The WTF Starts Now

[Adam Albright]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:14:56 -0700, "Gary" <Gary@somewhere.usa> wrote:

>Yes Ubunto is a toy os.
>I think that my previous post was too complex for you.

And you act like a child poster having a temper tantrum. Post again
when you can act like some responsible adult.

 

[Frank]

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:11:24 -0700, "Gary" <Gary@somewhere.usa> wrote:
>
>
>>So your saying Linux can't produce accurate colors.
>
>
> No fool, not what I'm saying at all you clueless windbag. I was
> expecting my favorite a-hole to dance to this post, but you'll do
> until he does.
>
> PC's (Windows) monitors have a different default gamma than Macs and
> since I don't have any box with Linux installed right now to check I'm
> assuming there is difference in their preferred gamma setting as well.
> If you knew what you were talking about, which you obviously don't,
> you would understand gamma effects the overall darkness of the image.
> Which if you had a functioning brain, which you obviously don't, just
> a out of control gum flapping mouth which you can't control, that
> would explain why Alias sees images "darker" then they appear in the
> Windows world.
>
> http://www.photoscientia.co.uk/Gamma.htm
>
> About Linux
>
> http://micke.hallendal.net/archives/2004/09/lcd_vs_crt_gamm.html
>
>
> You clowns should learn I'm WAY smarter than any of you fan boys. Pick
> a topic. Try me. PLEASE!
>

You mindless idiot...apple uses 1.8 gamma and pc's use 2.2.
Moron.
Frank

 

[Gary]

This coming from the person who doesn't know the difference between
transmitted and reflected light.


"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:mh0ia3141alrrv9j13j6e90pvebcfs1b93@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:14:56 -0700, "Gary" <Gary@somewhere.usa> wrote:
>
>>Yes Ubunto is a toy os.
>>I think that my previous post was too complex for you.
>
> And you act like a child poster having a temper tantrum. Post again
> when you can act like some responsible adult.
>

 

[Gary]

You really have no idea about the difference between transmitted and
reflected light do you.
Stick you big nose into your monitor what do you see. Oh surprise R,B,G if
any of those Red, Blue, Or Green have a value of more then 0 guess what numb
nuts it isn't black is it?



"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:5krha3t8dja8lho610abj0v96v4pg6088b@4ax.com...
> The fanboy club is hung up on "looks black" and according to RGB specs
> what is suppose to be called black. The whole exercise is pointless
> because I know of no professional that uses his computer for graphic
> work that uses RGB color space IF the work he is doing gets off the
> computer into the real world and is viewed on another medium like
> commercial printing, (that's CMYK color space based on inks) or video
> which I do a lot of that based on NTSC specs.
>
> For video work what's important is IRE (Institute of Radio Engineers)
> standards where a RGB value of 235, not 255 means white and 16 is
> black, not zero. For video, setting black to 0,0,0 is a BIG mistake.
> The proper scale is based on IRE values. More on how it works out here
> if anybody is interested.
>
> http://www.dps.com/custserv/dpsfaql...6006723e5?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,dpsReality
>
> While written for our friends in the Mac world that use Final Cut Pro
> the following site give a good but somewhat technical breakdown of
> what it all means.
>
> http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/video_levels_nattress.html
>
> There's even a "super black" which surprise is a value that is suppose
> to be blacker than black if there could be such a thing. Won't go
> there, the fanboy heads are probably spinning already and they simply
> wouldn't understand anyway.
>
> The point is what colors one sees on their monitor screen depends on a
> lot of variables and it isn't carved in stone that black must always
> be RGB 0,0,0. It can be different and still mean black. It DEPENDS on
> what your computer is used for!
>
> People that think black must always be RGB 0,0,0 are well, foolish. We
> obviously have a lot of foolish no nothing people in this newsgroup as
> you well know. Not talking about you Michael, but you do know the
> characters I am making reference to that never seem to get anything
> right that make this newsgroup if anything fun to read seeing what
> lengths they will go to only to sooner or later get proven wrong time
> after time. ;-)
>

