RMCG Photos
Lutester
<jsl...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>Nice picture, Lutester, but you didn't have to get all dressed up for it!
>:)
>
>John Sloan
>
As Mr. SW (s.w...@ntlworld.com) said on 2003-01-04:
" lutenists can be a little bit precious; you may prefer the more
robust world of the guitar."
R.
......feeling a bit precious today.
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
Lutester wrote:
That photo is just fabulous! Did your biker friends play sackbut and
crumhorn?
Steve (wasn't at Woodstock)
--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Larry Deack
> ......feeling a bit precious today.
Yeah, that's precious all right!
You, me, MO, Dave Payne, and Steve Perry look like we're from another
group altogether. The rest of you look a lot more like they play CG... might
be the guitars in your pictures... and who is that tall guy behind old man
Dave Payne anyway?
Matanya Ophee
tell him, Dave!
Matanya Ophee
Editions Orphe'e, Inc.,
1240 Clubview Blvd. N.
Columbus, OH 43235-1226
614-846-9517
fax: 614-846-9794
http://www.orphee.com
http://www.orphee.com/rmcg/album-rmcg/album.html
Lutester
It is an interesting bunch, isn't it? MO looks like the guy that sold
me a Rolex for $50 on Times Sq. and Carlos looks like the guy that
sold me some Chanel #5 in Miami. Todd looks like he might possibly
have a clown suit in his closet while John W. looks like he got caught
trying out his Christmas guitar too early.
Looks are certainly deceiving aren't they?
Robert
Lutester
<born...@dentaltwins.com> wrote:
>
> That photo is just fabulous! Did your biker friends play sackbut and
>crumhorn?
>
>Steve (wasn't at Woodstock)
Most bikers that are into early music do play wind instruments, that
is true. However, the most common instrument is a set of Harley pipes
chromed and fitted out with a Cornetto mouthpiece.
It sounds like a chorus of Shofars played by people wearing too tight
Speedos. But you should applaud anyway.
Robert
Lutester
<jsl...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>Nice picture, Lutester, but you didn't have to get all dressed up for it!
>:)
>
>John Sloan
>
Well, I did have to take off my balloon pants, stockings, woolen tunic
and waistcoat. My sword and frilly collar had to go also. After all
that, the casual garb you see was a relief in the hot summer weather
on the boardwalk.
Robert
Larry Deack
> Looks are certainly deceiving aren't they?
Yep. Looks like way too many guys and not enough ladies and that makes for
one bugugly looking web page for my poor eyeballs.
Lutester
Amen, brother. What happened to all the ladies? Where did they go?
Robert
PS: I think it's "Butt-ugly" but I ain't sayin' nothin'
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
Lutester wrote:
I'm applauding right now, sir!
Steve
--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
Larry Deack
> BTW, Larry, is your bat cedar or spruce? I need to fit you in there
> someplace. :)
Aluminum.
John Wasak
That was a quick snapshot, and yes, there was the element of surprise.
But it wasn't Xmas. And it wasn't a new guitar.
And if your $50. Rolex is still running then you got a better deal than me
with my $5. Cartier on Canal St. (well, Carter, really.)
> Looks are certainly deceiving aren't they?
>
> Robert
>
Well, I wonder .....
jw
John Wasak
> "Larry Deack" <cg...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:bcqi5i$bpf$1...@slb4.atl.mindspring.net...
> >
> > You, me, MO, Dave Payne, and Steve Perry look like we're from another
> > group altogether. The rest of you look a lot more like they play CG...
> might
> > be the guitars in your pictures...
>
> pictures, but it looks like we're about evenly split between cedar and
> spruce tops.
>
Well, the one in my photo is cedar. But you probably knew that!
BTW, John, I have to say, you look fairly similar to how I pictured you. And
I noticed we both have the same sort of lampshades behind our heads. Did
you wind up wearing yours later in the evening?....I think I may have. ;-)
jw
Matanya Ophee
>
>It is an interesting bunch, isn't it? MO looks like the guy that sold
>me a Rolex for $50 on Times Sq.
That's really bad. So look again, and see the picture of well known
terrorist...
John Wasak
Now we just need somebody playing a shining-like-the-Delta National Steel
Guitar to fit in with Larry! ;-)
jw
S.
>
> "Lutester" <ses...@erols.com> wrote in message
> news:efu1fv8qj862pmllb...@4ax.com...
> >
> > Amen, brother. What happened to all the ladies? Where did they go?
>
> don't .... please be skipping this thread ... please, Bob.
>
> PLEEEAAAAAASE! :)
>
> John Sloan
Our resident lutenist/guitarist/dominatrix, R., is quite aware of the
meanderings of that paucity of posts thread. Having actively flung
himself into the thick of it at one point or another. The leather and
goggles are clearly what saved him. ;->
S.
Alain Reiher
to see the baby picture!
[;o)
Alain
Avec une gueule comme celle là Lutester lui ... va commettre ... un Crim!
Matanya Ophee
>Eh! you are definitelly catching up on the Steidl idea! When are we going
>to see the baby picture!
>[;o)
>
>Alain
>
>Avec une gueule comme celle là Lutester lui ... va commettre ... un Crim!
Il la fait deja, si je me ne tromp pas. Des petits.
Alain Reiher
{:o) C'est bien! on peut se sentir plus en sécurité dans ce joyeux royaume du
rmcg! Plus on est de fous plus on rit!
Alain
dave payne
> tell him, Dave!
Nothing much to tell really :) . It's just a picture of me and a piece
of wax, along with the shadow of one truly monstrous nose on the wall.
Dave Payne,
the...@interlog.com
John Wasak
> No, but I've read quite a few good books under that thing (currently
> rereading my all-time favrite novel, "Middlemarch").
Middlemarch. Well, I wouldn't have guessed that! (And written under
pseudonym too!)
jw
John Wasak
> Lutester <ses...@erols.com> wrote:
> >It is an interesting bunch, isn't it? MO looks like the guy that sold
> >me a Rolex for $50 on Times Sq.
>
> That's really bad. So look again,
>
Isn't that cheating ?.....or something?
;-)
jw
Matanya Ophee
Of course it is. Basically, because at that time, I still have not
seen a guitar close by... But even the picture with the stogie is a
cheat. That was four years ago...
I'll think of something else...
John E. Golden
> Most bikers that are into early music do play wind instruments, that
> is true. However, the most common instrument is a set of Harley pipes
> chromed and fitted out with a Cornetto mouthpiece.
>
> It sounds like a chorus of Shofars played by people wearing too tight
> Speedos. But you should applaud anyway.
Dear Mr. Lutester,
I've been feeling the need for a bodyguard and you're hired.
Your picture scared the living s**t out of me.
Regards,
John E. Golden
Sharon
<ses...@erols.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 16:40:14 -0700, "Larry Deack"
><cg...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>"Lutester"
>>> Looks are certainly deceiving aren't they?
>>
>> Yep. Looks like way too many guys and not enough ladies and that makes for
>>one bugugly looking web page for my poor eyeballs.
>>
>Amen, brother. What happened to all the ladies? Where did they go?
You rang?
Sharon
John E. Golden
> Your picture scared the living s**t out of me.
P. S. Do you have a sister?
Regards,
John E. Golden
Lutester
Yes, indeed. Down that way madness lies. Beware, beware!!
R.
Lutester
TINK!!!
R.
Lutester
wrote:
WOW!! Is that a tintype?
That picture is even older than mine.
R.
.......from one handsome devil to another, of course
Lutester
wrote:
What was that cartoon where they had the "wayback machine?" I think
MO took a ride.
I wonder if the keys are still in it?
Robert
Lutester
wrote:
>"John Wasak" <mr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>Matanya Ophee wrote:
>>> Lutester <ses...@erols.com> wrote:
>>> >It is an interesting bunch, isn't it? MO looks like the guy that sold
>>> >me a Rolex for $50 on Times Sq.
>>>
>>> That's really bad. So look again,
>>>
>>
>>Isn't that cheating ?.....or something?
>
>Of course it is. Basically, because at that time, I still have not
>seen a guitar close by... But even the picture with the stogie is a
>cheat. That was four years ago...
>
>I'll think of something else...
>
>
>Matanya Ophee
I think you may run afoul of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
here.
R.
Lutester
<john....@NOSPAMatt.net> wrote:
Nope. Just an ugly brother.
R.
Matanya Ophee
>
>>That's really bad. So look again, and see the picture of well known
>>terrorist...
>
>
>WOW!! Is that a tintype?
Actually, it is an old black and white picture which I tinted in
Photoshop. Unfortunately, I still have not found a good software to
improve the sharpness, something I need quite often.
>
>That picture is even older than mine.
>
>R.
>.......from one handsome devil to another, of course
Damn right. Problem is that _now_ I know this. At the time, I didn't
and couldn't figure out why the girls where all over the place...
Matanya Ophee
>
>>> Yep. Looks like way too many guys and not enough ladies and that makes for
>>>one bugugly looking web page for my poor eyeballs.
>>>
>>Amen, brother. What happened to all the ladies? Where did they go?
>
>You rang?
Well, Sharon, anytime you want to submit a picture of _yourself_, I'll
be happy to add it to the album. I have a great spot for you, right
next to the Lutester.
As for adding a picture of your boss, I'll be happy to do that too,
with a link to his web site, as soon as he qualifies to be included by
posting to the NG directly. Once would be enough.
Sharon
<m.o...@orphee.com> wrote:
>Well, Sharon, anytime you want to submit a picture of _yourself_, I'll
>be happy to add it to the album. I have a great spot for you, right
>next to the Lutester.
I've considered it, but then again, why would I want to be
associated in any way with a man who lies, weasels out of
his promises, cannot admit when he's wrong, and impugns the
character and faith of my boss and friend?
>As for adding a picture of your boss, I'll be happy to do that too,
>with a link to his web site, as soon as he qualifies to be included by
>posting to the NG directly. Once would be enough.
Since he does not have an email account, such terms would be
impossible, I'm afraid.
Sharon
Secretary to Christopher Parkening
http://www.parkening.com
Ray Kelly
>>As for adding a picture of your boss, I'll be happy to do that too,
>>with a link to his web site, as soon as he qualifies to be included by
>>posting to the NG directly. Once would be enough.
>
>
> Since he does not have an email account, such terms would be
> impossible, I'm afraid.
Not impossible! Link to the newsgroup and post, you don't need an
e-mail address.
Matanya Ophee
>On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:10:27 GMT, Matanya Ophee
><m.o...@orphee.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Well, Sharon, anytime you want to submit a picture of _yourself_, I'll
>>be happy to add it to the album. I have a great spot for you, right
>>next to the Lutester.
>
>I've considered it, but then again, why would I want to be
>associated in any way with a man who lies, weasels out of
>his promises, cannot admit when he's wrong, and impugns the
>character and faith of my boss and friend?
You are the only one who can answer that question. But since you are
the one who volunteered to answer the question where the women where,
apparently you did it in order to join the anti-MO feeding frenzy.
Welcome back! You've been missed.
>>As for adding a picture of your boss, I'll be happy to do that too,
>>with a link to his web site, as soon as he qualifies to be included by
>>posting to the NG directly. Once would be enough.
>
>Since he does not have an email account, such terms would be
>impossible, I'm afraid.
And this is the reason why you sent me _his_ picture and dared me to
post it?
William D Clinger
> > someplace. :)
>
> Aluminum.
Like this Martin: http://www.elderly.com/new_instruments/items/ALTX.htm
Will
Lutester
wrote:
>>Well, Sharon, anytime you want to submit a picture of _yourself_, I'll
>>be happy to add it to the album. I have a great spot for you, right
>>next to the Lutester.
>
>I've considered it, but then again, why would I want to be
>associated in any way with a man who lies, weasels out of
>his promises, cannot admit when he's wrong, and impugns the
>character and faith of my boss and friend?
HEY!! Just being put next to me doesn't mean you have to love me, ya
know? How do you know I lie, weasel, can't admit I'm ever wrong, or
"impugns" ( is that really a word?) Lighten up.
We could maybe have some fun up there on the top row.
Robert
................deeply hurt and impugned.
Lutester
wrote:
>>WOW!! Is that a tintype?
>
>Actually, it is an old black and white picture which I tinted in
>Photoshop. Unfortunately, I still have not found a good software to
>improve the sharpness, something I need quite often.
Boy! I blew that one right by you didn't I? Ask j JW about tintypes.
Sometimes MO, you are just too literal.
R.
Ray Kelly
Robert,
You old impugning SOB, Sharon's boss and friend have been impugned upon
one too many times! Stop before Christopher impugns you personally for
your acts. Thank goodness Chris uses Sharon as his mediator, or you
would really be in trouble! ;)
Ray
Lutester
wrote:
>Ah! Bon! Alors si je comprends bien ... on a un garde du corps maintenant!
>{:o) C'est bien! on peut se sentir plus en sécurité dans ce joyeux royaume du
>rmcg! Plus on est de fous plus on rit!
>
>Alain
>
>Matanya Ophee wrote:
>
>> Alain Reiher <rei...@telus.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Eh! you are definitelly catching up on the Steidl idea! When are we going
>> >to see the baby picture!
>> >[;o)
>> >
>> >Alain
>> >
>> >Avec une gueule comme celle là Lutester lui ... va commettre ... un Crim!
>>
>> Il la fait deja, si je me ne tromp pas. Des petits.
>>
>> Matanya Ophee
Just because you guys talk that "fancy" language doesn't mean I can't
find out what you are saying.
I'll ask my wife. She knows everything.
Robert
Lutester
wrote:
>I have -many- clown suits in my closet; life is too short.
>
>TTT
..............but the shoes are so long.
R.
Larry Deack
> Like this Martin: http://www.elderly.com/new_instruments/items/ALTX.htm
Probably makes the same dull tink sound when you hit something with it. When
you see MO give it a try. Sharpen the edge and it really would be an axe but
then I suggest you not try it on anybody.
Matanya Ophee
I am sure she does, but if she runs into problems, I am sure both
Alain and myself will be happy to explain the bi-lingual pun.
Matanya Ophee
Alison Causton
"Lutester" <ses...@erols.com> wrote:
Alain said, "With a get-up like that, he should be charged with some sort of
High Crim(e), or other."
Then MO said, "Too late, he's already been booked for talking dirty to JW's
Savarez strings. Just the trebles, though."
Then Alain retorted, "Oh sure, now you tell me I need a body guard. Fine!
I want my security blanket and my crown back NOW, or I'll go completely mad
and send for the Lutester's wife to explain everything. Stop laughing, I
really mean it!"
Traduit, sort of, par,
Mlle Alison Causton.
Greg M. Silverman
>Lutester <ses...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 15:59:46 GMT, Matanya Ophee <m.o...@orphee.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>WOW!! Is that a tintype?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Actually, it is an old black and white picture which I tinted in
>>>Photoshop. Unfortunately, I still have not found a good software to
>>>improve the sharpness, something I need quite often.
>>>
>>>
>>Boy! I blew that one right by you didn't I? Ask j JW about tintypes.
>>
>>Sometimes MO, you are just too literal.
>>
>>
>
>I am an easy one to get sucked in. Ask Klaus.
>
>
An obvious play on your age given the photo historicalness of tintypes...
About sharpening, Photoshop does quite well I thought; beyond a certain
point though, it begins to look artificial... but there are many tricks
you can do with it to improve the sharpness quite significantly. Don't
ask for details since it's been a couple of years since I've seriously
used Photoshop, but it is the best that there is for what you need.
(Is that a tintype in your pocket, or are you just happy!)
gms--
Matanya Ophee
>Matanya Ophee wrote:
>
>>Lutester <ses...@erols.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 15:59:46 GMT, Matanya Ophee <m.o...@orphee.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>WOW!! Is that a tintype?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Actually, it is an old black and white picture which I tinted in
>>>>Photoshop. Unfortunately, I still have not found a good software to
>>>>improve the sharpness, something I need quite often.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Boy! I blew that one right by you didn't I? Ask j JW about tintypes.
>>>
>>>Sometimes MO, you are just too literal.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I am an easy one to get sucked in. Ask Klaus.
>>
>>
>
>An obvious play on your age given the photo historicalness of tintypes...
I looked it up and now I get it. Some terminologies are simply outside
my frame of reference.
>
>About sharpening, Photoshop does quite well I thought; beyond a certain
>point though, it begins to look artificial... but there are many tricks
>you can do with it to improve the sharpness quite significantly. Don't
>ask for details since it's been a couple of years since I've seriously
>used Photoshop, but it is the best that there is for what you need.
I tried many times, with all the tricks available in Photoshop, and
the results are often worse than the original...
Lutester
Hey, thanks, Mlle Alison. I try only to talk "racy" to trebles when
no one else is around.....except maybe a tuning fork. Sometimes they
turn red. The flamenco trebles are the most sensitive.
