UA cover - no spoilers
Richard Bos
just me, or does anyone else think that she looks remarkably like Kari
Byron, from Mythbusters?
Richard
Raymond Daley
redtiger
"Raymond Daley" <raymon...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:VzpEm.2$te...@newsfe13.ams2...
are wrong.
I also believe that the women on the cover are Mrs Whitlow and one of the
above stairs serving girls as;
Spoiler space
25
.
.
.
.
20
.
.
.
.
15
.
.
.
.
10
.
.
.
.
5
4
3
2
1
Juliet and Glenda never dress in cheerleading costumes. Juliet attends the
game as Jewels and Glenda is just Glenda. It is also mentioned that Juliet
has the breasts of someone 2 feet taller than she is. (Or something along
those lines). I would assume this may be a reference to six foot Amazons or
the like. The girl on the cover is rather petite in this department.
Anthony
--
I reject your reality and substitute my own!
- Adam Savage: Mythbusters
Aggie Angst
"redtiger" <redtige...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:tJidnTGzLvVI3HDX...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "Raymond Daley" <raymon...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:VzpEm.2$te...@newsfe13.ams2...
>>
>> "Richard Bos" <ral...@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
>> news:4ae1dd0...@news.xs4all.nl...
>>> This girl on the cover of UA, on the right - presumably Juliet - is it
>>> just me, or does anyone else think that she looks remarkably like Kari
>>> Byron, from Mythbusters?
>>>
>>> Richard
>>
>> I agree ;-)
>>
Couldn't say since the US release cover is all cartoon hands...
Aggie
Daibhid Ceanaideach
On the other hand, the cover also shows Lord V. as referee, and that
doesn't happen either. The possibly-Glenda seems a bit young to be Mrs
Whitlow, especially compared to Kidby's earlier picture of her:
http://freespace.virgin.net/ianstewart.joat/SOD1pic.jpg
--
Dave
"All those with psychokinesis, raise my hand."
The Room With No Doors, Kate Orman
Klaus Meinhard
> Juliet and Glenda never dress in cheerleading costumes. Juliet
> attends the game as Jewels and Glenda is just Glenda. It is also
> mentioned that Juliet has the breasts of someone 2 feet taller than
> she is. (Or something along those lines). I would assume this may be
> a reference to six foot Amazons or the like. The girl on the cover is
> rather petite in this department.
As it should be. The breasts mentioned belong to Brenda, and give her a
rather motherly look. I think you let your imagination run unchecked :-)
--
Herzliche Gr��e,
Klaus Meinhard
Otter t.
I, on another paw, am sure they are Glenda and Juliet. The
cheerleading
costume argument won't fly, because Vetinari is shown as a referee,
which
he never is.
Mrs. Whitlow is older.
And it's _Glenda_ who has big breasts. You may remember that Nutt
comments on them favorably.
Another thing that's wrong with Kidby's illustration is that Nutt is
the
same color as the humans, whereas the book describes him as being
grey.
All in all, I'm not sure why this Kidby cover is off-track, but it
is. But
the Librarian is just wonderful, as always.
Reader in Invisible Writings
>
> Another thing that's wrong with Kidby's illustration is that Nutt is
> the
> same color as the humans, whereas the book describes him as being
> grey.
>
> All in all, I'm not sure why this Kidby cover is off-track, but it
> is. But
> the Librarian is just wonderful, as always.
The original artwork was much better but the publisher decided to make
it sepia, like old camera photos. However DW iconographs have always
been full colour unless you take too many pictures with flesh tones
and/or blood in them! See http://www.paulkidby.net/March09.html for the
original artwork version. Possibly Paul did not have the time to read
all of the book this time.
--
Reader in Invisible Writings.. Something to Ponder upon!
steveski
[snip Glenda and Juliet (which I'm only just reading as of now)]
>
> The original artwork was much better but the publisher decided to make
> it sepia, like old camera photos. However DW iconographs have always
> been full colour unless you take too many pictures with flesh tones
> and/or blood in them!
