Why are jellyfish either super beautiful or super horrifying?
[URL="http://imgur.com/a/KGUEn?gallery"]"Interesting photos taken throughout history" - An Imgur Album[/URL]
Some highlights:
[t]http://i.imgur.com/617tr2z.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE]Testing football helmets, 1912[/QUOTE]
[t]http://i.imgur.com/YuDzVzg.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE]NASA scientists with their board of calculations, 1961[/QUOTE]
[t]http://i.imgur.com/c7R0wOE.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE]German soldiers react to footage of concentration camps, 1945[/QUOTE]
[t]http://i.imgur.com/OMvEdAK.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE]Harold Agnew carrying the plutonium core of the Nagasaki Fat Man bomb, 1945[/QUOTE]
The full album contains 60 pictures.
[QUOTE=Paranoia10;48282991]
[t]http://i.imgur.com/OMvEdAK.jpg[/t]
[/QUOTE]
this one is specially eerie
[t]http://40.media.tumblr.com/5472990ed1576515760dc6e80f4a46e2/tumblr_nrz16kYNrF1tfbj78o1_1280.jpg[/t]
Cool picture showing a MiG-21, F-16, two seat MiG-15, and an A-10 flying over the Egyptian pyramids.
[QUOTE=booster;48277954][vid]https://zippy.gfycat.com/ColorlessDefinitiveFlea.webm[/vid]
Surprisingly effective.[/QUOTE]
Birth of the Typhoon in DX:HR.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;48263528][t]https://steffiandtim.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/img_1265.jpg[/t]
The piano plays itself[/QUOTE]
Adding to the discussion about cool looking fast-food restaurants. Here's one of our majestic BK's.
[t]http://www.gullsten-inkinen.com/sites/default/files/styles/project-image/public/projects/dsc_3923.jpg?itok=fT_0k9cD[/t]
There used to be a casino on this profitable spot iirc., right inside our main railway station where tons of people walk past every day! Mad profits.
screw your fast food this is what my local pub looks like
[IMG]http://bier-traveller.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Counting-House-Oakham-Night-2.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Scot;48283957]screw your fast food this is what my local pub looks like
[IMG]http://bier-traveller.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Counting-House-Oakham-Night-2.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Spoons'?
Arent they famous for always converting old theatres and cinemas into pubs or bars
[QUOTE=cr2142;48284038]Spoons'?
Arent they famous for always converting old theatres and cinemas into pubs or bars[/QUOTE]
Yeah this is the nearest one to me, used to be a Bank. Now it's called the standing order :v:. The ceiling is massive.
[img]http://i1.trekearth.com/photos/134074/standing_orders-1.jpg[/img]
woah that's so cool
i love bars that don't have the usual cramped atmosphere you find everywhere but that's a whole other level
[QUOTE=NorthernFall;48284884]Yeah this is the nearest one to me, used to be a Bank. Now it's called the standing order :v:. The ceiling is massive.
[img]http://i1.trekearth.com/photos/134074/standing_orders-1.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Great location, shit pub.
Have you been to the Dome?
Snip
[img]https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtp1/t31.0-8/11722512_10155853237980615_478965422489237871_o.jpg[/img]
[img]https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xta1/t31.0-8/11780011_10155861355505615_3025022687462560755_o.jpg[/img]
[quote]The Apache Display Team from 3 Regiment Army Air Corp have been displaying the might of the gunship at the Royal International Air Tattoo (RIAT) last weekend.[/quote]
British Army Facebook page
[sp]the explosions are simulated[/sp]
Simulated? What does that mean?
Added in post? :v:
[QUOTE=paul simon;48286149]Simulated? What does that mean?
Added in post? :v:[/QUOTE]
Controlled explosion, not real bombs.
[QUOTE=ZpankR;48283090]this one is specially eerie[/QUOTE]
Clerk: "One atomic bomb core. Plutonium. Check for any visible cracks or signs of leaks. OK. Sign here that you received it."
[QUOTE=Skyward;48279926]Why are jellyfish either super beautiful or super horrifying?[/QUOTE]
Jellyfish are magic. Look at its tentacles, it's like ink in water. It's unreal, and beautiful.
Stingers or not I wouldn't want to get caught in it. It wouldn't care, it would keep on... jellying?
