crs@siesoft.co.uk (Chris Smith) (01/29/91)
I think that it is about time that there was a comp.graphics.pictures. It is a poor reflection on the Net when alt.sex has pictures but the group that actually deals with graphics doesn't. I don't know the correct way to go about this but, IS ANYBODY INTERESTED? -- =========================================================================== Chris Smith <crs@siesoft.co.uk> ===========================================================================
mcastle@mcs213f.cs.umr.edu (Mike Castle {Nexus}) (01/30/91)
[Note: I have cross-posted this to news.groups with followups directed to same -mrc] In article <1991Jan29.073924.23331@siesoft.co.uk> crs@siesoft.co.uk (Chris Smith) writes: > >I think that it is about time that there was a comp.graphics.pictures. > New to system, eh? :-> Actually, there is *supposed* to be a discussion going on in news.groups concerning the creation of just such a group. Discussion was initiated near the end of last year with an extend discussion period to compensate for the holidays. It seems, however, that discussion has dropped off. Last I remember, David M. Read had volunteered to be moderator. We were discussing such things as maximum volume for the group, censorship issues, and group name. I looked through news.groups and news.announce.newgroups but couldn't find the list of current discussion and voting status of groups. Was I looking in the wrong groups?? Anyway, I believe voting is scheduled to come up soon, as in early February. I think David was also the one who initiated the CFD and will probably issue the CFV as well. I think the biggest issue was the group name. Rec.images wasn't supported because many sites don't get alt.* or rec.*. Other possibilities are comp.images, comp.binaries.images, and comp.graphics.images. I suppose that we should try to get the discussion going again, so people will be aware of the upcoming vote, and vote accordingly. I'd best go and cross- post this to a.s.p.d as well. When is the vote scheduled, anyway? -- Mike Castle (Nexus) S087891@UMRVMA.UMR.EDU (preferred) | ERROR: Invalid mcastle@mcs213k.cs.umr.edu (unix mail-YEACH!)| command 'HELP' Life is like a clock: You can work constantly, and be right | try 'HELP' all the time, or not work at all, and be right twice a day. |
jet@karazm.math.uh.edu ("J. Eric Townsend") (01/30/91)
In article <1991Jan29.073924.23331@siesoft.co.uk> crs@siesoft.co.uk (Chris Smith) writes: >I think that it is about time that there was a comp.graphics.pictures. I think you'll find that this group is about *generating* images, not about trading them... -- J. Eric Townsend - jet@uh.edu - bitnet: jet@UHOU - vox: (713) 749-2120 "It is the cunning of form to veil itself continually in the evidence of content. It is the cunning of the code to veil itself and to produce itself in the obviousness of value." -- Baudrillard
jet@karazm.math.uh.edu ("J. Eric Townsend") (02/03/91)
In article <58167@bsu-ucs.uucp> 00dapoorbaug@bsu-ucs.uucp (I DON'T SCREW WITH MY BRAIN AND DON'T THINK WITH MY DICK...) writes: >Yah, I'll agree this is quite a bit more about generating images, however >what about us peon's with piddly little 7Mhz PC's? Uh, I dunno. Start a different group. I've got a 68000-based machine that does *great* graphics, so just stick to integer-based rendering. >Or is there a newsgroup someplace I'm missing? alt.fractals, for your fractal questions. Take a look in news.announce.newusers or news.lists for a complete list of all groups. -- J. Eric Townsend - jet@uh.edu - bitnet: jet@UHOU - vox: (713) 749-2120 "It is the cunning of form to veil itself continually in the evidence of content. It is the cunning of the code to veil itself and to produce itself in the obviousness of value." -- Baudrillard
niall@c3.PLA.CA.US (Neal Bedard) (03/04/91)
In article <1991Jan29.211234.7561@lavaca.uh.edu> jet@karazm.math.uh.edu ("J. Eric Townsend") writes: >In article <1991Jan29.073924.23331@siesoft.co.uk> crs@siesoft.co.uk (Chris Smith) writes: >>I think that it is about time that there was a comp.graphics.pictures. > >I think you'll find that this group is about *generating* images, >not about trading them... Image processing isn't about "generating" images (by definition), yet wouldn't it be foolish (or at least, blatantly chauvinistic) to eliminate that topic from comp.graphics? What about storage media? Compression? Display gamma correction? Color space conversion? Computer graphics is a _process_, of which image "generation" is but a part. To assert that comp.graphics is about "generating" images is like saying that the discipline of audio science is about making sounds. In the specific cases of image processing and compression, one needs test images - of both the natural (scanned) and synthetic variety - to serve as "standards" in evaluating the effectiveness of image processing algorithms and their applications. Further, the results of processing images are also of interest, particularly if doing so at local sites is impractical because of non-portable software or extreme compute time. Thus far, image interchange has been done by ftp, e-mail, or by posting the images in alt.sex.pictures; all of these methods have limitations. A group devoted to propagating images of interest to graphics developers would ease the exchange process, and would result in more-robust image processing applications. It is an idea whose time has come. -Neal [niall@c3.com]