log in | register | forums
Show:
Go:
Forums
Username:

Password:

User accounts
Register new account
Forgot password
Forum stats
List of members
Search the forums

Advanced search
Recent discussions
- WROCC Newsletter Volume 41:11 reviewed (News:)
- WROCC March 2024 meeting o... Hughes and Peter Richmond (News:1)
- Rougol March 2024 meeting on monday with Bernard Boase (News:)
- Drag'n'Drop 13i2 edition reviewed (News:)
- South-West Show 2024 talks (News:4)
- February 2024 News Summary (News:1)
- Next developer fireside chat (News:)
- DDE31d released (News:)
- South-West Show 2024 Report (News:)
- South-West Show 2024 in pictures (News:)
Latest postings RSS Feeds
RSS 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.9
Atom 0.3
Misc RDF | CDF
 
View on Mastodon
@www.iconbar.com@rss-parrot.net
Site Search
 
Article archives
Acorn Arcade forums: The Playpen: MINE EYES!!!
 
  MINE EYES!!!
  swirlythingy (11:57 31/1/2011)
  monkeyson2 (13:09 31/1/2011)
  nunfetishist (14:14 31/1/2011)
    qUE (15:08 31/1/2011)
      moss (16:58 31/1/2011)
        nunfetishist (17:11 31/1/2011)
          filecore (18:20 31/1/2011)
            tribbles (18:35 31/1/2011)
              filecore (20:16 31/1/2011)
            trevj (20:18 31/1/2011)
              qUE (23:58 31/1/2011)
              filecore (00:18 1/2/2011)
                qUE (02:50 1/2/2011)
                swirlythingy (19:23 1/2/2011)
                  filecore (20:53 1/2/2011)
            nunfetishist (09:54 1/2/2011)
              monkeyson2 (13:09 1/2/2011)
 
Martin Bazley Message #116393, posted by swirlythingy at 11:57, 31/1/2011

Posts: 460
http://eatliver.com/i.php?n=6739

Never seen a better summation of all that is bad about Microsoft, presentations, corporations, incompetence, and bullshit.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Phil Mellor Message #116395, posted by monkeyson2 at 13:09, 31/1/2011, in reply to message #116393
monkeyson2Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler

Posts: 12380
They forgot "taste". tongue
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Rob Kendrick Message #116396, posted by nunfetishist at 14:14, 31/1/2011, in reply to message #116393
nunfetishist
Today's phish is trout a la creme.

Posts: 522
I seen things only a step or two above that in presentations at RISC OS shows.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
qUE Message #116397, posted by qUE at 15:08, 31/1/2011, in reply to message #116396
qUE

Posts: 187
I seen things only a step or two above that in presentations at RISC OS shows.
Haha, too true!
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
John Hoare Message #116398, posted by moss at 16:58, 31/1/2011, in reply to message #116397

Posts: 9348
I seen things only a step or two above that in presentations at RISC OS shows.
Haha, too true!
Far too true. Embarrassingly so.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Rob Kendrick Message #116399, posted by nunfetishist at 17:11, 31/1/2011, in reply to message #116398
nunfetishist
Today's phish is trout a la creme.

Posts: 522
I seen things only a step or two above that in presentations at RISC OS shows.
Haha, too true!
Far too true. Embarrassingly so.
But don't let that stop us having a pointless Microsoft bashing.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jason Togneri Message #116400, posted by filecore at 18:20, 31/1/2011, in reply to message #116399

Posts: 3867
Nice bandwagon you lot have. Get it repainted recently? It continues to run surprisingly well for something so old.

And out of curiosity: why is this Microsoft's problem? Give a moron the tools to be a moron, and he'll be a moron with them. Let's give these morons iLife or OpenOffice, and let them make moronic presentations with those instead. Then do we get to bash Apple and the broad spectrum that is Linux?

[Edited by filecore at 18:23, 31/1/2011]
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jason Tribbeck Message #116401, posted by tribbles at 18:35, 31/1/2011, in reply to message #116400
tribbles
Captain Helix

Posts: 929
My neighbour made a leaflet for his DIY services in December that looked very much like this.

He asked me what I thought - being tactful, I said "You're not afraid to use fonts, are you? And colours...".
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jason Togneri Message #116402, posted by filecore at 20:16, 31/1/2011, in reply to message #116401

Posts: 3867
laugh
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Trevor Johnson Message #116403, posted by trevj at 20:18, 31/1/2011, in reply to message #116400
Member
Posts: 660
<rant>
Are any of the above software products packaged with tutorial coverage of DTP basics? ISTR that when I bought Impression Style, it was accompanied by such a (printed) book. It's an idea so simple that it can be easily (and deliberately) omitted.

And anyway, why include a decent book with your software when you can receive royalties from any number of books for which you give 'certified approval'? How does the user decide which is a good book? Who cares, they'll probably keep buying them, until they find something they can relate to! (And don't get me started on public libraries and their dubiously imposed spending criteria either!)

