ascorbic
|
Re: Silbury updates
Jun 27, 2007, 17:10
|
|
slumpystones wrote:
You said they'd been drinking beer too. Glad they found time for the simple pleasures ;)
I guess we are guilty of the Time Team thing, and you're right about the 'before and after' work being done by others with no credit, leaving them to edit film in later with amazingly educated assumptions. It makes it dangerous, because when we have this multi-million pound project, we're pretty much conditioned to expect results now.
Most of my dig experience is being a pain in the arse by asking constant questions, taking photos and generally getting in everyone's way, bribing them with beer n stuff to save myself from getting a ban :)
As for the Whitehall civil servant, I just thought it would be better to ask someone with webpage experience to put together the report based on stuff received from the site. If the image is crap, I'm surprised nobody put their hand up and asked for a better one, which is how it would work anywhere else.
Well, it's not archaeology unless you go to the pub after a day's work!
To be honest, I think it was the opposite - it was sent back because the file was too large to email with full-res images, so they re-compressed it and sent it again. It's only an image in an update; hardly worth making such a big issue out of it. I'm sure they'll find a better balance between file size and image quality next time. As someone who spends a large amount of my working day dealing with JPEG encoding and image processing, I know it can be annoying.
|
slumpystones
|
Re: Silbury updates
Jun 27, 2007, 17:21
|
|
Maybe a link to a better image would be a nice idea. It doesn't have to a part of the pdf itself.
|
rammie
|
Re: Silbury updates
Jun 27, 2007, 20:44
|
|
ascorbic wrote: slumpystones wrote:
You said they'd been drinking beer too. Glad they found time for the simple pleasures ;)
.......
Well, it's not archaeology unless you go to the pub after a day's work!.....
Anyone heard from Fachtna McAvoy recently?
|
Pete G
|
Re: Silbury updates
Jun 27, 2007, 21:08
|
nope, not expecting too for a a while.
Even Mark is on holiday....
|
Pete G
|
School visit
Jun 27, 2007, 21:09
|
has been cancelled.
Any info on this ScouseMaiden?
Pete
|
slumpystones
|
Re: Silbury updates
Jun 27, 2007, 21:15
|
|
ascorbic wrote: slumpystones wrote:
And they are the people at whom the criticism is directed!
Which "they"?
This 'they' !
"The guys at head office (or some other EH office somewhere - I don't know) are the ones who deal with the actual stuff of putting things onto the web site and handling the technical stuff related to that."
Damn them!
|
rammie
|
Re: Silbury updates
Jun 27, 2007, 21:36
|
|
Holiday, aye?
|
VenerableBottyBurp
|
Re: Silbury updates
Jun 28, 2007, 11:33
|
|
Littlestone wrote: I'm not a tyre obsessive. Honest.
Yeah... that's not what you said when you came to the Megameet dressed in 'em from head to toe :-)
That tyre buried in 1970 .... it was a Good Year !
VBB
|
Littlestone
|
Re: Silbury updates
Jun 28, 2007, 12:03
|
|
That tyre buried in 1970 .... it was a Good Year !
It was the Michelin Man wot dun it :-)
One of these at http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=michelin+man&hl=en&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2005-50,GGLR:en&um=1&sa=X&oi=images&ct=title has got to be the logo for Atkinson's 'work' at Silbury.
Choose yer favourite - I'm going with 4th line, 2nd across ;-)
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Silbury updates
Jun 28, 2007, 12:17
|
Umm, is this portrayal of Atkinson as the Michelin man the whole story?
As I hear it, the tunnellers were left unsupervised for weeks at the end of the process, they could actually see voids forming as the fill settled as they worked their way backwards and that elm boarding was removed from around the stancheons to make bonfires inside the tunnel....
|