Some paintings soldiers did from a DC army treasure room:
[t]http://i.imgur.com/VJJ9oE9.jpg[/t]
[t]http://i.imgur.com/arbc7S8.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE=Dr.Critic;48286079][img]https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtp1/t31.0-8/11722512_10155853237980615_478965422489237871_o.jpg[/img]
[img]https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xta1/t31.0-8/11780011_10155861355505615_3025022687462560755_o.jpg[/img]
British Army Facebook page
[sp]the explosions are simulated[/sp][/QUOTE]
The WAH-64 is the one aircraft I've gone full geek on. Can probably tell you more about it than anyone who isn't an expert, or the pilots/mechanics themselves, who obviously know way more.
[url=https://farm1.staticflickr.com/291/19322650693_a6d8c760df_o.jpg][img]https://farm1.staticflickr.com/291/19322650693_413567b733_c.jpg[/img][/url]
Pretty amazing photograph, the "flowers" are made from various materials to get the desired effect.
Click for original size.
Whenever I see a show or movie with shit action choreography it bothers me that they couldn't take ten minutes to plan out a competent action scene. Shakey-cam is not an acceptable substitute for good action either.
[img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/229468864/Reaction/Choreography.gif[/img]
Honestly depends on the medium, for example traditional animation would take years to make a full length movie up to the quality of animation you just showed. For movies and things of that nature rendering out realistic scenes takes a lot longer than making a short looping gif of some cartoony 3d models with no background. So honestly you didn't really give a very valid comparison and it gives me the impression you think creating a well coordinated and choreographed movie is an easy task. That animation has literally all of its focus put into only animation with no other work done on any of the other things a movie or a show requires, and I am sure it took the animator a good amount of time to create even that tiny piece which has been around for 3+ years and hence why you havn't seen anything come out of it. They don't have textures, backgrounds, sounds, voice acting, camera positioning and lighting for different scenes, as a someone who is creating a movie has to take into account. Furthermore all of this shit is so massive its done by different groups of people who have coordinate themselves before they can even work on coordination in the actual movie versus this one scene who was probably done by some guy on the side as hobby.
It really grinds my gears when I see someone say "why cant game developer X or movie company Y create this, see look at this tiny animation piece its easy!!"
[QUOTE=Reds;48298195]Whenever I see a show or movie with shit action choreography it bothers me that they couldn't take ten minutes to plan out a competent action scene. Shakey-cam is not an acceptable substitute for good action either.
[img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/229468864/Reaction/Choreography.gif[/img][/QUOTE]
Holy shit I love you so fucking much for this website.
Seriously man i could watch all of these for hours
[url]http://animatorsteve.weebly.com/[/url]
[QUOTE=1chains1;48298812]Honestly depends on the medium, for example traditional animation would take years to make a full length movie up to the quality of animation you just showed. For movies and things of that nature rendering out realistic scenes takes a lot longer than making a short looping gif of some cartoony 3d models with no background. So honestly you didn't really give a very valid comparison and it gives me the impression you think creating a well coordinated and choreographed movie is an easy task. That animation has literally all of its focus put into only animation with no other work done on any of the other things a movie or a show requires, and I am sure it took the animator a good amount of time to create even that tiny piece which has been around for 3+ years and hence why you havn't seen anything come out of it. They don't have textures, backgrounds, sounds, voice acting, camera positioning and lighting for different scenes, as a someone who is creating a movie has to take into account. Furthermore all of this shit is so massive its done by different groups of people who have coordinate themselves before they can even work on coordination in the actual movie versus this one scene who was probably done by some guy on the side as hobby.
It really grinds my gears when I see someone say "why cant game developer X or movie company Y create this, see look at this tiny animation piece its easy!!"[/QUOTE]
You appear to be mistaking choreography with "showy animation".
A slideshow with creative and thought-out moves will be better choreographed than an excellently animated 60 FPS scene where they just smash their swords/fists/noodly appendages into each other for the entire duration of it.
[QUOTE=Reds;48298195]Whenever I see a show or movie with shit action choreography it bothers me that they couldn't take ten minutes to plan out a competent action scene. Shakey-cam is not an acceptable substitute for good action either.
[img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/229468864/Reaction/Choreography.gif[/img][/QUOTE]
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1PCtIaM_GQ[/media]
Watch this as a primer, sure, it talks about Jackie and action comedy specifically but it is almost an undeniable fact that noone coreographs better scenes than he does. He's undoubtedly a master.
If you want more, see this:
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYpwwYojns0[/media]
It's very interesting how he discusses the juxtapositions of actual martial arts versus the theatrical styles. Myself, I'm a practitioner of theatrical and historical fencing and I intend to make a movie with good looking fighting at one point, so I really find Jackie inspirational in these aspects. It's a very unique type of visual comedy.
