Topic: urban (Read 790 times)

armand · « **on:** February 24, 2013, 09:00:37 pm »

urban landscapes

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #1 on:** February 24, 2013, 10:53:35 pm »

I like "sad."

wolfnowl · « **Reply #2 on:** February 25, 2013, 06:47:53 pm »

Indeed. Well seen.

Mike.

francois · « **Reply #3 on:** February 26, 2013, 03:51:23 am »

Sad is interesting, simple yet evocative.

NickMarkou · « **Reply #4 on:** March 01, 2013, 11:42:51 am »

Sad is alright, but for me the elements of the 1st image are really really interesting in a symbolic day, maybe in a different composition.the word "touch fee" on the sign, the red lit hand and the word green on the right hand .....there are nice ingredients

l_d_allan · « **Reply #5 on:** March 03, 2013, 01:35:19 pm »

Quote from: wolfnowl on February 25, 2013, 06:47:53 pm

Indeed. Well seen.

Agree. "Sad" has a simplicity and "humanity" somewhat like the Pixar lamp from the 90's.

It "might" have looked a bit more like a human face with "keystone distortion correction" done to extreme ... past the lines being vertical ... so that the lines were slanted "inwards" from top to bottom. It would look more like a "V" than a "^".

Or "\ /" than "/ \"?

But without trying it, I can only speculate that such keystone correction could make the bricks and "eyes" look odd and distorted.

Author Topic: urban (Read 790 times)

armand

urban

Eric Myrvaagnes

Re: urban

wolfnowl

Re: urban

francois

Re: urban

NickMarkou

Re: urban

l_d_allan

Re: urban