DWB, those are some beautiful colours and very pleasing, relaxing photos. Wish I was in Santa Fe 
it looks lovely for just ambling about with the camera.
No ambling around for me, I was in Amsterdam last week. Here's some shots.
First, some standard touristy snapshots...
#1 The Rijksmuseum at the far end of the Museumplein
#2 Some leaning houses by a canal. No that's not lens distortion, they really do lean outwards like that.
#3 "De Oude Kerk" - as you'll never guess such a difficult translation, this is "The Old Church".
#4 *cough*... *wheeze*...
#5 The very well-kept bandstand in the Vondelpark
#6 In the butterfly house at Hortus Botanicus (the botanical gardens)
#7 And of course, the obligatory Amsterdam "no originality" shot.
And a couple of more heavily processed shots. My personal preference is to not do too much PP to my photos, keeping them as (hopefully!) pleasing but realistic representations of how things really looked. But I couldn't resist playing with some of these photos a bit more.
#8
#9
On the final full day there, I was tired from walking around so much and spent a good couple of hours chilling at Leidseplein in a pavement cafe with a couple of cold beers, people watching. So I figured I'd have a go at candid street photography. Jeez, it's hard! Here's a couple of better results from my first attempt.
#10 Big guys on little bikes
#11 Heavy metal
it looks lovely for just ambling about with the camera.No ambling around for me, I was in Amsterdam last week. Here's some shots.
First, some standard touristy snapshots...
#1 The Rijksmuseum at the far end of the Museumplein
#2 Some leaning houses by a canal. No that's not lens distortion, they really do lean outwards like that.
#3 "De Oude Kerk" - as you'll never guess such a difficult translation, this is "The Old Church".
#4 *cough*... *wheeze*...
#5 The very well-kept bandstand in the Vondelpark
#6 In the butterfly house at Hortus Botanicus (the botanical gardens)
#7 And of course, the obligatory Amsterdam "no originality" shot.
And a couple of more heavily processed shots. My personal preference is to not do too much PP to my photos, keeping them as (hopefully!) pleasing but realistic representations of how things really looked. But I couldn't resist playing with some of these photos a bit more.
#8
#9
On the final full day there, I was tired from walking around so much and spent a good couple of hours chilling at Leidseplein in a pavement cafe with a couple of cold beers, people watching. So I figured I'd have a go at candid street photography. Jeez, it's hard! Here's a couple of better results from my first attempt.
#10 Big guys on little bikes
#11 Heavy metal
Last edited by STROBE, .
Reason : fixed spelling
You have got to be joking. £25 for a usb cable?
/me wishes he had founded PC World if people really are that stupid.
That would be nice.
That's a good point. I mentioned in my other post here about FXO advantages and the way the slow boost hurts cars that drive the rear wheels. But the locked diff is also an issue. When you remove the locked diff from the FXO (i.e. give it a realistic setup), it handles like you expect a fwd to handle: go overboard on the gas and it ploughs straight on. This hurts the laptimes and provides a limitation to the corner (and corner exit) speed in the way the other two have.
Maybe the issue is the unrealistic setups we're allowed? This is on the basis that a locked diff fwd would be bloody undriveable, which I've always understood to be the case.
Based on your posts last night, I think you should get drunk more often.
Range Rover Sport? UK built, of course. So it should be cheaper in the UK as there's no shipping expenses.
Range Rover Sport Supercharged:
In the US... 72,450 USD = ~36,225 GBP
In the UK... 58,500 GPB = ~117,000 USD
(if we take the before tax UK price of 49,235 GBP, that's still ~98,500 USD)
In the US, the car costs 62% of what it does in the UK.
That's the absolute definition of a bad driver. Age has nothing to do with knowing you can't stop in two car lengths, and in the UK you'd never have got your licence if you tailgated anyone like that. Yes we all get better with experience, but if the starting point is sufficiently bad that you don't know what a safe distance is, then it's simply a case of being a bad driver.
lmao, if only. When it comes to consumer goods, the exchange rate suddenly becomes 1 USD = 1 GBP.
As Bladerunner said, average wage is nothing like £35k, outside of London. And in London, the higer wages are negated by the frightening cost of living.
Don't forget the high taxes we pay which is needed to spend ~£13bn a year on benefit payments so people don't have to go to work if they don't fancy it much.
The main difference between North America and the rest of the world is the attitude and culture towards cars and using energy. Like the woman Scatter mentioned who will leave her car running for over half an hour for no genuine reason. Or the much lauded "summer driving season" that gets referenced every year - wtf is a "driving season"? Going for a drive isn't a sport. It can be fun, but if everyone does it, it just becomes an epic waste of fuel.
