 | | Color chart
|
|
I have a finished rough draft of an element color chart: (URL) to see how much order there can be to what was (to me) seeming like a jumble of new colors. Rather than render each swatch as an image, I used HTML's table background specs for the (...) (25 years ago, 29-May-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
FUT .publish (...) Well, my Sony Mavica takes pretty good closeup shots. My dad bought it a year and a half ago for ~$250 (I *think*) and I'm sure prices have dropped since then. I dunno what price range you're looking for, but even I (on my $5 an (...) (25 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Sort of off topic but...
|
|
(...) it (...) button, the internet options. Click the porgram tab and click the Reset Web Settings button. That'll make it the default browser again. Hope that helped! ~Nick (URL) (25 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Sort of off topic but...
|
|
Does anyone know how to set Netscape or IE as the default browser? I got one of those Neoplanet customizeable browsers that when I installed it it became the default browser. I don't want to delete it or un-install it. -Kyle (URL) paid to surf the (...) (25 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
Ben Gatrelle <ben@yellowcastle.spam.com> wrote in message news:Fv1ruA.2En@lugnet.com... (...) (snippety snip) (...) horrible (...) an (...) No - the pictures were taken on a windowsill in daylight. As you say, the flash is no good for closeups, (...) (25 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera (Go Kodak!)
|
|
(...) I've worked on "softening" the flash a bit by taping a couple of layers of tissue paper over the flash. I suppose a grey filter could work, too, but tissue is nice and cheap, plus it diffuses the flash a bit. Natural daylight seems to be the (...) (25 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera (Go Kodak!)
|
|
Will Middelaer wrote in message ... (...) (fixed (...) My (...) soft, (...) I'll second that, I also have a DC215 (a fancy gold one!) and it has a good macro mode. My complaint about the camera, though, is that its flash is way too harsh, and makes (...) (25 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Whoa! Something must have happened!
|
|
Hey, really, what's going on? It said 13 today! Have I been nominated for smoething or what? --Tobias Tobias Möller skrev i meddelandet <392D2C87.C40A4A9D@t...ia.com>... (...) (25 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
Mark Sandlin <sandlin@nwlink.com> wrote in message news:Fv32HI.2H1@lugnet.com... (...) Au contrare, all the good cameras have "macro" features (listed in the Buyer's Guide). They tend to be in the more expensive price tier, though ($500 US and up). (...) (25 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego found in animation tutorial
|
|
(...) Hee hee... I like it. Woo. Alan (URL) (25 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.town, lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Lego found in animation tutorial
|
|
I was messing around learing to do animations when I found this: (URL) down to dynamic html and click on Monkeys in New York, isn't it cool that someone teaching you how to animated with dynamic html used legos in one of their exampples! Well it is (...) (25 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.town, lugnet.general, lugnet.publish) !
|
| |
| | Re: Odd URL Thing
|
|
(...) I'm curious as well. Using default documents makes for more memorable URLs. (25 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Odd URL Thing
|
|
(...) Interesting... I was just wondering what the issues were that made switch away from index.html? I rely heavily on index.html in the sites that I manage. My general practice is to only have one HTML file per directory that is always index.html. (...) (25 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Odd URL Thing
|
|
(...) Interestingly, because of various issues, in my own web pages, I've started to rely less on index.html and instead having a specific page within a directory. I then make index.html auto-redirect to the correct page. One thing this means is (...) (25 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Whoa! Something must have happened!
|
|
I checked my counter reports today, and I had a... believe it or not, 18 hits! On a page that usually gets one hit a day! Something must have happened! And it's not the same person reloading over and over, I can see how many times a person has (...) (25 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera (Go Kodak!)
|
|
Aw, heck. I got that decimal in the wrong place again. I'll send you your $.01 soon. ;^) Thanks for the pics. ~Mark (...) them (...) post to (...) $250) has a (...) mode (fixed (...) My (...) soft, (...) no (...) (25 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera (Go Kodak!)
|
|
(...) Especially see (URL) some of the better close up work I have done with this camera. Will (25 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera (Go Kodak!)
|
|
(...) Can I get in on that bet? My Kodak DC215 (a fairly cheap camera, obtainable now for under $250) has a macro mode that lets you focus as close as 8". The regular focus mode (fixed focus) is no slouch either, working from about half a meter to (...) (25 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
Unfortunately, there is no option for "takes good closeups." Many (usually cheaper) digital cameras cannot focus any closer than about 2.5-3 feet. I went through the options and it recommended a whole bunch of bargain-basement cameras, but I'll bet (...) (25 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
(...) <clip> (...) Wow, I'm surprised that these were taken with an ePhoto 1280. I had this exact camera but sold it because I could not get adequate close-ups. Also the flash was positioned poorly for close-ups and always cast horrible shadows and (...) (25 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.space)
|