[QUOTE=1chains1;48298812]Honestly depends on the medium, for example traditional animation would take years to make a full length movie up to the quality of animation you just showed. For movies and things of that nature rendering out realistic scenes takes a lot longer than making a short looping gif of some cartoony 3d models with no background. So honestly you didn't really give a very valid comparison and it gives me the impression you think creating a well coordinated and choreographed movie is an easy task. That animation has literally all of its focus put into only animation with no other work done on any of the other things a movie or a show requires, and I am sure it took the animator a good amount of time to create even that tiny piece which has been around for 3+ years and hence why you havn't seen anything come out of it. They don't have textures, backgrounds, sounds, voice acting, camera positioning and lighting for different scenes, as a someone who is creating a movie has to take into account. Furthermore all of this shit is so massive its done by different groups of people who have coordinate themselves before they can even work on coordination in the actual movie versus this one scene who was probably done by some guy on the side as hobby.
It really grinds my gears when I see someone say "why cant game developer X or movie company Y create this, see look at this tiny animation piece its easy!!"[/QUOTE]
I think you've wildly misinterpreted what I'm saying. I'm talking about the fight itself, not hwo it's animated.
Choreography is not animation. Good choreography can exist even in animated works with a low art quality or if hand-drawn, with a low frame count.
Choreography itself is just the planning of the fight, and it's very important. That animator is very good at it hence why I used that gif. Because it looks cool. The important part is when somebody has planned out every motion in the fight.
A good fight's choreography needs many things. The actions need to look good, and what they're doing needs to be interesting, you can't just blindly wave at your opponent if it's a sword fight or punch a guy and expect it to automatically be good.
Gonna start with an anime webm I have on hand that I keep around specifically as an example of a good fight. I'm better at describing my point in regards to animated works I think.
[vid]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/229468864/Webm/ChaikaFight.webm[/vid]
Ignoring the technical parts of the animation, this is a really good fight. It has good speed, momentum, push and pull, and alternates the control and flow of the fight while having visually interesting motions and attacks. In animation you can sometimes make generic fights look good if your animation is good enough though. There's clearly thought put into every motion in this fight.
And then you get stuff like movies where two guys just sort of punch each other with no flair or planning. Or you get movies with lots of flashy movements but no substance to it.
I feel like I'm not very good at making my point tonight. I guess I'll just post a fight I like. The whole thing is one continuous shot which is cool as fuck.
[video=youtube;79ditPebZ8g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79ditPebZ8g[/video]
In contrast, this is bad fight choreography:
[IMG]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/e1/9c/c3/e19cc31879ef579152b26d659b7c4530.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Reds;48299130]I think you've wildly misinterpreted what I'm saying. I'm talking about the fight itself, not hwo it's animated.
Choreography is not animation. Good choreography can exist even in animated works with a low art quality or if hand-drawn, with a low frame count.
Choreography itself is just the planning of the fight, and it's very important. That animator is very good at it hence why I used that gif. Because it looks cool. The important part is when somebody has planned out every motion in the fight.
And then you get stuff like movies where two guys just sort of punch each other with no flair or planning. Or you get movies with lots of flashy movements but no substance to it.
I feel like I'm not very good at making my point tonight. I guess I'll just post a fight I like. The whole thing is one continuous shot which is cool as fuck.
[video=youtube;79ditPebZ8g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79ditPebZ8g[/video][/QUOTE]
It's a really cool shot, but I was really taken out of it at 3.22 where the other guy literally just stands there as the dude is breaking his buddy's arm. Also, why did he randomly hide from 1 or two of them when he previously had no trouble taking out 2, 3 or more? Small things that don't make sense can break the continuity, and it's really sad to see in such a well planned shot like this.
[QUOTE=1chains1;48298812]Honestly depends on the medium, for example traditional animation would take years to make a full length movie up to the quality of animation you just showed. For movies and things of that nature rendering out realistic scenes takes a lot longer than making a short looping gif of some cartoony 3d models with no background. So honestly you didn't really give a very valid comparison and it gives me the impression you think creating a well coordinated and choreographed movie is an easy task. That animation has literally all of its focus put into only animation with no other work done on any of the other things a movie or a show requires, and I am sure it took the animator a good amount of time to create even that tiny piece which has been around for 3+ years and hence why you havn't seen anything come out of it. They don't have textures, backgrounds, sounds, voice acting, camera positioning and lighting for different scenes, as a someone who is creating a movie has to take into account. Furthermore all of this shit is so massive its done by different groups of people who have coordinate themselves before they can even work on coordination in the actual movie versus this one scene who was probably done by some guy on the side as hobby.
