Hello

#1 · #1 by **Miscellaneous** » Dec 01, 2018 11:26 am

I am skeptical. There's more than can meet the eye. Pop goes the weasel.

#2 · #2 by **DougC** » Dec 01, 2018 2:10 pm

#3 · #3 by **Evolving** » Dec 01, 2018 2:21 pm

: weasel.jpg (50.61 KiB) Viewed 329 times

#4 · #4 by **Evolving** » Dec 01, 2018 2:21 pm

Welcome to the forum.

#5 · #5 by **Cito di Pense** » Dec 01, 2018 3:27 pm

Miscellaneous wrote:I am skeptical. There's more than can meet the eye. Pop goes the weasel.

I guess I'm infer it, then. Welcome to Tommy's Holiday Camp.

Your remark is either a trivial observation that people can't see atoms with the naked eye, or it's packing some woo. Normally, if you want anyone to take you seriously, you'll want to give them a basis for doing so.

#6 · #6 by **scott1328** » Dec 01, 2018 6:34 pm

Miscellaneous wrote:I am skeptical. There's more than can meet the eye. Pop goes the weasel.

Canyou operate a steamroller?

#7 · #7 by **newolder** » Dec 01, 2018 7:01 pm

Miscellaneous wrote:I am skeptical. There's more than can meet the eye. ...

Especially when motion is involved - do you anticipate a long stay?

#8 · #8 by **Evolving** » Dec 01, 2018 7:04 pm

newolder wrote:

Wow. Never seen that before. Cool.

#9 · #9 by **newolder** » Dec 01, 2018 7:13 pm

Yes, there seems to be a few "previously unseen by me" images going around at the mo. This one had a ball inside the torus last time I searched but it seems to have disappeared from this view:

**#10** · **#10** by **Evolving** » Dec 01, 2018 7:17 pm

I don't see a ball either. What size was it, and where in the torus was it?

Strangely pleasing, though, even without a ball.

**#11** · **#11** by **newolder** » Dec 01, 2018 7:24 pm

Here's a version of the one I was thinking of. The ball is larger, the surface patterns are different, the watermark doesn't help and the effect is not as good. Heigh ho.

**#12** · **#12** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Dec 01, 2018 9:37 pm

Actually this last one does seem in motion whereas the previous does not, to me.

**#13** · **#13** by **Evolving** » Dec 01, 2018 9:39 pm

Really? I didn't realise it was supposed to look as though it was moving. I only get that effect with post 8.

**#14** · **#14** by **The_Piper** » Dec 01, 2018 10:41 pm

All 3 work for me. Hi Miscellaneous

**#15** · **#15** by **LucidFlight** » Dec 02, 2018 1:40 am

Those last two — on my phone, nothing; on the big monitor... woah!

**#16** · **#16** by **Animavore** » Dec 02, 2018 1:43 am

Is there a Mr. Cellaneous?

**#17** · **#17** by **Fallible** » Dec 02, 2018 1:14 pm

**#18** · **#18** by **Ironclad** » Dec 02, 2018 3:22 pm

I think we've already met.. :sherlock:

**#19** · **#19** by **Evolving** » Dec 02, 2018 3:37 pm

LucidFlight wrote:Those last two — on my phone, nothing; on the big monitor... woah!

Unfortunately I haven't got a big monitor. Just a laptop and a phone,and the only one that moves is post 8, and that only on the laptop.

**#20** · **#20** by **newolder** » Dec 02, 2018 3:45 pm

Evolving wrote:
LucidFlight wrote:Those last two — on my phone, nothing; on the big monitor... woah!

Unfortunately I haven't got a big monitor. Just a laptop and a phone,and the only one that moves is post 8, and that only on the laptop.

Ambient lighting seems to have an effect. The coloured images only seem to move in a well-lit room. Also, increased viewing distance seems to help. Otherwise, :dunno:

Hello

Hello

Ads by Google

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Ads by Google

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Ads by Google

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Re: Hello

Who is online