|
Desktop pics (NO flesh pics though)
|
|
Senior Member
|
6. September 2009 @ 07:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
omeg, do you create something like this from scratch, or do you find something similar use your own modiifications and go from there?
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 13:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well...I was thinking of making something that looked like a rose. But the "Apophysis" program I use, is generally random. I am however learning how to manipulate it. What I did was, found a fractal I liked, rendered it in both green and red, overlayed them in photoshop, gave it a few effects and bingo. I believe it may be possible to manipulate the program, in such a way, that one could create almost exactly what they want.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 13:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
One of the things you can learn from the site I posted earlier, Apophysis can produce a large variety of different effects. :P
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
6. September 2009 @ 13:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
That much is definitely true. Before I go reading, watching tutorials, I wanted to dig into the program for myself. I learn better "Hands On." Once I have a good understanding of the program, then i'll take another look across the web :)
Thanks again by the way.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
7. September 2009 @ 14:12 |
Link to this message
|
Here's a little something for the AMD fans. Im working on something for Intel as well, so don't go thinking im some kinda fanboy. Fact of the matter is, im simply not sure what to do for them. Their imagery just isn't sparking anything for me yet.
Im trying to incorporate the Fractals into other imagery. This is pretty basic, but im sure at least a few people will like this one.
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/4340/amdwallpaper2560.jpg
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. September 2009 @ 14:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
It seems a little distant from the company's logo, I think staying somewhat more faithful to it (like the silicon outline image posted a while back) is better, imo.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
7. September 2009 @ 16:13 |
Link to this message
|
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
10. September 2009 @ 03:37 |
Link to this message
|
This has to be the silliest, funniest action movie ive ever seen LOL! I give this movie (Crank 2) a strong 8/10! I don't give 10's very often, due to there always being room for improvement. However, I have given a few :) This movie is the type that you either love it or hate it. Not sure how else to explain it, without ruining it. This scene here had me rolling on the floor darn near. He really played his role VERY well. For those wondering what he's doing...*****SPOILERS***** He's grasping a High voltage transformer. ROFL!!!
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
10. September 2009 @ 04:04 |
Link to this message
|
Ho ho! I didn't know you could run several instances of the Windows 7 weather report. Thats kind of cool. Apparently a few others(Gadgets) allow it too. Though I don't know why one would need to run several instances of the Cpu/memory monitor/Tachometer.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. September 2009 @ 04:06
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
10. September 2009 @ 08:02 |
Link to this message
|
|
Crank 2 was awesome - the power station scene was the best, simply for the sheer 'WTF' factor.
|
Moderator
|
13. October 2009 @ 17:20 |
Link to this message
|
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules *** |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 03:59 |
Link to this message
|
Well...I didn't make it myself, but what can I say. I have an extreme appeal for the enterprise :P Darth Vader, eat your heart out. LOL! reminds me of a GIF image I saw today. Picard Bi*ch slapping Darth Vader LOL!
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 15:26 |
Link to this message
|
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388 |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 15:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
So basically, Star Wars employs a ridiculously far-fetched technology. Totally just teasing here...Hmmm, or am I :P
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 15:56 |
Link to this message
|
As does Star Trek if you think about it. But just as a comparison, Star Wars would decimate Star Trek. The scale is larger and the technology is far more advanced. Darth Vader eat his heart out? He's so badass his heart is a machine. Star Trek is like a few planets and is based in one quadrant of the galaxy which takes several years for them to traverse. Star Wars is based on millions of planets and systems covering an entire galaxy where core to outer rim is a few hours and considered daily traffic. You do the math :P
Also consider the crew of Enterprise E is about 1,400-2,000 depending if they've taken on extra maintenance personnel or landing parties. The crew of an Imperial Class Star Detroyer is about 37,000. Not to mention an Executor Class Super Star Dreadnought has a crew of roughly 300,000.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. November 2009 @ 16:03
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 16:02 |
Link to this message
|
Its no secret, im a trekkie LOL! The reason I never got into star wars(The orginal), was it seemed to me, that there wasn't enough story line to the movies. All action and no story. I really should give it another chance though...
Im not really knocking star wars here, im actually noting my own ignorance there of...
