|
471. dusty - 10/2/1999 6:16:43 AM I found it, the loon file is 41k. 472. marjoribanks - 10/2/1999 10:02:43 AM Pseuder,
That large photo you posted is good. Is it yours?
If so, congratulations. It's a good shot, where was it taken? I'm inspired to get scanned a couple of mine on the same theme.
473. marjoribanks - 10/2/1999 10:04:37 AM Pelle,
That photograph is excellent. Please reproduce it here as often as you can. 474. pseudoerasmus - 10/2/1999 1:28:29 PM Marzipranks: No, I did not take that photo. My great-uncle took it some 10 years ago, but he only gave it to me this summer. The "Pathan" boy in the photo is, shall we say, in costume. 475. EricCartman - 10/2/1999 3:16:19 PM Pseudo:
Your later posts were more legible and pronounceable with the addition of the other Cyrillic font you advised; I'm still curious as to the translation, as you may still recall how poor my Russian is. However, your original posts (393-394, or thereabouts) are still way off, as far as I can see. What font did you use for those posts?
Excellent photo, by the way, but I had assumed that you were somewhat older. One learns something new every day.
476. pseudoerasmus - 10/2/1999 3:41:19 PM Hahahahaha. No, it's not me. I didn't mean to give that impression. 477. CalGal - 10/2/1999 3:42:11 PM I'm relieved. I really hadn't pictured you that.....cute. 478. EricCartman - 10/2/1999 3:45:36 PM Pseudo:
I'm kidding, of course. I haven't seen you in quite a while, and couldn't resist the urge to give you a hard time. 479. CalGal - 10/2/1999 3:47:35 PM You've seen PseudoErasmus? With or without the pink bathrobe?
I mean--assuming that's not too personal a question. 480. pseudoerasmus - 10/2/1999 3:47:47 PM Cartman, the clue as to who it is in the name of the file. 481. pseudoerasmus - 10/2/1999 3:49:57 PM 
482. pseudoerasmus - 10/2/1999 3:50:30 PM I don't understand why these files come out so huge. The pictures themselves are ordinary-sized. 483. CalGal - 10/2/1999 3:52:38 PM How odd. I pictured you younger. 484. CalGal - 10/2/1999 3:54:57 PM And no, the picture is posting at its normal size. I just checked the URL. 485. pseudoerasmus - 10/2/1999 3:57:06 PM No, the pictures themselves are not more than 3 by 5 or 3 by 6. Why do the files end up so huge when they are scanned? 486. Stumbo - 10/2/1999 4:03:01 PM Resolution setting? Anything more than 72 bpi tends to be superfluous (unless needed for a specific purpose.) 487. CalGal - 10/2/1999 4:07:43 PM Oh, I see. Isn't there a setting? Scaling, or something like that? I don't scan often, although I've talked my mother through it a few times. 488. pseudoerasmus - 10/2/1999 4:09:43 PM I really don't know. I have the homosexual at the shop downstairs do the photo scanning for me.
489. pseudoerasmus - 10/2/1999 4:10:03 PM 
490. pseudoerasmus - 10/2/1999 4:10:32 PM 
|
