 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Shocked, shocked I am this image didn't rank higher in the voting! This was
one of my top picks, with a great concept and execution, and a fun image to
boot.
The image is a bit grainy, but it captured the underwater "atmosphere" well,
and the posing of the characters is excellent. The bubbles are also
excellent.
The image might benefit from the architectural field camera perspective, as
the outside characters are leaning in a bit, but I don't think it would
make a big difference.
Jeremy also included a puzzle, asking which of the suits was badly
engineered. I guessed Mr. Carmagnolle, the guy on the left. All that
armour...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Renderdog wrote:
>Shocked, shocked I am this image didn't rank higher in the voting! This was
>one of my top picks, with a great concept and execution, and a fun image to
>boot.
As a diver myself, I liked this one too.
>The image is a bit grainy, but it captured the underwater "atmosphere" well,
>and the posing of the characters is excellent. The bubbles are also
>excellent.
Yep.
>
>The image might benefit from the architectural field camera perspective, as
>the outside characters are leaning in a bit, but I don't think it would
>make a big difference.
I hadn't attributed that to the camera :) I thought he was just making them
a closeknit group of buddies!
>
>Jeremy also included a puzzle, asking which of the suits was badly
>engineered. I guessed Mr. Carmagnolle, the guy on the left. All that
>armour...
<venturing wildly into non POV territory ;-)>
Hmmmm, the Carmagnolle suit was never actually produced, although tests of
the design showed it to work down to a depth of at least a few meters. The
problems with it weren't in getting up and down, they were more in the fact
that the joints didn't handle pressure well, the diver became immobile at
depth.
I'd say the problem suit is Frank's on the right. Being made of an
inherently buoyant material, plus being filled with air, it would require a
lot of weight to sink. With no way to control buoyancy it would go straight
to the bottom with no way back except to dump the weight, at which point
the barrel would rise very quickly, either leaving the diver on the bottom
or risking severe damage from too rapid decompression. Not good for depth
of more than 10-15 ft max.
RG - I'll stick to my Scuba-Pro & Dive-Rite gear, thanks...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I really liked the concept for this pic. Personally, I felt the wavy
camera lens effect was a little too strong. I would have backed it
off by maybe a half, but that's just my personal taste.
On Thu, 3 Apr 2003 15:37:19 EST, "gonzo" <rgo### [at] lanset com> said:
>I'd say the problem suit is Frank's on the right. Being made of an
>inherently buoyant material, plus being filled with air, it would require a
>lot of weight to sink. With no way to control buoyancy it would go straight
>to the bottom with no way back except to dump the weight, at which point
>the barrel would rise very quickly, either leaving the diver on the bottom
>or risking severe damage from too rapid decompression. Not good for depth
>of more than 10-15 ft max.
I'm going to agree with this pick, but for different reasons. The
suit has no external air supply. The diver using this suit is
rebreathing the air he exhaled, and eventually the CO2 levels will
climb to a level not compatible with consciousness.
---
Jet Jaguar
Visit my crappy home page at http://home.att.net/~chmilnir/
MSTie #54297
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Shocked, shocked I am this image didn't rank higher in the voting! This
was
> one of my top picks, with a great concept and execution, and a fun image
to
> boot.
This image certainly stands out in my memory. Sometimes it's too bad that
"Fun" isn't one of the criteria. This image brings a smile to my face every
time I view it.
--
Slash
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> This image certainly stands out in my memory. Sometimes it's too bad that
> "Fun" isn't one of the criteria. This image brings a smile to my face every
> time I view it.
>
Yes, it seems that the basic device that the artist is using is similar
to what you would find in an illustrated atlas where several examples of
a thing are shown in a common environment. But with the slightly
whimsical line of striding divers together with the perspective
distortions and bubbles, it is reminiscent of a fashion shoot. Also the
diving suits themselves take on the anthropomorphic look of cartoon
figures. We are so media/image saturated it is nearly impossible to
completely control how an image is seen.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