I would never talk dirty to basses. That's unnatural. They're all
scratchy and stuff. YUK!
Robert
thomas
> "Lutester"
> > Looks are certainly deceiving aren't they?
>
> Yep. Looks like way too many guys and not enough ladies and that makes for
> one bugugly looking web page for my poor eyeballs.
Didn't there used to be a woman's picture on that page, someone
named Chipotle (excuse the sp.)?
Greg M. Silverman
>"Greg M. Silverman" <gm...@NOSPAM.umn.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Matanya Ophee wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Lutester <ses...@erols.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 15:59:46 GMT, Matanya Ophee <m.o...@orphee.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>WOW!! Is that a tintype?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>Actually, it is an old black and white picture which I tinted in
>>>>>Photoshop. Unfortunately, I still have not found a good software to
>>>>>improve the sharpness, something I need quite often.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Boy! I blew that one right by you didn't I? Ask j JW about tintypes.
>>>>
>>>>Sometimes MO, you are just too literal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I am an easy one to get sucked in. Ask Klaus.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>An obvious play on your age given the photo historicalness of tintypes...
>>
>>
>
>I looked it up and now I get it. Some terminologies are simply outside
>my frame of reference.
>
>
>
>>About sharpening, Photoshop does quite well I thought; beyond a certain
>>point though, it begins to look artificial... but there are many tricks
>>you can do with it to improve the sharpness quite significantly. Don't
>>ask for details since it's been a couple of years since I've seriously
>>used Photoshop, but it is the best that there is for what you need.
>>
>>
>
>I tried many times, with all the tricks available in Photoshop, and
>the results are often worse than the original...
>
I do take it you are using the latest and greatest version? sometimes
the tricks are not so obvious... When I get home later today, I'll send
you the title of a fantastic book that gives many tricks Adobe doesn't
quite reveal in an obvious manner.
Guitar content: I missed a bloody distinction on my First Performer's
certificate exam by _2-freaking points_, more or less because I was WAY
too cautious with my Granados (the examiner said I wasn't expressive
enough, I say I just sucked up a storm due to fear of the cross-string
acciacaturas in the F section: I guess I should have just let it rip
like I was doing in the practice room... oh well)! GDMFSOB! Next up,
preparation for my Performer's Certificate and my grade 7 exam with a
shot of Barbancourt before each exam to calm my stupid nerves... good
fun in a bucket, yessiree!
And, I just have to add, I love Robert's picture... I am sure he was and
still is a good biker! (don't ask about my sister's ex, who was a Hell's
Angel... seriously). Now, I jsut have to find a photo of myself that
tops Robert's (if at all possible) and scan it off...
gms--
Matanya Ophee
>
>>I tried many times, with all the tricks available in Photoshop, and
>>the results are often worse than the original...
>>
>
>I do take it you are using the latest and greatest version? sometimes
>the tricks are not so obvious... When I get home later today, I'll send
>you the title of a fantastic book that gives many tricks Adobe doesn't
>quite reveal in an obvious manner.
I have version 6. They are up to 7 now. But I can't figure from the
adverts what adavntages this has that V. 6 doesn't give me already.
These upgrades really can mount up to serious money, so I only upgrade
when I can see some real benefit.
Lutester
<gm...@NOSPAM.umn.edu> wrote:
>
>Guitar content: I missed a bloody distinction on my First Performer's
>certificate exam by _2-freaking points_, more or less because I was WAY
>too cautious with my Granados (the examiner said I wasn't expressive
>enough, I say I just sucked up a storm due to fear of the cross-string
>acciacaturas in the F section: I guess I should have just let it rip
>like I was doing in the practice room... oh well)!
Bummer. Which Granados was it? Is "bloody distinction" better or
worse than just plain old "really good?"
>GDMFSOB!
Puleeze! Even *I* can figure that one out.
>Next up,
>preparation for my Performer's Certificate and my grade 7 exam with a
>shot of Barbancourt before each exam to calm my stupid nerves... good
>fun in a bucket, yessiree!
>
All right!! Those exams aren't on the same day are they?
>And, I just have to add, I love Robert's picture... I am sure he was and
>still is a good biker! (don't ask about my sister's ex, who was a Hell's
>Angel... seriously).
My fav ride was a '61 Royal Enfield twin. My last was a BSA Goldstar
of uncertain vintage. Those aren't "Angel" rides.
>Now, I jsut have to find a photo of myself that
>tops Robert's (if at all possible) and scan it off...
>
Try to keep it tasteful.
Robert
Greg M. Silverman
>"Greg M. Silverman" <gm...@NOSPAM.umn.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>I tried many times, with all the tricks available in Photoshop, and
>>>the results are often worse than the original...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I do take it you are using the latest and greatest version? sometimes
>>the tricks are not so obvious... When I get home later today, I'll send
>>you the title of a fantastic book that gives many tricks Adobe doesn't
>>quite reveal in an obvious manner.
>>
>>
>
>I have version 6. They are up to 7 now. But I can't figure from the
>adverts what adavntages this has that V. 6 doesn't give me already.
>
>These upgrades really can mount up to serious money, so I only upgrade
>when I can see some real benefit.
>
You of course could have your wife buy the upgrade through her
employer; much cheaper that way, really. But, you probably already do
that...
gms--
Sam Culotta
news:0eh3fvk4fjuma5878...@4ax.com...
Whew ! That's a relief!!
Sam
Greg M. Silverman
>On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 14:47:18 -0500, "Greg M. Silverman"
><gm...@NOSPAM.umn.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Guitar content: I missed a bloody distinction on my First Performer's
>>certificate exam by _2-freaking points_, more or less because I was WAY
>>too cautious with my Granados (the examiner said I wasn't expressive
>>enough, I say I just sucked up a storm due to fear of the cross-string
>>acciacaturas in the F section: I guess I should have just let it rip
>>like I was doing in the practice room... oh well)!
>>
>>
>
>Bummer. Which Granados was it?
>
Valses Poeticos number 1 ... a pretty trivial piece at a nice brisk
clip, but when you freak yourself out right before the exam because of
the cross-string ornamentals and end up playing it below tempo, it goes
bad, really fast... oh well.. 'tis a learning experience to not try
something right before the big performance.
>Is "bloody distinction" better or
>worse than just plain old "really good?"
>
it just plain doesn't matter, really... except given that I almost had
the material mastered, if I would have score 95% or better, then I would
have gotten a monetary award from the good folks at Trinity College
London, and it just would have felt really special.
On the bright side of things, I have my BWV 999 down really amazingly
awesome thanks to this exam. (I got 22 out 24 on it... only fault was in
my dynamics not being dynamic enough).. in fact, I'd boldly say my
performance of this piece is so much insteresting than Sharon Isbin's
after hearing her new take on this piece (very slow and cautious
througout)... Herr Spross was right: her new Bach is purely elevator fare!
>>GDMFSOB!
>>
>>
>
>Puleeze! Even *I* can figure that one out.
>
the first 2 may be considered blasphemous by some... the 2nd is rather
oedipal (if it is one's own that is)... and the last 3, well, you can
figure it out, good sir.
>>Next up,
>>preparation for my Performer's Certificate and my grade 7 exam with a
>>shot of Barbancourt before each exam to calm my stupid nerves... good
>>fun in a bucket, yessiree!
>>
>>
>>
>All right!! Those exams aren't on the same day are they?
>
>
hope not... if so, I'll have to get really snookered...
>>And, I just have to add, I love Robert's picture... I am sure he was and
>>still is a good biker! (don't ask about my sister's ex, who was a Hell's
>>Angel... seriously).
>>
>>
>
>My fav ride was a '61 Royal Enfield twin. My last was a BSA Goldstar
>of uncertain vintage. Those aren't "Angel" rides.
>
>
ah, then you aren't a Harley kind of guy... good to hear it! (from my
personal experience with the "Angels" -- that being an extrapolation of
the whole lot of 'em from 1 big time loser -- they are mostly a bunch of
low lifes)
>>Now, I jsut have to find a photo of myself that
>>tops Robert's (if at all possible) and scan it off...
>>
>>
>>
>Try to keep it tasteful.
>
>
:-D
gms--
John Wasak
Could be a daguerreotype! ;-)
> Actually, it is an old black and white picture which I tinted in
> Photoshop.
Looks tinted by the patina of time! ;-)
>Unfortunately, I still have not found a good software to
> improve the sharpness, something I need quite often.
