ThePortForum.com

Posted: **20:45 Wed 05 Mar 2014**

flash_uk, in the thread entitled [url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=72836#p72836]Tue 04 March 2014, 1994 Horizontal, Michael Schuster[/url], wrote:Have noted to self that for future "3rd party" organised tastings, compiling a generic placemat using a well-known high quality piece of software would be a sensible step. As it happened, 1-14 scribbled on the back of some A4 did the trick, but there were a few moments where things almost got muddled.

jdaw1, in reply, wrote:I had reached a similar conclusion. And as we knew the Ports in advance, I really had no excuse. Next time we’ll show up with the paperwork.

Might www.jdawiseman.com/2014/201403_generic_a4.pdf assist?

Keep a copy in your briefcase at all times. And if you love your pals, include multiple copies of the first eight pages.

Posted: **21:59 Wed 05 Mar 2014**

jdaw1 wrote:Might www.jdawiseman.com/2014/201403_generic_a4.pdf assist?

Keep a copy in your briefcase at all times. And if you love your pals, include multiple copies of the first eight pages.

Splendid. Exactly what I had in mind. JDAW gets

Posted: **10:42 Thu 06 Mar 2014**

For our American friends I have added www.jdawiseman.com/2014/201403_generic_usl.pdf.

Links to the two versions:
• /A4 = (250mm÷√√2) × (250mm×√√2) ≈ 210mm × 297mm;
• /USL = 8½″ × 11″ = 215.9mm × 279.4mm.

Posted: **20:15 Thu 20 Mar 2014**

Flash has drawn my attention to TheVintagePortSite.com/view.php?id=13820, saying “seems like the placemat is famous”.

TheVintagePortSite.com wrote:

Initially I thought that the Symingtons were using the software, but this was actually made by our very own SushiNorth for the Dow vertical in New York on Saturday 19^th March 2011.

Posted: **21:41 Thu 20 Mar 2014**

Ah. But where did the photo get picked up, as there is none on the thread?

Posted: **22:38 Thu 20 Mar 2014**

Not my photo, as my placemats at that tasting had the "old" flight on the left. Perhaps Sushi's or G-man's?

Posted: **10:24 Fri 21 Mar 2014**

Tasting notes on the left suggests a left-hander, but none of the placemat pages are left-handed.

Posted: **15:17 Fri 21 Mar 2014**

jdaw1 wrote:Tasting notes on the left suggests a left-hander, but none of the placemat pages are left-handed.

We're typically pretty crowded at the ACPT tastings, so the notes on the left could belong to the taster on the left. Inconclusive, I think.

Posted: **18:26 Fri 21 Mar 2014**

jdaw1 wrote:Flash has drawn my attention to TheVintagePortSite.com/view.php?id=13820, saying “seems like the placemat is famous”.
Initially I thought that the Symingtons were using the software, but this was actually made by our very own SushiNorth for the Dow vertical in New York on Saturday 19^th March 2011.

Well that's pretty cool -- but I merely used JDaw's software for the mats. The origin of the picture is far more interesting -- I have been unable to find it amongst my set, which means it likely came from a different attendee.

Posted: **21:09 Fri 28 Mar 2014**

It seems that I am no longer able to make use of this section of code:

Code: Select all

/PackingDirectionVertical /TopToBottom def  % /TopToBottom /BottomToTop
/PackingDirectionHorizontal /LeftToRight def  % /LeftToRight /RightToLeft
/PackingNestingColumnMajor false def

No matter how I alter the parameters, the result is that the first glass in the list is top left, the last glass is bottom right, and rows are filled before columns.

Previous discussion in this thread indicated that simply setting /PackingNestingColumnMajor true def would reverse the order of the rows. That is to say, the first glass would be bottom left, the last glass would be top right, and rows would be filled before columns. Based on the naming convention I suspect that isn't true, but regardless making that change seems to have no effect.

I have tried both /PackingNestingColumnMajor true def and /PackingDirectionVertical /BottomToTop def but end up with the same output in either case. I have tried it both using the placemats that I'm trying to create, and finally just to be sure I hadn't messed something up elsewhere I have tried it using the baseline software downloaded fresh from www.jdawiseman.com/placemat.

