Re: Masks Sketch

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by John Turco, Jul 29, 2011.

  1. John Turco

    John Turco Guest

    Dudley Hanks wrote:
    >
    > Well, I finally have access to Adobe (at least limited access), so I tried
    > playing around with it, a bit.
    >
    > Here's my first attempt:
    >
    > http://www.blind-apertures.ca/images/MasksSketchSmall .jpg (fast loading)
    >
    > http://www.blind-apertures.ca/images/MasksSketch.jpg (full size)
    >
    > It's just a straightforward conversion of the Ceremonial Masks pic I took at
    > the Royal Museum in Victoria, with no adjustments.
    >
    > While the combo of an updated screen reader and newer version of Adobe give
    > me a basic level of functionality of most PhotoShop features, there are
    > still some things that don't work with speech, ie. scaling the size of a
    > pic.
    >
    > Oh, well, at least I can do a few things with it.
    >
    > Appreciate any feedback you'd care to share...
    >
    > Take Care,
    > Dudley



    I've noticed that you've stopped using your own "script" and have gone
    back to Outlook Express, for Usenet postings.

    --
    Cordially,
    John Turco <>

    Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>
    John Turco, Jul 29, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. John Turco

    John Turco Guest

    Dudley Hanks wrote:
    >
    > > "John Turco" <> wrote:


    <edited for brevity>

    > > I've noticed that you've stopped using your own "script" and have gone
    > > back to Outlook Express, for Usenet postings.

    >
    >
    > Yeah, the up-graded screen reader works fairly well with Outlook Express --
    > at least it hasn't crashed, yet.
    >
    > While I don't generally worry about spell-checking Usenet posts, it's nice
    > to have that capability (as in OE). Also, I never got around to figuring
    > out threading with the script, so that's also a plus with OE.
    >
    > Take Care,
    > Dudley



    I've never used spell checkers, and have always relied on proofreading.

    --
    Cordially,
    John Turco <>

    Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>
    John Turco, Aug 6, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. John Turco

    PeterN Guest

    On 8/6/2011 12:34 AM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
    > "John Turco"<> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Dudley Hanks wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "John Turco"<> wrote:

    >>
    >> <edited for brevity>
    >>
    >>>> I've noticed that you've stopped using your own "script" and have gone
    >>>> back to Outlook Express, for Usenet postings.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Yeah, the up-graded screen reader works fairly well with Outlook
    >>> Express --
    >>> at least it hasn't crashed, yet.
    >>>
    >>> While I don't generally worry about spell-checking Usenet posts, it's
    >>> nice
    >>> to have that capability (as in OE). Also, I never got around to figuring
    >>> out threading with the script, so that's also a plus with OE.
    >>>
    >>> Take Care,
    >>> Dudley

    >>
    >>
    >> I've never used spell checkers, and have always relied on proofreading.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Cordially,
    >> John Turco<>
    >>
    >> Marie's Musings<http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>

    >
    > Unfortunately, screen readers tend to slow things down a lot, which can
    > result in the computer missing characters that have actually been typed.
    >
    > Hence, if I type, "they're," it might end up input as, "they'r," which can
    > sound right if I'm in a hurry. That's something a quick spell check can
    > fix, but an audible proofing might not catch.
    >
    > Some minor typos stick out like a sore thumb, others blend right in.
    >


    Every so often, instead of typing "does not," I type "doe snot." in
    formal documents that can be embarrassing. Hence I frequently use Dragon
    Naturally Speaking. that program has problems of its own, but at least I
    can blame the program, not my dyslexic fingers.


