DVDizzy Forum

I don't know if this has been asked before, but here's my question for Luke:

When you start posting, you're a Newbie, and after you've posted a few posts you become a Member. At 50 posts you become Gold Collection. Then at 200 posts you are Special Edition. Can you give me a list of what other "titles" comes next in correct order (e.g. Limited Edition, Masterpiece Edition etc.) and how many posts do you need to gain it? Thanks.

I don't remember exactly when you hit 1000 you are Limited Issue. When you hit 2000 you are Masterpiece. When you hit 510 I think you are SupaGenius. I don't remember all of them all.

And if you behave like Basil or Tangela or ArtofDisney other titles awaits you.

Well these are the ranks that people have reached thus far:

Newbie 0
Member 5
Gold Collection 50
Special Edition 200
Super Genius 500
Collector's Edition 550
Limited Edition 1000
Masterpiece Edition 2000

There's one other rank, which I'm sure you could guess, but no one has reached that yet.

And JimmyJackJunior is correct. "Banned Deadbeat", for instance, is a custom title bestowed to someone who tries to weasel a free gift out of the forum's Secret Santa program by lying about sending his gift, and then saying it was "his bad cousin" and not him using his computer and Instant Messenger account.

I was wondering why I wasnt a super genius for very long.

Thanks for the list, Luke. And just for my curiousity... how many posts do you need for Platinum Edition?...

disneychris04 wrote:Thanks for the list, Luke. And just for my curiousity... how many posts do you need for Platinum Edition?...

We'll have to wait and see, so it will be a big Surprise!

Luke wrote:

disneychris04 wrote:Thanks for the list, Luke. And just for my curiousity... how many posts do you need for Platinum Edition?...

We'll have to wait and see, so it will be a big Surprise!

I'd have to assume 5000 but that's quite a lot. But, then, what after that? CEO?

It might be a race down to the wire. Given posts to date and current pace I calculate Luke will hit 5,000 in 152 days(Jan 15, 2005) and Aaron in 163(Jan 26, 2005). I also calculate Aaron will take over the # 1 spot in 185 days. For the record, I should hit 5,000 in a mere 1,692 days or about 4.6 years.

Maybe Deathie Mouse would check the math.

I think Aaron will probably be the first to get it, as Luke has the Site Admin title. Though perhaps he'll get rid of it temporarily when he reaches 5000 so that he can be platinum.

Hey, don't discount Netty, Loomis, and MMB! Especially since school starts back for me soon, which means a dramatic reduction in my free time.

Maybe PE is at 10,000! Or it could be a random number, like 4,374.

-Aaron

Well as long as you set aside enough time to run Survivor

Always!

-Aaron

JimmyJackJunior you also being a Wizard hat wearing mouse (btw where's your avatar?) i'll leave this calculation to you

Steve Jobs would probably burst a gasket if somebody else here became CEO before him

I was thinking after Platinum someone that posts that much should have the honorific title of Walt Disney's Personal Assistant

Oh, and , am I imagining things, or the rate in which you post per day, also changes your title?
I coulda sworn I saw that happen once. Must lay off watching so many RGB images...

JimmyJackJunior wrote:It might be a race down to the wire. Given posts to date and current pace I calculate Luke will hit 5,000 in 152 days(Jan 15, 2005) and Aaron in 163(Jan 26, 2005). I also calculate Aaron will take over the # 1 spot in 185 days. For the record, I should hit 5,000 in a mere 1,692 days or about 4.6 years.

Maybe Deathie Mouse would check the math.

For me to hit 5,000 it would probably be around 50 years!

Deathie - I was trying to add an avatar of me kayaking with my daughter but it kept saying there were too many pixars. Ill work on it more tomorrow.

JimmyJackJunior wrote:but it kept saying there were too many pixars

There can never be too many Pixars!

However I think the limit for avatars pixels is 140 x 140
So take your piccie and making it a bitmap,

First: Crop/trim it so all the image you want included fits inside the closest multiple of 140 that holds everything you want, like 280 x 280, 420 x 420, 560 x 560, 700 x 700 etc. If the piccie needs to be rectangular to look better/hold everything, make sure the longest dimension you trim to is a multiple of 140. (This step theoretically preserves the most quality. In practice it may or may nor make much difference especialy if your original image size is big )

Second: resize it in you image editing application so that the longest/biggest dimension is 140. If the resize proportional thingie is checked, the other dimension will fall in place. For shrinking images I sometimes use nearest neighbor resizing but you could try bilinear or other to see which looks bettah.

Third: after shrinking, images might look too blurry, so some sharpening is adviced

Fourth: jpeg the resulting image, checking that the final file size is smaller than 35 KB (If i recall correctly)
(I think all my avatars ended smaller than the 35 KB limit without having to reduce the jpeg quality thinguie, but always check just in case )

Hope we see soon a kayaking JimmyJackJunior and daughter

deathie mouse wrote:Third: after shrinking, images might look too blurry, so some sharpening is adviced

You heard it here first folks. Deathie Mouse recommends Edge Enhancement on DVD transfers!

errr....




Netty! AHAHAHAHAAH!







Actually, edge enhancement done wrong (the ugly one that's visible) is worse than leaving the image blurry cus apart to being just the same error as blurrying but in the exact opposite direction, it creates something additional which i call Digital Astigmatism. (on top of it's it's ugly visibility)

But that should go into another topic
Anyway here's a deathi summary:

videophile destested edge enhancement = too much amplitude applied to the WRONG lower frequencies instead to the maximum frequencies, into low resolution images that don't really have enough pixels to create a finely defined sharp edge from the beggining!

(and the correct amplitude and frequency change depending on the size and distance you're viewing the image, so what works perfectly on a a small monitor on a telecine desk would look horrendous on a huge 8 feet wide screen watched from the sofa. )

btw even film uses edge enhancement (in this case, done chemically)

Oops Freudian slip on the Pixar/Pixel thing.