I have eaten a good 2/3 of the tub of hummus I bought this morning. At least I've gotten a lot of protein today?
Willow ,'Potential'
Natter 69: Practically names itself.
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
It is totally both endearing and nefarious! But just wait, because one of her classmates, a year younger than her and with two fewer years of lessons under his belt, is about to pass her. He is less talented, but methodical about his learning, and relentless in his willingness to repeat a song until he gets it right. His first year, it was all we could do to keep him in the chair. This year, he is going to surpass his entire class.
Man, you guys go in for realism in your drills, huh?
In elementary school we postponed an earthquake drill until after the spelling quiz. Earthquake midway through. Unpredictable.
Timelies all!
Went to the Weird Al concert last night, so I'm just now catching up.
We head off to OVFF tomorrow, so I need to pack.
So we need a simple, non-technical way to explain that print publications need more pixels than web graphics. It's driving me mad.
Are you ok with saying that pictures on the internet appear blurry when printed and leave it at that or are you being asked "why?"
We're being asked "why," often in a really belligerent way, and then they say the line that makes me want to reach through the computer and get slappy, "But it looks good on MY SCREEN!"
Also, maybe you could have an example PDF on hand to send to them -- Ask them to view the PDF on their computer, and then print it out, so they can see for themselves what you're talking about.
What happens is we use the shitty image they gave us, send them a PDF galley to review, and they print the PDF and then call to ask why the image is shitty.
They also have this cute trick of sending a story in a Word file or an e-mail with the images embedded and don't understand why I can't just use them as-is.
When they're embedded in Word, we have given up on trying to get the art files from the authors. ("What's an 'art file'?" being a common question.) (And all I want to do is scream "How the FUCK did you write your article?!? You know the pretty picture in it? Did it get in there BY MAGIC??? That's a fucking ART FILE.")
Instead we save that one page of Word as a PDF and then export the PDF as a 1200-dpi tiff and then tinker from there. It usually works, unless the art was shitty to begin with. If you take a 72-dpi image off a website and embed it in Word, our weird end-run to make it into a usable art file still won't make it look good. You can't add pixels, god damn it.
This is a cool gank of Pantone.
of course I read that as "Pantene."
This is a cool gank of Pantone.
Makes me consider a Christmas tree.
You can't add pixels, god damn it.
Well, you can but it doesn't end well.
It is totally both endearing and nefarious!
Ah, kids.