    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Aug 6, 2011
    #3
  4. John Turco

    PeterN Guest

    On 8/6/2011 1:21 AM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
    > "PeterN"<> wrote in message
    > news:4e3cc7a0$0$5207$-secrets.com...
    >> On 8/6/2011 12:34 AM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
    >>> "John Turco"<> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Dudley Hanks wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> "John Turco"<> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> <edited for brevity>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> I've noticed that you've stopped using your own "script" and have gone
    >>>>>> back to Outlook Express, for Usenet postings.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yeah, the up-graded screen reader works fairly well with Outlook
    >>>>> Express --
    >>>>> at least it hasn't crashed, yet.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> While I don't generally worry about spell-checking Usenet posts, it's
    >>>>> nice
    >>>>> to have that capability (as in OE). Also, I never got around to
    >>>>> figuring
    >>>>> out threading with the script, so that's also a plus with OE.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Take Care,
    >>>>> Dudley
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I've never used spell checkers, and have always relied on proofreading.
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Cordially,
    >>>> John Turco<>
    >>>>
    >>>> Marie's Musings<http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>
    >>>
    >>> Unfortunately, screen readers tend to slow things down a lot, which can
    >>> result in the computer missing characters that have actually been typed.
    >>>
    >>> Hence, if I type, "they're," it might end up input as, "they'r," which
    >>> can
    >>> sound right if I'm in a hurry. That's something a quick spell check can
    >>> fix, but an audible proofing might not catch.
    >>>
    >>> Some minor typos stick out like a sore thumb, others blend right in.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Every so often, instead of typing "does not," I type "doe snot." in formal
    >> documents that can be embarrassing. Hence I frequently use Dragon
    >> Naturally Speaking. that program has problems of its own, but at least I
    >> can blame the program, not my dyslexic fingers.
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >> Peter

    >
    > I use Naturally Speaking as well, but not on the computer I read / post
    > Usenet messages.
    >
    > This one just doesn't have enough jam to power the Dragon.
    >
    > I'm impressed that Dragon can accurately translate "Their house is over
    > there, but they're not home."
    >


    The newer versions even do "Which witch is which."


    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Aug 6, 2011
    #4
  5. John Turco

    PeterN Guest

    On 8/6/2011 3:19 PM, Allen wrote:
    > On 8/6/2011 11:28 AM, PeterN wrote:
    >> On 8/6/2011 1:21 AM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
    >>> "PeterN"<> wrote in message
    >>> news:4e3cc7a0$0$5207$-secrets.com...
    >>>> On 8/6/2011 12:34 AM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
    >>>>> "John Turco"<> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>> Dudley Hanks wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "John Turco"<> wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> <edited for brevity>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I've noticed that you've stopped using your own "script" and have
    >>>>>>>> gone
    >>>>>>>> back to Outlook Express, for Usenet postings.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Yeah, the up-graded screen reader works fairly well with Outlook
    >>>>>>> Express --
    >>>>>>> at least it hasn't crashed, yet.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> While I don't generally worry about spell-checking Usenet posts,
    >>>>>>> it's
    >>>>>>> nice
    >>>>>>> to have that capability (as in OE). Also, I never got around to
    >>>>>>> figuring
    >>>>>>> out threading with the script, so that's also a plus with OE.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Take Care,
    >>>>>>> Dudley
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I've never used spell checkers, and have always relied on
    >>>>>> proofreading.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> --
    >>>>>> Cordially,
    >>>>>> John Turco<>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Marie's Musings<http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Unfortunately, screen readers tend to slow things down a lot, which
    >>>>> can
    >>>>> result in the computer missing characters that have actually been
    >>>>> typed.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Hence, if I type, "they're," it might end up input as, "they'r," which
    >>>>> can
    >>>>> sound right if I'm in a hurry. That's something a quick spell check
    >>>>> can
    >>>>> fix, but an audible proofing might not catch.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Some minor typos stick out like a sore thumb, others blend right in.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Every so often, instead of typing "does not," I type "doe snot." in
    >>>> formal
    >>>> documents that can be embarrassing. Hence I frequently use Dragon
    >>>> Naturally Speaking. that program has problems of its own, but at
    >>>> least I
    >>>> can blame the program, not my dyslexic fingers.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Peter
    >>>
    >>> I use Naturally Speaking as well, but not on the computer I read / post
    >>> Usenet messages.
    >>>
    >>> This one just doesn't have enough jam to power the Dragon.
    >>>
    >>> I'm impressed that Dragon can accurately translate "Their house is over
    >>> there, but they're not home."
    >>>

