A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotationefficiently?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old April 25th 13, 04:02 AM posted to alt.comp.freeware,rec.photo.digital,alt.graphics.photoshop
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotation efficiently?

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 18:18:35 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2013-04-24 17:56:49 -0700, Eric Stevens said:

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:52:13 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2013-04-24 16:14:17 -0700, Eric Stevens said:

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:36:22 +1200, Eric Stevens
wrote:

Just to tidy up loose ends:

--- snip ---

The car you shot appears not to be an entirely genuine Bugatti.
Certainly all major parts are genuine but different parts seem to have
come from different cars. I suspect it is patterned on the Bugatti
Aerolithe.

See http://www.bugattibuilder.com/forum/...php?f=1&t=2120

The "Aerolithe" is a totally different car. It is a fast back
streamlined coupe, and while technically a Type 57, its only physical
resemblance to the Type 57 roadsters, is the familiar radiator. The
Type 57 was the basis for a whole line of very different cars between
1935 and 1939.
http://www.guildclassiccars.com/1935...Aerolithe.html

The Type 57S above was undergoing a full restoration, and is not a
replica as suggested. This car won the Paris Salon of 1935.

That's true - and its never been seen since.

I wasn't suggesting the car you photographed was a replica. I was
suggesting it was built out of a collection of Bugatti parts.

http://www.hopupmag.com/index.php/weblog/article/C2/ has more of the
story which is consistent with what I read elsewhere. A chassis + a
gear box + and engine.

"A guy we know has been building this car for some time; I think he
bought the (correct, one-off) frame in about 1981. It had been
acquired from the factory when it all ended in 1960 or so. It’s the
show Bugatti from 1935 which was not sold and went back to the
factory and kind of ‘parted out’, if I have it correct. It’s all
righteous Bug parts on that for-real frame and the body thereon
is…magnesium. Oh, yeah. It’s getting wrapped up now for the world
debut - I think the chassis was at Pebble Beach last year to demo
the engine and run it for the plebes. Anywho, it should be in all
the right mags and shows in time."

The photograph/sketch
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/31088803/57222.jpg shows the
intended riveted flange of the elektron guards (wings) as were used in
the Aerolithe. This car undoubtedly has the S type (lowered) chassis
(while the recently made Aerolithe replica seems to have a standard
chassis). The car you photographed has the correct type of chassis
which may well be that of the Aerolithe.

The information accompanying
http://www.bugatti-trust.co.uk/photo...C0623.jpg.html
throws more light on the matter. I now conclude the car is not rebuilt
on the Aerolithe chassis but more likely that of the 'Torpedo
Competition' with Electron (sic) A.I.A.C.R. body' which was also
exhibited at the Paris show. It appears to be a faithful replica of
that car.

It is more than a "faithful replica", it is a faithful full
restoration. There is a difference.
Note: the chassis number for the restoration Type 57S in my shot is
#57222, the original Paris Show chassis.


I didn't know about the chassis number but that confirms my guess. Is
the engine number also 235S?


As best as I can make out from what I have the engine number is 240S.


So it's not the original engine.

In any case http://www.finishing.com/519/33.shtml is a very
interesting read. The original engine was removed and the body
destroyed while the car was in the factory. I know from another site
that the gearbox is from another car which disappeared in 1958.

So it seems we have the original chassis, probably a different engine,
certainly a different gearbox, and a new body which may have been
built in the wrong material! It's certainly a stretch to call it a
'restoration'. Never mind.


My understanding is the body material is duplicated "Elektron"
Magnesium/aluminum alloy as use in the original.


One of the comments in the URL I have given above is:

"I did a bit of further research on the Bugatti riveted aluminum
cars. Three of them still exist, and they are definitely aluminum
bodies. At the time Bugatti called them "Elektron".'

... so may be Phil Reilly and the gang up in Canada (with the
duplicate Aerolithe) may have been mislead into using the wrong
material.


Anyway, regardless our bantering, restoration, or partial replication
of any of these great cars can only be commended, and I for one feel
privileged to be able to see them today.


I envy you. One way or another it is a unique motor vehicle.

--- snip ---

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #82  
Old April 25th 13, 04:29 AM posted to alt.comp.freeware,rec.photo.digital,alt.graphics.photoshop
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotation efficiently?

