Depth of field - two of them?

[Commander Kinsey]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ctqungbvvetxffp/field.jpg?dl=0
This is a snapshot of Startrek The Next Generation, Season 6, Episode 26.
It appears to have two planes of focus, one centred on the right eye of the man in the foreground, and one on the right side of the chest of the man in the background. Two cameras with superimposing? Or some effect put in afterwards?

[nospam]

In article <op.zvnye...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan>, Commander Kinsey

it's not two planes of focus.

[David B.]

Why is the left hand side of the body of the man in the background so
out of focus?

--
David B.

[nospam]

In article <dcs%D.9089$ox....@fx05.fr7>, David B. <

B"@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> Why is the left hand side of the body of the man in the background so
> out of focus?

because that's what the director wanted.

[David B.]

You are GUESSING again!

https://i.imgur.com/ehnp4m0.jpg

--
David B.

[nospam]

In article <ACs%D.1355$7S2...@fx08.fr7>, David B. <

B"@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> >> Why is the left hand side of the body of the man in the background so
> >> out of focus?
> >
> > because that's what the director wanted.
>
> You are GUESSING again!

nope.

> https://

spam.

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 22:14:49 -0000, Andy Blanchard <an...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:

> Possibly a post-processing effect, but another option might be that a
> perspective correcting lens was used to apply some swing to the plane of
> focus. Looks very much like there's a single plane of focus from Data's
> right eye (our left) through the Borg, and on to the wall in the
> background, which is very much an effect these lenses can achieve.
>
> Not sure whether that's a physical option for the cameras used for
> ST:TNG though...

Yes it does look that way, it sounds interesting, how can a lens do such a thing? And yes I did try google and only got unrelated results.

[Ron C]

Google Scheimpflug Rule
--
==
Later...
Ron C
--

[Jeff]

"Commander Kinsey" <CFKi...@military.org.jp> wrote in
news:op.zvnye...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan:

Going by the still and not seeing the video I would assume the Borg is a
chromakeyed background since the lighting is quite different on them.

[Commander Kinsey]

Cool! Especially this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheimpflug_principle#/media/File:Tilt-lens_photo_of_model_train.jpg
I'm surprised this isn't used more often.

[Commander Kinsey]

Are you sure? What makes you say the lighting is different?

[Whisky-dave]

No the Borg are a cybernetic organism that assimilates other lifeforms and technologies into their own collective consciousness.

Resistance is futile. :-)

Well to some extent anyway.

[Commander Kinsey]

I doubt they can manipulate the focussing of themselves.

[Eric Stevens]

On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 22:27:28 +0000, Andy Blanchard
<an...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 00:50:09 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
><CFKi...@military.org.jp> wrote:
>
>>Cool! Especially this:
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheimpflug_principle#/media/File:Tilt-lens_photo_of_model_train.jpg
>>I'm surprised this isn't used more often.
>

>It's used more often that you might think, and you'll find examples of
>both tilt (tipping the lens up or down) and swing (turning it left or
>right) as with the train or ST:TNG still if you know what to look for.
>Tilt is often used for purely creative effects or extreme depth of field
>for long-distance shots, swing is mostly used for keeping two characters
>(or whatever) in sharp focus like this is really the only usage I've
>noticed for swing. Swing is a pretty good solution for scenarios where
>the director wants a deep depth of field but lighting conditions mean
>high ISOs and/or wide apertures.
>
>The limiting factor is more the camera used and what mount options are
>available as realistically, you need Canon EF or Nikon F mount, although
>there are a few other options for TS-E/PC lenses. Now that DSLR lenses
>are being used more for broadcast video the options for tilt/shift
>lenses have gone up and I expect to see much more usage.
>
In the days of plate and cut-film cameras, most such cameras had the
ability to employ a number of such adjustments. Only the more
expensive 'technical' cameras offered the full range. See for example
https://s23527.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/chroma_technical_large_format-1.jpg.optimal.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/y72s28qo
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[newshound]

I remember them, when we had a proper photographer at the research labs.

How much for a full plate sensor though!

[Eric Stevens]

I don't know about full plate, but how about this?
http://largesense.com/files/1514/9071/3222/Banner1e.jpg
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

[Commander Kinsey]

7.5MP? Not particularly good, or am I missing something?

[Jeff]

"Commander Kinsey" <CFKi...@military.org.jp> wrote in

news:op.zvop0...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan:

Data more directly lighted mainly from the left, Borg diffused slightly
biased from the right.
Like I said this is just from the still. I don't know if the video would show
them interacting in a way that showed they were being filmed at the same
time.

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:30:03 -0000, Jeff <j...@donotspam.me> wrote:

> "Commander Kinsey" <CFKi...@military.org.jp> wrote in
> news:op.zvop0...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan:
>
>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 00:27:07 -0000, Jeff <j...@donotspam.me> wrote:
>>
>>> "Commander Kinsey" <CFKi...@military.org.jp> wrote in
>>> news:op.zvnye...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan:
>>>
>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ctqungbvvetxffp/field.jpg?dl=0
>>>> This is a snapshot of Startrek The Next Generation, Season 6, Episode
>>>> 26. It appears to have two planes of focus, one centred on the right eye
>>>> of the man in the foreground, and one on the right side of the chest of
>>>> the man in the background. Two cameras with superimposing? Or some
>>>> effect put in afterwards?
>>>
>>> Going by the still and not seeing the video I would assume the Borg is a
>>> chromakeyed background since the lighting is quite different on them.
>>
>> Are you sure? What makes you say the lighting is different?
>
> Data more directly lighted mainly from the left, Borg diffused slightly
> biased from the right.

Good point, I hadn't noticed that. But there are several lights in the room.

> Like I said this is just from the still. I don't know if the video would show
> them interacting in a way that showed they were being filmed at the same
> time.

They were interacting. Whether they were filmed simultaneously I can't tell.

[Savageduck]

On Jan 17, 2019, Commander Kinsey wrote
(in article <op.zvsbq...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan>):

Yup, you are missing something. That is 75-micron pixel size, not 75MP.
However, the actual photo resolution is 12 MP @ 3888 x 3072, and it is B&W
only, and you will get images that only a large area sensor can produce.
...and it only costs $106,000 without a lens.

<http://largesense.com/gallery/>

<http://largesense.com/products/8x10-large-format-digital-back-ls911/>

<https://youtu.be/CgpioaDb3Fs>

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[David B.]

Ha! :-) I hope you have found it worthwhile coming to this group!

--
David B.

[Whisky-dave]

I'll have two so I can take stereo photos.

[Commander Kinsey]

I looked up "8 x 10 digital resolution", which google says is 2400x3000 pixels.

> However, the actual photo resolution is 12 MP @ 3888 x 3072, and it is B&W
> only, and you will get images that only a large area sensor can produce.
> ...and it only costs $106,000 without a lens.

What's so good about a large sensor? Or maybe they don't lie about the MP like a lot of cameras - my Fuji 10MP is only capable of about 2.5MP. Telling it to give out 10MP doesn't increase the image quality - either they used a duff lens or the sensor isn't 10MP and they're interpolating.

[Commander Kinsey]

Yes, there are knowledgeable people in here, which is unusual for newsgroups :-)

[Commander Kinsey]

On the subject of stereo - am I the only one that never needs to use the focus control on binoculars? My eyes seem to focus it themselves.

[nospam]

In article <op.zvtdj...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan>, Commander Kinsey

<CFKi...@military.org.jp> wrote:

> > However, the actual photo resolution is 12 MP @ 3888 x 3072, and it is B&W
> > only, and you will get images that only a large area sensor can produce.
> > ...and it only costs $106,000 without a lens.
>
> What's so good about a large sensor?

better image quality, with less noise and/or more pixels.

> Or maybe they don't lie about the MP
> like a lot of cameras

none do. lying about the specs is illegal.

> - my Fuji 10MP is only capable of about 2.5MP.

false.

> Telling
> it to give out 10MP doesn't increase the image quality - either they used a
> duff lens or the sensor isn't 10MP and they're interpolating.

neither. the lens has nothing to do with how many megapixels the sensor
has and it's not interpolated up from 2.5mp.

this was already explained to you several times in another thread and
i'm sure you'll argue about it yet again.

[David B.]

There ARE good people here! :-)

Philo (my Facebook friend) tells me that 98% of answers given by
'nospam' are simply wrong. You must make up your own mind though.

Enjoy the group.

--
David B.

[nospam]

In article <E3l0E.79848$Yn2....@fx26.fr7>, David B. <

B"@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> >
> > Yes, there are knowledgeable people in here, which is unusual for
> > newsgroups :-)
>
> There ARE good people here! :-)

and you're not one of them.

> Philo (my Facebook friend)

translated: new stalking target.

> tells me that 98% of answers given by
> 'nospam' are simply wrong. You must make up your own mind though.

your repeated attacks make you the troll.

either prove what i say as wrong or stfu.

[Commander Kinsey]

I thought nospam was a reincarnation of Rod Speed. He acted like him in another group, and I've since killfiled it.

[Commander Kinsey]

I recently gave up on Facebook. I contact friends and relatives by email/phone/in person, privately, not publicly so everyone can see what you're talking about. All I ever got on Facebook was notifications that a friend of a friend of a friend I'd never heard of before had visited MacDonalds and taken a photo of their happy meal.

[nospam]

In article <op.zvtlb...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan>, Commander Kinsey

<CFKi...@military.org.jp> wrote:

> >> Yes, there are knowledgeable people in here, which is unusual for
> >> newsgroups :-)
> >
> > There ARE good people here! :-)
> >
> > Philo (my Facebook friend) tells me that 98% of answers given by
> > 'nospam' are simply wrong. You must make up your own mind though.
> >
> > Enjoy the group.
>
> I thought nospam was a reincarnation of Rod Speed. He acted like him
> in another group, and I've since killfiled it.

nope. you did so because i repeatedly called you out on your never
ending bullshit claims, as did many, many others.

examples include camera makers lying about the number of pixels, that
they upsample images to fool people, what megapixels actually means,
the specs of your alleged canon slr, that edge is not part of win10 and
must be downloaded separately, that your webcam is nonstandard, and
just yesterday, your ridiculous claim that humans can swim in 0c/32f
icy water for 'several hours' without any suitable protection from the
cold.

all of that is bullshit.

[David B.]

I'm saddened to learn of your poor experience.

Do you require any help/advice/assistance?

--
David B.

[Commander Kinsey]

No thanks, I just don't see the point in Facebook. Anyone I really care about I contact outside of Facebook anyway.

[David B.]

OK! :-)

--
David B.

[PeterN]

Cheap at half the price. Here's one guy working on a DIY 4x5 equivalent.
<http://maxotics.com/2016/05/30/graflex-4x5-digital-back-diy/>

--
PeterN

[Alan Browne]

On 2019-01-15 19:27, Jeff wrote:
> "Commander Kinsey" <CFKi...@military.org.jp> wrote in
> news:op.zvnye...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan:
>
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ctqungbvvetxffp/field.jpg?dl=0
>> This is a snapshot of Startrek The Next Generation, Season 6, Episode
>> 26. It appears to have two planes of focus, one centred on the right eye
>> of the man in the foreground, and one on the right side of the chest of
>> the man in the background. Two cameras with superimposing? Or some
>> effect put in afterwards?
>
> Going by the still and not seeing the video I would assume the Borg is a

> chromakeyed background since the lighting is quite different on them.

+1. Or not necessarily chromakeyed but simply separate video source
being merged into the principle scene.

This is really the silliest of silly threads... oh, wait, but close.

--
"2/3 of Donald Trump's wives were immigrants. Proof that we
need immigrants to do jobs that most Americans wouldn't do."
- unknown protester

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 23:51:14 -0000, Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:

> On 2019-01-15 19:27, Jeff wrote:
>> "Commander Kinsey" <CFKi...@military.org.jp> wrote in
>> news:op.zvnye...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan:
>>
>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ctqungbvvetxffp/field.jpg?dl=0
>>> This is a snapshot of Startrek The Next Generation, Season 6, Episode
>>> 26. It appears to have two planes of focus, one centred on the right eye
>>> of the man in the foreground, and one on the right side of the chest of
>>> the man in the background. Two cameras with superimposing? Or some
>>> effect put in afterwards?
>>
>> Going by the still and not seeing the video I would assume the Borg is a
>> chromakeyed background since the lighting is quite different on them.
>
> +1. Or not necessarily chromakeyed but simply separate video source
> being merged into the principle scene.
>
> This is really the silliest of silly threads... oh, wait, but close.

If someone is sillier than me I want to meet him.

[Ron C]

Um ..... see Eric vs nospam;
pick one ;-)
--
==
Later.................
Ron C
--

[Commander Kinsey]

And where exactly do I "see" this "Eric vs nospam"?

[Savageduck]

On Jan 19, 2019, Commander Kinsey wrote
(in article <op.zvvd2...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan>):

Just check any recent thread.

