Bob,
Don't really care about your stand on underwear. I can bet, however, that
you ARE wearing bifocals if you can read the teensie type as it appears on
my screen. The 80% black type on 100% black is a challenge, too.
Bill Pearce
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Whitmire" <bwhitmire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 2:51 PM
Subject: [OM] Re: A question regarding my online photo gallery
>
> On Apr 10, 2008, at 8:19 AM, Marc Lawrence wrote:
>> I've finally been getting around to setting up a gallery for my
>> photos,
>> using the Gallery 2 software.
>
> I can't say about the differences in appearance. I just know stuff
> looks different on the web than it does in print, and it looks
> different on different monitors, unless all owners are anal about
> their calibration, and maybe use exactly the same calibrator. For me,
> the decision has been to mutter and mumble and spew curses and poxes
> on all their houses, and continue to use Adobe color space and treat
> everything as though it's going to be a print. Which likely it is,
> though there are a few pix on my website that may never get printed.
>
> But I second the opinion of others that the type is near-impossible
> to read. How are people going to know about your ambivalence to
> underwear if they can't separate the words from the background? Alas,
> for myself, I fear I'm not far from the day when I have to wear
> Pampers for Old Poops.
>
> And, oh yeah, I like the first dog pic the best.
>
> --Bob Whitmire
> Incontinence is not a State of Mind
> www.bwp33.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|