While written over 24 years ago, I was hoping this book would give me an understanding of the mathematical basis (if not the current state-of-the art;) ) of computer graphics. Despite (arguable to many) years of university math courses, I found this volume merely humbling, rather than enlightening. If you are more comfortable with fairly advanced mathematical notation and concepts than most, especially relative to geometry, you may find this book useful. I found it only marginally useful -- primarilly as a reference to some concepts I had previously been exposed. Best of luck.

Excellent coverage of matrix transformations. Some I had seen elsewhere, some not. This books real strength is the coverage of splines and patches however. Very readable w/ little procedural seggestion, i.e. implementation left to the reader.

I ordered this book because as an emerging graphic desginer, I wanted to know how to set my documents up for print in programs like Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator, and of course Quark. Although this book is very detailed about the history of printing and how printing works, as well as job estimates for printing, it seems really outdated as far as using your computer for prepress and helping a designer work with a local printer. And the clencher is, it is basically a school textbook. That is what it looks and reads like, unfortunately. However, if you are an artist in any way and are studying art and printing processes and all the different kinds, you might find it somewhat helpful. For those of you creating a brochure in Quark and need information on color processing, stacking, and how to approach your printer to get the job done? This is not the book. Try "Pocketguide to Digital Printing".

This book takes the reader through the right steps to acheive satisfactory results on a press. The knowledge contained in this book will separate the reader from the growing population of half-baked desktop publishers who cause grief to printers, service bureaus, advertising agencies and the like. It can also save the self-publisher hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars caused by bad design and or process.

"Do me and the printing industry a favor, read it!"

Osprey's Warrior series claims to provide "insights into the daily lives of history's fighting men and women, past and present, detailing their motivation, training, tactics, weaponry and experiences." David Westwood's volume, German Infantryman, succeeds only in detailing some of aspects of German infantry training, tactics, weaponry and experiences in the period 1933-1940. Westwood, who studied at Sandhurst (like the Great Gatsby "at Oxford"?), is familiar with military terminology but does not write with the insight of a military man. The author chose an excellent methodology to detail the inner workings of a German infantry unit - by focusing on a specific unit - but executes this methodology in a very peculiar and uneven manner. While the photographs and illustrations provide an excellent graphic quality to this volume, the narrative is too generic to be of much historical value.

German Infantryman consists of a short introduction that provides background on the inter-war Reichsheer, followed by a 24-page section on recruiting and training. Initially, the training section starts out well with a brief description of the Wehrkreise system, the training depots, basic training and weapons training. In some cases, the author provides good detail, like the fact that a German soldier fired over 300 rounds during basic training. However, there is surprisingly little depth provided about the 16 weeks of German basic training and much of what is provided could apply to any army's basic training. I recall other German sources mentioning significant differences in their basic training - like hand grenades and anti-tank training - that is barely touched here. There is no mention of motivation, regional differences between units or how men were selected for various operational specialties. Nor does the author even mention specialty training after basic, such as mortar school or pioneers. While the Warrior series is not designed to address organization, the author might also have made some effort to state how many infantrymen were in a platoon, company, battalion, etc (there is one skimpy line diagram, but no personnel strengths are listed). The later half of this section, covering issues such as marching, field craft and map reading, could apply to any army.

In the second section, the author decides to convey the battlefield experiences of a particular unit - the 30th Infantry Regiment in the 18th Division - in the Polish and French campaigns. The author shifts into this focus on the 30th Infantry Regiment with no explanation or introduction to the unit. In this section, the author providers a pastiche of German eyewitness accounts relating to marches, initial combat experiences, a set-piece battle, river crossings, attack on fixed defenses, fighting in urban areas and anti-tank fighting. Some accounts are interesting, some not, but most are too generic to be of much value. There is no real explanation of tactics here, such as how a German infantry platoon employed its machineguns and 50mm mortar in the attack or how a German battalion made a movement to contact, only vague reminiscences. The color plates are quite good, as usual, and these will be of benefit to model builders but the historical value of this volume is quite suspect.