 

[Frank]

Gary wrote:

> You really have no idea about the difference between transmitted and
> reflected light do you.
> Stick you big nose into your monitor what do you see. Oh surprise R,B,G if
> any of those Red, Blue, Or Green have a value of more then 0 guess what numb
> nuts it isn't black is it?
>


hahaha...that's funny!
Frank

 

[Adam Albright]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:00:57 -0700, Frank <fb@nospaner.cnm> wrote:

>Adam Albright wrote:
>
>>>
>>>-Michael
>>
>>
>> The fanboy club is hung up on "looks black" and according to RGB specs
>> what is suppose to be called black. The whole exercise is pointless
>> because I know of no professional that uses his computer for graphic
>> work that uses RGB color space IF the work he is doing gets off the
>> computer into the real world and is viewed on another medium like
>> commercial printing, (that's CMYK color space based on inks) or video
>> which I do a lot of that based on NTSC specs.
>
>Ummm...who said we use RGB for out putting printer ready files? Only an
>idiot would think that.

Stop dancing Frankie. You're the Bozo that kept making reference to
RGB 100,0,0. Of course you did that to pick on Alias. Want to pretend
otherwise give it your best shot.

>We do a lot of color correction work in LAB space and of course every
>file must be converted to CMYK for the printer.

Funny, you only mention that AFTER I mentioned it. Just like you
parrot other things I informed you about. Only after you hear me say
something, then you repeat it. You're a phony Frank.

 

[norm]

Frank wrote:
> norm wrote:
>
>>>
>> That is how mine looks too (black), but Frank disagrees,
>
> I haven't seen your taskbar have I? so how could I disagree?
>
>
> as he has been
>> "in the biz" for years. Frank cannot admit that anyone who dares
>> disagree with his "experience" or "knowledge" might be correct.
>
> Try referring to the subject matter and not some supposed subject
> matter. My replies have only been to the referenced taskbar .jpg posted
> by alias. It that too difficult for you to comprehend?
>
> I
>> wonder, were Frank to choose "high contrast black" from the available
>> choices in color schemes, how he would "define" that color?
>
>
> Black is black. RGB 0,0,0 is black. RGB 100,0,0 the color reading taken
> from the top portion of the fountain filled Vista taskbar referenced
> .jpg is not black. Is that, that difficult for you to understand?
>
>
> Would it be black, or something other than what it is stated as being?
>
> If I chose to run "high contrast" black I'd expect it to be black.
> Wouldn't you?
> Frank
>
Frank, my first comment on this issue was related strictly to your very
first reply to Alias about the color black in vista. You said, and I quote:
"Vista doesn't have any black in it." Frank
Yet vista has "high color black" in the available choices in color
schemes, and when asked " Would it be black, or something other than
what it is stated as being?", you replied above:
"If I chose to run "high contrast" black I'd expect it to be black.
Wouldn't you?" Frank
So, please explain yourself once more. Does vista have black in it?
Remember, your credence is again on the line, so be very careful how you
reply. No wiggle worming, no lectures on colors, nothing about your
business, your status, your intelligence or anything else. Just give us
nothing but the truth and the whole truth. lol

--
norm

 

[Adam Albright]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:07:27 -0700, Frank <fb@nospaner.cnm> wrote:

>norm wrote:
>
>>>
>> That is how mine looks too (black), but Frank disagrees,
>
>I haven't seen your taskbar have I? so how could I disagree?

Again you being the idiot you are totally miss the point you
pathetically dumb Bozo! Let me explain it to you in real simple terms
even some runt like you may hopefully grasp parts of.