Posted: **21:54 Fri 28 Mar 2014**

Since these were written, much of the relevant code has changed. An error is entirely possible. Please email me the code.

Glenn E. wrote:Previous discussion in this thread indicated that simply setting /PackingNestingColumnMajor true def would reverse the order of the rows.

That parameter should switch the ordering of the loops, i.e. whether “rows would be filled before columns” or the reverse.

Glenn E. wrote:I have tried both /PackingNestingColumnMajor true def and /PackingDirectionVertical /BottomToTop def but end up with the same output in either case.

Unless you are using positions supplied as an array, or one of the other PermittedPackingStyles in which this request would make no sense, it is my bug. Please email your code.

Posted: **22:01 Fri 28 Mar 2014**

My bug: sorry.

These option still exist, and still work, but as a flag within PermittedPackingStyles. The bug was forgetting to delete the three lines in which the no-longer-used parameters were set. So you might want something like

Code: Select all

/PermittedPackingStyles [
	[ /RectangularDislocation /PackingNestingColumnMajor true /PackingDirectionTopToBottom false ]
] def

Just uploaded, a new version of the code without the three redundant lines.

Posted: **22:36 Fri 28 Mar 2014**

jdaw1 wrote:
Glenn E. wrote:Previous discussion in this thread indicated that simply setting /PackingNestingColumnMajor true def would reverse the order of the rows.
That parameter should switch the ordering of the loops, i.e. whether “rows would be filled before columns” or the reverse.

This is what I expected based on the name. The earlier discussion, then, was in error. This is the preferred outcome: code > discussion.

Posted: **22:38 Fri 28 Mar 2014**

jdaw1 wrote:My bug: sorry.

These option still exist, and still work, but as a flag within PermittedPackingStyles. The bug was forgetting to delete the three lines in which the no-longer-used parameters were set. So you might want something like
Code: Select all
/PermittedPackingStyles [
	[ /RectangularDislocation /PackingNestingColumnMajor true /PackingDirectionTopToBottom false ]
] def
Just uploaded, a new version of the code without the three redundant lines.

Excellent, thank you. I will go attempt the following:

Code: Select all

/PermittedPackingStyles [
	[ /Diamonds /PackingNestingColumnMajor false /PackingDirectionTopToBottom false ]
] def

My desire is RowMajor, BottomToTop.

Posted: **22:40 Fri 28 Mar 2014**

I believe that I have lately used the code you intend to use, and it has worked just dandy.

Posted: **22:45 Fri 28 Mar 2014**

Glenn E. wrote:I will go attempt the following:
Code: Select all
/PermittedPackingStyles [
	[ /Diamonds /PackingNestingColumnMajor false /PackingDirectionTopToBottom false ]
] def
My desire is RowMajor, BottomToTop.

Then the “/PackingNestingColumnMajor false” is redundant, IIRC.

Posted: **22:55 Fri 28 Mar 2014**

Success; thank you for the help.

Posted: **22:56 Fri 28 Mar 2014**

And thank you for the bug report.

Posted: **12:23 Sun 30 Mar 2014**

Do you go up or down?

The placemats produced for this small meeting occasioned a slight discolouration of the man who made the software. He expressed his disdain for a placemat which goes upwards from the bottom left on the glasses page, and yet downwards from the top on the tasting note page. He also communicated a concern that users would become confused.

Does anybody else have an opinion?

Posted: **12:44 Sun 30 Mar 2014**

[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=73630#p73630]Here[/url] djewesbury wrote:

djewesbury, responding by PM to an observation of jdaw1, wrote:I like to go up and across from the left. You prefer to do the opposite. Thus, for me, the first and youngest wine is at the bottom of the glasses page and the top of the TN page.

jdaw1, replying by PM, wrote:Going down one page whilst up the other seems, to my simple mind, more confusing than going through both in the same direction.

djewesbury, replying by PM, wrote:I can understand your logic. All I can say is that I want to backwards in my glasses and downwards in my TNs. This is a valuable experiment in literacy, facilitated by Port!

Posted: **19:51 Sun 30 Mar 2014**

I most certainly prefer to go downwards in my notes, it assists not smudging notes made previously.

However, I have observed that on many occasions I will pick glasses out based on something other than the order in which they are placed on the sheet - apparent evolutionary age, for example.