The relatively low cost of technology now means that practically anyone can "save a few quid" by producing such literature (or presentations) themselves - rather than paying a "professional" company or in-house service to do it for them. And anyway, why should they do that when the same mistakes may well be made by employing such a service (particularly with respect to grammar and spelling)?

Is there a relevant trade organisation for signwriters and other producers of publicity material? Not that I know of (in Britain). Do the vast majority of such companies do any sort of proof reading?
</rant>
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
qUE Message #116404, posted by qUE at 23:58, 31/1/2011, in reply to message #116403
qUE

Posts: 187
<rant>
Are any of the above software products packaged with tutorial coverage of DTP basics? ISTR that when I bought Impression Style, it was accompanied by such a (printed) book. It's an idea so simple that it can be easily (and deliberately) omitted.

And anyway, why include a decent book with your software when you can receive royalties from any number of books for which you give 'certified approval'? How does the user decide which is a good book? Who cares, they'll probably keep buying them, until they find something they can relate to! (And don't get me started on public libraries and their dubiously imposed spending criteria either!)

The relatively low cost of technology now means that practically anyone can "save a few quid" by producing such literature (or presentations) themselves - rather than paying a "professional" company or in-house service to do it for them. And anyway, why should they do that when the same mistakes may well be made by employing such a service (particularly with respect to grammar and spelling)?

Is there a relevant trade organisation for signwriters and other producers of publicity material? Not that I know of (in Britain). Do the vast majority of such companies do any sort of proof reading?
</rant>
Actually, it's interesting you bringing up people doing type setting, graphic design as a profession. Some people are actually very good at it and will give you something in the design which personally I can't put my finger on, but it looks very good, generally uncluttered and gets the point across simply. Of course like any other industry it's full of arseheads which give you a load of crap for your money. Best way to probably weed them out is through samples, but then how can you be sure they haven't just ripped someone elses work :/

I also find different people have different apsects on what is good design, the people who tend to be very good at design have a style which is somehow palettable with a broad range of people.

I expect there's a massive amount of R&D in it, maybe should look at that instead of tutorials wink

[Edited by qUE at 00:01, 1/2/2011]
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jason Togneri Message #116405, posted by filecore at 00:18, 1/2/2011, in reply to message #116403

Posts: 3867
Is there a relevant trade organisation for signwriters and other producers of publicity material? Not that I know of (in Britain). Do the vast majority of such companies do any sort of proof reading?
The answers are "probably not" and "not usually". Most people consider their own English good enough, and are blind to their own mistakes - and of course, anyone pointing it out is a pretentious grammar snob. I speak as a professional editor and proofreader working with the translation industry, and sometimes when a client-written text arrives already in the target language (in my case, English), I will work on it and send it back - and sometimes the client will argue with me, because they think their text was good already! But those are at least looking for justification; the fact that they already sent their text for proofing shows their commitment to correctness.

I also find different people have different apsects on what is good design, the people who tend to be very good at design have a style which is somehow palettable with a broad range of people.
Well, just look at anything for that (because pretty much everything involves design, structure or aesthetics at some level). From spelling (some people consider "paedophile" to be more aesthetically pleasing than "pedofile" and vice versa) to technology (I personally can't stand Apple's bland surgical whiteness, but neither do I like the garish bling of case modders' neon lights and case windows), to cars, the shape of female bodies, font selection and layout, musical style, and anything else you want to consider.

Although some things are clearly favoured by the majority, it's very obvious that "good" design is, like all those other things, in the eye of the beholder. I point you to both the London 2010 "Lisa Simpson giving a blowjob" and the Office of Government Commerce "firm grip on public spending" logos as prime examples.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
qUE Message #116406, posted by qUE at 02:50, 1/2/2011, in reply to message #116405
qUE

Posts: 187
Is there a relevant trade organisation for signwriters and other producers of publicity material? Not that I know of (in Britain). Do the vast majority of such companies do any sort of proof reading?
The answers are "probably not" and "not usually". Most people consider their own English good enough, and are blind to their own mistakes - and of course, anyone pointing it out is a pretentious grammar snob. I speak as a professional editor and proofreader working with the translation industry, and sometimes when a client-written text arrives already in the target language (in my case, English), I will work on it and send it back - and sometimes the client will argue with me, because they think their text was good already! But those are at least looking for justification; the fact that they already sent their text for proofing shows their commitment to correctness.

I also find different people have different apsects on what is good design, the people who tend to be very good at design have a style which is somehow palettable with a broad range of people.
Well, just look at anything for that (because pretty much everything involves design, structure or aesthetics at some level). From spelling (some people consider "paedophile" to be more aesthetically pleasing than "pedofile" and vice versa) to technology (I personally can't stand Apple's bland surgical whiteness, but neither do I like the garish bling of case modders' neon lights and case windows), to cars, the shape of female bodies, font selection and layout, musical style, and anything else you want to consider.

