|
|
Times change. Even when you have pointy hair: Meetings just got a lot more fun[^]
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
LOL! That is so funny 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, and it's not wrong either. Mac users DO stink! 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
Never argue with a fool. Onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.
Mark Twain
modified 27-May-20 3:22am.
|
|
|
|
|
"Great Scott" is a very apt phrase to use there.
Intention, or coincidence?
|
|
|
|
|
musefan wrote: "Great Scott" is a very apt phrase to use there.
It was a coincidence. Wow! Didn't even think about it until I read your comment. 
|
|
|
|
|
2/22/22, we could even call it 2's day.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ZurdoDev wrote: Looking forward to Tuesday, Feb 22, 2022
I (on the other hand) am looking forward to lunch. 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
As it will be my 62nd birthday, I intend having a great lunch
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was waiting for you to post that. 
|
|
|
|
|
Not me. I had expected him to post 2022-02-22 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
Never argue with a fool. Onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.
Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
Well, apart from your typo, a more common format would be 22-02-2022 in which form it is palindromic and the last palindromic date using only two different digits for over a thousand years. (The last one was about 3 months ago on 02-02-2020). (Happy to be proven wrong if I am!)
|
|
|
|
|
Some people have more respect for international standards than others have 
|
|
|
|
|
Don't panic, I'd only ever use that as a display format! 
|
|
|
|
|
ZurdoDev wrote: we could even call it 2's day.
or just today for short?
|
|
|
|
|
And it will be. 
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, I have a need to link two xaml windows due to a constraint on xml processing. Instead of sending one xml request, I have to send two.
I have some some research, and there is not a whole lot on doing this. I found an article that discussed:
How can i combine multiple XAML files using C# in WPF? - Stack Overflow[^]
Can anyone steer me in the right direction? I just want to run one xaml window then the next.
I put them into my project and nothing happened. I did not receive an error, but nothing happened.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Software related, but not programming, so I didn't find another place to ask:
Time lapse photos have been fashion among photo nerds for some time - usually using a camera monted in the same position for hours, days or months. Results may be fascinating, or boring, but they are usually OK from a technical point of view. Then you have those who take a self portrait, or a photo of their kids, every day or week, and put together as a movie, which usually doesn't look like a time lapse at all - just a spastically flickering kaleidoscope of messy setups.
I really would like to make decent time lapse portraits! So I am considering two measures to improve the quality:
First, I need a camera that can be hooked up to a PC as a "viewfinder". In principle, any USB webcam satisifies, but I would prefer the quality of a decent DSLR. The viewfinder image would not be displayed directly, but XORed with the previous photo in the series. If the person is unchanged from the previous photo, and sits in exactly the same position, the screen would be pitch black. There will always be some differences - you would see some outline of the face, but the subject may be instructed how to move the head to make the image as black (i.e. as close to the previous one) as possible, before clicking the release button. I guess I would be able to program this myself.
Second... This alone would give me a lot better time lapse series that what we frequently see e.g. on YouTube. But I would like to improve it even further: Rather than displaying the original photos, I would like to use intermediate ones: Merging photos n and n+1 into an n+0.5. I would like to be flexible so that I could merge n-1, n, n+1 and n+2 into n+0.5 as well (with less weight on the more "remote" inputs than on the closer ones).
I've seen lots of talking about morphing photographs this way, but not many products. The products I have found have been far from freeware, mostly complex professional packages at several hundred USD or more. I may have overlooked some obvious cheap or free alternative .
What would you use to merge two+ almost-indentical photos into one that picks up elements from all the input sources?
|
|
|
|
|
Member 7989122 wrote: Software related, but not programming, so I didn't find another place to ask:
Photography Stack Exchange
Photography
And maybe some other Photoshop discussion boards here and there
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
sounds like a niche market/demand kind of thing.
I would recommend looking at Photoshop, etc. but if you want to keep this on the cheap and you can't find anything on this site or others, than I would recommend rolling your own software for this.
Combine images with Auto-Blend Layers in Adobe Photoshop[^]
Combine images |[^]
FYI - I have an Adobe monthly subscription and it is fairly cheap if you just want Photoshop.
modified 26-May-20 12:47pm.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