>
Do you use the Unsharp Mask filter?
jw
Matanya Ophee
>
>>Unfortunately, I still have not found a good software to
>> improve the sharpness, something I need quite often.
>>
>
>Do you use the Unsharp Mask filter?
Yes. But the results, as I said, are not convincing.
John Wasak
> "John Wasak" <mr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >>Unfortunately, I still have not found a good software to
> >> improve the sharpness, something I need quite often.
> >>
> >
> >Do you use the Unsharp Mask filter?
>
> Yes. But the results, as I said, are not convincing.
>
Is it because of oversharpening? Have you played around a lot with the
Amount, Radius, and Threshold settings? (The Radius setting often holds the
key to a good result) Too, if the image is intended for halftone or inkjet
output usually you need to have it look a little oversharpened on the
screen.
If those methods aren't working that well have you tried Layer-based
sharpening?
jw
Alain Reiher
[;o)
Alain
Now should I be checking for Harley Davidson howling pipes coming near my home soon
you think?
Alison Causton
<rei...@telus.net> wrote:
> Thanks Alison! For that exact translation " toute la vérité rien que la
> vérité" ...
> [;o)
> Alain
>
> Now should I be checking for Harley Davidson howling pipes coming near my home
> soon
> you think?
Hehe, heaven help me if there's such a thing as "retroactive flunking" for
bad translations ;-)) .
As for motorcycles, if it's howling you hear, then it's probably a Harley.
If it's ve-r-r-ry smooth, then it's probably an Aspencade (Gold Wing).
I like that expression, by the way <<toute la vérite...>> ... ain't it the
truth!
;-)
Alison
thomas
Here's the only amplifer that anyone should ever use with that guitar:
http://namm.harmony-central.com/SNAMM00/Content/Ashdown/PR/Ashdown-Acoustic.html
Matanya Ophee
>
>Is it because of oversharpening? Have you played around a lot with the
>Amount, Radius, and Threshold settings?
I tried them all. But frankly, I lose patience with this not before
long. The only time I have to deal with this is when I need to process
images from newspapers, or even some art books, and occasionally, off
the web. The end product ends as a .TIF file imported into a DTP
program for either the cover of a book, or sometimes as part of the
preface, as occurred with several images in the preface to the
Chilesotti book. The portrait of Chilesotti came to me from his
grandson in a pretty crummy paper print which I tried to scan at
various resolutions and reduce them to the standard (for commercial
printers) 300DPI. the image on the web site will give an idea of the
problem:
http://www.orphee.com/Lute/codice.html
Where I really were fighting with this was with Jan de Kloe's book on
Oscar Esplá, which included a lot of photographs taken from period
newspapers. I even downloaded some plugins from various sources who
promised to make it look good, but eventually, the images still look
like blurred newspaper prints..
>If those methods aren't working that well have you tried Layer-based
>sharpening?
That is something I do not know about.
Larry Deack
> Too, if the image is intended for halftone or inkjet
> output usually you need to have it look a little oversharpened on the
> screen.
Having written OEM printer drivers for most of the major printer
companies I can tell you that we applied a number of filters to the image
prior to sending it to your printer including unsharp mask. In many of our
drivers the unsharp mask is surfaced to the user interface and controllable
by the user. What you get on output is actually pure magic since there are
SO many factors that go into what comes out of your printer. If you apply a
lot of processing in before we start doing our thing at the printer driver
level you might actually be adding more unsharp mask than you really want.
S.
Lutester wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 01:47:11 GMT, "S." <s43...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >John Sloan wrote:
> >>
> >> "Lutester" <ses...@erols.com> wrote in message
> >> news:efu1fv8qj862pmllb...@4ax.com...
> >> >
> >> > Amen, brother. What happened to all the ladies? Where did they go?
> >>
> >> Uh, oh..... Bob Ashley, please don't be reading this thread .... please
> >> don't .... please be skipping this thread ... please, Bob.
> >>
> >> PLEEEAAAAAASE! :)
> >>
> >> John Sloan
> >
> >Our resident lutenist/guitarist/dominatrix, R., is quite aware of the
> >meanderings of that paucity of posts thread. Having actively flung
> >himself into the thick of it at one point or another. The leather and
> >goggles are clearly what saved him. ;->
> >
> >S.