Although some things are clearly favoured by the majority, it's very obvious that "good" design is, like all those other things, in the eye of the beholder. I point you to both the <a target=_top href="<a target=_top href="http://www.globe-net.com/media/150664/london_olympics_logo.jpg">London">http://www.globe-net.com/media/150664/london_olympics_logo.jpg">London</a> 2010</a> "Lisa Simpson giving a blowjob" and the <a target=_top href="<a target=_top href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1901656/OGC-unveils-new-logo-to-red-faces.html">Office">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1901656/OGC-unveils-new-logo-to-red-faces.html">Office</a> of Government Commerce</a> "firm grip on public spending" logos as prime examples.
IMHO Apple's current style is clearly inspired by 70s sci-fi sets. Sterile, clean and no sharp edges.

I can't work out those logos (and similar ones from b3ta), either the person that devised them was a bitter genius on minimum wage or a complete moron probably on an average persons annual wage per month big grin

[Edited by qUE at 02:51, 1/2/2011]
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Rob Kendrick Message #116407, posted by nunfetishist at 09:54, 1/2/2011, in reply to message #116400
nunfetishist
Today's phish is trout a la creme.

Posts: 522
And out of curiosity: why is this Microsoft's problem? Give a moron the tools to be a moron, and he'll be a moron with them.
Quite. Hence my comment about pointless Microsoft bashing.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Phil Mellor Message #116408, posted by monkeyson2 at 13:09, 1/2/2011, in reply to message #116407
monkeyson2Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler

Posts: 12380
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sb1aQVpT-60
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Martin Bazley Message #116410, posted by swirlythingy at 19:23, 1/2/2011, in reply to message #116405

Posts: 460
Is there a relevant trade organisation for signwriters and other producers of publicity material? Not that I know of (in Britain). Do the vast majority of such companies do any sort of proof reading?
Nope.

Oh, and, not strictly proofreading, but this one is funnier.

Most people consider their own English good enough, and are blind to their own mistakes - and of course, anyone pointing it out is a pretentious grammar snob.
Story of my life. I once knew a woman who, along with being a WordArt career criminal (and, to be fair to bad spellers, a nasty piece of work in general), was fond of rewriting the laws of grammar. Colons were strictly forbidden, with semicolons considered an acceptable substitute in all circumstances. Use of a dictionary was a sign of weakness. Every phrase must end in a full stop, even when blantently inappropriate (this extended to queries as well as the obvious problems with headings). She also had an unhealthy fascination with that particularly vile light blue wavy text, using it for almost anything. I once saw a line of the stuff with so much text squashed into such a restricted space that the letters overlapped each other, and deciphering it hurt your eyes.

The only justification she ever provided for not learning how to write was that it was 'her own personal style'.

You might think my bitterness is unjustified, but I saw that woman and her posters every day for two years and they grated. (I have other reasons for hating her as well, but in this case she just happened to be the best example of trenchant stupidity.)

...Office of Government Commerce "firm grip on public spending" logos as prime examples.
Sorry, I'm awful at 'magic eye' pictures (I really had to struggle to see Lisa Simpson too). What's funny about it?
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jason Togneri Message #116412, posted by filecore at 20:53, 1/2/2011, in reply to message #116410

Posts: 3867
Nope.
Reminds me of an article I read about how, if you jumble all the letters of a word except for the first and last, the brain will automatically unscramble them. I think the example was: self-edit, turns out some people think it's a fake. Still intriguing anyhow.

Oh, and, not strictly proofreading, but this one is funnier.
Ha, yes, I remember that one.

Colons were strictly forbidden, with semicolons considered an acceptable substitute in all circumstances.
Ugh. I know people like that. An old schoolfriend on Facebook always overuses ellipses. Not unusual, you may think. However, he uses commas instead of periods,,, his sentences all look like this,,, lol,,,,,, its really anoying lool,,,

...Office of Government Commerce "firm grip on public spending" logos as prime examples.
Sorry, I'm awful at 'magic eye' pictures (I really had to struggle to see Lisa Simpson too). What's funny about it?
I'm also terrible at Magic Eye pictures and any type of stereogram really. The Lisa Simpson one is basically how the 0 of 2012 looks like her jagged hairdo, and the Z-shape of the 2 looks like she's kneeling. The central dash is a penis of the opposing 'figure'.

In the OGC one, it's actually clearer. Think of it as a stylised stick figure. O for the head, and two C shapes for the torso/arms and the legs. Only with a G instead of a C, you now have a hand reaching in and, yes, an erect penis being held in the aforementioned hand. Thus we have our homographic sexual innuendo.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 

Acorn Arcade forums: The Playpen: MINE EYES!!!