Jump to content

Madelaine McMasters

Resident
  • Content Count

    19,135
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Everything posted by Madelaine McMasters

  1. My own personal experience with the books and its followers is very limited, and my take on it all may be uninformed and unhelpful. I skimmed one Gor book long ago, and was surprised it made it into Waldenbooks. Norman makes suspension of disbelief painful for anyone who can think. The result for me was suspension of belief in Norman's intelligence and anyone who takes Gor seriously. Fortunately, I haven't yet met a follower who does. I think that explains our different attitudes towards it. The one Gor sim I visited was sufficiently tongue in cheek to be inoffensive. Though the trappings were different, the relationship dynamics I witnessed were much like those anywhere else in SL. I recall a visit during which folks around the campfire were marveling at how much all the roasted Gorean animals tasted like chicken. If Gor didn't exist, Amina, we would have to invent it, just to ensure that we didn't miss out on lines like this from you. I'm in complete agreement with Scylla here. I adore your hatred for Gor enough to be glad Gor is there for you to hate it. It's easy and fun to imagine Norman as a hunt-and-pecker, furiously banging out books at his typewriter, precariously balanced on a shelf in the shower because his wife has better things to do than launder his shorts.
  2. During my first months in SL, as I was figuring out who I was here, I looked more like Maybie than Rhonda. I wore long feminine hair and pretty dresses. I didn't yet have an AO, so body language wasn't a distinguishing characteristic. I was attempting to create an avatar I found attractive. That's not the same as creating an avatar I identify with. The image of Madelaine in my profile is more "me". You can't see her crossed arms (something I looked for in my eventual AO), but they are crossed. When I posted in @Rhonda Huntress's thread, I thought of asking her which of the two avatars she'd be most likely to approach for a dance. I know I'd rather approach my early day Maddy than the current one. My early self was who I wanted to be with. My current self (including the li'l devil) is who I want to be. Snugs is probably who I am...
  3. Ignoring the profile information: Rhonda's a Huntress. She's got her arms crossed in front of her, though that doesn't look as intimidating as when I do it, because of the bare bellybutton. She's tall, red, and hinting of weariness mixed with cynicism. Maybie's name invites hope, as does her blonde hair. She's clinging to a huntress for safety, but she's looking outward for attention or opportunity. She took care to coordinate her outfit with the background. That must mean something! I don't think Forum fame figures into this. I doubt any of us are well known at random venues in world.
  4. Nope. That's really Orwar. This is me... Watch your back, @Orwar
  5. Oooh, how cute. They're doing "The Sick Kitty Shuffle"!
  6. I left and returned once. Here's how I did it... If I leave again, I doubt I'll come back.
  7. As High Priestess of the Forum, I'm holier than all of you.
  8. Hard to believe this was a decade ago... Even harder to believe this is now...
  9. You're quite right about that irrational aura that surrounds some people in some way. It's a fragile thing though. A photogenic face or body might go to pieces when it moves. If their movement is also magic, there's the potential for voice to take them down. If the magic survives speaking, it might take a few minutes for some intellectual or ideological fault to bring fingernails to the blackboard. I recently posted about witnessing one of those people at my local Apple Store. She was other worldly until she spoke with the voice of a chipmunk. Long ago, while walking through the galleria at the bank were my ex-hubby worked, three women in office attire were walking the other way. The one in the middle was nearly take-your-breath-away beautiful. I was so focused on her that I walked into one of those sand-filled ashtrays, knocking it over. The bowl went rolling across the floor like that hub cap after the car crash. When it finally rattled to a stop, I got a around of applause from others in the galleria. My benchmark for beauty since then has been whether it causes that hubcap sound to rise from my subconscious. More recently, I went to the post office to deliver a package. As I was getting into my car, a woman pulled up in a fire-engine-red Corvette and stepped out. She was blonde, gorgeous, and wearing a matching red dress and impossibly high red patent leather heels. Her walk to the entrance was a study in sexual energy. Thankfully, on exiting the parking lot, I did not knock down a road sign. I did hear the hubcap.
  10. Yes! I had Rich Hall's Sniglets calendar long ago. I actually still use some of the words I learned from him... Lactomangulation (LAK to man gyu LAY shun) - n. Manhandling the "open here" spout on a milk carton so badly that one has to resort to using the "illegal" side. Elecelleration (el a cel er AY shun) - n. The mistaken notion that the more you press an elevator button the faster it will arrive. Houndwounding (hownd' wown ding) n. - Canine act of circling a spot three or four times before settling on it. Hudnut (hud' nuht) - n. The leftover bolt or screw in any "some assembly required" project. Pockalanche (pok' uh lansh) n. - Perpetual action of reaching down to pick up an item fallen from a shirt pocket, only to have another item fall out. The last word on that list wouldn't have stood out to me if not for watching Dad do exactly that countless times when I was young. The relative paucity of pockets in women's blouses is all the evidence I need that gals are smarter than guys.
  11. Yes. Where have you been since 2006, which is approximately the year Earth's population of women surpassed 3,360,663,425 (3,110,092,423 + 250,541,002)? There are currently 3,850,249,536 of us gals here, and 3,915,366,464 of you fellas. I'd like those odds, but I'm batting for your team.
  12. I learned something wonderful today. The most replaced book in the Milwaukee County Federated Library System (because people check them out but never return them) is... The Bible. Apparently a lot of people who check out that book never read it.