    >>
    >> The newer versions even do "Which witch is which."
    >>
    >>

    > My wife deals with seminary students from time to time. A few years ago
    > she had one, and ex-lawyer, who was dyslexic and used NS. He had
    > constant problem: no matter how carefully he said "Jesus" (a word used a
    > great deal by seminary students) it would invariably show "cheeses".
    > Allen


    That sounds like a context training issue. He might consider wiping all
    prior training and having the Dragon fed texts they actually use.
    HTH

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Aug 6, 2011
    #5
  6. Dudley Hanks <> wrote:
    > "PeterN" <> wrote in message


    [Dragon Naturally Speaking]

    >> The newer versions even do "Which witch is which."


    > How about: The score of game two was two to two, too...


    He said: "Which witch-doctor do you recommend?"
    vs
    He stammered: "Which, which doctor do you recommend?"

    Does that work?

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Aug 13, 2011
    #6
  7. John Turco

    PeterN Guest

    On 8/27/2011 8:36 PM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
    > "Wolfgang Weisselberg"<> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Dudley Hanks<> wrote:
    >>> "PeterN"<> wrote in message

    >>
    >> [Dragon Naturally Speaking]
    >>
    >>>> The newer versions even do "Which witch is which."

    >>
    >>> How about: The score of game two was two to two, too...

    >>
    >> He said: "Which witch-doctor do you recommend?"
    >> vs
    >> He stammered: "Which, which doctor do you recommend?"
    >>
    >> Does that work?
    >>
    >> -Wolfgang
    >>

    >
    > Dragon got it...
    >
    > Here's what it translated, exactly as dictated:
    >
    > The young man stammered, "Which which doctor?"
    >
    > Which witch doctor do you recommend?
    >
    > Take Care,
    > Dudley
    >
    >

    context, context context. ;-)

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Sep 1, 2011
    #7
  8. John Turco

    PeterN Guest

    On 9/7/2011 10:42 PM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
    > "PeterN"<> wrote in message
    > news:4e5f7dbf$0$5511$-secrets.com...
    >> On 8/27/2011 8:36 PM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
    >>> "Wolfgang Weisselberg"<> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Dudley Hanks<> wrote:
    >>>>> "PeterN"<> wrote in message
    >>>>
    >>>> [Dragon Naturally Speaking]
    >>>>
    >>>>>> The newer versions even do "Which witch is which."
    >>>>
    >>>>> How about: The score of game two was two to two, too...
    >>>>
    >>>> He said: "Which witch-doctor do you recommend?"
    >>>> vs
    >>>> He stammered: "Which, which doctor do you recommend?"
    >>>>
    >>>> Does that work?
    >>>>
    >>>> -Wolfgang
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Dragon got it...
    >>>
    >>> Here's what it translated, exactly as dictated:
    >>>
    >>> The young man stammered, "Which which doctor?"
    >>>
    >>> Which witch doctor do you recommend?
    >>>
    >>> Take Care,
    >>> Dudley
    >>>
    >>>

    >> context, context context. ;-)
    >>
    >> --
    >> Peter

    >
    > Yep, that seems to be the key...
    >
    > But, the new version is REALLY good at picking up those contextual cues...
    >
    >


    Yup!
    I purchased version 1, when it was called Dragon Dictate. The cost was
    several thousand dollars. Yo could only dictate one word at a time. By
    using the program I saved about half a secretary. To me its amazing how
    well it works. Even the speech recognition in my Droid works reasonably
    well, for what it is.


    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Sep 8, 2011
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Dave Croft

    Photo To sketch conversion

    Dave Croft, Oct 7, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    430
    ┬░Mike┬░
    Oct 7, 2004
  2. Stacey

    Insta sketch

    Stacey, Feb 13, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    394
    Stacey
    Feb 13, 2005
  3. A good method to convert photo to sketch

    , Nov 5, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    312
    =?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?=
    Nov 5, 2005
  4. A tool to convert Photo To Sketch

    , Jan 2, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    347
  5. Mini tutorial - pencil sketch

    , Jun 9, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    382
    Stewy
    Jun 15, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page