Introduction:

     This is not my first Mac Chat page. This page is a rebirth of the original chat page that ran from issues 1.01 through 1.10. For several reasons, I turned the technical discussion page into a personal discussion page, which contained a number of technical articles in its time, but the purpose was more to relate the projects going on in my life than dealing with the technical aspects of hardware, graphics, and web design.
     But I have decided to re-establish the page some three years later. Needless to say, I am considerably wiser in matters of digital processing that I was when I first began the technical discussion page, and I hope to make this page a bit more informative than before.
     Now before I begin the discussions, I would like to describe what my intentions for this page. Here, I hope to describe aspects of using the Macintosh for those with varying level of experience. I will have articles for the new comers (nubies), climbing up to the veteran users who love to open up the hood and see what makes the Mac tick. I will be discussing specific hardware and software, systems and formats, offering tips and reviews and trying to make it easier for those unfamiliar with the intricacies of the Mac. As before, my writings will often deal with topics that are applicable to other platforms, like Windows, Unix, etc. I'll be covering systems, graphics, layout, word processing, internet, utilities, diagnostics, software development, cross platform conversion, and more. The topic of the Macintosh is very broad, and I doubt that I will run out of things to say for many years to come.
     So, if you own a Mac, or even if you don't, I think that you'll find ample information on this page in the future that will help make your computing experience more useful and enjoyable.

     Oh yeah, if you are a software or hardware developer, and you want me to review your products on this page, make sure that the check you send me is hefty enough to the point that I can't possibly refuse the request. I'll also accept hardware, such as a dual G4 with DVD RAM, pro grade digital cameras like a studio Leica, or comperable equipment. Otherwise, the opinions here are my own, based on my own experience, and unsolicited. ;-)

     Well, on with the geek greek........






Nubies' Corner

     I recently got an e-mail letter from a young lady inquiring about image editors, having seen a graphic that a friend of hers had designed in Photoshop. She wanted to get started making graphics of her own, and I suggested that she start with an application a little less expensive and easier to learn than Photoshop. This was not easy for me to do, as those who know me well can attest.

     So, with that in mind, I'll start off talking about my favorite Mac application, Photoshop. (Photoshop for PC is almost identical to the Mac version, except for some of the plugs. So this article applies to both.)
     All my graphics go through Photoshop at one time or another, to one degree or another. Some are touched by nothing else, being born within Photoshop and finished within Photoshop. Nothing else comes close to matching it in ease of use, stability, and universal acceptance by the graphics community. It is the industry standard for image editing, and that is why I have a Photoshop download page, to draw the attention of my peers to my web site. It's not cheap (about $700 full retail for version 6), but it is effective and a must have for any serious graphic designer, if for no other reason than all the other graphic designers use it. In many publishing and print shops, they will not (or will not readily) accept graphics in any other than native Photoshop format.
     Photoshop is not easily mastered. The basic tools can be understood and used effectively within a month or two by one who understands the concepts of photography and painting, within half a year by those new to the concepts of RGB (red, green, blue), the basic mode of editing in Photoshop. But there are so many tools beyond the basic toolbars, with the capacity for adding thousands more in the form of plug-in filters (I currently am hosting over 600 plugs in my filter folder, out of some 1330 filters that I possess, and I'm always looking for more). In essence, the tools are all designed on a mathematical basis for altering pixel values within an image.

     The pixel is the basic unit of any digital image, one single spec of the graphics screen. Columns and rows of pixels give the image its size and composition, one dot at a time. How this information is stored is defined as format and compression. Any way that the information within the pixel matrix can be modified can be defined as a filter, be it a relationship of the pixel and/or its neighboring pixels. This is the means for redefining the pixel data. And there are many means of doing so, some better than others. Nor are all priced according to the same scale of merit. Some filters are must have, some are not, and they may not be quite so obvious. There are money traps, so care in selection of filters is required to get the most for the dollar (et al). There are plenty of gems as well, as long as they aren't overdone.

     The one grace that Photoshop has is for being able to pull together the elements from a large number of resources and blending them into an image file that any commercial establishment will accept. With that kind of muscle and finesse, it's not easy to ignore for long periods of time. If you're doing graphics, you eventually have to come over to Photoshop for survival. There's just no way around it. Nor should there be. When you're ready for Photoshop, you're ready for Photoshop. No two ways about it. You'll know its call, and price will be a matter of concern, but not enough to swing the vote, and never a regret. Everything graphic flows through Photoshop at one time or another, or it sees a solitary existence.






Hardware

     I recently added a second monitor to my production unit, so I think I'll talk a little bit about adding a second monitor to increase the desktop acreage. Naturally, you'll need two video drivers with ample VRAM to power your monitors' needs. It is possible to run the monitors off of physical RAM, if you have plenty to spare (20M or better) and the extensions to handle it. However, using dual cards is easier and more convenient. If you don't have the hardware, don't buy a second monitor until you upgrade the hardware. The card will determine the process followed in set up. Follow instructions closely.
     When a proper connection is made, the Monitors Control Panel is consulted to determine the arrangement. Here is the Monitors Control Panel window from OS 9, showing the arrangement options:

     You'll notice the cursor grabbing the title bar and shifting it to the other window. This function allows either monitor to possess the menu bar. In some cases where the video cards are identical (mine are not), the screens can be mirrors, displaying the same image and possessing the same control. However, the usual preferred arrangement is to make them abutting screens as arranged in the window. Shown above at 640X480 next to 800X600, the screens are adjoining neighbors on the desktop, with the top sides of the screens aligned in a straight line.When the cursor jumps off the edge of one screen, it is picked up on the other, as if it passed over the fenceline, applying the neighbor metaphor further. On the bottom of the larger screen, there will be a portion of the edge that doesn't match up, and here the cursor will stop, and to cross, it must be raised up to the common boundary on the desktop. This can make the raising of the smaller monitor a definite convenience to visual continuity. But if the monitors sit at different levels, such as the smaller monitor sitting lower, the boxes can be arranged to accomodate the arrangement where the cursor flows smoothly in a straight line from screen to screen. They can even stack vertically, as shown below, if they occupy shelves.

     The advantage? Clearly more territory to plop windows all over the place without sacrificing resolution. Applications with many windows (Photoshop comes to mind, for starters, GoLive too) can have a tool palette screen and a document window screen, keeping each window and palette viewable for instant use. Also, dual resolutions can shed new light on documents meant for distribution to multiple sized screens, like 640X480 and 600X800 (internet comes to mind, since these are the two most popular screen sizes for which web pages are designed), dragging a window to the other screen to expand it for a broader view. Also different color settings, like seeing the difference between 8 bit color and 32 bit color without having to change the monitor settings. This is great for game designers who deal in fast operations where color is sacrificed for the sake of speed.
     There are a few nags to be said for the set up. Appearance only applies to the menu bar screen, so the Monitors Control Panel must be opened first to direct Appearance launch to the correct screen. Mice without turbo-boosting take several runs to get across both screens (Kensington makes a great turbo control panel). The mouse no longer stops at the edge of the screen, sailing on across to the far side, until the habits of mouse control are refined. It's amazing how ingrained the act of expecting the mouse to stop at the edge can be, and how it affects the next step based on that expectation as a starting point. It's mostly a case of new habits thrown into the process, a small price to pay for the extra terrain.
     And, to throw a wildcard in to the mix, try the combo with Virtual Desktop, an extension/application combo that allows active scrolling of the desktop, much like a large window scrolls, with an overviewer map so that you don't lose open windows over that way somewhere.
     So if you have the bucks and the wrists and need more elbow room for work, take the dive. It's worth it.






Software

     No shortage of topics here. If anything, software is probably the biggest topic for Mac users. And to kick off the return of Mac Chat, it has to be special. So I'll dedicate it to to the freeware application that dragged me by the imagination into the world of 3D, POV-Ray.

     POV-Ray (Persistence of Vision - Ray Tracing) released its second issue of 3.1 recently. (3.1r2). The POV-Ray story is one of dedication to the digital arts by a volunteer team whose sole purpose is developing the language and interface for seven platforms (more than any other application) for the furtherment of 3D design as an artform. The POV-Ray team has broken ground time and again, with contributions by those who eagerly followed along in the rapture of the simplicity and complexity so blended into such elegance. So many other 3D applications have benefitted from the pioneering by the POV-Ray team that 3D would not have achieved its current status without them, especially on the desktop.
     POV-Ray is the most simplistic 3D designer available today. Compare it to BBEdit being used to write HTML code, and you're not too far off. It's a text interface, with text writing templates, and almost 300 commands for cntrolling visual virtual reality. Like any other 3D applications, it imports formats. OBJ models from Poser can be translated to POV-Ray. DXF models off the web are a mainstay of POV-Ray modeling. At least half of the 3D formats can be changed directly into POV-Ray language (Amapi 5 is very useful for this, among others), and even more indirectly. As long as the model can be broken into polygons (in this case, triangles), there is a way to translate it to POV-Ray.
     While the routine of alter and render, time and time again, the tweaking process finds its way around to the best quality ray tracing to be found. When it comes to details, there is none finer. POV-Ray is for the serious, because the dedication to learning the language. With patches, the most recently notable being MacMegaPov, many new templates are available, containing modeling interfaces to make the focus less on syntax and more on concept, for those who like the visual interface to a small degree (I beta test it, so I'm biased, but by choice; I happen to like the process of visualizing 3D concepts mathematically).
     POV-Ray is not kind on the beginner to 3D. It's not kind to anyone except those with a strong 3D math and photography background who have seen the results it can produce. I wouldn't undertake a serious animation with POV-Ray. Its capable, but my patience isn't. But for still frame, it's definitely its own reward. It's why I have a page dedicated to work I do in it. It's that intoxicating to see the magic appear when the correct text is typed in. It reduces visual reality to its findamentals and then applies them in the ray tracing (rendering).
     This is a test run that I made for lighting adjustments. To do it justice, it needs to be seen in 32 bit mode, not net palette, so feel free to take it out of the browser in order to appreciate the lighting gradients. I made this without active textures and antialiasing, becase I wanted to set lighting before applying textures to speed the process. Any photographer worth his salt would do the same. In my book, the 32 bit image speaks for itself. I want all my tests to look this good.

     For more examples of POV-Ray artistry, take a peek at the art filled International Ray Tracing Competition site. But be careful, it's addictive. You could be downloading for hours and wearing out your eyes without noticing it.