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

I used 19 minutes of my 700 minute voice plan last month. That
doesn't include mobile-to-mobile minutes because the basic plan gives
me those free. I never use the camera. I do text, but that's
included in the basic plan for free.


the camera in the iphone 4 is quite good, so you'd probably use it at
least some of the time, probably with one of the many camera apps
available. however, the cameras in the 4s & 5 are noticeably better.


It doesn't interest me. I'm an avid photographer, but with my Nikons.
If I'm going to go out for photos, I do it with the Nikons. I've got a
P&S camera in the car for quickies and unexpected shots.


suit yourself, but there is quite a bit that can be done with a
smartphone camera that is harder than with other cameras, such as
panoramas. pick the best tool for the job.

then again, you like making more work for yourself.
  #83  
Old April 25th 13, 04:29 AM posted to alt.comp.freeware,rec.photo.digital,alt.graphics.photoshop
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotation efficiently?

In article , Danny D.
wrote:

why do you need a replacement disk for windows? can't you contact
microsoft and get it activated?


Huh? The brand new hard disk needs an operating system.
Where am I supposed to "get" that operating system?


same place you got the original.

or just restore from a backup. you do have backups, right?

you gave up on windows because you can't figure out
how to reactivate windows when swapping a hard drive?


Um, maybe you know something I don't know.
How do you reactivate something that's not there?
I must be missing something critical here - so please let me know how.


how did you get windows in the first place?

Trust me that you can live perfectly well _without_ iTunes!

not if you have an ipod, iphone or ipad, you can't.


I just explained that I have my own iPod & my kid has an iPhone,
and they work perfectly fine without iTunes. We don't need to argue
because this is extremely well known information.


with limited functionality, they do. who wants limited functionality?

maybe that's acceptable for you and your kid, but it's not for the rest
of the world. people want more features, not less.

meanwhile, hundreds of millions of people have itunes installed without
problems. there's no reason to avoid it.

If you still really think you can't populate an iPod/iPhone without
iTunes, you'll need more advice than I am prepared to dish out anyway.


you can, however, functionality is more limited than with itunes, as i
said.

some of what can't be done without itunes includes full backups, smart
playlists, editing tags and much more. also, many things are much
easier to do in itunes than on an iphone or ipad.

you may be ok with limited functionality, but others certainly are not.

to say that someone doesn't need itunes is flat out false.

in other words, you can't live perfectly well without itunes.


Wow. Your repeated inability to comprehend shows that you simply want to
argue - but I know the old adage ... so I refuse to drop down to that
level - where your experience will win out anyway.


i'm not arguing. i'm refuting your ludicrous claims. plus, you're
contradicting yourself.

Since I refuse to drop to the level of a grade schooler, this
conversation is over. Good luck.


translated: you know you're wrong and can't back anything up so you
back out. why am i not surprised.

bye bye.
  #84  
Old April 25th 13, 10:56 AM posted to alt.comp.freeware,rec.photo.digital,alt.graphics.photoshop
bugbear
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,258
Default Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotationefficiently?

Danny D. wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:57:33 +0100 bugbear wrote:

Try googling screenshot annotation
if that's what you want, rather than "proving" that image
editors aren't screenshot annotators.


Interesting point, especially when it comes to freeware.

Since you're experienced with freeware, you're aware that the goal
is to have as few programs as possible that get the job done.


I'm not "aware" of that, in fact I disagree. I would far rather
have a larger number of dedicated programs, than a single
jack of all trades.

And this applies to "software", wether paid for or not.

BugBear

  #85  
Old April 25th 13, 10:57 AM posted to alt.comp.freeware,rec.photo.digital,alt.graphics.photoshop
bugbear
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,258
Default Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotationefficiently?

Danny D. wrote:
One point to make though, even though all programs can grow
the canvas, is that it's generally done in one of two ways.

1. You accurately specify the size & shape to grow (down to the pixel);
2. Or, you simply stretch & contract the canvass as needed.

Most freeware uses the first method, e.g., The GIMP, as shown below


Gimp supports (1) (2), and (indeed) hybrid modes (2) constrained
in various ways by (1).

BugBear

  #86  
Old April 25th 13, 12:33 PM posted to alt.comp.freeware,rec.photo.digital,alt.graphics.photoshop
Poutnik[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotation efficiently?


bugbear posted Thu, 25 Apr 2013 10:56:00 +0100


Since you're experienced with freeware, you're aware that the goal
is to have as few programs as possible that get the job done.


