X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f996b,b257da76e202500c X-Google-Attributes: gidf996b,public From: Dave Bird---St Hippo of Augustine Subject: Re: Does size make a difference? Date: 1997/10/31 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 286269324 Distribution: world X-NNTP-Posting-Host: xemu.demon.co.uk [158.152.196.209] References: <63ckjf$5n2$1@alpha10.curtin.edu.au> <19971031141301.JAA00199@ladder01.news.aol.com> Organization: 1st Canine Chapel of Bob Dobbs Dog (Church of the SubGenius) Newsgroups: alt.ascii-art In article <19971031141301.JAA00199@ladder01.news.aol.com>, Spunk1111 writes: >As for size of ASCII rendering... it really depends upon the >individual and what you want to use the ASCII for. If it's for >a sig, it has to be small. If it's for the main page of a MUD or >BBS, it has to be screen size. To me, over screen size is >useless...it can't even be printed out well... > The smaller ASCII pics are much more difficult to make. >Each characater means more in the creation of a picture. >David Bird will argue this point. Smaller is better. Smaller >is much more of a challenge, I admit. I don't mind outrageusly large sigs. I don't even say smaller is "better". It is definitely harder, requires more ingenuity from the artist, and therefore -- as an aspiring creator as well as consumer of asciiart -- I admire the ingenuity that went into it. Sort of like a cathedral made out of matchsticks the first thought is "gosh, thatt must have taken some making..." |~/ |~/ ~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~ P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O L |{a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"}{/a}_____________|/_______| L and{a href="http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/lynx/q0.html"}{/a}XemuSP4(:)