Perhaps the 402 message "Finally got to the point where no new camera holds
my interest (waiting for specific offering)” thread might be a good example
of Eric vs nospam vs Alan Browne.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[nospam]

In article <0001HW.21F37BEC03...@news.giganews.com>,

Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>
> Perhaps the 402 message "Finally got to the point where no new camera holds
> my interest (waiting for specific offering)² thread might be a good example
> of Eric vs nospam vs Alan Browne.

more accurately described as eric vs {nospam, alan browne, harry
nyquist, claude shannon, every signal processing text book..}

[Commander Kinsey]

Sorry? 402? That's an http "payment required" error code.

> "Finally got to the point where no new camera holds
> my interest (waiting for specific offering)” thread might be a good example
> of Eric vs nospam vs Alan Browne.

Christ, 95% of that thread has been deleted by my killfiles, and I've only just entered the group.

[Alan Browne]

;-)

[Alan Browne]

On 2019-01-19 11:51, Commander Kinsey wrote:

> Christ, 95% of that thread has been deleted by my killfiles, and I've
> only just entered the group.

Well done. There is nothing to see there.

[Savageduck]

On Jan 19, 2019, Commander Kinsey wrote

(in article <op.zvvig...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan>):

That was a total (as of the writing of my post) a thread that was 402 posts
long.

>
>
> > "Finally got to the point where no new camera holds
> > my interest (waiting for specific offering)” thread might be a good
> > example
> > of Eric vs nospam vs Alan Browne.
>
> Christ, 95% of that thread has been deleted by my killfiles, and I've only
> just entered the group.

Good! So you filters are working?

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[David B.]

I agree with that.

>>> "Finally got to the point where no new camera holds
>>> my interest (waiting for specific offering)” thread might be a good
>>> example
>>> of Eric vs nospam vs Alan Browne.
>>
>> Christ, 95% of that thread has been deleted by my killfiles, and I've only
>> just entered the group.
>
> Good! So you filters are working?

Are you still filtering me? ;-)

--
David B.

[Commander Kinsey]

Ah, I didn't think of that.

>> > "Finally got to the point where no new camera holds
>> > my interest (waiting for specific offering)” thread might be a good
>> > example
>> > of Eric vs nospam vs Alan Browne.
>>
>> Christ, 95% of that thread has been deleted by my killfiles, and I've only
>> just entered the group.
>
> Good! So you filters are working?

Yes, unlike a lot of people, my filters remove replies to people I don't like.

[Commander Kinsey]

I shall reply to this so he can see your question ;-)

[David B.]

Thank you! :-)

He's a GOOD man - I really regret upsetting him. :-(

--
David B.

[Commander Kinsey]

Some people are too easily upset. I only killfile those who repeatedly bore me.

[David B.]

How do you feel about emailing me and telling me a little more about
you? You've been a bit of fresh air on Usenet since the day I first met you!

--
David B.

[Commander Kinsey]

Ok, what's your email address?

[David B.]

Can you view here?

<q1vqr8$rkv$1...@dont-email.me>

Great shot of a Hawk

--
David B.

[Savageduck]

On Jan 19, 2019, Commander Kinsey wrote

(in article <op.zvvtv...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan>):

Not a good idea.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[Commander Kinsey]

Please elaborate on your ridiculous assertion.

[Savageduck]

On Jan 19, 2019, Commander Kinsey wrote

(in article <op.zvvwl...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan>):

Experience, which after I gave him the benefit of doubt, and a degree of
trust, I was somewhat disappointed.

...but if you care to go ahead, who am I to stop you

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[David B.]

You doubted my sincerity! I trusted you.

> ...but if you care to go ahead, who am I to stop you

Exactly! ;-)

--
David B.

[David B.]

davidandtrishab @ btinternet.com (no spaces)

--
David B.

[Commander Kinsey]

I can only comment on what I've seen between David and Diesel. Diesel appears to be an utter arsehole.

[Savageduck]

On Jan 19, 2019, Commander Kinsey wrote

(in article <op.zvv0j...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan>):

Well, I can only agree. His methodology is not one I would employ, or
endorse.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[David B.]

On 19/01/2019 23:59, Savageduck wrote:
> On Jan 19, 2019, Commander Kinsey wrote

> (in article <op.zvv0j...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan>):
[....]

>> I can only comment on what I've seen between David and Diesel. Diesel appears
>> to be an utter arsehole.
>
> Well, I can only agree. His methodology is not one I would employ, or
> endorse.

This would be a good thread to read, Commander Kinsey!

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.photo.digital/vqqGFGIQSg4%5B1-25%5D

Lots of background (and starting with cats!)

--
David B.

[David B.]

On 19/01/2019 19:43, Commander Kinsey wrote:

> Yes, unlike a lot of people, my filters remove replies to people I don't
> like.

Now, completely off topic ....

Did *YOU* make this video?

https://www.facebook.com/SweetBabieFamily/videos/1954302204639493/

If not, you could probably make one much like it! ;-)

--
David B.

[Commander Kinsey]

Indeed, my cats are also that stupid, in particular they really cannot grasp Newton's third law of motion (equal and opposite reactions). As in why the hell did the box I just leapt off fly in the other direction and knock everything over, scare the hell out of my sister, and cause her to leap in the air, scare me, and make me knock something else over? I really don't understand how any animal without a basic grasp of its surroundings can survive, perhaps quick reactions.

[David B.]

Indeed!

I've always been fascinated by the clips showing a cat 'meeting' a
cucumber! ;-)

--
David B.

[Commander Kinsey]

So have I, so I tried it. Evidently my cats aren't quite that stupid. They just ignored it completely. Not sure why a cucumber should scare a cat any more than any other object. All I can find on google is it's either something "sneaking up on them", so why not anything else like a book placed next to them?, or it looks like a snake (but pet cats have never seen a snake so that doesn't make sense either.).

[Commander Kinsey]

Looks like 2/3rds of cats are scared of them: https://youtu.be/agi4geKb8v8
Strangely all 7 of mine I tested it on were not scared - perhaps it's the way they're brought up?

[PeterN]

On 1/19/2019 6:22 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 22:10:53 -0000,  wrote:

<snip>

>> ...but if you care to go ahead, who am I to stop you
>
> I can only comment on what I've seen between David and Diesel.  Diesel
> appears to be an utter arsehole.

I don't read either of them.

--
PeterN

[David B.]

You should read *ME*! (I'm the GOOD guy!)

THIS is for you, Peter ..... https://goo.gl/SUkH8j

It's about CATS! :-D

--
David B.

[nospam]

In article <9b41E.109351$Mo2....@fx28.fr7>, David B. <

B"@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> >> I can only comment on what I've seen between David and Diesel.  Diesel
> >> appears to be an utter arsehole.
> >
> > I don't read either of them.
>
> You should read *ME*! (I'm the GOOD guy!)

'read' is the wrong word, and no.

> THIS is for you, Peter ..... https://

do not click his links.

[nospam]

In article <q22hm...@news4.newsguy.com>, PeterN

<"peter,newdelete"@deleteverizon.net> wrote:

> > I can only comment on what I've seen between David and Diesel.  Diesel
> > appears to be an utter arsehole.
>
> I don't read either of them.

then you can't comment at all.

[Troll Finder]

'nospam' is a *TROLL*

98% of what he posts is *WRONG*!

[nospam]

In article <q22kb2$1m7p$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Troll Finder

<mixm...@remailer.privacy.at> wrote:

> 'nospam' is a *TROLL*
>
> 98% of what he posts is *WRONG*!

oh look, david b under a new nym.

now who is the troll...

[David B.]

Seems to me that someone else is on your tail at last! :-)

IIRC it was Philo who posted that 98% of what you say is BAD advice.

Yep! It was - here's the MID <q1ob4l$tam$1...@dont-email.me>

--
David B.

[nospam]

In article <pI41E.11563$oQ1....@fx03.fr7>, David B. <

B"@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

>
> Seems to me that someone else is on your tail at last! :-)

nope. it's you and you alone, and your smiley is clear proof who is the
troll here.

[Troll Finder]

Philo is right. You ARE wrong, dopey!

[Bill W]

Do you really have no idea at all how creepy you are?

[Commander Kinsey]

What do you have against David?

[Commander Kinsey]

I'm only 43, and it took me less than forty seconds, so there!

[David B.]

"Creepy"? NO, no idea at all.

I try my best to deal in facts. Have I made an error, 'Bill W'?

If it helps, I do believe in what I call 'the greater consciousness of
mankind' - it often provides me with what others call 'insight' and I
have an ability to 'read between the lines' too.

--
David B.

[nospam]

In article <L%41E.75868$fJ4....@fx09.fr7>, David B. <

B"@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> > On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 20:18:28 +0000, "David B." <"David
> > B"@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> > ...

> > Do you really have no idea at all how creepy you are?
>
> "Creepy"? NO, no idea at all.

no surprise there.

> I try my best to deal in facts.

no you don't.

> Have I made an error, 'Bill W'?

many.

> If it helps, I do believe in what I call 'the greater consciousness of
> mankind' - it often provides me with what others call 'insight' and I
> have an ability to 'read between the lines' too.

you have no such ability.