See: Twoflower's iconograph imp running out of pink after his and
Rincewind's visit to the Whore Pits :-)
--
Steveski
Reader in Invisible Writings
Daibhid Ceanaideach
wrote:
> The original artwork was much better but the publisher decided to make
> it sepia, like old camera photos. However DW iconographs have always
> been full colour unless you take too many pictures with flesh tones
> and/or blood in them!
Just to be pedantic: The Truth mentions that *very* cheap iconographs
produce black and white pictures[1], and quotes Otto as saying monochrome
is an artform in itself. And the Moving Pictures are b&w to start with,
to make it easier for the imps to paint that fast. (Colour clicks happen
eventually, when they've bred faster imps.)
[1]It doesn't explain why. Maybe they're cheap because they have limited
painting supplies. Or maybe it's cheaper to summon colour blind imps.
Reader in Invisible Writings
> On 04 Nov 2009, Reader in Invisible Writings <markfo...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The original artwork was much better but the publisher decided to make
>> it sepia, like old camera photos. However DW iconographs have always
>> been full colour unless you take too many pictures with flesh tones
>> and/or blood in them!
>
> Just to be pedantic: The Truth mentions that *very* cheap iconographs
> produce black and white pictures[1], and quotes Otto as saying monochrome
> is an artform in itself. And the Moving Pictures are b&w to start with,
> to make it easier for the imps to paint that fast. (Colour clicks happen
> eventually, when they've bred faster imps.)
>
> [1]It doesn't explain why. Maybe they're cheap because they have limited
> painting supplies. Or maybe it's cheaper to summon colour blind imps.
>
>
Two Flower had brought a bit of 'alien' technology to AM and although
(once someone saw how, or even heard about it) it was clear it was done,
that does not mean that they could immediately copy it.
This reminds me of a bit in DA's Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective
Agency, when Dirk comments that Newton was a genius because he was the
inventor of the Cat Flap. Explanation that Gravity was obvious, "look
they even leave it on at the weekend" whereas a door within a door was
inspired. Anyone could have invented it... precisely anyone could, but
no one did... but once invented it is obvious and easy to copy.
Also, Galileo reportedly heard that some people* down in the docks** had
a tube with glass at each end which enabled them to see small things a
long way off bigger. Immediately he realised that the glass ends were
lenses, experimented with lenses he already had to hand and produced a
superior telescope in no time. He could have looked through a pair of
lenses and made a telescope at any time, but never did until he heard
that it could be done.
*Now reckoned to the the Dutch opticians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telescope
** Being able to identify ships coming in, and so the cargo/owner was a
valuable bit of knowledge.
Chris Zakes
Daibhid Ceanaideach <daibhidc...@aol.com> to write:
>On 04 Nov 2009, Reader in Invisible Writings <markfo...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> The original artwork was much better but the publisher decided to make
>> it sepia, like old camera photos. However DW iconographs have always
>> been full colour unless you take too many pictures with flesh tones
>> and/or blood in them!
>
>Just to be pedantic: The Truth mentions that *very* cheap iconographs
>produce black and white pictures[1], and quotes Otto as saying monochrome
>is an artform in itself.
It's been a while since I've read "The Truth", but is the the
iconographs themselves, or the newspaper versions of them that are
done cheaply in black & white?
(Although the argument that B&W pictures are an artform in themselves
is at least as old as the development of color film--I can recall it
being discussed in various film classes back when I was in college in
the '70s.)
>And the Moving Pictures are b&w to start with,
>to make it easier for the imps to paint that fast. (Colour clicks happen
>eventually, when they've bred faster imps.)
>
>[1]It doesn't explain why. Maybe they're cheap because they have limited
>painting supplies. Or maybe it's cheaper to summon colour blind imps.
It's cheaper because you only need one color of ink or
paint--black--combined with the existing white background, rather than
multiple colors. Modern color printing requires four different colors
of ink, combined in various ways to get the spectrum.
-Chris Zakes
Texas
"We put all our politicians in prison as soon as they're elected. Don't you?"
"Why?"
"It saves time."
-Terry Pratchett, "The Last Continent"
Daibhid Ceanaideach
> On 5 Nov 2009 13:21:13 GMT, an orbital mind-control laser caused
> Daibhid Ceanaideach <daibhidc...@aol.com> to write:
>>Just to be pedantic: The Truth mentions that *very* cheap iconographs
>>produce black and white pictures[1], and quotes Otto as saying
>>monochrome is an artform in itself.
>
> It's been a while since I've read "The Truth", but is the the
> iconographs themselves, or the newspaper versions of them that are
> done cheaply in black & white?
The former (well, both): "Most pictures were painted in colour these
days. Only really cheap imps painted in black and white, even though Otto
insisted that monochrome 'vas an artform in itself'. But *printing*
colour..."
>>[1]It doesn't explain why. Maybe they're cheap because they have
>>limited painting supplies. Or maybe it's cheaper to summon colour
>>blind imps.
>
> It's cheaper because you only need one color of ink or
> paint--black--combined with the existing white background, rather than
> multiple colors. Modern color printing requires four different colors
> of ink, combined in various ways to get the spectrum.
Yep, for the printing - but since the imps are *painters*, not printers,
you also need white to mix up the greys. And, having just checked the
text to quote it above, it specifically refers to the *imps* being cheap,
whereas if it was just a question of a limited palette, they could be
"upgraded" simply by, well, buying them more paints...
redtiger
"Klaus Meinhard" <K_Mei...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:hcooj9$14o$00$1...@news.t-online.com...
I spent an hour scanning the book last night and I can't find the page I
read this on. Maybe Daibh can perform his magic?
I do not mean that Juliet is meant to be built like an Amazon, she is
described as being only slightly taller than Glenda and can be used to model
dwarf fashion. More that the stereotypical footballer's wife tends to be a
pretty, skinny girl with certain enhancements in the chest region that can
seem out of proportion in some cases. (Who didn't think of Trev and Juliet
as Posh and Becks at least some time during the reading?)
Anthony
--
See a pin and pick it up, and all day long
you'll be looking for the hand grenade.
ISIHAC
Default User
>
> "Klaus Meinhard" <K_Mei...@gmx.de> wrote in message
> news:hcooj9$14o$00$1...@news.t-online.com...
> > As it should be. The breasts mentioned belong to Brenda, and give
> > her a rather motherly look. I think you let your imagination run
> > unchecked :-)
> >
> >
>
> I spent an hour scanning the book last night and I can't find the
> page I read this on. Maybe Daibh can perform his magic?
In my hardback edition, page 26. That's where Glenda first appears,
bringing the food to wizards' meeting.
Brian
--
Day 277 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project
Daibhid Ceanaideach
>
> "Klaus Meinhard" <K_Mei...@gmx.de> wrote in message
> news:hcooj9$14o$00$1...@news.t-online.com...
>> Hallo redtiger,
>>
>>> Juliet and Glenda never dress in cheerleading costumes. Juliet
>>> attends the game as Jewels and Glenda is just Glenda. It is also
>>> mentioned that Juliet has the breasts of someone 2 feet taller than
>>> she is. (Or something along those lines). I would assume this may be
>>> a reference to six foot Amazons or the like. The girl on the cover
>>> is rather petite in this department.
>>
>> As it should be. The breasts mentioned belong to Brenda, and give her
>> a rather motherly look. I think you let your imagination run
>> unchecked :-)
>>
>>
>
> I spent an hour scanning the book last night and I can't find the page
> I read this on. Maybe Daibh can perform his magic?
I can't check the book just now, but I'm afraid my recollection coincides
with Klaus.
> (Who didn't think of Trev and Juliet
> as Posh and Becks at least some time during the reading?)
Oh, yes, although I think they're both noticably brighter.
ISTR hearing somewhere that one of Girls Aloud was married to a
footballer as well.
steveski
> On 06 Nov 2009, "redtiger" <redtige...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> "Klaus Meinhard" <K_Mei...@gmx.de> wrote in message
[snip]
>> (Who didn't think of Trev and Juliet
>> as Posh and Becks at least some time during the reading?)
>
> Oh, yes, although I think they're both noticably brighter.