Of course, wasting fuel didn't matter in the past with it being so cheap. But now it does matter, and I bet there's a hell of a lot of people and families, mainly in the states, who for generations have taken cheap fuel for granted and wouldn't even know where to start with saving energy.
That's an interesting take on things. Not sure what you were taught in your history lessons, but the rest of the world is taught that Japan attacked the US, the US declared war on Japan, and as a result Germany and Italy declared war on the US.
You think the US has some sort of halo over it's head. It doesn't.
What?
What??
Yeah. Obviously, a few fighter crews in Kuwait, Turkey and Saudi Arabia is a much more expensive and labour-intensive commitment than having half the US Army stationed in Iraq for a decade or more.
And I think that sums up your blind faith in the US pretty neatly.
You're really pissing me off now. You think that the US invasion of Iraq was lucky for the Iraqi population? The population that got massacred in the anarchy following the US invasion? The population whose bodycount is far higher under US rule than it was under the entirety of Saddam's rule? The population who can now not go to the market without fear of being blown up by a car bomb?
If you want to eliminate leaders on the basis of being brutally despotic, why did the US cosy up to Islam Karimov, offering Uzbekistan (like all members of the Coalition of the "Willing") financial aid in return for his token of support? Why doesn't the US take on half of Africa? Simple answer: because there's no money to be made in Africa. Or Uzbekistan.
Well, maybe your selective memory is having an effect again. In case you need a reminder of the only thing the Bush administration was talking about in 2003, here's a reminder. Go on, go and say that we actually only invaded to rescue the poor Iraqi people. I dare you.
(EDIT) Or for more fun, watch that lying little war cr ... hit Rumsfeld squirm on tv.
Well I raced on Race2 earlier this week, sticking with XRT. I had some good battles and great racing, and don't wish to put down the FXO drivers I was racing against.
But by god, the FXO is frustrating. At times I was watching FXOs in my mirrors, putting wheels on the grass, going sideways into corners, and they still power out of the corner as quick as the XRT. Whereas with the XRT if you make the slightest mistake or put the power down a fraction too soon, you're just going sideways where the FXO just goes where you point it.
It shouldn't be up to the CTRA to balance the cars. The devs should do it, but for some reason they don't. I guess when turbo modelling is improved, the balance will be more equal (due to the massive turbo lag, you need ot hit the gas early which makes the rwd XRT much more risky than the FXO). I'm not sure why they try to improve the other cars rather than just curtailing the FXO slightly. And yes, occasionally there's an alien driver who wipes the floor with everyone in a XRT, but amongst "normal" drivers, the FXO is generally the easiest and fastest to drive. Noticeably so, on the majority of tracks.
But by god, the FXO is frustrating. At times I was watching FXOs in my mirrors, putting wheels on the grass, going sideways into corners, and they still power out of the corner as quick as the XRT. Whereas with the XRT if you make the slightest mistake or put the power down a fraction too soon, you're just going sideways where the FXO just goes where you point it.
It shouldn't be up to the CTRA to balance the cars. The devs should do it, but for some reason they don't. I guess when turbo modelling is improved, the balance will be more equal (due to the massive turbo lag, you need ot hit the gas early which makes the rwd XRT much more risky than the FXO). I'm not sure why they try to improve the other cars rather than just curtailing the FXO slightly. And yes, occasionally there's an alien driver who wipes the floor with everyone in a XRT, but amongst "normal" drivers, the FXO is generally the easiest and fastest to drive. Noticeably so, on the majority of tracks.
I wasn't. I was referring to Bliar's cabinet.
No. Based on David's logic, the US would have already invaded some of the countries that joined the "coalition of the willing". There were some tiny central Asian states that joined the coalition who have leaders that make Saddam Hussein look like Mary Poppins. One in particular had a reputation for boiling his opponents alive.
Yup - about twelve of them.
Thank you for putting into words what I've had at the back of my mind but couldn't find a way of putting. It's a bit like arguing with the White House spokesman.
I can't tell here whether you're trying to be funny, or just actually being incredibly boorish.
I'll go with (a) myself. In his golden, moralistic vision of the USA that does everything for the Right Reason, he seems to have forgotten who put Saddam in power in the first place. Pity I've got stacks of work to get done today, I'll have to save my (full) reply for later.
What does the number of combos have to do with anything? You cover the same corners on the track using the different circuit configurations. Your overall route might be different but the corners are still the same. The scenery is still the same. The immersion offered by that particular environment is still the same. We're better covered on the car front in terms of the variety available, and they all handle quite differently. But I have no desire to try all 900+ combos. FE3 in an LX4 is very much like FE3 in an LX6. KY2 in a RB4 is a very similar experience to KY2 in a XRT, bar the obvious handling differences. We might have hundreds of combos, but distil them down to groups of interesting/appropriate tracks and car classes, and the number drops dramatically.