[Savageduck]

On Jan 20, 2019, nospam wrote
(in article<200120191507225186%nos...@nospam.invalid>):

Naah! I have a sneaking feeling that it might be the Santa Clara nymshifter
currently known as Arlen Holder. The minmix.net is a hint. I don’t deal
with him any more.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[Savageduck]

On Jan 20, 2019, Savageduck wrote
(in article<0001HW.21F51D1D03...@news.giganews.com>):

However, I could be wrong.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[Whisky-dave]

On Saturday, 19 January 2019 00:16:21 UTC, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 23:51:14 -0000, Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>
> > On 2019-01-15 19:27, Jeff wrote:
> >> "Commander Kinsey" <CFKi...@military.org.jp> wrote in
> >> news:op.zvnye...@desktop-ga2mpl8.lan:
> >>
> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ctqungbvvetxffp/field.jpg?dl=0
> >>> This is a snapshot of Startrek The Next Generation, Season 6, Episode
> >>> 26. It appears to have two planes of focus, one centred on the right eye
> >>> of the man in the foreground, and one on the right side of the chest of
> >>> the man in the background. Two cameras with superimposing? Or some
> >>> effect put in afterwards?
> >>
> >> Going by the still and not seeing the video I would assume the Borg is a
> >> chromakeyed background since the lighting is quite different on them.
> >
> > +1. Or not necessarily chromakeyed but simply separate video source
> > being merged into the principle scene.
> >
> > This is really the silliest of silly threads... oh, wait, but close.
>
> If someone is sillier than me I want to meet him.

Plenty on facebook.

[David B.]

Do *YOU* have a Facebook personal, Dave?

--
David B.

[Commander Kinsey]

I closed my facebook account. I failed to see the point of a friend of a friend of a friend I've never heard of showing a photo of the MacDonalds happy meal they're eating.

[Commander Kinsey]

WHY do some people CAPITALISE stuff for NO reason at ALL?

[David B.]

I did, of course, mean PERSONA! ;-)

--
David B. - EMPHASISING!

[Whisky-dave]

Yes.

[Whisky-dave]

There are options you can set, you don't have to see friends of friends posts
, you don't even have to see your friends posts.

[Commander Kinsey]

Argh, I hate that word. You'll be saying "emoticon" next.

[Commander Kinsey]

If I block friends of friends, and also friends, I'd see nothing. So what would be the point? Anyone I actually want to speak to, I email, phone, text, or visit in person. Why would I want to discuss things with friends where everyone can see them?

[David B.]

It's an awesome facility for sharing photographs with family and
friends. The associated Facebook 'Messenger' is just as private as email
and is great for more-or-less instant chatting.

--
David B.

[David B.]

>> Do *YOU* have a Facebook *persona*, Dave? [Error corrected!]

> Yes.

So what did you think of the Stonehenge image?

--
David B.

[Commander Kinsey]

I've got something called "email" for that. I send the photos to precisely the people I want them to go to.

[Whisky-dave]

Although I only have ~80 friends on FB most I don't see anything from, but they can messege me or contact me in a group message or post, I don't see what they have for dinner as I have seleted not to see every post they make.
I think I only have 2 friends on FB that I haven't met in real life anyway.
If you know how to use FB it can be useful, but like any method of communication you should be able to control it and I can.

[Commander Kinsey]

It just seems completely pointless to me. If you want to contact your friend, why not just email them? You can send them videos or photos that way quite easily, and even to more than one friend at a time.

[Whisky-dave]

I don't use FB while at work, due to cookies I don't want to see aads for the sort of things I buy at work, when I'm on FB I'm more likely be responding to music rather than electronic devices.

And as the link has disappeared from this post I won't see it.

>
> --
> David B.

[Commander Kinsey]

Ever heard of an adblocker? I saw zero adverts on facebook.

> And as the link has disappeared from this post I won't see it.

What link?

[Whisky-dave]

But what if I want all the followers of a friends band to see the video I recordeed of them, I don;t have all their email address and there might be others that liike the band that are not my friends, I might not even like them but why should that stop them from watching the video ?
VBut I do use youtube to store the video and FB to publicise it, and I don;t want 100s of people knowing my email address and I don't want their email addresses.

[Whisky-dave]

I don't mind seeing ads for things I buy or use at home infact I like the idea of seeing IR filters cameras etc... I just don't want to see ads at home for stuff I use at work.

>
> > And as the link has disappeared from this post I won't see it.
>
> What link?

The link to the stonehenge picture that DB was refering to.