I'm not "aware" of that, in fact I disagree. I would far rather
have a larger number of dedicated programs, than a single
jack of all trades.


I suppose the goal is not to have a single program,
tha is able to do everything.....

--
Poutnik
  #87  
Old April 25th 13, 03:12 PM posted to alt.comp.freeware,rec.photo.digital
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,514
Default Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotation efficiently?

| Huh? The brand new hard disk needs an operating system.
| Where am I supposed to "get" that operating system?
|
| same place you got the original.
|

Circa 1998 a Windows PC came with a Windows CD that
could be used to install Windows on any other PC, or to
reinstall. It was an actual copy of Windows. Since then Microsoft
has gone to great lengths to lock the OS to the hardware
and render a PC as a disposable appliance. With XP, MS
instituted Product Activation, tying Windows to the hardware.
The public has been trained to see Windows as part of the
PC, and trained to see the PC itself as a single unit, when
it's actually just an assemblage of parts put together by
the OEM company in a branded box.

Microsoft now make a lot more profit from people like
Danny D. Most people buy another Windows license with
every PC purchase. And many people buy another PC the
first time their current PC "doesn't work". Meanwhile, pressure
from Microsoft and plunging PC prices have all but eliminated
"white box" PC shops, so it's very difficult to buy any PC
without also buying a Windows license.

It's possible, through various means, to make sure that
one has a backup of the OS in the case of hard disk failure,
power surge, nasty malware, etc., but most people don't
know anything about that and don't realize they're at risk.
Danny D. might also be able to successfully reinstall using
an OEM disk with his existing product key. But where will he
get a basic OEM disk? He can't use his product key with
any other license type. And only people who build their own
computers are likely to have a generic OEM Windows disk.
(Microsoft have been careful to cover all the angles.)

From what I've seen, even the average tech. support
person doesn't create an install disk or make a disk image
for customers. So any failure that can't be fixed by re-installing
from a "restore partition" usually means buying either a new
PC or a new copy of Windows unnecessarily.

Actually, even MacOS could be installed to a "white box"
at one point. Then Steve Jobs returned to Apple and locked
it to their hardware. Probably the Microsofties got the
idea from him. They might not have dared to try pulling
it off otherwise. But Steve Jobs was more clever. He
provided the appearance that Apple was actually building
the hardware, so rendering the software virtually embedded
didn't seem so odd, even though Apple is really just the sole
OEM company for MacOS. They don't make the hardware any
more than Dell does. They just design the package. But Windows
comes in several packages, which dilutes their brand. HP,
Dell and Acer all manage to create the illusion that they
built the hardware, but since there are several Windows OEM
companies there's no "Microsoft computer" in the same way
that there's an "Apple computer". (Apple lovers often refer
to "Wintel" because they've been trained to view Macs as
appliances with embedded software, but there was never
such a monolithic Windows hardware brand.)


  #88  
Old April 25th 13, 04:58 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 703
Default Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotationefficiently?

On 4/24/2013 4:11 PM, nospam wrote:
In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:


it matters if your time is worth something.


Everyones tinme is worth something, which is one of the reasons for fast
food, it's more expensive too, you pays yuor money and takes yuor choice.


fast food is not always more expensive. compare the price of mcdonalds
to that of a fancy burger place. i've heard of $20 burgers at some
places.


Fast food is neither.

If you want a cardboard taste, just grind up paper, and cover it with
ketchup, cheaper than a big Mac. Less calories too.




--
PeterN
  #89  
Old April 25th 13, 05:02 PM posted to alt.comp.freeware,rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotation efficiently?

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

| Huh? The brand new hard disk needs an operating system.
| Where am I supposed to "get" that operating system?
|
| same place you got the original.

Circa 1998 a Windows PC came with a Windows CD that
could be used to install Windows on any other PC, or to
reinstall. It was an actual copy of Windows. Since then Microsoft
has gone to great lengths to lock the OS to the hardware
and render a PC as a disposable appliance. With XP, MS
instituted Product Activation, tying Windows to the hardware.
The public has been trained to see Windows as part of the
PC, and trained to see the PC itself as a single unit, when
it's actually just an assemblage of parts put together by
the OEM company in a branded box.


everything is an assemblage of parts.

users don't care about the individual parts. they care about the
finished product, a working computer which helps them get work done.