But when I follow the order in which the glasses are placed, I prefer to work from the top left to top right and then down the page. I find this tends to minimise my chances of spilling, knocking over or trying to return glasses to spaces which are occupied. I am at my most sober when trying to get glasses from furthest away and at my least sober when dealing with the glasses that are closest to me.

Posted: **19:55 Sun 30 Mar 2014**

If others contribute their opinions and the general consensus is that I am plain bonkers, then I am happy to redo my placemat. Flash, what do you think?

Posted: **20:05 Sun 30 Mar 2014**

I tend to grab the nearest glass first! I agree with Alex that note-taking starting at the top and working down is preferable, so I have a mild preference for the DJ approach. I can work with any layout, but will start with the tasting notes and find the glass rather than the other way round.

Posted: **20:19 Sun 30 Mar 2014**

I think the TNs would start at the top no matter what. JDAW's initial complaint was that, this being invariable, the glasses pages should follow the same order. I would perhaps agree that in a large tasting it might be better to work forwards. But I disagree that anyone could become confused. I think we are all sufficiently adept at recognising names and reading across from a page laid out in a diagrammatic way to one that is organised in a tabular format.

Posted: **20:28 Sun 30 Mar 2014**

As I am not Chinese I prefer to work my way through from top left to bottom right.

The order in which TNs appear on a page rarely affects my general well being.

Posted: **20:41 Sun 30 Mar 2014**

In common layouts I would start top left, then either working across the rows (mostly) or down the columns as appropriate. On some non-standard layouts there could be variation, for example an arch of glasses on A3 using placemat as centre, but these would be the special cases.

Posted: **20:43 Sun 30 Mar 2014**

PhilW wrote:an arch of glasses on A3

FYI, an example (and more):

Posted: **07:30 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

Daniel,

I do an occasional tasting of Port and/or Madeira and my format never changes. As I am a techno-failure, Glenn typically helps me to organize and print out the placemats using the brilliant software that has been designed and upgraded by Julian.

I prefer and always do, have the line of wine at the front of the tasting sheet, go from left to right and that L-R theme continues back in each row. I never vary this, even when doing less formal tastings on my own. and all judgings I take part in, lineup their flights in this manner as well.

I hope that helps!

Best regards,

Roy

Posted: **07:41 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

Roy Hersh wrote:I prefer and always do, have the line of wine at the front of the tasting sheet, go from left to right and that L-R theme continues back in each row. I never vary this, even when doing less formal tastings on my own. and all judgings I take part in, lineup their flights in this manner as well.

Roy: please help persuade others by saying why you prefer this.

Posted: **15:22 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

I prefer for my placemats to go from front left to back right in row major order, but for my TN sheets (at least in theory) to go top to bottom.

Reasoning:

1. As for AHB, writing top to bottom seems obvious. Otherwise one could smudge previously written notes.

2. As I progress through a tasting, I tend to get... tipsy. Or worse. It is best if, as the evening progresses, I do not have to reach over full glasses in order to pick up the next glass to drink. Catastrophes can happen. Best that they not involve full glasses of Port.

3. When pouring prior to starting the tasting, we generally pour youngest to oldest but reverse that for drinking (oldest to youngest). It therefore makes sense to fill the placemat from the back while it is empty and there are no glasses in the way. Then #2 kicks in for the tasting of the Port.

Note that our placemats tend to be more crowded than yours. I will put 20 glasses on USL2 (11" x 17") or 10 glasses on USL (8.5" x 11") in order to leave as much room as possible on the table for other things.

Posted: **15:32 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

I was with you until this bit:

Glenn E. wrote:When pouring prior to starting the tasting, we generally pour youngest to oldest but reverse that for drinking (oldest to youngest). It therefore makes sense to fill the placemat from the back while it is empty and there are no glasses in the way. Then #2 kicks in for the tasting of the Port..

You drink oldest to youngest? You drink the most mature and more delicate stuff first? I must admit to always having done it the other way around – saving the best to last… but now you've put the idea into my head I can see that tasting a delicate, ethereal, fully mature wine after some blousy tannic blockbuster may make little sense.

Does this sensational revelation from Glenn change anyone's already stated opinion?

Posted: **15:38 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

djewesbury wrote:You drink oldest to youngest? You drink the most mature and more delicate stuff first?

Yes, of course.

It isn't as true now as it once was, but think back to 2005. The monsters that were the 2003s have just been released. You're about to do a vertical of Noval. Do you really want to ruin your palate - and everyone else's - by tasting the 2003 Noval first?

Always drink VP oldest to youngest. Enjoy the delicate nuances of the old wines first, then let the gradually increasing power of the younger wines slowly take precedence.

Also - drink the fabulous old wines first before you are drunk and can't tell the difference.

Posted: **16:05 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

Glenn E. wrote:
djewesbury wrote:You drink oldest to youngest? You drink the most mature and more delicate stuff first?
Yes, of course.

Certainly I taste the oldest first. Sometimes, and less often than I should, I save a little of the oldest to drink late evening. But the tasting starts with the oldest.

Though “oldest” can mean oldest-looking, at which AHB hinted.

AHB wrote:on many occasions I will pick glasses out based on something other than the order in which they are placed on the sheet - apparent evolutionary age, for example.

Posted: **16:48 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

By way of example, assume there are twelve ports: Oldest, 2, 3, …, 10, 11, Youngest. If arranged in a rectangle, there are eight obvious ways to order these.

1. Favoured by JDAW (most occasions), DRT, AHB, PhilW. And, after the re-think below, Flash.

2. Favoured by Roy Hersh, Glenn E., and perhaps Daniel J.

3. Favoured by JDAW for a big vertical, because it is easier to set out the glasses (the reaching is slightly-around rather than over). MiD by PhilW.

Not liked.

Posted: **16:51 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

This is a very instructive and useful thread. I am reconsidering and will update to Glenn's / Roy's pattern.

Perhaps a parameter should be added, a little like /Lefthanders (could be called /Americans ?) that allows different users to have their mat arranged as they prefer it?

Posted: **16:57 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

djewesbury wrote:Perhaps a parameter should be added, a little like /Lefthanders (could be called /Americans ?) that allows different users to have their mat arranged as they prefer it?

Currently everybody has the same layout. Changing that to be by-person would have lots of awkward consequences. It would be a lot of unsatisfactory work.

That’s a refusal.

Posted: **16:58 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

*sigh*

Posted: **18:59 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

This analysis has me reconsidering. My preference is to start at the top of tasting notes, and drink oldest first. I think the primary factor for the layout is to minimise the potential for knocking things over which is more likely at the end of 12 glasses than at the start, and considering it is more likely (I think) that things nearest to the front of the placemat are knocked over, it seems that it might be a better idea to go for option 1 above. The choice between option 1 and option 2 being (assuming I like tasting old first):
1: knock over a probably fuller glass of something younger
2: knock over a slightly less full glass of something older

However, option 1 is preferred, because after 8 glasses, I am on the "front" row and therefore not lifting/placing glasses over the top of others for glasses 9-12. With option 2 after 8 glasses, I am heading for the "back" row. Uh Oh. If it's a horizontal, then I would still prefer the order of option 1 even though there is no older/younger, for the "front row after 8 glasses" benefit already described.

This may be what someone else has already concluded and explained above, but I'm only just getting it!

Posted: **19:04 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

jdaw1 wrote:Currently everybody has the same layout. Changing that to be by-person would have lots of awkward consequences. It would be a lot of unsatisfactory work.

That’s a refusal.

Having recently looked at the software to attempt my first placemat, I can fully understand why adapting it to have by-person layouts would add an almighty amount of complexity!

Posted: **19:07 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

He's done much more complex things. I don't know, you offer a constructive suggestion…

Posted: **20:39 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

Having consumed wines during judging competitions and at trade and personal events for more than 3 decades now; old habits die hard.

Glenn has learned well, in a fairly short period of years

With VP and in any vertical of wines, I've always preferred oldest to youngest for numerous reasons.

Posted: **20:47 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

jdaw1 wrote:Currently everybody has the same layout. Changing that to be by-person would have lots of awkward consequences. It would be a lot of unsatisfactory work.

djewesbury wrote:He's done much more complex things. I don't know, you offer a constructive suggestion…

An example difficulty, using an example glasses page on which /CrossHatchingTitles true def.

There is also a pre-pour sheet (shown smaller).

