I'm trying to locate some photos which may have been taken during my talk at
the LPW at the end of November 2013 - the last one :) The talk was about:
PMSE and SNLP.
If anyone knows where I might find a cache of LPW photos, or who the people
were who took photos on the day, I'd appreciate
I've also got some pics up at
https://plus.google.com/photos/102381504977265553584/albums/5952417348817549217
(including some from the trip to and from LPW) - not as good as
Chris's - again, mail me off list if you want your face (even more)
pixelated/blurred for privacy :)
A
If anyone's interested, I have put a few photos up from this year's London
Perl Conference. You can find them here:
https://plus.google.com/photos/104598318166622233830/albums/5952849024849301
153?authkey=CJDc4M-snaLrIA
Email me off list if you appear in a photo and you'd rather it was removed
From: James Laver james.la...@gmail.com
https://picasaweb.google.com/104598318166622233830/LondonPerlConference24112012?authuser=0feat=directlink#5814779230205261074
Not entirely flattering. You must have picked a hell of a moment.
From: Pedro Figueiredo m...@pedrofigueiredo.org
No,
If anyones's interested, I put a few photos up from the conference at:
https://picasaweb.google.com/104598318166622233830/LondonPerlConference24112
012?authuser=0feat=directlink
If anyone wants full size versions, drop me an email,
Regards
Chris
On 25 Nov 2012, at 16:04, Chris Jack (MSN) chris_j...@msn.com wrote:
https://picasaweb.google.com/104598318166622233830/LondonPerlConference24112
012?authuser=0feat=directlink
On 25 Nov 2012, at 17:25, James Laver james.la...@gmail.com wrote:
Not entirely flattering. You must have picked a hell of a moment.
No, this is a hell of a moment:
https://picasaweb.google.com/104598318166622233830/LondonPerlConference24112012#5814779296635010610
Why is character encoding
On 25 Nov 2012, at 17:38, Pedro Figueiredo m...@pedrofigueiredo.org wrote:
On 25 Nov 2012, at 17:25, James Laver james.la...@gmail.com wrote:
Not entirely flattering. You must have picked a hell of a moment.
No, this is a hell of a moment:
On 25/11/2012 16:04, Chris Jack (MSN) wrote:
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
...
If anyones's interested, I put a few photos up from the conference at:
https://picasaweb.google.com/104598318166622233830/LondonPerlConference24112
012?authuser=0feat=directlink
And again; this time
I've trimmed and thumbnailed a few of the photos I took on Thursday.
http://husk.org/pics/x/people/london.pm_2003-04-03
--
:: paul
:: compiles with canadian cs1471 protocol
of them diary people,
need to be in my work :)
Phil
On Sat, 11 Jan 2003 00:09:33 +
David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/photos/london.pm/20030109
--
Phil
On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, Philip Pereira wrote:
I'm so sorry I wasn't able to make it on Thursday - I really wanted to
go; but the wife was very ill and I decided to look after her instead.
No problem, hope she feels better.
Fear not, nothing will hold me back from meeting you all for the first
On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 12:09:33AM +, David Cantrell wrote:
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/photos/london.pm/20030109
Correction:
s/jody\-sells/jody-buys/
Jody: Let me know if it works under winex?
tjc
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/photos/london.pm/20030109
--
Grand Inquisitor Reverend David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david
This is a signature. There are many like it but this one is mine.
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/photos/london.pm
--
Grand Inquisitor Reverend David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david
Us Germans take our humour very seriously
-- German cultural attache talking to the Today Programme,
about the German supposed lack of a sense of humour, 29 Aug 2001
On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, David Cantrell wrote:
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/photos/london.pm
The requested URL /photos/london.pm was not found on this server
the hatter
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 04:31:45PM +, the hatter wrote:
On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, David Cantrell wrote:
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/photos/london.pm
The requested URL /photos/london.pm was not found on this server
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/photos/london.pm/
--
dave thorn | [EMAIL
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 04:31:45PM +, the hatter wrote:
On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, David Cantrell wrote:
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/photos/london.pm
The requested URL /photos/london.pm was not found on this server
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/photos/london.pm
Refunds are available from our
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 04:42:04PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/photos/london.pm
I'd forgotten why they called you *evil* dave. Those are horrid photos.
--
Lusercop.net - LARTing Lusers everywhere since 2002
I have never seen a camera yet with an Auto white balance that ever works with
non-sunlight conditions, btw.
Then you need to find a better camera... May I recommend mine? The Nikon
Coolpix 950 (you can pick them up el cheapo now for about £250, but mine
cost me about £400 at the time)...
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 03:32, Toby|Wintrmute wrote:
Some will give a range of options like Sunlight, Halogen, Flurescent,
Incandescent, others may give you a White Balance menu instead, which
allows you to select what temperature lighting you are using. (5300k,
6500k, etc)
I have
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 07:32:19PM -0800, Toby|Wintrmute wrote:
http://downlode.org/photos/photos.pl/by_subject/events/perl_mongers_social_2002-12-05
The blue tint is due to the lighting. Most digital cameras that are worth
their salt will have a menu option somewhere to select
Toby|Wintrmute said:
(
PS. Anyone want to buy The Settlers 3? (Win32 ver)
(
I bought a 2nd hand copy of the sequel on ebay, then realised it
probably wouldn't run on my non-3D accelerated laptop - so i bought S3
for a few quid in the meantime. Then S4 rocks up, and turns out to
have an
On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 09:32:38AM +, Tom Insam wrote:
Have you /seen/ the camera these came out of?
Lack of white balance is not it's largest limitation.
http://jerakeen.org/pics/Misc/LEspion.jpg
It's astonishing how many people have these cameras, considering you
wouldn't generally
calculations built on that.
Oh just do it by hand, it doesn't take that long to run through them, even
when the photos are several Mpixels, which is what I tend to do. But with
500 images to fix in my next batch, I think I'll be going for the former
option.
the hatter
On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 09:32:38AM +, Tom Insam wrote:
Have you /seen/ the camera these came out of?
Lack of white balance is not it's largest limitation.
http://jerakeen.org/pics/Misc/LEspion.jpg
At 09:52 17/12/02, Paul Makepeace wrote:
It's astonishing how many people have these
how many people have these cameras, considering you
wouldn't generally expect a LEspion to breed...
I bought one of these and took it on holiday. I took about 20 photos, then
got a low battery warning, so stopped using it. When I got home all my
photos had drained away.
It actually drains a AAA
.
At 09:52 17/12/02, Paul Makepeace wrote:
It's astonishing how many people have these cameras, considering you
wouldn't generally expect a LEspion to breed...
I bought one of these and took it on holiday. I took about 20 photos, then
got a low battery warning, so stopped using it. When I got
many people have these
cameras, considering you
wouldn't generally expect a LEspion to breed...
I bought one of these and took it on holiday. I took
about 20 photos, then
got a low battery warning, so stopped using it. When
I got home all my
photos had drained away.
It actually drains
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, john muth wrote:
So it's not just me. I have the same battery drain
problem. It's ridiculous. I never use it now. If
it weren't for that problem I'd always have mine with
me and I'd be pretty happy with it but as it is I feel
I wasted £40.
The general consenus for
://www.smudgypixels.net/neil/photos/
On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 03:22:09PM +, Neil Ford wrote:
On 17/12/02 12:58 pm, Simon Dick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a canon a40 proper digital camera, but I also have one of those
nokia 7650 mobile phones with built in 640x480 cameras, if I want to
keep any pics from it I just
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 15:22, Neil Ford wrote:
On 17/12/02 12:58 pm, Simon Dick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a canon a40 proper digital camera, but I also have one of those
nokia 7650 mobile phones with built in 640x480 cameras, if I want to
keep any pics from it I just send them
]net
http://www.smudgypixels.net/neil/photos/
On Sat, 2002-11-16 at 20:15, David Cantrell wrote:
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/photos/london.pm/PIG/
There are no pictures of any food there apart from small baskets of
bread.
Have some images been censored? Or did you fear that the camera would
get splashed by liquid pork fat?
alex
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 11:14:29AM +, alex wrote:
On Sat, 2002-11-16 at 20:15, David Cantrell wrote:
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/photos/london.pm/PIG/
There are no pictures of any food there apart from small baskets of
bread.
There were some pics of food, but they didn't come out
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/photos/london.pm/PIG/
--
David Cantrell | Benevolent Dictator | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david
attractivating: inducing the quality of being attractive,
especially to members of the appropriate sex. -- Henrik Levkowetz
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~lucifer/photos/yapc/
L.
I have put the photos from the last social meet on my colo at:
http://www.natalie.ourshack.org/londonpm20020307/IMG007.jpg
Could whoever maintains the website put them of the website for me?
I had hoped to make it to this week's social meet with some black
white film in an attempt to take
Natalie Ford wrote:
I have put the photos from the last social meet on my colo at:
http://www.natalie.ourshack.org/londonpm20020307/IMG007.jpg
Is there any particular reason why IMG005 (with the lowest number) is the
newest of those pictures according to its file date and IMG037a
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 08:28:54AM +0100, Natalie Ford wrote:
my diary tells me i have a 1700 appointment on Thursday and one at
1800 on Friday
Of course, i mean 0800 on Friday ;(
--
Natalie Ford .. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 08:28:54AM +0100, Natalie Ford ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I have put the photos from the last social meet on my colo at:
http://www.natalie.ourshack.org/londonpm20020307/IMG007.jpg
Could whoever maintains the website put them of the website for me?
And can we have some
On 02/04/2002 at 14:58 +0100, Dave Cross wrote:
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 08:28:54AM +0100, Natalie Ford
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I have put the photos from the last social meet on my colo at:
http://www.natalie.ourshack.org/londonpm20020307/IMG007.jpg
Could whoever maintains the website put
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 02:35:32PM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote:
Natalie Ford wrote:
I have put the photos from the last social meet on my colo at:
http://www.natalie.ourshack.org/londonpm20020307/IMG007.jpg
Is there any particular reason why IMG005 (with the lowest number) is the
newest
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 03:16:39PM +0100, Paul Mison wrote:
As to why the pictures are numbered in a discontinuous manner, it seems
that Natalie decided a fair few weren't worth exposing to public view.
You should see the rest! I can send them to you if you like... or
put them on my site...
Some of my photos from last night are at the usual place,
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/london.pm/
--
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david
We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity
has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god
On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 07:50:11PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
Some of my photos from last night are at the usual place,
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/london.pm/
ScriptAlias? Heard of it?
MBM
--
Matthew Byng-Maddick [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://colondot.net/
On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 09:39:40PM +0100, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 07:50:11PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
Some of my photos from last night are at the usual place,
http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/london.pm/
ScriptAlias? Heard of it?
Yes. No intention
48 matches
Mail list logo
