#Pixelart Austravel, Channel Four, Teletext Ltd., 4th July 1997. Is that a palm tree I see creeping in on the right hand side there? Ahh!
Captured by Jason Robertson http://twitter.com/grim_fandango
Source: http://archive.teletextart.co.uk | http://www.uniquecodeanddata.co.uk/teletext76
WE USED TO USE TELETEXT
I’m feeling nostalgic for a system I never ever used.
that isn’t voxels. Hmm.
still something I’m chewing on
modern game development is all about finding coherent aesthetics that allow you to eschew realism because god damn realism is expensive.
hence MineCraft, the 8-bit retro craze, Undertale, even polished cartoony looks like Witness and Firewatch.
I think stylised game art has gotten significantly better looking since 2015.
Oh man you aren’t wrong, do you know how many hours it would have taken me to “realistically” model those tiny houses? And that would make the renders less understandable instead of more understandable.
collapsedsquid said: What about Criminal Country?
believe it or not, this is actually hot discourse right now:
Taken literally, TuAo means “unrefined, backwards Australia”.
…
Wai Ling Yeung, a former Chinese studies professor at Curtin University, points out that many Chinese-Australians use the character for village when referring to suburbs.
“Because of that, many China-based netizens think all Australian cities are like country towns, but this is in fact not what Chinese-Australians mean,” she said.
She contrasts TuAo with humorous slang used by Chinese abroad in other countries, including FuGuo for Britain, meaning “decadent country” — a coded term believed to refer to the UK’s attitudes towards homosexuality.
The US is also sometimes referred to online as MeiDi, meaning “American empire”.
If the Chinese call it an Empire, who am I to disagree? The largest military budget in the world, culture and commerce spreading out over the Earth, a currency used as a reserve everywhere else and as real money by entire foreign countries, and partial responsibility for the growing global obesity epidemic - who is to say that a Republic can’t be an Empire?
Now,
* inhales *
* coughing *
you know what actually nevermind the rest of it
* coughing *
this pipe gimmick was a bad idea
* wheezes *
Anonymous asked:
argumate answered:
Melbourne was in fact founded by Batman, which explains the art deco buildings and the dark brooding winter.
This is a common misconception. Batman is, in fact, a heavy-handed metaphor for Melbourne itself. Even the original authors confirmed this in a leaked document released on 4chan.
Anonymous asked:
Yes.
What is visual art about? At its barest - color, shape/form, composition…
Abstract art, when it is good, is about these things, the far end of a continuum of realism vs abstraction.
And I think a lot of the pushback really is about seeing some kinds of art as a scam, defined totally by the artist’s popularity.
Truly lovely. Sometimes it’s a drag, but I’m glad I live at the end of the great era of popular art.
Why do you think this is the end of the great era of popular art?
I’m too tired to fully explicate this, but the idea in my head is something like this. The great era of popular art (movies and pop music [that is, anything from jazz to rock to rap – anything with a backbeat], mainly) that’s lasted for a century or so was the product of a few one-time technological innovations – the reliable recording of audio and images plus the ability to distribute those recordings en masse. Mechanically reproduced art, basically. As soon as these technologies became viable there was a great wave of cultural innovation. Genre after genre was created and explored by artist after artist.
Think of the way that rock music developed from a primitive (not in a bad sense) model in the 50′s, to something more fully fleshed out in the 60′s as artists figured out what rock was, to all sorts of weird and baroque experimentation in the 70′s. That’s crude, but you get the basic idea. In an incredibly short span of time artists were figuring out what rock music could be, what its limitations were. There have been spasms of creativity in rock music since, but it’s fair to say that rock has slowly been drying up as a source of innovation since the 70′s. Why? Well, like I said, artists figured out what rock music was. There was less scope for things that were both novel and good. It’s still possible to make great rock music, even albums that stand up with the original greats, but it’s harder to surprise. Not impossible, but harder and harder. And so the culture moves on. Just as importantly, Real Artists move on. The productive subcultures go away, one by one. Hence why people say that rock music is dead. It isn’t dead, but it is eternally senescent in much the same way that classical is. All rock is now made in reference to the past.