>
> Yes, indeed. Down that way madness lies. Beware, beware!!
>
> R.
You should know better than anyone that some people enjoy that kinda thing.
S.
John Wasak
news:9ah4fvsvheun67drm...@4ax.com...
> "John Wasak" <mr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Is it because of oversharpening? Have you played around a lot with the
> >Amount, Radius, and Threshold settings?
>
> I tried them all. But frankly, I lose patience with this not before
> long. The only time I have to deal with this is when I need to process
> images from newspapers, or even some art books, and occasionally, off
> the web. The end product ends as a .TIF file imported into a DTP
> program for either the cover of a book, or sometimes as part of the
> preface, as occurred with several images in the preface to the
> Chilesotti book. The portrait of Chilesotti came to me from his
> grandson in a pretty crummy paper print which I tried to scan at
> various resolutions and reduce them to the standard (for commercial
> printers) 300DPI. the image on the web site will give an idea of the
> problem:
>
> http://www.orphee.com/Lute/codice.html
>
> Where I really were fighting with this was with Jan de Kloe's book on
> Oscar Esplá, which included a lot of photographs taken from period
> newspapers. I even downloaded some plugins from various sources who
> promised to make it look good, but eventually, the images still look
> like blurred newspaper prints..
>
Ah, I see. I thought you were talking about more modern photographs. That
Chilesotti portrait on your page could be sharpened more but it wouldn't
help in any significant way - there's too much 'noise' in that image. I
think it's safe to say that it will never approximate a good close-grained
photographic image. You can only do so much with the software and, after
all, old newspaper photos are not very good to begin with.
>
> >If those methods aren't working that well have you tried Layer-based
> >sharpening?
>
> That is something I do not know about.
>
It's a more advanced technique where you can work on separate layers in the
image - like the background - and leave other layers untouched. The
problem with the Unsharp Mask is that it sharpens everything including a
piece of dust, a scratch, a noise pixel, film grain, etc. Use of layered
sharpening can help out in those situations, but again, I'd say that
technique won't do much for your concerns with those old images and
newspaper photos.
jw
John Wasak
That may be Larry, but I've seen the need for occasional oversharpening as
well. Maybe it's something to do with the viewing medium - paper or
computer monitor.
jw
S.
Magnanimous translation!!
S.
Larry Deack
> That may be Larry, but I've seen the need for occasional oversharpening as
> well. Maybe it's something to do with the viewing medium - paper or
> computer monitor.
It's just magic. Paper and the monitor are completely different worlds.
Printing is what I know. You would not believe what we do to the image to
print on a non-continuous tone device. Dot gain alone can throw everything
else off and gray component removal and undercover removal are really pure
magic.
The ultimate guide is your own senses. If you like it then that is what you
like. We had many very long disagreements about how the defaults are set
with almost nobody agreeing on what they liked.
John Wasak
> "John Wasak" <mr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:7K9Ia.2724$C83.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> >
> > Middlemarch. Well, I wouldn't have guessed that!
>
> I'm full of surprises. :)
>
> > (And written under [a] pseudonym too!)
>
> "George Eliot" went by about a half dozen different names during her
> lifetime, most of the variations on her birth name. As a novelist I
think
> she surpassed even Dickens.
>
> John Sloan
>
It's been a while since I indulged in the "classic" novels, and not being at
all a reader of novels myself these days, I can only say that, very
probably, my favorite novelist was F. Scott Fitzgerald. The final line of
The Great Gatsby: "So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back
ceaselessly into the past." may be the best final line in any novel. (of
course, that's an IMO!)
jw
Matanya Ophee
>"John Wasak"
>> That may be Larry, but I've seen the need for occasional oversharpening as
>> well. Maybe it's something to do with the viewing medium - paper or
>> computer monitor.
>
> It's just magic. Paper and the monitor are completely different worlds.
>Printing is what I know.
Do bear in mind that in my business, the printer's that attached to
the computer is only an intermediate device that is used for proofing.
There was a time where the final image was produced on a Linotron
Imagesetter, the machine that actually made the films used to generate
the printing plates. But today's technology had done away with that
too. My commercial printers take my computer files, which I upload to
their web site, and generate the printing plates directly. No films
involved. The real challenge is to imagine how the image on the screen
will appear on the printing plate, not on any intermediate paper
print.