It really grinds my gears when I see someone say "why cant game developer X or movie company Y create this, see look at this tiny animation piece its easy!!"[/QUOTE]
most people who call for better fight scenes in movies are also talking about multi-million dollar productions who already hire experts to work on the choreography and camerawork. it's not an issue of good fight scenes and clearer shots not being feasible in action films, it's an issue with big producers being cheap and taking the easy route with shaky cam fighting
[QUOTE=Reds;48299130]I think you've wildly misinterpreted what I'm saying. I'm talking about the fight itself, not hwo it's animated.
Choreography is not animation. Good choreography can exist even in animated works with a low art quality or if hand-drawn, with a low frame count.
Choreography itself is just the planning of the fight, and it's very important. That animator is very good at it hence why I used that gif. Because it looks cool. The important part is when somebody has planned out every motion in the fight.
A good fight's choreography needs many things. The actions need to look good, and what they're doing needs to be interesting, you can't just blindly wave at your opponent if it's a sword fight or punch a guy and expect it to automatically be good.
Gonna start with an anime webm I have on hand that I keep around specifically as an example of a good fight. I'm better at describing my point in regards to animated works I think.
Ignoring the technical parts of the animation, this is a really good fight. It has good speed, momentum, push and pull, and alternates the control and flow of the fight while having visually interesting motions and attacks. In animation you can sometimes make generic fights look good if your animation is good enough though. There's clearly thought put into every motion in this fight.
And then you get stuff like movies where two guys just sort of punch each other with no flair or planning. Or you get movies with lots of flashy movements but no substance to it.
I feel like I'm not very good at making my point tonight. I guess I'll just post a fight I like. The whole thing is one continuous shot which is cool as fuck.
[/QUOTE]
Well I meant it more along the lines of when choreographing you have to take into account all of the points I mentioned above while working with a large compartmentalized group of people. Yea I agree shaky cams and things of that nature are stupid, but I can also see the reasons behind why it exists. I just feel like people don't take into consideration the sheer amount of work even a shitty movie has put into it and how hard it is to even coordinate all those people together, let a lone make choreography that depends on:
- The camera crew
- The actors
- The choreographers
- Lighting team to show off the scene
- Sound to link it up properly
- budget
- Director to coordinate all of this
- Story board team
And that's just a small list of the groups of people working on a film, bad camera work can show the fists not connecting, bad lighting can make the combat look chaotic, bad actors can make it look fake as hell and a bad director can fail to make the right calls. Choreography as a whole and final product depends on a lot people and variables that can easily make it look terrible.
Its a huge group effort which is why people like jackie chan get so much fame, because of the difficulty in pulling it off well. The point I am trying to make is that making good choreography doesn't take "10 minutes", and I feel like the teams of people who do this for a living deserve more praise than that.
edit - a movie is a giant group of artworks put together and to do that seamlessly is hard, not to mention the bigger money put into the production the more ass ton of people you're going to use and the more the message gets jumbled down the line in this version of telephone. And obviously I am not saying it is impossible but there is a reason people who do well at it are famous, it takes A LOT of work.
[QUOTE=1chains1;48299356]Well I meant it more along the lines of when choreographing you have to take into account all of the points I mentioned above while working with a large compartmentalized group of people. Yea I agree shaky cams and things of that nature are stupid, but I can also see the reasons behind why it exists. I just feel like people don't take into consideration the sheer amount of work even a shitty movie has put into it and how hard it is to even coordinate all those people together, let a lone make choreography that depends on:
- The camera crew
- The actors
- The choreographers
- Lighting team to show off the scene
- Sound to link it up properly
- budget
- Director to coordinate all of this
- Story board team
Its a huge group effort which is why people like jackie chan get so much fame, because of the difficulty in pulling it off well. The point I am trying to make is that making good choreography doesn't take "10 minutes", and I feel like the teams of people who do this for a living deserve more praise than that.
edit - a movie is a giant group of artworks put together and to do that seamlessly is hard, not to mention the bigger money put into the production the more ass ton of people you're going to use and the more the message gets jumbled down the line in this version of telephone. And obviously I am not saying it is impossible but there is a reason people who do well at it are famous, it takes A LOT of work.[/QUOTE]
I do get that, "ten minutes" is an exaggeration. But on the other hand, depending on the scene and setting of the fight, there's often no good reason why there shouldn't be a better fight. Particularly if it's martial arts based with no special effects or environmental interaction.
Like, if it's two guys having a fistfight on a flat plane with no particularly interesting environment or fight gimmick and your fight sucks that's something you could have done something about.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