However, at some point it’s not just that individual genres are losing their potency, it’s that the whole grouping of genres enabled by this new mode of artistic production are losing their potency. Punk was an interesting challenge to an overblown status quo. Grunge was a less interesting challenge to an overblown status quo. The third time will be utterly predictable and boring. Rock and rap and electronica are all different, but the parallels are obvious and at some high level things start to blend together. It’s predictable. You can still make good movies, but it’s hard to make one that’s unpredictable. What was the last new movie that surprised you in that way? Even the languages of shock and irony become played out. You can’t get heavier than doom metal without going below the range of human hearing. You can’t get noisier than noise music, or more ambient than ambient. Both popular music and its more experimental derivatives have been explored at this point. Not totally, but to an ever-increasing degree.
It’s taken a century, but this is the end of the line for innovation in popular art, the end of the golden age.
Or so the theory in my head goes. The other option is that the rate of cultural innovation has genuinely permanently increased and that we’ll see new and interesting popular genres get churned out indefinitely. It’s possible – it’s hard to distinguish between an S-curve and an exponential one when you’re on it – but I’m doubtful. It would hardly be the first time a whole style of art similarly lost momentum. I already mentioned classical music. Think too of the deconstructive impulse of Modernism. Exhibiting a urinal in a gallery is a genuinely interesting gimmick, but only for the first time.
In the end, there’s only so much you can do with a backbeat. Or with the shot reverse shot.
Which isn’t to say that art is dead forever, mind. (Or that pop art is going away. It’s popular for a reason!) That sort of mindless declinism is just tedious. I have no doubt that there will be equally interesting artistic innovations sooner or later. Though it is hard to see from where. So far video games have fallen woefully short of being Art Art (even the best written games are terribly mediocre compared to anything else), and the internet has been useful for distribution but not really for artistic innovation, with minor exceptions. So I dunno, we’ll see. But I don’t think there will be another rock music.
(Thanks to @argumate for some of the ideas here. I don’t think I’ve written this post before, but who can be sure of that kind of thing anymore.)
The future is more art and more customization.
The use of algorithmic tools and other software allows for more creators to use less effort to create more art. That leads to a greater volume of art and a potentially faster exploration of micro-genres. These micro-genres will more closely suit the preferences of individual readers.
However, it is impossible for one individual to view all of this art. There simply isn’t enough time, even for a NEET.
This will allow shocks to occur when viewers leave their micro-genres in order to explore new ones.
Anonymous asked:
argumate answered:
It’s like the tension in MMORPG design: if everyone does the same quest it destroys the logic of the game world to some degree (the bad guy is beaten millions of times!) but if quests have to be unique for each player you can’t share the experience.
* twitches *
Time. The answer is Time.
Set the MMORPG in a world where the timelines are divergent and there are thousands or millions of them, and the world itself is broken into thousands of planes/zones/worlds spread across a vast and diverse cosmos in a state of multiversal war.
The players are warrior-chrononauts, members of various factions in this cosmic war across universes and timelines. Many of the same worlds, however, occur again and again, and thus they have a shared experience of intervening in them. There isn’t just one Space Hitler, there are thousands or millions echoing out into the cosmic void.
Video games are almost perfect for this, since single-player games do the multiple timelines branching thing intuitively just by their structure, with saves and replays!
oh sure you can do that for one game, just gets a bit painful when you have to resort to it for all games.
Anonymous asked:
A few of them have certainly been cleaned up, like a dropped sandwich would be, after being “mistaken” for food waste. And in another case, a dropped food item that had nothing to do with the installation was assumed to be part of it.
(Fortunately, the last time I heard about cleaning staff cleaning up an exhibit of this kind by accident, they did not get fired for it.)
I understand that having your field constantly mocked for being arcane and boring is unpleasant, but can you please not do the same to other people? For the love of every fucking god ever to walk this blighted earth, you’d think it’d be obvious that the weirdoes need to stick together.
but nooooooo, clearly anyone who can Do Maths is superior and anyone who says “art is very important to most people” in slightly imprecise terms is Wrong.
Unless you want to live in a fucking stone cube with no decoration and eat soylent for every meal, art is fucking essential.
@ me next time.
I have no problem with people who can’t do math. But I don’t feel bad about holding people to unreasonable standards of well-roundedness when they assert that their favorite corner of human experience is equivalent to humanity itself. I suppose a true polymath may indeed call me out on this, but I strongly doubt that any true polymath would be running around asserting the superior human-ness of a single specific field in the first place.