No - personally, I want more content to provide more choice of racing venue, more variety, and yes, of course there is an appeal to having something new, both to learn and to play around in.
If everyone never wanted any new tracks, we'd all still be playing on LFS's recreations of the tracks from Pole Position on the Atari 2600. There's nothing wrong with wanting new tracks. It's not a sin. It's not symptomatic of having some kind of attention deficit disorder.
Mind you, none of this makes any difference if everyone continues to drive, and continues to be provided for/encouraged to drive, the same bloody AS3/GTR. I'd love to see what would happen if that combo could be blocked at the master server for a weekend.
Last edited by STROBE, .
I really wanted to get cracking with some work as soon as I got in the office this morning, but spotted some shit that needs smothering.
Aggressive? How many times had he attacked or threatened the USA? please, name them.
The country was destitute, broken, with a half-assed conscription army and a few dozen mid-Soviet era tanks. What money had been earnt, or illegally acquired from the UN programmes, was squandered on luxurious palaces for Saddam's family. Or were you referring to a different "Iraq"?
Oh? He was? Please, name them (the terrorists). I'm curious what you'll come up with, because it'll probably mention the favoured bogeymen from a few years ago - Al Qaeda. Except that Saddam and Al Qaeda really didn't get along and had nothing to do with each other.
This and further comments suggests that you suffer from the idealism someone mentioned earlier in this or another thread, whereby too many Americans think their country has such a clean conscience, a heart of gold, and whose shit doesn't stink.
You talk about Americans going to Iraq to fight terrorism, which is just a beautiful example of how if you repeat something often enough, it seems to become true. There was no mention of terrorism when the gunsights shifted from Afghanistan to Iraq. No, it was all about WMD. Saddam was developing WMD. Saddam building new development facilities to make more WMD. Saddam's WMD were getting longer ranged. Saddam had more WMD than we could count. The whole frikkin country was bristling with frikkin WMD, according to Bush'n'Bliar. Oh, and of course, Saddam was merely evading the weapons inspectors with mobile WMD labs. Remember Colin Powell standing at the UN with a comical Powerpoint slideshow, depicting nothing more incriminating than satellite photos of some sheds with trucks parked around them. The Bush administration were all over tv giving interviews and press conferences, chanting the mantra, "Saddam, WMDs, Saddam, WMDs, Saddam, WMDs".
And then they invaded against the advice and common sense of the rest of the world, there was no trace of WMD, and then it was a case of, "errr, well Saddam was a terrorist anyway, yeah, didn't you know? He has bottom sex with Osama Bin Laden every other night".
Except that Saddam didn't. The only terrorists in Iraq came there in the power vacuum created by the US.
Aggressive? How many times had he attacked or threatened the USA? please, name them.
The country was destitute, broken, with a half-assed conscription army and a few dozen mid-Soviet era tanks. What money had been earnt, or illegally acquired from the UN programmes, was squandered on luxurious palaces for Saddam's family. Or were you referring to a different "Iraq"?
Oh? He was? Please, name them (the terrorists). I'm curious what you'll come up with, because it'll probably mention the favoured bogeymen from a few years ago - Al Qaeda. Except that Saddam and Al Qaeda really didn't get along and had nothing to do with each other.
This and further comments suggests that you suffer from the idealism someone mentioned earlier in this or another thread, whereby too many Americans think their country has such a clean conscience, a heart of gold, and whose shit doesn't stink.
You talk about Americans going to Iraq to fight terrorism, which is just a beautiful example of how if you repeat something often enough, it seems to become true. There was no mention of terrorism when the gunsights shifted from Afghanistan to Iraq. No, it was all about WMD. Saddam was developing WMD. Saddam building new development facilities to make more WMD. Saddam's WMD were getting longer ranged. Saddam had more WMD than we could count. The whole frikkin country was bristling with frikkin WMD, according to Bush'n'Bliar. Oh, and of course, Saddam was merely evading the weapons inspectors with mobile WMD labs. Remember Colin Powell standing at the UN with a comical Powerpoint slideshow, depicting nothing more incriminating than satellite photos of some sheds with trucks parked around them. The Bush administration were all over tv giving interviews and press conferences, chanting the mantra, "Saddam, WMDs, Saddam, WMDs, Saddam, WMDs".
And then they invaded against the advice and common sense of the rest of the world, there was no trace of WMD, and then it was a case of, "errr, well Saddam was a terrorist anyway, yeah, didn't you know? He has bottom sex with Osama Bin Laden every other night".