You nagged and nagged Alias when he made some reference to a image
that to him parts of looked black. So Alias posted a link to this
image. Get it? He didn't email it to you or provide an attachment. So
you viewed in on YOUR computer and he is viewing it on his. OF COURSE
there can be perceived difference since neither of us knows what gamma
value HIS monitor is set to or yours or if either of yours is PROPERLY
calibrated. Yet you always being the stumbling ass you always are you
climb up on a stack of bibles and insist that you're right and
everyone else is wrong. That's what you do. That's what you always do
in every thread. Only after I started to explain how gamma plays a
role did you start to back away from your original claim. You are
nothing but a liar and I nail your sorry ass to the wall every time I
make the effort to expose you as nothing but a clueless buffoon and
fraud.
>
>
>as he has been
>> "in the biz" for years. Frank cannot admit that anyone who dares
>> disagree with his "experience" or "knowledge" might be correct.
>
>Try referring to the subject matter and not some supposed subject
>matter. My replies have only been to the referenced taskbar .jpg posted
>by alias. It that too difficult for you to comprehend?

And as usual you were dead wrong jumping to conclusions.
>
>
>> I wonder, were Frank to choose "high contrast black" from the available
>> choices in color schemes, how he would "define" that color?

I asked the idiot that already. Stone silence.
>
>
>Black is black. RGB 0,0,0 is black. RGB 100,0,0 the color reading taken
>from the top portion of the fountain filled Vista taskbar referenced
>.jpg is not black. Is that, that difficult for you to understand?

Not so fast Bozo. You claimed not once, but over and over that the
Vista GUI was incapable of producing black. Those are you words. If
you force me to look up your posts at Google I assure you I will make
you choke on them.

 

[Frank]

norm wrote:

> Frank wrote:
>
>> norm wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>> That is how mine looks too (black), but Frank disagrees,
>>
>>
>> I haven't seen your taskbar have I? so how could I disagree?
>>
>>
>> as he has been
>>
>>> "in the biz" for years. Frank cannot admit that anyone who dares
>>> disagree with his "experience" or "knowledge" might be correct.
>>
>>
>> Try referring to the subject matter and not some supposed subject
>> matter. My replies have only been to the referenced taskbar .jpg
>> posted by alias. It that too difficult for you to comprehend?
>>
>> I
>>
>>> wonder, were Frank to choose "high contrast black" from the available
>>> choices in color schemes, how he would "define" that color?
>>
>>
>>
>> Black is black. RGB 0,0,0 is black. RGB 100,0,0 the color reading
>> taken from the top portion of the fountain filled Vista taskbar
>> referenced .jpg is not black. Is that, that difficult for you to
>> understand?
>>
>>
>> Would it be black, or something other than what it is stated as being?
>>
>> If I chose to run "high contrast" black I'd expect it to be black.
>> Wouldn't you?
>> Frank
>>
> Frank, my first comment on this issue was related strictly to your very
> first reply to Alias about the color black in vista. You said, and I quote:
> "Vista doesn't have any black in it." Frank
> Yet vista has "high color black" in the available choices in color
> schemes, and when asked " Would it be black, or something other than
> what it is stated as being?", you replied above:
> "If I chose to run "high contrast" black I'd expect it to be black.
> Wouldn't you?" Frank
> So, please explain yourself once more. Does vista have black in it?
> Remember, your credence is again on the line, so be very careful how you
> reply. No wiggle worming, no lectures on colors, nothing about your
> business, your status, your intelligence or anything else. Just give us
> nothing but the truth and the whole truth. lol
>

Nice try norm but no cigar.
I said the Vista GUI doesn't have any black in it..and I was strictly
referring to the referenced jpg he posted.
It that too difficult for you to comprehend or understand?
Frank

 

[Frank]

Adam Albright wrote:


>
> Stop dancing Frankie. You're the Bozo that kept making reference to
> RGB 100,0,0. Of course you did that to pick on Alias. Want to pretend
> otherwise give it your best shot.
>
>

How stupid are you? The color dropper reading I got from the fountain
filled taskbar posted by alias was RGB 100.0.0.
Now show me where I mentioned anything at all about printing the damn
thing?
You're so stupid as to be unbelievable anymore!
What the hell is on your mind?

>>We do a lot of color correction work in LAB space and of course every
>>file must be converted to CMYK for the printer.
>
>
> Funny, you only mention that AFTER I mentioned it.

You mentioned LAB color space? Bullsh*t! Where?
Show me..right now!!!
You don't even know what that is do you?

Just like you
> parrot other things I informed you about.

You haven't informed me about a damn thing except to prove me and to
this entire ng that you're an idiot as*hole know nothing bigmouth liar!

Only after you hear me say
> something, then you repeat it. You're a phony Frank.
>

Hey you dumb ass drunk, I've said many times before that only CMYK files
go to the printer. Any first week graphics student knows that.
You're really an idiot...a true moron and most likely a drunken sod!
Get a life bozo.
Frank

 

[Adam Albright]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:31:40 -0700, Frank <fb@nospaner.cnm> wrote:

>Gary wrote:
>
>> You really have no idea about the difference between transmitted and
>> reflected light do you.
>> Stick you big nose into your monitor what do you see. Oh surprise R,B,G if
>> any of those Red, Blue, Or Green have a value of more then 0 guess what numb
>> nuts it isn't black is it?
>>
>
>
>hahaha...that's funny!
>Frank

The both of you are funny in your absolute ignorance on so many
topics.

 

[Frank]

Adam Albright wrote:

>
>
> Not so fast Bozo. You claimed not once, but over and over that the
> Vista GUI was incapable of producing black.

You're a drunken lying son of a bitch! I never, ever said that Vista GUI
was incapable of producing black color. I said that the posted jpg did
not have any black in the taskbar.
It is really difficult for you to be wrong isn't it?


Those are you words.

Look it up pal and post it RIGHT NOW!!! GOT THAT!
RIGHT NOW...or else stick you're loser tail between your legs and run
off in total defeat.
RIGHT NOW!!!
Well...?
I'm waiting...!


If
> you force me to look up your posts at Google I assure you I will make
> you choke on them.
>
>
Do it you drunken moron!
RIGHT NOW!!!
I'm waiting...
Well...?
Frank

 

[Gary]

PROVE that what I told you is incorrect. Until then your just making a idiot
out of yourself.

"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:2d9ia3lgitb6681hngnpquv9ib96pj82a3@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:31:40 -0700, Frank <fb@nospaner.cnm> wrote:
>
>>Gary wrote:
>>
>>> You really have no idea about the difference between transmitted and
>>> reflected light do you.
>>> Stick you big nose into your monitor what do you see. Oh surprise R,B,G
>>> if
>>> any of those Red, Blue, Or Green have a value of more then 0 guess what
>>> numb
>>> nuts it isn't black is it?
>>>
>>
>>
>>hahaha...that's funny!
>>Frank
>
> The both of you are funny in your absolute ignorance on so many
> topics.
>

 

[Adam Albright]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:36:10 -0700, Frank <fb@nospaner.cnm> wrote:

>norm wrote:
>
>> Frank wrote:
>>
>>> norm wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>> That is how mine looks too (black), but Frank disagrees,
>>>
>>>
>>> I haven't seen your taskbar have I? so how could I disagree?
>>>
>>>
>>> as he has been
>>>
>>>> "in the biz" for years. Frank cannot admit that anyone who dares
>>>> disagree with his "experience" or "knowledge" might be correct.
>>>
>>>
>>> Try referring to the subject matter and not some supposed subject
>>> matter. My replies have only been to the referenced taskbar .jpg
>>> posted by alias. It that too difficult for you to comprehend?
>>>
>>> I
>>>
>>>> wonder, were Frank to choose "high contrast black" from the available
>>>> choices in color schemes, how he would "define" that color?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Black is black. RGB 0,0,0 is black. RGB 100,0,0 the color reading
>>> taken from the top portion of the fountain filled Vista taskbar
>>> referenced .jpg is not black. Is that, that difficult for you to
>>> understand?
>>>
>>>
>>> Would it be black, or something other than what it is stated as being?
>>>
>>> If I chose to run "high contrast" black I'd expect it to be black.
>>> Wouldn't you?
>>> Frank
>>>
>> Frank, my first comment on this issue was related strictly to your very
>> first reply to Alias about the color black in vista. You said, and I quote:
>> "Vista doesn't have any black in it." Frank
>> Yet vista has "high color black" in the available choices in color
>> schemes, and when asked " Would it be black, or something other than
>> what it is stated as being?", you replied above:
>> "If I chose to run "high contrast" black I'd expect it to be black.
>> Wouldn't you?" Frank
>> So, please explain yourself once more. Does vista have black in it?
>> Remember, your credence is again on the line, so be very careful how you
>> reply. No wiggle worming, no lectures on colors, nothing about your
>> business, your status, your intelligence or anything else. Just give us
>> nothing but the truth and the whole truth. lol
>>
>
>Nice try norm but no cigar.
>I said the Vista GUI doesn't have any black in it..and I was strictly
>referring to the referenced jpg he posted.
>It that too difficult for you to comprehend or understand?
>Frank

You're lying your sh*t encrusted ass off again like you always do
Frankie. Even when your own quote is just a handful of lines above you
actually LIE about what anyone can see for themselves you actually
said. It takes a special kind of idiot to be you Frankie. Really.

I guess you forgot how I nailed you sorry ass.

Right click on desktop. Personalize, Windows color and appearances.
Open Classic appearance properties for more color options, select
either white or black high contrast.

Now watch Frankie try to pretend changing your desktop chrome isn't
part of the GUI. You made NO reference to Alias's JPG in the many
times you were whining "Vista's GUI doesn't have any black in it".

 

[*711]

I would be glad if my problems stoped on the incompatibility issues
since at this point in time (july 2007) most of things are already
compatible (safe NVIDIA, but that is because they are too inconpetent to
write a working driver so I don't blame Microsoft for this)...

The thing that bugs me the most are the things that keep missing from
my computer... first my start programs vanished, then my system folders
faded into the pretty moving wallpapper... and now my shortcuts are
getting boken and some of the bundled programs (Snipping Tool for
instance) decide when they work and when don't....

Its getting to my nerves, BUT I am perssisting because "its really
pretty", and as a designer, I like polish visuals on my work enviroment.
But still, 2 weeks fighting the ugly beast, and getting closer to
abandon my 200US$ investment to rot on the drawer by the second.


--
*711

 

[Adam Albright]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:47:59 -0700, Frank <fb@nospaner.cnm> wrote:

>Adam Albright wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Stop dancing Frankie. You're the Bozo that kept making reference to
>> RGB 100,0,0. Of course you did that to pick on Alias. Want to pretend
>> otherwise give it your best shot.
>>
>>
>
>How stupid are you? The color dropper reading I got from the fountain
>filled taskbar posted by alias was RGB 100.0.0.

Bingo! The color dropper reading YOU got! Not what I got. I don't need
to add I have tons more creditability then you do, plus anyone could
have easily checked themselves. How come nobody yet has stepped
forward to backup your claim of RGB 100,0,0?

My guess, because while you claim to be an expert, that's you run some
business, you run a marketing company, blah, blah, blah, you keep
posting garbage that exposes you both as a liar and dummy.

BTW dummy I've been letting you make the same mistake over and over
just so you can't deny you said it. You keep referring to "fountain
fill" you have claimed you have Photoshop. There is no such named
feature in Photoshop, buy is the in cheap knock off Paint Shop Pro.
Photoshop uses the more accurate term gradient fill.

Why do you lie about everything?

>>>We do a lot of color correction work in LAB space and of course every
>>>file must be converted to CMYK for the printer.
>>
>>
>> Funny, you only mention that AFTER I mentioned it.
>
>You mentioned LAB color space? Bullsh*t! Where?
>Show me..right now!!!

No, you fuc*ing dickh*ead, YOU injected LAB color, not me.


>You don't even know what that is do you?

That's funny. Again anybody that wants to waste time checking can see
you and other fanboys starting to use terms ONLY after I've explained
them. Too funny!
>
> Just like you
>> parrot other things I informed you about.
>
>You haven't informed me about a damn thing except to prove me and to
>this entire ng that you're an idiot as*hole know nothing bigmouth liar!

Google proves you a liar on that too.
>
> Only after you hear me say
>> something, then you repeat it. You're a phony Frank.
>>
>
>Hey you dumb ass drunk, I've said many times before that only CMYK files
>go to the printer. Any first week graphics student knows that.
>You're really an idiot...a true moron and most likely a drunken sod!
>Get a life bozo.

I noticed the more I expose you the louder you protest. Too bad.

 

[Adam Albright]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:00:42 -0700, "Gary" <Gary@somewhere.usa> wrote:

>This coming from the person who doesn't know the difference between
>transmitted and reflected light.

Did you learn how to make goofy Strawmen from Frankie?
>
>
>"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
>news:mh0ia3141alrrv9j13j6e90pvebcfs1b93@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:14:56 -0700, "Gary" <Gary@somewhere.usa> wrote:
>>
>>>Yes Ubunto is a toy os.
>>>I think that my previous post was too complex for you.
>>
>> And you act like a child poster having a temper tantrum. Post again
>> when you can act like some responsible adult.
>>
>

 

[Adam Albright]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:13:01 -0700, "Gary" <Gary@somewhere.usa> wrote:

>You really have no idea about the difference between transmitted and
>reflected light do you.
>Stick you big nose into your monitor what do you see. Oh surprise R,B,G if
>any of those Red, Blue, Or Green have a value of more then 0 guess what numb
>nuts it isn't black is it?

Write this down so you don't look as stupid next time. Monitors
neither have to be nor always are calibrated to RGB color space. So
your premise is bogus. You need a better teacher then Frankie. He's a
hoot to read, but technically he's behind your average ten year old.

 

[Gary]

Write this down so you don't look like a fool Computer Monitors use RGB in
there displays.
What a dumb ass.


"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:6dbia3pkjtb139vf7u47uv6lp0irhhc2m7@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:13:01 -0700, "Gary" <Gary@somewhere.usa> wrote:
>
>>You really have no idea about the difference between transmitted and
>>reflected light do you.
>>Stick you big nose into your monitor what do you see. Oh surprise R,B,G if
>>any of those Red, Blue, Or Green have a value of more then 0 guess what
>>numb
>>nuts it isn't black is it?
>
> Write this down so you don't look as stupid next time. Monitors
> neither have to be nor always are calibrated to RGB color space. So
> your premise is bogus. You need a better teacher then Frankie. He's a
> hoot to read, but technically he's behind your average ten year old.
>

 

[Gary]

Couldn't come up with the difference could you.



"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news9bia39qgbn2ob2ag73cihanrb69pps50a@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:00:42 -0700, "Gary" <Gary@somewhere.usa> wrote:
>
>>This coming from the person who doesn't know the difference between
>>transmitted and reflected light.
>
> Did you learn how to make goofy Strawmen from Frankie?
>>
>>
>>"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
>>news:mh0ia3141alrrv9j13j6e90pvebcfs1b93@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:14:56 -0700, "Gary" <Gary@somewhere.usa> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Yes Ubunto is a toy os.
>>>>I think that my previous post was too complex for you.
>>>
>>> And you act like a child poster having a temper tantrum. Post again
>>> when you can act like some responsible adult.
>>>
>>
>