In any case, the original article isn’t even about “art”, in the sense of what most people would consider to be missing from a stone cube, and which does include, as pointed out, such diverse works as fashion, music, movies, video games, furniture design, international technical symbols, the patterns on shampoo bottles, cooking, typography, and hentai doujins. (And not just because many of the actual stone cubes we have today are entirely the fault of artists, and the governments and large institutions that backed brutalist architecture.) It’s about “the arts” and cutting the funding they get from the United States government.
While it should be obvious that there’s a pretty hard limit on just how subversive anything that gets funding from the United States government can actually be, the author doesn’t want to admit that it’s in service of a power-that-is that they happen to side with, and so equivocates the defunding of a government arts program with the active suppression of art (by, for example, mass executions) that people would otherwise create on their own, state funding or not.
And indeed, people do create a lot of art on their own, without state funding. Every form of art you mention to emphasis the importance of art only argues against the National Endowment for the Arts, because if people can create all of that without government funding, then how important can the NEA possibly be? Not important at all, unless you want to protect art from influence of the regime, in which case, getting government money out of the arts should be something you’re entirely on board with.
Much of the “subversive” art is highly overrated, buying into existing boring narratives already approved by factions that have existed for a long time, and I’m beginning to wonder about an Alt Righter’s claim that modern art is actually some kind of tax avoidance scheme.
If the government is going to fund art, it should be art that people actually LIKE and as such benefit the nation, not deliberately insulting and confusing pretentiousness. The other suitable role is to preserve elements of our cultural heritage, such as historic buildings. This isn’t like materials science where pushing the cutting edge improves our standard of living.
In other words, government-funded art should be unironically pleasant.
“God put this drive very strongly inside males so that we can be providers and supporters for more than one woman,” Mr. Trad said.
Nominative determinism strikes again!
the virgin monogamist vs. the Trad bigamist?
[583] Dr. McDermott summarizes the literature demonstrating the effects of the practice of polygyny on women, children and men, and concludes that many negative consequences touch upon each of the groups.
[584] Women in polygynous relationships are at increased risk of mental health problems as a result of higher rates of domestic violence, including sexual abuse, and co-wife conflict. They also tend to fare worse financially.
[585] Children of polygynous unions have worse outcomes than their monogamously born counterparts, as measured in a variety of ways. They face a higher risk of mortality. Young girls are often married to much older men and engage in early sexual behaviour, which has repercussions for their life expectancy and physical well-being. Where girls give birth frequently, shortened inter-birth intervals pose a heightened risk for various problems which can affect both the mother and the child.
[586] As for effects on men, Dr. McDermott notes that polygyny causes the proportion of young unmarried men to be high, up to a ratio of 150 men to 100 women. This leads to a need for a polygynist community (at least a closed one) to excise at least half of the junior boys, the so-called “Lost Boys”. “Junior boys who are thrown out of such societies at much greater rates in order to make a sexually asymmetrical system viable, often receive less education and achieve lower levels of employment, as they are forced onto a society with few skills and no social support” (at para. 33).
[587] Junior males who are unable to find wives represent “a class of largely poor, young, unmarried men who are statistically predisposed to violence” (at para. 34).
2011 BCSC 1588 Reference (re: Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada)
Call me a Modernist, but this is one aspect of ancient Traditionalism that can be left behind, never to return until either sex or sexual orientation has become far more flexible (under Transhumanism) than it is today.
SAN FRANCISCO—In an effort to reduce the number of unprovoked hostile communications on the social media platform, Twitter announced Monday that it had added a red X-mark feature verifying users who are in fact perfectly okay to harass. “This new verification system offers users a simple, efficient way to determine which accounts belong to total pieces of shit whom you should have no qualms about tormenting to your heart’s desire,” said spokesperson Elizabeth James, adding that the small red symbol signifies that Twitter has officially confirmed the identity of a loathsome person who deserves the worst abuse imaginable and who will deliberately have their Mute, Block, and Report options disabled. “When a user sees this symbol, they know they’re dealing with a real asshole who has richly earned whatever mistreatment they receive, including profanity, body-shaming, leaking of personal information, and relentless goading to commit suicide. It’s really just a helpful way of saying to our users, ‘This fuck has it coming, so do your worst with a clear conscience and without fear of having your account suspended.’” At press time, Twitter reassuredly clarified that the red X was just a suggestion and that all users could still be bullied with as little recourse as they are now.
