New Sig/Profile Pic
What do you think?
I'm definately no artist, but I try :D

RE: New Sig/Profile Pic

At 1/13/07 02:47 PM, Claxor wrote: What do you think?
I'm definately no artist, but I try :D

Actually, I like it. Simple but effective. It's much better than your last one IMO.

At 1/13/07 02:57 PM, Maxxor wrote:

RE: New Sig/Profile Pic

Actually, I like it. Simple but effective. It's much better than your last one IMO.

:D
I don't like the text saying claxor, but meh..

At 1/13/07 03:15 PM, Sam wrote: Flashregs

Hacked again, appears to have been hacked earlier today. Not really a problem though, as the site was dead :(

That fag hacked my forum under a different name, but with the same site. I eliminated his forums.

It's silly how simple of a script he uses, just check the forum code, the previous leader of my flash team fixed it up in a few minutes.

unless, of course, it's another, different turkish hacker
too many turkish hackers >_>

At 1/13/07 03:15 PM, Sam wrote: Flashregs

Hacked again, appears to have been hacked earlier today. Not really a problem though, as the site was dead :(

Wait, wasn't it already hacked by someone else? Did it even get restored beweeen hackings??? >.<

At 1/13/07 04:40 PM, Arby wrote: Wait, wasn't it already hacked by someone else? Did it even get restored beweeen hackings??? >.<

Maybe the hacking got hijacked by another hacking. That'd probably be ironic... somehow.

lol @ how much FR gets hacked

At 1/12/07 11:18 PM, Coaly wrote:

At 1/12/07 11:07 PM, ShirtTurtle wrote:

At 1/12/07 09:51 PM, Shmelo wrote: Blue kicks ass.

I think hes a complete cock head.

RE: Aqua Teen Hungar Force
where did you get the soundtrack from? I voted 5...more because its fun to hit the 5 then of how awesome it was, it was pretty good though, the shot was a little wide like...someone else said

I give a link to the site where you can get all kinds of sounds from the show and a link to aquateencentral. Their making a movie, its gonna be sweet. AAAAAAAND as for art and whatnot I tried to be as much like the show as possible but manipulated the two guys, the animation at the end is jumpy because it was like ten oclock last night when I did it and wanted to go watch tv lol. Otherwise from that I now am better at lip syncing.

RE: Cock head blue in sigs
I think hes just very social. And it is odd how he is your sig...

Headings

At 1/13/07 04:57 PM, Paranoia wrote:

lol @ how much FR gets hacked

Whoa ho! Forgot myself for a second there :P You're not catching me out that easy!

RE: Cock head blue in sigs

At 1/13/07 05:05 PM, Shmelo wrote: I think hes just very social. And it is odd how he is your sig...

What's this? Cocks? In sigs? What am I missing?

RE: Grammar

At 1/13/07 05:13 PM, ArthurGhostly wrote: Grammar
Silly question, which one is correct:
You'd have to have read...
or
You'd have to of read?

or am I completely off either way?

I think it's 'to have read'. If you've done something in the past, then you 'have' done it. If you have to have done it, then you have to have done it.

Errm :S

Anyway, 'of read''s probably just a distortion of it.

RE: grammer
Both make sense, depending on the sophistication of your sentence though its best to pick one or the other.

RE: Grammar

At 1/13/07 05:17 PM, ArthurGhostly wrote:

At 1/13/07 05:15 PM, Paranoia wrote: I think it's 'to have read'. If you've done something in the past, then you 'have' done it. If you have to have done it, then you have to have done it.

It's just having the same word repeating so close to it's self in the same sentance. Just didn't sound right to me.

I guess... It could be one of thsoe weird grammar things like not having an apostrophy for ommission in 'its'.

I hate grammar >.<

The Programming Forum

Sorry about the double post, but

The programming forum really is more mature :P I mean, look at this kid here; probably about the most spamming pillar of flame you could expect to see.

Now look at the average responses (well, not so much the first two).

Now imagine that thread popping up in general, or even here. Imagine how many people would be telling that guy to die, or reflecting his flaminess. The thread would probably reach three pages of unrelenting horror before a mod caught up with it.

There's only one sensible conclusion to derive from this.

Afro has enslaved the Programming forum in a despotic reign of evil! Any posters who fail to live up to the strict standards of helpfulness are deal with swiftly and cruelly! There's probably a whole dungeon of posters from that thread who didn't suggest ways for the poster to better himself, hanging by their buttocks over vats of boiling acid somewhere beneath the mod lounge!

You only have to look at the posts their to feel the horror of the average programming reg. If they rebel, they'll be slaughtered; if they run, they'll be hunted down like dogs. And now with DFox looking fairly likely to be a mod within a year, Afro will have a right hand man to dish out double the torment on the oppressed peoples of the programming forum!

Something has to be done!

Who wants to help me plant heroin in DFox's backpack?

GRAMMAR!!
AAARGH! It could not possibly be, I have to of!! The 'of' is justa shortening of 'have'. EG "I have to've" which gets made into of. It's completely incorrect grammer, nothing to do with sophistication, it's just wrong.
Phew, glad I got that out there.

RE: Grammar

Yeah, it's "have read."

A lot of people mix that up, and do the same thing with the words could/should/would have. People say would of instead of would have.

English is just something you catch on to, it's a language with a crapload of socially accepted things rather than rules, which makes it so tough to learn. Sucks balls eh? :D

RE: Programming Forum

They wear Tophats and Monicles over in the programming forum.

RE: 29.97 FPS

Why would you possibly need 29.97 frames per seconds? 30 fps would work just fine.

At 1/13/07 11:07 PM, SpaceAndTime wrote: Frames per second issue

Um, ok, so I'm making this animation thing... I NEED to make it in 29.97 fps. Is that possible? I put 29.97 in the document settings box, but in the bottom-of-the-timeline view it says 30fps. Which one is right?

Surely such a small difference wont matter. I dont know which one is correct but it really should make that much difference. why do you need it that speed?

At 1/13/07 11:07 PM, SpaceAndTime wrote: Frames per second issue

Um, ok, so I'm making this animation thing... I NEED to make it in 29.97 fps. Is that possible? I put 29.97 in the document settings box, but in the bottom-of-the-timeline view it says 30fps. Which one is right?

RE:FPS

At 1/13/07 11:07 PM, SpaceAndTime wrote: Frames per second issue

Um, ok, so I'm making this animation thing... I NEED to make it in 29.97 fps. Is that possible? I put 29.97 in the document settings box, but in the bottom-of-the-timeline view it says 30fps. Which one is right?

i suppose that flash wasnt meant to work with centesims (real english word???).. so it rounds it to the nearest (30).. cause 29.97 is almost 30... and its nearer 30 than 29.9..

-why would you want to work it at 29.97 ? its some hard math involved...?

i think it would work at the 30.0fps for default.. anyway i dont think anyone cna actually notice the differnce..

At 1/13/07 11:32 PM, PinkSkull wrote:

i think it would work at the 30.0fps for default.. anyway i dont think anyone cna actually notice the differnce..

Only Superman would notice the extra .03 frames every single second.

The rest of us...well obviously our time freezing abilities haven't caught up yet.

At 1/13/07 11:36 PM, iAnimate wrote:

Only Superman would notice the extra .03 frames every single second.

The rest of us...well obviously our time freezing abilities haven't caught up yet.

The delay would be of 1 frame every 33.33333... seconds or something

At 1/13/07 11:45 PM, PinkSkull wrote:

At 1/13/07 11:36 PM, iAnimate wrote:

Only Superman would notice the extra .03 frames every single second.

The rest of us...well obviously our time freezing abilities haven't caught up yet.

The delay would be of 1 frame every 33.33333... seconds or something

Oh my! Surely a delay of 1/30 second every 33.33 seconds would be completely disastrous! Curse you, dear fates! Curse you all!

RE:FPS

At 1/13/07 11:51 PM, iAnimate wrote:

At 1/13/07 11:45 PM, PinkSkull wrote:

Oh my! Surely a delay of 1/30 second every 33.33 seconds would be completely disastrous! Curse you, dear fates! Curse you all!

it would be a delay of 1 second after 15 minutes ..Bong bong bong
well.. if 2 people were doing a 15 minute flash.. one at 29.97 fps and the other one at 30.00 fps.. in teh end the one at 30.00 fps would have animated 30 frames.. that is rounding the delay to 1/30 of second and not 1/33.333... in the end.. animating at 29.97fps is more productive.. coz you end animating less frames.. but the difference is almos unnoticeable (existant word??)

come on.. noone does 15 minutes flashes.. only pros (tv show and the decline of videogaming)!

RE:FPS...sorry for dp

At 1/13/07 11:45 PM, PinkSkull wrote:

in teh end the one at 30.00 fps would have animated 30 frames..

I meant 30 MORE frames

he would have drawn 30 more frames thant the one at 29.97 fps

At 1/14/07 12:10 AM, SpaceAndTime wrote:

60i, or 60 interlaced frames = 29.97 progressive frames,

ok.. i dont understand that

You do the math. I mean thinking.

by far it is important.. maybe on something short it isnt noticeable.. but the 0.03 dealy accumulates and ends up with a big delay.. like the rotation of earth that is of 23hours and 56 minutes or something.. in 4 years we end up with an extra day
i touhgt you were doing a game or something that needed exact math for programming.. not that i know programing.. i dont understand it!! (and i dont make games)

So nobody know, then? I think flash can only do framerates to the first decimal place.

that why under the timelien it says 30.0 fps and not 30.00

.......:; i dont think anyone had actually tried ;:.......

A non integer (a number with a decimal point, or a negative number) is not possible in the .swf file specification. The .swf file format simply can not contain a fractional fps.

You can accomplish that by using more fps and more frames probably

At 1/14/07 01:45 AM, Inglor wrote: A non integer (a number with a decimal point, or a negative number) is not possible in the .swf file specification. The .swf file format simply can not contain a fractional fps.

You can accomplish that by using more fps and more frames probably

flash can, indeed, go down to hundredths of a frame per second. the lowest is 0.01.

putting 29.97 FPS works fine for me.

29.97 frames per second is the framerate for NTSC format. NTSC is standard for television developed a while back for televisions. Since early television required a color additive wavelength to black and white television, the frequency of frames had to be dropped slightly to add to this color (it was 30 fps). Today, that small chunk of frequency has been replaced with other information regarding color and other information, but still holds strong at 29.97.

However, with the invention of digital format, this may be phased out shortly.

At 1/13/07 05:59 PM, Paranoia wrote: And now with DFox looking fairly likely to be a mod within a year

According to whhhho?

iAnimate

Hey, it's a friend of WiiCade. Hooray.

Cybex got daily 2nd
I didn't deserve it, it's an overused concept, i made it in 4 hours and i was just extremely lucky that today was such a low good submission day. But i'm not complaining.

Here it is.

At 1/14/07 03:50 AM, Cybex wrote: Cybex got daily 2nd
I didn't deserve it, it's an overused concept, i made it in 4 hours and i was just extremely lucky that today was such a low good submission day. But i'm not complaining.

Here it is.

At least your man enough to admit that.
I would loose all respect for you if you went about whoring your achivement and thinking you were better than everyone else. (though, you are better than most)