Posted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 7:19 pm
word! I just realized and edited accordingly.portugalwillie wrote:I think he was referring to robroe's post about a Jaguar being smaller than a Jazzmaster . . .
Page 4 of 4
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:37 am
god dammit. ill just fuckin take a photo of the one laying on top of the other one. hold on
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:48 am
ok so its a tiny bit smaller.
i took a photo from 6 different angles for you. depending on which way i lean, its short in the back, short on the bottom/not in the back, or not smaller at all. i did not move either guitar during this photo process. honestly i bet i could put the jaguar on top of the JT100 and make the same illusions of size. in photo #6 the flash is hitting right where the neck meets the body, its probably the most straight down photo.
just remember I am the reason this site costs money. (i took these photos with my shitty old 3.0MP olympus, not hilary's new nikon)
i took a photo from 6 different angles for you. depending on which way i lean, its short in the back, short on the bottom/not in the back, or not smaller at all. i did not move either guitar during this photo process. honestly i bet i could put the jaguar on top of the JT100 and make the same illusions of size. in photo #6 the flash is hitting right where the neck meets the body, its probably the most straight down photo.
just remember I am the reason this site costs money. (i took these photos with my shitty old 3.0MP olympus, not hilary's new nikon)
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:54 am
That's not too bad at all, size-wise. Is that the RobOG neck you said you were going to put on? It looks great like that. Is this the big reveal, or did I miss it in another thread?
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:57 am
you must've just missed it on page 2. probably took that page too long to load on your busted ass amish atari internetz. 
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:59 am
Oh, Jesus fuck. I did miss all of page 2 somehow. Thanks.
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 4:03 am
avj wrote: big
yes.
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 4:04 am
i can make the photos bigger and re-post them?
hahahaha
mez might ban me for longer than 15 minutes next time though
hahahaha
mez might ban me for longer than 15 minutes next time though
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 9:19 am
they're still huge!robroe wrote:just remember I am the reason this site costs money. (i took these photos with my shitty old 3.0MP olympus, not hilary's new nikon)
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 1:04 pm
dude are you viewing shortscale on a game boy?
im sitting here in bed with Hilary's 3 year old 1st generation netbook and the photos load fine.
it only has 1gig of memory, and no graffix card.
i cant help it if you are using a game boy, string and dixie cups to internet.
how do you internet when words and letters look like square blocks stuck together?
im sitting here in bed with Hilary's 3 year old 1st generation netbook and the photos load fine.
it only has 1gig of memory, and no graffix card.
i cant help it if you are using a game boy, string and dixie cups to internet.
how do you internet when words and letters look like square blocks stuck together?
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 5:30 pm
they still take forever to load on my computer . . .
it seems after the first time they load, it's not so bad.
it seems after the first time they load, it's not so bad.
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 6:51 pm
that's what she said.
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 7:16 pm
savagehotrodperlmutter wrote:that's what she said.
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 10:49 pm
no, but when i click on them they enlarge to about 5948576x the size.robroe wrote:dude are you viewing shortscale on a game boy?
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 11:45 pm
Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 12:41 am
funnay
Posted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 3:01 am
bump + demo for Mickie
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 3:10 pm
Look at that sideways-ass bridge. Looks AUG'D.
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 3:18 pm
Sideways bridge = intonates easier?