Daniel wants a re-ordered version of this glasses page. If that is done by moving circles and not changing the cross-hatching, it would look weirdly disjointed. No. If it is done with changing the cross-hatching, circles on the American glasses page wouldn’t match the pre-pour page. No.

Plus, the parameter controlling this would be very cryptic (and there really are enough of those already). Plus plus, it would be a lot of unsatisfactory work.

No.

Posted: **20:49 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

Roy Hersh wrote:Having consumed wines during judging competitions and at trade and personal events for more than 3 decades now; old habits die hard.

So Roy’s preference, adopted by his near-neighbour Glenn, is attributed to habit. For the youngsters amongst us (looks around — everybody just pretend) who are still choosing what habits to adopt, that reasoning seems insufficient.

Posted: **21:11 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

I have updated the placemats, but since this is a small tasting I have clung to my 'American' glass-order. I put this forward as an experiment and will report the company's feelings towards it.

Posted: **22:28 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

jdaw1 wrote:
Roy Hersh wrote:Having consumed wines during judging competitions and at trade and personal events for more than 3 decades now; old habits die hard.
So Roy’s preference, adopted by his near-neighbour Glenn, is attributed to habit.

This doesn't seem possible. As he has already admitted, Roy isn't a techno-whiz. For me to have adopted his habit, I would have had to have seen and/or used placemats that he created. I don't believe that such a unicorn exists.

It is more likely that I learned my habit from someone other than Roy, but the list of possibilities is rather short. It could have been G-man or SushiNorth, but since we meet only once per year and I've been the instigator of those meetings, that doesn't seem likely. (It is noteworthy, however, that both G-man and SushiNorth use the same arrangement that Roy and I use.)

That leaves only... jdaw1. But the first placemats that I ever used were these, and as you can see they use jdaw1's current preference. Which makes sense because he made them.

Which means that I developed my habit organically on my own, as I was introduced to placemats via jdaw1's preference and could not have been indoctrinated by observing placemats produced by Roy. It remains possible that I was indoctrinated by G-man or SushiNorth, but I find that difficult to believe based on timing.

Posted: **22:31 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

So who's indoctrinated me??

Posted: **22:33 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

djewesbury wrote:So who's indoctrinated me??

Whoever had most influence on your life until the age of seven.

Posted: **22:40 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

My mum? I'm pretty certain she'd have gone for the nearest glass too.

Posted: **23:10 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

Glenn E. wrote:Which means that I developed my habit organically on my own, as I was introduced to placemats via jdaw1's preference and could not have been indoctrinated by observing placemats produced by Roy. It remains possible that I was indoctrinated by G-man or SushiNorth, but I find that difficult to believe based on timing.

The first version of the /BottomToTop feature was added to the code on 19^th October 2008, shortly after making for RAH the placemats used on 18^th October 2008. (And my oh my, that was a tip-top event.) Also, I vaguely recall a conversation with Roy at this time about this desideratum. So RAH was the cause of that piece of functionality.

Which might or might not help ascertain the origin of GEE’s preference.

Posted: **23:34 Mon 31 Mar 2014**

I was not intimating that Glenn learned from me, just that he's picked this stuff up in a rather short period of years, overall.

As to reasons, since it seems that Julian is all about learning the "why" ... here are three of many good reason to explain my point above.

a. the winemaker/journalist group that initially brought me into and taught me proper dynamics of wine judging, always instilled in me to drink wines from oldest to youngest. So this would fall under, "learned behavior."
b. Old wines have more subtleties and therefore should be experienced early in a given tasting, because these nuances are best experienced when the palate is at its freshest during a tasting with more than a couple of wines in it. Try having a 2003 side-by-side with a 1945 or older Vintage Port. Try the oldest first and then the younger one second. Now reverse this order during a 2nd pass. Which do you find allows you to best discern the organoleptic qualities of the pairing? For me, there's no question which direction works best. Tried and true for my palate. YMMV.
c. Younger wines have bolder flavors and by far, more prominent tannins and if they precede old wines in a vertical, or just random tasting, their characteristics will often overshadow the refined distinctivenss of well-aged wines/Ports.

Just a few examples of why going from oldest to youngest makes more sense to me.

ThePortForum.com

Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats

Re: Software that makes placemats