Microsoft now make a lot more profit from people like
Danny D. Most people buy another Windows license with
every PC purchase.


that's because it's bundled with every pc purchase.

And many people buy another PC the
first time their current PC "doesn't work".


that's because buying a new computer is usually a much better choice
than putting money into an older computer, broken or not.

Meanwhile, pressure
from Microsoft and plunging PC prices have all but eliminated
"white box" PC shops, so it's very difficult to buy any PC
without also buying a Windows license.


so what? windows is licensed per machine so you need a windows license.
might as well get it bundled.

It's possible, through various means, to make sure that
one has a backup of the OS in the case of hard disk failure,
power surge, nasty malware, etc., but most people don't
know anything about that and don't realize they're at risk.


if you don't make backups, then you will be screwed when a hard drive
crashes. this applies to anything, not just windows.

Danny D. might also be able to successfully reinstall using
an OEM disk with his existing product key. But where will he
get a basic OEM disk? He can't use his product key with
any other license type. And only people who build their own
computers are likely to have a generic OEM Windows disk.
(Microsoft have been careful to cover all the angles.)


recovery disk.

From what I've seen, even the average tech. support
person doesn't create an install disk or make a disk image
for customers. So any failure that can't be fixed by re-installing
from a "restore partition" usually means buying either a new
PC or a new copy of Windows unnecessarily.


whose fault is that?

Actually, even MacOS could be installed to a "white box"
at one point. Then Steve Jobs returned to Apple and locked
it to their hardware.


nope.

before steve jobs returned to apple in 1997, mac os could *not* be
installed to a generic 'white box'.

apple did have clones in the 90s, but those were really licensed mac
motherboards with minor modifications by the clonemakers. mac clones
was also a really stupid move and caused apple to lose money, which is
why it was ended.

Probably the Microsofties got the
idea from him.


windows activation is because windows was widely pirated, not just
people getting it off pirate sites, but those who bought one copy and
installed it on multiple machines.

They might not have dared to try pulling
it off otherwise. But Steve Jobs was more clever. He
provided the appearance that Apple was actually building
the hardware, so rendering the software virtually embedded
didn't seem so odd, even though Apple is really just the sole
OEM company for MacOS. They don't make the hardware any
more than Dell does. They just design the package.


anyone who thinks a mac is just a repackaged dell or lenovo but with an
apple logo is very mistaken.

But Windows
comes in several packages, which dilutes their brand.


it doesn't dilute the brand, but it does confuse people on which
version to buy.

HP,
Dell and Acer all manage to create the illusion that they
built the hardware, but since there are several Windows OEM
companies there's no "Microsoft computer" in the same way
that there's an "Apple computer".


there are microsoft computers, which is ****ing off their hardware
partners.

(Apple lovers often refer
to "Wintel" because they've been trained to view Macs as
appliances with embedded software, but there was never
such a monolithic Windows hardware brand.)


nonsense. the term wintel did not originate from apple fans and macs do
not have embedded software either, nor are they appliances.

where do you come up with this ****?
  #90  
Old April 25th 13, 05:02 PM posted to alt.comp.freeware,rec.photo.digital,alt.graphics.photoshop
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshot annotation efficiently?

In article , Poutnik
wrote:

Since you're experienced with freeware, you're aware that the goal
is to have as few programs as possible that get the job done.


I'm not "aware" of that, in fact I disagree. I would far rather
have a larger number of dedicated programs, than a single
jack of all trades.


I suppose the goal is not to have a single program,
tha is able to do everything.....


the goal is to get whatever is necessary to do what the user needs to
do, not meet some goal of having the most or the fewest apps.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What's a good Linux (freeware) program to view/add/delete EXIF data Danny D.[_2_] Digital Photography 15 October 31st 12 02:40 PM
Best freeware windows program to harvest all Exif metadata David Remley Photography Digital Photography 3 July 3rd 08 06:02 PM
My Geek Picture (linux, windows & cie) jejetster Digital Photography 0 November 3rd 06 08:02 AM
Windows "magnify" program substitute [email protected] Digital Photography 4 January 23rd 05 07:08 PM
Computer System for Digital Photography: MS-Windows, Apple, or Linux [email protected] Digital Photography 158 January 3rd 05 12:29 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.