  13. Those prefixes originate from Latin, where "cis" means "this side" and "trans" means "other side". My first encounter with them was in organic chemistry class, where they were used to describe the location of methyl groups with respect to double bonds in organic molecules. We now know of trans people as those who transition to the other gender or simply identify as being of the other gender (with respect to society's classification of their physical selves). While the use of "trans" seems natural because it's used in the word "transition", there wasn't a word to describe the far more common situation of people who's self view matched society's view of them. As awareness of the spectral nature of gender increased, someone decided we needed a prefix for that and coined "cis". So now we have transgender folks who identify as "the other" gender from their physical presentation and cisgender folks who identify the same as they appear. I'm sure my explanation is missing some nuance, but there ya go. Latin also gives us "ambi"gender, which describes people who are everywhere and/or nowhere in the spectrum. I'd love to meet someone who's fiercely ambigender. I'm ambivalently cisgender.
  14. Without knowing what your particles represent, it's difficult to know how to drive llParticleSystem(). For something like exhaust smoke, you might change rate, burst count, speed_min, speed_max. angle_begin and angle_end. You'd also probably want to set PSYS_PART_WIND_MASK. Regardless of what you're trying to do, I see potential errors in your calculation... float rate = llAbs(throttle + 10) / 0.0333; if (rate > 1) rate = 1; It seems you want increasing particle emission with acceleration and decreasing with slowing. Your function would do approximately the opposite. We might blame LL for misnaming the PSYS_SRC_BURST_RATE parameter. It should be called PSYS_SRC_BURST_INTERVAL. At zero, "rate" produces bursts of particles as fast as the viewer can go, potentially starving other emitters within view. As rate rises to one (second), particle emission slows to the puff-puff-puff of a steam locomotive pulling out of the station. You use llAbs(), which suggests to me that you're expecting negative throttle values, probably for reverse as Qie assumed. You add 10 to throttle so that there is some output (exhaust?) at idle. Unfortunately, for a throttle of -10, you'll get a rate of 0.0, which Rachel notes will produce the maximum possible burst rate. You divide the throttle value by 0.0333, which is the same as multiplying by 30, but far less obvious. Your calculation will produce a rate of one for all values of "throttle" outside the range of -9.966 to -10.0333. I don't think that's your intent. You mention both throttle and gears, but I suspect you mean your vehicle has 10 forward velocities, idle(zero), and three reverse velocities. Let's presume throttle ranges from 10 to -3. This might be more like what you want... From there, you'd use "count" to set PSYS_SRC_BURST_PART_COUNT and you'd set PSYS_SRC_BURST_RATE to something reasonable, like 0.2 (five bursts/second).
  15. SL houses do eat things. Here's my first home in Forgotten City trying to consume you...
  16. Long ago, I was laid off after the company I worked for was acquired. I was told I was "high maintenance". I found that comforting!
  17. This reminds me. I got a letter in the mail last week, from a local real-estate agent. He wants me to know there are people looking for houses in my neighborhood and that now would be a good time to sell mine. Here's his business card... Imagine my dismay over his being a real-estate agent and not the proprietor of a new restaurant specializing in flame grilled ovaries.
  18. I love Valentine's Day! There's no better reward for eschewing romanticism and tradition than scoring candy the day after for cents on the dollar.
  19. Thanks for mentioning that FOV is controllable via key commands, Alyona. I use Phototools because I can write down the numbers should I wish to take additional snapshots with similar characteristics. In the OP's case, simply zooming in to the max, then camming out to the DD limit would do the trick. As for the meaning of "flat", in the OP's case I read it like a cartographer, or even a landscape photographer, where DOF is rarely an issue. He wants an orthographic view of an object, where everything appears to be equidistant from the camera and there is no spherical distortion. Simple lenses have a spherical focal plane (at both the subject and the film) and so cannot obtain orthographic views, unless infinitely far from the subject (zero FOV, infinite DOF). Landscape photographers use "flat" to describe images in which depth is compressed or eliminated, making everything seem at the same distance. They also use "flat" to indicate lack of spherical distortion, where horizons appear flat regardless of their position in the frame. In the extreme, that's an orthographic view. DOF is rarely an issue, as the subject distance is vast compared to the aperture size. In astrophotography, where we get "infinite" distances (and DOF) to the subject for free, attention switches to reducing spherical distortion and focus problems in images caused by the film being close to the mirror/lens. As with the image plane, the film focal plane is curved, but it's a LOT closer to the optics, so that curvature is an issue. You can address this by designing optics to flatten the focal plane, curve the film to match it, fix the image in post, or a mix of those techniques. DOF is also not a concern in aerial cartography (ex: Google/Apple maps). Here again, "flat" refers to lack of spherical aberration in the images, making it easier to stitch them together accurately. In macro photography, we get the worst of both worlds. There is distortion caused by the low subject focal and film distance to aperture ratio. This shows up primarily as short DOF, but there can also be significant spherical distortion. Because close up work exacerbates focus issues caused by the small subject distance to aperture ratio (resulting in short DOF), "flat" in this context refers more to obtaining good focus across the field of view than to obtaining a flat perspective. When both are desired, you use tele-macro lenses to increase DOF (for focus) and decrease FOV (for flatness). As you move from macro through portrait, to landscape, to astrophotography, the meaning of "flat" changes. Even within those classes of photography, the meaning of "flat" depends on the goal. ETA: I forgot to mention that "flat" can also refer to correcting intensity variations in images caused by vignetting and/or varying pixel sensitivities and noise in digital sensors. Astrophotographers (I'm an amateur) routinely take "flat" or "dark" frames with the telescope capped. Dark frames record the sensor noise and are taken just before, intermingled with, or just after an imaging session. Flat frames are taken of twilight/dawn bits of evenly illuminated sky, or of reference targets, to account for any vignetting in the optical train. Those frames are then used to correct the image frames. So there's yet another definition of "flat".
×
×
  • Create New...