Except that Saddam didn't. The only terrorists in Iraq came there in the power vacuum created by the US.
-1 from me. In real life you can reach down and feel what gear you're in, or if necessary, look where the gear lever is. When you don't have that option on the computer (as we don't all have G25s), you need an on-screen substitute.
My real car starts just fine without pushing any pedals. You're advised to dip the clutch but it's not essential.
Fingers crossed that future improvements to the damage and collision models will make post-race wrecking harder or near impossible. So when some moron decides they have to start crashing into people, they'll only be able to do it once and then be left with a car with no radiator, the tyres jammed into the bodywork and unable to roll or turn, the engine in the passenger seat, and so on - and he won't be able to do it any more. It's only the current damage model that allows people to bash and bump around like they do after the race. When it (the damage system) (hopefully) gets a LOT more sensitive, it'll stop a great deal of the problems.
I don't see as much of it now as I used to, but post race wrecking is incredibly annoying. The FFB causing the wheel to whip round is a genuine cause for concern, whether you have your chin resting on the wheel (I do that too sometimes) or your fingers resting on the spokes, or even if the wheel is left unattended. I've parked my car up well out of the way before then jumped out my seat to get a drink/take a piss etc before the next restart, and some twat still manages to hit me.
I think you've bought the wrong game mate. Oh, wait...
So when some moron decides they have to start crashing into people, they'll only be able to do it once and then be left with a car with no radiator, the tyres jammed into the bodywork and unable to roll or turn, the engine in the passenger seat, and so on - and he won't be able to do it any more. It's only the current damage model that allows people to bash and bump around like they do after the race. When it (the damage system) (hopefully) gets a LOT more sensitive, it'll stop a great deal of the problems.I don't see as much of it now as I used to, but post race wrecking is incredibly annoying. The FFB causing the wheel to whip round is a genuine cause for concern, whether you have your chin resting on the wheel (I do that too sometimes) or your fingers resting on the spokes, or even if the wheel is left unattended. I've parked my car up well out of the way before then jumped out my seat to get a drink/take a piss etc before the next restart, and some twat still manages to hit me.
I think you've bought the wrong game mate. Oh, wait...
This has nothing specifically to do with this year's German GP, but everytime I look at that circuit map, I cringe and think back to the early '90s GPs with Prost, Senna, Mansell etc thundering through the forest with sparks flying from the undertray.
Bloody Tilke.
Bloody Tilke.
That's a damn good point. Why don't they run shorter tracks? I can understand why the super-long tracks were phased out due to the difficulties of providing adequate marshal/fire/first aid coverage, but I think a GP with a fast, 45 second lap would actually be very lively!
With the viewfinder of a D40, not so much lost as just very hard to find. 
ffs...
Same as it always is - "when it's ready to be tested".
Holy shit, this is a major topic bump.
I'm afraid I tend to agree with Becky's comments from 2006, in principle if not in a literal sense. I've never understood some people's fascination with upgrading their sound systems. On the road, you need to be able to hear your surroundings in order to be a safe and quick driver. Chavs driving round with their rear glass bouncing to the beat are idiots - they can't hear their own engine, let alone anything around them. Occasionally I see idiots with loud music on holding up ambulances or fire engines because they never heard the siren coming, and it's no surprise that the same people are also too thick and/or irresponsible to look in their mirrors and notice the swathes of flashing lights.
I'm afraid I tend to agree with Becky's comments from 2006, in principle if not in a literal sense. I've never understood some people's fascination with upgrading their sound systems. On the road, you need to be able to hear your surroundings in order to be a safe and quick driver. Chavs driving round with their rear glass bouncing to the beat are idiots - they can't hear their own engine, let alone anything around them. Occasionally I see idiots with loud music on holding up ambulances or fire engines because they never heard the siren coming, and it's no surprise that the same people are also too thick and/or irresponsible to look in their mirrors and notice the swathes of flashing lights.
Thanks.
They say that 90% of an image is made by the person holding the camera, so don't blame your equipment. Not that I mean it in an egotistical way - simple physics dictates that to get the kind of bokeh in my shots you need a decent sized sensor and a suitably fast lens. No photographic skill required, just open up the lens and shoot.
Love the last picture, great posture.
What is it you like about the 40D?
Of course they can. I've seen magazine-worthy fashion shots on location that were just taken with a decent Fuji compact. And yes, SLRs are a bloody money pit. Fortunately I got my A700 on special offer, combined with the Sony cashback, plus selling my old A100, meant I managed to upgrade for just under £400. But now I need a better general zoom lens. I'm very tempted to splash out for when I go to Amsterdam at the end of this month, but I don't really want to part with another £300 at the moment.
No.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG