my theory wrong...
SpeedMattersNot said:
CanAm said:
SpeedMattersNot said:
good example of something being close to parallel, but train lines aren't parallel.
Because you're claiming there's some tolerance in the measurements?? (I'm excluding curves of course)How about a parallelogram then?
I'm happy to hear of an example to prove my theory wrong...
/ /
There’s two
Jonboy_t said:
I I
/ /
There’s two
Yeah, that's a common response. / /
There’s two
I'm not qualified to claim they're not parallel, but I suspect that if you were to measure the lines on the outside of the screen with a high enough tolerance the imperfections in the screen would mean;
- they're not absolutely equidistant at all points.
- the light is refracted out of position anyway.
- how the LCD parts are assembled, would affect their accuracy in producing parallel lines.
But as said, I'm not fully qualified to answer that, but I'd imagine someone who knows about LCD screens would be able to dismiss or agree with my theory.
SpeedMattersNot said:
Jonboy_t said:
I I
/ /
There’s two
Yeah, that's a common response. / /
There’s two
I'm not qualified to claim they're not parallel, but I suspect that if you were to measure the lines on the outside of the screen with a high enough tolerance the imperfections in the screen would mean;
- they're not absolutely equidistant at all points.
- the light is refracted out of position anyway.
- how the LCD parts are assembled, would affect their accuracy in producing parallel lines.
But as said, I'm not fully qualified to answer that, but I'd imagine someone who knows about LCD screens would be able to dismiss or agree with my theory.
t if it’s parallel according to whatever. If it looks wonky, it is wonky. On with the thread
SpeedMattersNot said:
CanAm said:
SpeedMattersNot said:
good example of something being close to parallel, but train lines aren't parallel.
Because you're claiming there's some tolerance in the measurements?? (I'm excluding curves of course)How about a parallelogram then?
I'm happy to hear of an example to prove my theory wrong...
Meanwhile, how do you prove to your students that the plumb lines are not parallel to the extent that you state? (assuming that they are not as argumentative as us
)SpeedMattersNot said:
With cocktail sticks in an orange normally does it.
By definition the theory of a parallelogram satisfies parallel lines. But if it was made into a physical object it wouldn't. Anyway, the poster above doesn't want me to discuss further.
Good job you don't have any flat earthers amongst your students. By definition the theory of a parallelogram satisfies parallel lines. But if it was made into a physical object it wouldn't. Anyway, the poster above doesn't want me to discuss further.
Steamer said:
Bright Halo said:
Arrr this happens quite often - totally agree its annoying.. however, the actors surnames run in alphabetical order.king watermarking which covers a part of the image I want to see. I refuse to use it, it's st.In fact, what is it with PH and pictures? If they're not being covered by watermarks from Thumbsnap then they're teeny tiny sizes and compressed to buggery so they look appalling. I continue to use PH for the same reason I use Windows - not because I love it but in spite of it...
Edited by Funk on Tuesday 24th September 14:04
I would think that it is in order of billing, ie Bill Owen was a more widely known/higher regarded actor than Peter Sallis etc
Top and above-title billing[edit]
The actors whose names appear first are said to have "top billing". They usually play the principal characters in the film and have the most screen time. Frequently, top-billed actors are also named in advertising material such as trailers, posters, billboards and TV spots.
The two or three top-billed actors in a movie will usually be announced prior to the title of the movie; this is referred to as "above-title billing". For an actor to receive it, he/she will generally have to be well-established, with box-office drawing power. Those introduced afterward are generally considered to be the supporting cast. Well-known actors may be given top billing for publicity or contractual purposes if juvenile, lesser-known, or first-time performers appear in a larger role
Top and above-title billing[edit]
The actors whose names appear first are said to have "top billing". They usually play the principal characters in the film and have the most screen time. Frequently, top-billed actors are also named in advertising material such as trailers, posters, billboards and TV spots.
The two or three top-billed actors in a movie will usually be announced prior to the title of the movie; this is referred to as "above-title billing". For an actor to receive it, he/she will generally have to be well-established, with box-office drawing power. Those introduced afterward are generally considered to be the supporting cast. Well-known actors may be given top billing for publicity or contractual purposes if juvenile, lesser-known, or first-time performers appear in a larger role
Edited by Abbott on Tuesday 24th September 14:11
Steamer said:
Abbott said:
I would think that it is in order of billing, ie Bill Owen was a more widely known/higher regarded actor than Peter Sallis etc
Top and above-title billing[edit]
All over the shopTop and above-title billing[edit]
TLJ 2nd star 2nd in the list and to the right (as you look at it)
Other bloke not important 3rd
Funk said:
What's making my teeth itch even more is Thumbsnap's fking watermarking which covers a part of the image I want to see. I refuse to use it, it's st.
In fact, what is it with PH and pictures? If they're not being covered by watermarks from Thumbsnap then they're teeny tiny sizes and compressed to buggery so they look appalling. I continue to use PH for the same reason I use Windows - not because I love it but in spite of it...
If there is anything of interest at the bottom of a picture, I copy it with a white space at the bottom for the watermark and click on Forum Fit when uploading. It seems to work ok.(well, it looks ok on my phone!)king watermarking which covers a part of the image I want to see. I refuse to use it, it's st.In fact, what is it with PH and pictures? If they're not being covered by watermarks from Thumbsnap then they're teeny tiny sizes and compressed to buggery so they look appalling. I continue to use PH for the same reason I use Windows - not because I love it but in spite of it...
Edited by Funk on Tuesday 24th September 14:04
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff