[QUOTE=Roll_Program;43863947]Do you think this style came from Tropico?[/QUOTE]
No, the style is what inspired tropico. I meant that the che guevara and the old car reminded me of Tropico 3.
I swear I get the feeling I'm being put on the spot here for not knowing something, when all I said was "hey, this scene is giving me a feeling like playing a certain game."
[QUOTE=kaze4159;43867090]A massive, slow moving, explosive target[/QUOTE]
yeah but back during WWI, the only AAA that existed was someone pointing their Maxim or springfield in the air and air ships were always far out of the range of said Maxims. Their only real threat were fighter aircraft and those didn't really exist early in the war. Aircraft were strictly for recon use, and when they fought each other (or fought airships) they typically either rammed each other or threw bricks. Even when aircraft started mounting machine guns, they still didn't do a whole lot against the airships. Airships were pressurized to pretty much the same as the outside air, so a few holes wouldn't cause it to lose any altitude. They weren't easy to take out until incendiary ammunition came into play.
And I've heard that German airships made attacks on mainland England at one point, but only managed to kill a few hundred over the course of WWI. Sounds like a lot but it really isn't.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;43867271]yeah but back during WWI, the only AAA that existed was someone pointing their Maxim or springfield in the air and air ships were always far out of the range of said Maxims. Their only real threat were fighter aircraft and those didn't really exist early in the war. Aircraft were strictly for recon use, and when they fought each other (or fought airships) they typically either rammed each other or threw bricks. Even when aircraft started mounting machine guns, they still didn't do a whole lot against the airships. Airships were pressurized to pretty much the same as the outside air, so a few holes wouldn't cause it to lose any altitude. They weren't easy to take out until incendiary ammunition came into play.
And I've heard that German airships made attacks on mainland England at one point, but only managed to kill a few hundred over the course of WWI. Sounds like a lot but it really isn't.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=kaze4159;43867090]A massive, slow moving, explosive target[/QUOTE]
Not to mention very nearly everything else was massive and/or slow and/or explosive.
Opposing planes: Slow, explosive and about as strong as the scarves the pilots wore.
Soldiers: Stopped in trenches, squishy and inexperienced.
Tanks: Massive, slow, explosive, experimental, temperamental.
Buildings: Massive, immovable, bombed to shit.
The ground: Massive, was sliding around by the end of it and is [I]still[/I] explosive.
There was also the fact that airships could fly higher than the max altitude of early biplanes and anything else that could kill it. They stopped doing that though because navigation was almost impossible and you couldn't achieve any sort of accuracy dropping dumb bombs in the vague area of your target. Any damage they could do was trivial, but they made good terror weapons. People saw a spec in the sky and ran for cover thinking they were about to be bombed.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;43867493]There was also the fact that airships could fly higher than the max altitude of early biplanes and anything else that could kill it. They stopped doing that though because navigation was almost impossible and you couldn't achieve any sort of accuracy dropping dumb bombs in the vague area of your target. Any damage they could do was trivial, but they made good terror weapons. People saw a spec in the sky and ran for cover thinking they were about to be bombed.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/zeppelin-terror-attack.html#[/url]
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;43867493]There was also the fact that airships could fly higher than the max altitude of early biplanes and anything else that could kill it. They stopped doing that though because navigation was almost impossible and you couldn't achieve any sort of accuracy dropping dumb bombs in the vague area of your target. Any damage they could do was trivial, but they made good terror weapons. People saw a spec in the sky and ran for cover thinking they were about to be bombed.[/QUOTE]
Plus Zeppelins are just badass looking.
[img]http://www.awesomestories.com/images/user/949af3870d.jpg[/img]
You all saw it coming.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4A8eiA1jhXc[/media]
a humongous map of the NYC Central Park from 1875
[t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Central_Park_1875_Restored.png[/t]
Sony are selling a waterproof MP3 player inside a bottle of water.
[IMG]http://cdn3.sbnation.com/entry_photo_images/9819715/sony_large_verge_super_wide.jpg[/IMG]
I've always liked the idea of armed zepelins.
[IMG]http://trialx.com/curetalk/wp-content/blogs.dir/7/files/2011/05/cities/Kirov-3.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=MenteR;43861460]these are really good but i never understood why would you even do this when you can simply take a picture.[/QUOTE]
"Why make art? You can just take a photograph."
[QUOTE=Alice3173;43872606]"Why make art? You can just take a photograph."[/QUOTE]
what
most people completely misunderstood my point but let's not derail the thread.
he does have a point
if you paint it and make it look EXACTLY like a certain picture, for example, what's the difference between the painting and the picture? obviously its the work that was put into it, and if you wanted to expand on that you could ask yourself whether or not it really matters, considering the final product is the exact same
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43873888]he does have a point
if you paint it and make it look EXACTLY like a certain picture, for example, what's the difference between the painting and the picture? obviously its the work that was put into it, and if you wanted to expand on that you could ask yourself whether or not it really matters, considering the final product is the exact same[/QUOTE]
I'd say it's a massive demonstration of skill and a good achievement in itself. Like climbing a mountain. It's essentially pointless but you prove something about yourself and you can be proud of it later.
yes, but is an achievement art? would a picture of someone at the peak of mt everest also be art? is art more about how something is made or about how something looks? and if it's about how it's made, then where does creativity come into play? because as impressive as those paintings are, they're not creative at all.
if you ask me, yes, i think that'd qualify as art, and i'd also understand it perfectly if someone didn't think of it as such. my point is, people often look at stuff from a very one-dimensional point of view, and forget that there's more than one aspect to things, especially when it comes to art
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43875094]yes, but is an achievement art? would a picture of someone at the peak of mt everest also be art? is art more about how something is made or about how something looks? and if it's about how it's made, then where does creativity come into play? because as impressive as those paintings are, they're not creative at all.
if you ask me, yes, i think that'd qualify as art, and i'd also understand it perfectly if someone didn't think of it as such. my point is, people often look at stuff from a very one-dimensional point of view, and forget that there's more than one aspect to things, especially when it comes to art[/QUOTE]
the fact that you are asking this makes an answer obsolete(in the good way)
what?
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43875610]what?[/QUOTE]
it made you think, the problem and process evoke a response from you
i have no idea what you're talking about
[editline]11th February 2014[/editline]
you mean that the hyperrealistic painting is art because it made me think? because i fail to see how that makes any sense
[QUOTE=Killuah;43875598]the fact that you are asking this makes an answer obsolete(in the good way)[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Killuah;43875633]it made you think, the problem and process evoke a response from you[/QUOTE]
thats the most pretentious fucking thing I've heard in my entire god damn life.
[editline]12th February 2014[/editline]
you seem like the kind of person that looks at paint splotches dropped on the ground by clumsy contractors and tries to find political meaning in it.
[IMG]http://24.media.tumblr.com/f3d4e47954ba84a07202b29a26c206fc/tumblr_n0aa5fOi9B1roe9r1o1_1280.jpg[/IMG]
B-29 rollout.
[editline]12th February 2014[/editline]
[IMG]http://24.media.tumblr.com/5577fdca6dc634cde9e7ef65789984bd/tumblr_n0a7veQjnF1rq7x1to1_1280.jpg[/IMG]
Tu-95 "Bear" being escorted by an F-4 Phantom II.
[QUOTE=Roll_Program;43877114][IMG]http://24.media.tumblr.com/f3d4e47954ba84a07202b29a26c206fc/tumblr_n0aa5fOi9B1roe9r1o1_1280.jpg[/IMG]
B-29 rollout.
.[/QUOTE]
The B29 had a badass turret control system.
[img]http://www.twinbeech.com/images/gunnery/cfc/DSC00436.JPG[/img]
[video=youtube;nskFayhBcy0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nskFayhBcy0&feature=player_detailpage[/video]
Keep in mind this was done in the 1940s. There's a second part to that video that should appear in the reccomendations, and here's a link with a bit more info [url]http://www.twinbeech.com/CFCsystem.htm[/url]
Two [url=https://31.media.tumblr.com/a04fe08aa9437e54be79ba6c4e79d012/tumblr_n0usz61VDF1r3gb3zo1_400.gif]penguins[/url] [url=https://24.media.tumblr.com/9f1f8da25b2714d5668772e553cdbbdd/tumblr_n0usz61VDF1r3gb3zo3_400.gif]grieving[/url] over their dead chick.
(Tagged in-case someone cries about it being NSFW or some shit.)
[QUOTE=Killuah;43875633]it made you think, the problem and process evoke a response from you[/QUOTE]
As a person who draws pretty often, I find this to be the complete anti-thesis of every drawing I've ever drawn.
As content, have the latest thing I've drawn.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/aqR3n5V.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE=Rofl_copter;43875528][IMG]http://25.media.tumblr.com/c9196b63e19ee283ac2e106c2e9ce086/tumblr_mq0lbbQDgC1sb0tqco1_1280.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Planes getting light from above and to the right, guy getting light from the left.
calling fake
[QUOTE=archival;43880536]Planes getting light from above and to the right, guy getting light from the left.
calling fake[/QUOTE]
They're in the middle of a roll dood. Look at the shadows the fuselage casts onto the wings. They're getting light from the same direction, just one of the aircraft is further into, or out of, it's roll than the other is.
Can we go 3 minutes here without calling something fake because the lighting hits something at an angle????????
I find it depressing how whenever anything cool is photographed [I]somebody[/I] has to claim that it's fake.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;43875641]i have no idea what you're talking about
[editline]11th February 2014[/editline]
you mean that the hyperrealistic painting is art because it made me think? because i fail to see how that makes any sense[/QUOTE]
Yes.
It raised the questions you asked up there.
[quote]yes, but is an achievement art? would a picture of someone at the peak of mt everest also be art? is art more about how something is made or about how something looks? and if it's about how it's made, then where does creativity come into play? [/quote]
[editline]12th February 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Reds;43880582]I find it depressing how whenever anything cool is photographed [I]somebody[/I] has to claim that it's fake.[/QUOTE]
I think it's good to think about what you see and to question it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.