Bwahahaha! Tea on the monitor.
--
Steveski
Stacie
wrote:
> On 04 Nov 2009, Reader in Invisible Writings <markfowera...@hotmail.com>
Could very well be colour/color (choose one as appropriate) blindness
makes them cheaper. The extremely tiny nano-imp mentioned in TFE, I
think it was, commanded a pretty high price tag, a few hundred
dollars. So "better" imp features seem to cost extra.
Otter t.
>(Who didn't think of Trev and Juliet
> as Posh and Becks at least some time during the reading?)
I didn't, for roughly the same reason Granny Weatherwax could
keep from visualizing a pink rhinoceros. Who are Posh and
Becks?
Chris Zakes
I think Posh is a singer, married to Becks, a footballer (soccer
player for folks on this side of The Water.)
But I could easily be mistaken--I don't pay much attention to either
subject; I think recognize the names from headlines on the sidebar in
the Daily Mail.
nicho...@gmail.com
wrote:
Posh is (or was) a member of the Spice Girls, using the stage name
Posh Spice. She married David Beckham, one of the most successful
soccer players in English history. He was the guy the Los Angeles
Galaxy signed for $250 Million a few years back
Nick
redtiger
"Daibhid Ceanaideach" <daibhidc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9CB7B72787DF1da...@130.133.1.4...
I was going with the fact that Lord V. was, as usual, controlling
everything. A metaphorical referee of the city wide game as it were.
However, given that my wossname was totally confused on the Glenda/Juliet
description, I will have to say that this is just the artist making full use
of his licence and having fun with elements of the story.
Anthony
--
Good judgement comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgement.
Richard Bos
> I do not mean that Juliet is meant to be built like an Amazon, she is
> described as being only slightly taller than Glenda and can be used to model
> dwarf fashion. More that the stereotypical footballer's wife tends to be a
> pretty, skinny girl with certain enhancements in the chest region that can
> seem out of proportion in some cases. (Who didn't think of Trev and Juliet
> as Posh and Becks at least some time during the reading?)
Not really. Of football players and their wags in general, certainly.
But Posh and Becks are not much like T&J. In particular, they got
together when they were both already well famous.
Richard
Carol Hague
>(Who didn't think of Trev and Juliet
> as Posh and Becks at least some time during the reading?)
I didn't. Never occurred to me at all until you mentined it and I still
don't think they're much alike.
I don't know much about Posh and Becks (only what I can't avoid knowing
from bits on the telly and radio) but I get the strong impression that
Posh is the brains of the outfit, while the same can't really be said of
Juliet (or Trev either really.)
--
Carol. www.mullimages.com
"This might as well say "bing tiddle tiddle bong".
It's complete gibberish," - Rodney McKay, Stargate: Atlantis
Richard Bos
> redtiger <redtige...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> >(Who didn't think of Trev and Juliet
> > as Posh and Becks at least some time during the reading?)
>
> I didn't. Never occurred to me at all until you mentined it and I still
> don't think they're much alike.
>
> I don't know much about Posh and Becks (only what I can't avoid knowing
> from bits on the telly and radio) but I get the strong impression that
> Posh is the brains of the outfit,
That, it must be said, is one of the strongest examples of damning with
faint praise that I've seen all year.
Richard
Nigel
> "Klaus Meinhard" <K_Meinh...@gmx.de> wrote in message
>
> I do not mean that Juliet is meant to be built like an Amazon, she is
> described as being only slightly taller than Glenda and can be used to model
> dwarf fashion. More that the stereotypical footballer's wife tends to be a
> pretty, skinny girl with certain enhancements in the chest region that can
> seem out of proportion in some cases. (Who didn't think of Trev and Juliet
> as Posh and Becks at least some time during the reading?)
>
Of course - especially since Pepe wants to use a picture of Trev in
his underwear for advertising.
Mind you, since Trev's surname is "Likely", I was also vaguely
reminded of the 60's BritCom "The Likely Lads". Trev and Nutt sort of
correspond to the working class Terry and the more aspirational Bob in
that series.
Cheers,
Nigel.