There are a host of issues that the other should have at least mentioned but failed to address, like the "wave" system in which German divisions were raised and the fact that there were different types of infantry units (Jaeger, Landwehr, reserve). The issue of motivation should have been addressed, too. In the early stages of the Polish campaign, some German infantry units were very reticent to enter combat and some even performed poorly. Fear of heavy losses caused by the memory of the First World War and the legacy of defeat was not completely gone until the French victory. The author should also have made some mention of the demographics of German infantrymen, as well as more discussion on the junior leadership. While the author's bibliography seems robust enough, it does not appear that he made a full effort to address this subject in the depth it deserves.

The admissions standards potrayed in the book are the authors opinion. The book put out by the LSAC has most of the school's actual admission decisions.

country. I'm not sure how often the passages on each schools are updated but I bought the 1999 edition and found it to be a refreshging departure from the usual bland statistics that are quoted in other books. It is nice to hear from students even though I do agree that the authors try to make every law school appealing. I also found the admissions section to be annoying because the authors seem to suggest that every law school is difficult to gain admission too. In conclusion, I certainly wouldn't use this book as my sole guide to law schools but I think that it is a nice compliment to the ABA book.

I am currently in my second semester in law school. This book was the only resource that I used when contacting schools for information and narrowing my choices. It had all of the information that I needed to get in touch with the schools. I was very concerned with the practical lawyering skills at each school and this was the ONLY source that had statistics on lawyering skills for each school. This book was RIGHT ON for the school that I am now attending.

Stupid SAT Prep. Awful book

This book has horrible vocabulary examples (you know, the example that accompanies the vocab). For instance, an example for the word "wry" which means "dryly humorous" was "if she is dryly humorous, then she is wry". How stupid is that? There were tons of other examples that were just like that. Plus, the book doesn't really teach you how to score higher. It teaches you how to gamble with your score. I definately do not recommend this book!

Having purchased other Princeton Review books, I was dissapointed with this book. Not enough of the book was dedicated to examples, and it lacked practice tests. 2 critical things missing considering the price of this book.
I liked that their word lists are composed of the words most common ones on the SAT, but I didn't like the way the words were arranged. Words that didn't really relate seemed to be thrown together into a list.
The vocab cards seem like a plus, but they put 2 words into a card.
Overall, this book isn't worth the money. It skimps over the basic necessities that a SAT verbal book should have.

The cover of this book pretty much explains its content. Despite its claims of creating a reference guide that spans all the major characters and themes in the asian mythosphere, it falls way short in its balance of information. This book basically covers the traditions of India, China and Japan, while just glancing at other mythologies. However, even the most fundamental characters in the Chinese and Japanese mythologies are curiously absent. What's more insulting is that it groups the mythologies of Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines into a single category, implying that a singular tradition binds all three countries. This shows the author's lack of resources, or lack of interest. A quick glance at the book's bibliography further reinforces that the author didn't really use a wide asian base of information. Overall, this is just a handy reference guide for people who know nothing of Asian tradition, but have the itching need to know about every single godling in the Indian pantheon. Ambitious goals shold have ambitious results, unlike this book.

This is an alright book i suppose. I had to read it for english class so you can understand my disgust with it. I found it very confusing and hard to understand....... Give it a go though for your own. I hate reading most books. Sad to say I find manuals more interesting thatn reading novels....Laugh as you may..o well

bob

I haven't read many biographies, but I have read lots of Baldwin -- both essays and novels. I came away from this book wishing that it was as compelling as its subject -- that Leeming had contributed his insights to the efforts of a writer closer to Baldwin's caliber -- and that the book had the benefit of a better editor. There is a sense that perhaps Leeming reveres Baldwin a bit too much. It's hard to communicate a true sense of intimacy with your subject when he's so high up on a pedestal! Overall, a disappointment.