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 16:06 |
Link to this message
|
Haha read my edit on crew capacity if you haven't :P
I'm not knocking Star Trek either but the fact is Star Wars has better technology. After being humbled by the sheer scale of a Super Star Destroyer, the Enterprise is nothing more than a very outdated(ancient like at the advent of FTL travel) lightly armed light transport to me.
And there's plenty of story to Star Wars. It's just that it hasn't been fleshed out as well as Star Trek's due to the absence of a long running TV series. To find the real story you need to read the books. Star Wars is MASSIVE. And even though some of the books are spin-offs, there's actually a running database of what is canon and what is fan-fiction. Surprisingly most of the books are accepted as official Star Wars history. Myself owning about 100 of the books I can say there are very few contradictions.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. November 2009 @ 16:24
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
1. November 2009 @ 16:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
Estuansis, you got the distances wrong for star wars & star trek. star wars speed was just past light speed whereas star trek was lightspeed x 9.9 power. star trek was more thought out & realistic compared to star wars. a federation dreadnaught can take on an imperial star destroyer with a good chance of winning.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 16:34 |
Link to this message
|
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 16:35 |
Link to this message
|
I know this is largely put together through some lazy methods but it does outline the differences fairly well.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/
The raw power output and weapons capacity of an Imperial Class Star Destroyer absolutely dwarves anything in the Star Trek fleet. Please, tell me how a Federation Fleet can win against much more powerful technology and vastly greater numbers. Even ship to ship I'm just not seeing it.
Also, I consider the technology of each to be fairly valid considering it's all science fiction. They've simply takne n the tech in different directions. Remember the Federation Star Fleet is 90% exploration and mainly experimental based on the theoretical future of Earth. The Imperial Fleet is actually there to control and police an empire many times larger than all of known space in Star Trek.
Also, AFAIK Star Trek speed was not 9.9 but .99 lightspeed with only the newest ships breaking the barrier just barely. Whereas Star Wars actually deals with faster than light travel by an order of magnitude. If you watch the series they only cover a single quadrant of the milky way over a period of several years. In Star Wars it takes them only 4-5 hours to travel from the core systems to the outer rim. Also Star Trek is set several hundred years in our future. Star Wars is set in a universe where faster than light travel has been possible for THOUSANDS of years.
Of course I could be entirely wrong. Link me to some more concrete facts if possible.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. November 2009 @ 18:40
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 19:07 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Estuansis:
Also, AFAIK Star Trek speed was not 9.9 but .99 lightspeed with only the newest ships breaking the barrier just barely. Whereas Star Wars actually deals with faster than light travel by an order of magnitude. If you watch the series they only cover a single quadrant of the milky way over a period of several years. In Star Wars it takes them only 4-5 hours to travel from the core systems to the outer rim. Also Star Trek is set several hundred years in our future. Star Wars is set in a universe where faster than light travel has been possible for THOUSANDS of years.
Of course I could be entirely wrong. Link me to some more concrete facts if possible.
So, your suggesting the federation could barely break light speed? The first warp ship did that easily(Zefram Cochrane's warp ship). I could be mistaken, but i've always assumed that warp .9 was light speed. Just before warp one...
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Warp_factor
Edit - LOL, looks like multiple sites have their info wrong. Where's Gene Roddenberry when you need him!
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. November 2009 @ 19:18
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 19:30 |
Link to this message
|
So maybe I am wrong as far as how fast Star Trek's ships are. But if you look at the relative distances and how long it took to travel them Star Wars is obviously still several times faster. In Star Wars it takes maybe 4-5 days with an average speed commercial grade hyperdrive to cross the entire galaxy. Not to mention the measly 1-2 days needed by the giant military grade drives in Star Destroyers. I read somewhere the theoretical battle between Enterprise and an Imperial SD. It said that if the Star Destroyer made a 10 second jump in any direction, Enterprise would have to push max speed for two hours to catch up.
I know this is a geek debate and has nothing to do with the thread topic, but the comparison being made triggered it all :P
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 19:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
Eh, its all in good fun :) I've recently become bored with my wallpapers, so im trying to make some more as well as find some more :D I'll post more soon.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
|
ddp
Moderator
|
1. November 2009 @ 20:35 |
Link to this message
|
warpspeed is the speed of light. warp 9.98 is lightspeed times itself 9.98 times. hans solo even says .1 past lightspeed for his ship's max speed which is faster then the star destroyers.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
1. November 2009 @ 20:44 |
Link to this message
|
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
