Paul Corfield wrote:
It would seem there has been a press launch for the new DLR stock.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...ntre/7723.aspx

Some piccies here

http://dlr-admin.appius.com/uploads/...e%20Launch.JPG

The guy on the right, has he been photoshopped in, has he got an
oddly-proportioned head or am I hallucinating?

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:11:38 +0000, Dave Newt
wrote:



Paul Corfield wrote:
It would seem there has been a press launch for the new DLR stock.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...ntre/7723.aspx

Some piccies here

http://dlr-admin.appius.com/uploads/...e%20Launch.JPG

The guy on the right, has he been photoshopped in, has he got an
oddly-proportioned head or am I hallucinating?

Ian Brown - don't know. I thought Ken looked like a cardboard cut out.
The angle of the photo is very odd indeed - I suspect the photographer
was pinned against the platform end barriers!

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Mar 14, 11:11 pm, Dave Newt wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote:
It would seem there has been a press launch for the new DLR stock.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...ntre/7723.aspx

Some piccies here

http://dlr-admin.appius.com/uploads/...DLR%20Vehicle%...

The guy on the right, has he been photoshopped in, has he got an
oddly-proportioned head or am I hallucinating?

I have measured it and it seems to be 50% larger than a normal head.

Offramp wrote:
On Mar 14, 11:11 pm, Dave Newt wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote:
It would seem there has been a press launch for the new DLR stock.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...ntre/7723.aspx

Some piccies here

http://dlr-admin.appius.com/uploads/...DLR%20Vehicle%...

The guy on the right, has he been photoshopped in, has he got an
oddly-proportioned head or am I hallucinating?

I have measured it and it seems to be 50% larger than a normal head.

That's because Ian Brown is nearest to the camera! It's a wide-angle shot
taken close to the train and the people, so you get that sort of distortion.

Re your comment in another post about 10 megapixel images: They do have
their uses. For example, in this case you can see from the shape of the dot
over the 'i' in 'capacity' that it's in New Johnston Book at a large size,
contrary to the TfL design rules. (The dot is about 20 x 20 pixels, at
which size it's possible to see that it has concave sides to the diamond, a
feature of New Johnston Book that is not supposed to be readily visible. The
rules say that NJ Book should not be used at larger sizes than 12-point.
New Johnston Light should be used instead.)
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

On Mar 15, 9:34 am, "Richard J." wrote:
Offramp wrote:
On Mar 14, 11:11 pm, Dave Newt wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote:
It would seem there has been a press launch for the new DLR stock.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...ntre/7723.aspx

Some piccies here

http://dlr-admin.appius.com/uploads/...DLR%20Vehicle%...

The guy on the right, has he been photoshopped in, has he got an
oddly-proportioned head or am I hallucinating?

I have measured it and it seems to be 50% larger than a normal head.

That's because Ian Brown is nearest to the camera! It's a wide-angle shot
taken close to the train and the people, so you get that sort of distortion.

Re your comment in another post about 10 megapixel images: They do have
their uses. For example, in this case you can see from the shape of the dot
over the 'i' in 'capacity' that it's in New Johnston Book at a large size,
contrary to the TfL design rules. (The dot is about 20 x 20 pixels, at
which size it's possible to see that it has concave sides to the diamond, a
feature of New Johnston Book that is not supposed to be readily visible. The
rules say that NJ Book should not be used at larger sizes than 12-point.
New Johnston Light should be used instead.)
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

Great stuff. I'm a font fan so it makes a lot of sense.

Richard J. wrote:

Re your comment in another post about 10 megapixel images: They do
have their uses. For example, in this case you can see from the shape
of the dot over the 'i' in 'capacity' that it's in New Johnston Book
at a large size, contrary to the TfL design rules. (The dot is about
20 x 20 pixels, at which size it's possible to see that it has
concave sides to the diamond, a feature of New Johnston Book that is
not supposed to be readily visible. The rules say that NJ Book should
not be used at larger sizes than 12-point. New Johnston Light should
be used instead.)

But that's for signs. This is not a sign, it's part of a small photo, and
was not supposed to be looked at IRL. Use of New Johnston Book was IMO
correct.

John Rowland wrote:
Richard J. wrote:

Re your comment in another post about 10 megapixel images: They do
have their uses. For example, in this case you can see from the shape
of the dot over the 'i' in 'capacity' that it's in New Johnston Book
at a large size, contrary to the TfL design rules. (The dot is about
20 x 20 pixels, at which size it's possible to see that it has
concave sides to the diamond, a feature of New Johnston Book that is
not supposed to be readily visible. The rules say that NJ Book should
not be used at larger sizes than 12-point. New Johnston Light should
be used instead.)

But that's for signs. This is not a sign, it's part of a small photo,
and was not supposed to be looked at IRL. Use of New Johnston Book
was IMO correct.

What's "in real life" for a photo? Arguably it's displayed at full
resolution (10Mpixels, not "small") on a computer screen, and the curved
sides of the diamond are then clearly visible. Even reduced to fit my
laptop screen, the word 'capacity' appears at about 16-point, whereas NJ
Book is restricted throughout TfL to 12-point and below. This is because it
has features like the curved diamond that are slight distortions of the
original design to make it easier to read body text in documents.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)