 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I have 2 big problems with the new topic: Time (Steampunked)
Firstly, and perhaps undermining any hope of a rational argument, I do not
like steam punk. As I see it this is a fundamental problem with it as an
IRTC topic: you are choosing the aesthetic I must use.
Secondly, would Jules Vern's time machine count as steampunk? I mean it
predates the whole concept, and was set in victorian times so it was
designed that way out of necessity rather than style. And yet it has the
correct aesthetic (to the best of my understanding) and it is a time
machine.
This use of a specific style has not occured with any previous topic. The
closest example I can find is "minimalism" which would at first glance
appear to dictate the aesthetic of the image, but as the winning entry
showed there was no reason to take that as dictating the style of scene. I
cannot see any such broad interpretations for steam punk.
Seriously, I don't like to cause a fuss, but I really think this topic is a
bad idea.
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek <tek### [at] evilsuperbrain com> wrote:
> I have 2 big problems with the new topic: Time (Steampunked)
Your entry will not be rejected if it doesn't strictly adhere to the
current topic. It's up to the voters to decide the merits of your image.
You could, perhaps, do something more imaginative than simply adhering
to the topic. The message of your image could, for example, be more at a
metalevel. For instance, it could be some kind of protest against the
topic in question. If done in good taste and in a clever way, in a way
that shows creativity and cleverness, it may even gain favorable votes.
Just an idea.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek wrote:
> would Jules Vern's time machine
I'm pretty sure Jules Verne did never write a time traveling story.
H. G. Wells did.
>count as steampunk?
Sure.
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek wrote:
> Firstly, and perhaps undermining any hope of a rational argument, I do not
> like steam punk. As I see it this is a fundamental problem with it as an
> IRTC topic: you are choosing the aesthetic I must use.
Agree, it's boring. Mostly because people had timepieces in the 19th
century which were a lot more interesting for the modern technology they
*didn't* use.
Steampunk would be OK on its own as Minimalism was, but "subject(style)"
is too limiting for a topic, IMO.
-Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I didn't know what steampunk was (after some searching, now I do), but looking
at the google image search pages on it get my creative juices flowing. I will
definitely need to participate this round, and probably wouldn't have without
such an arguably cool topic.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ive" <"ive### [at] lilysoftorg"> wrote in message
news:4a9d863d$1@news.povray.org...
> Tek wrote:
>> would Jules Vern's time machine
>
> I'm pretty sure Jules Verne did never write a time traveling story.
> H. G. Wells did.
Doh! I should have googled that :)
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek wrote:
> I have 2 big problems with the new topic: Time (Steampunked)
>
> Firstly, and perhaps undermining any hope of a rational argument, I do not
> like steam punk.
I like your honesty though.
As I see it this is a fundamental problem with it as an
> IRTC topic: you are choosing the aesthetic I must use.
>
A succinct point.
But I think Warp's counter makes sense. The topic can be merely the
grain of sand to the oyster. We are all clever enough here by half,
let's face it, we can 'go meta' on a topic without loosing a beat.
> This use of a specific style has not occured with any previous topic. The
> closest example I can find is "minimalism" which would at first glance
> appear to dictate the aesthetic of the image, but as the winning entry
> showed there was no reason to take that as dictating the style of scene.
Exactly. Interpretations of a topic morph in many directions..
As for precedent, personally I don't fear a slippery slope in this regard.
I think you protest is good to consider but I feel you are over-reacting.
I view such a topic as a chance to visit, (or comment on,) a style
I wouldn't ordinarily come anywhere near.
-Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
P Brewer wrote:
> I didn't know what steampunk was (after some searching, now I do), but looking
> at the google image search pages on it get my creative juices flowing. I will
> definitely need to participate this round, and probably wouldn't have without
> such an arguably cool topic.
>
>
Well I havn't done any googling yet but I am already picturing
fossilized steam pistons.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Charter schrieb:
> I view such a topic as a chance to visit, (or comment on,) a style
> I wouldn't ordinarily come anywhere near.
I personally do agree with Tek:
Prescription of a certain topic is ok.
Prescription of a certain style would be ok as well IMO.
Prescription of a certain topic /and/ style is a bit too limiting IMO.
Just my cents.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
a coffee drink.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
