Strangely Intriguing

acrouch · Post by **acrouch** » August 22nd, 2008, 6:30 pm

http://salavon.com/Playboy/figure1.shtml

Roy Janik · Post by **Roy Janik** » August 22nd, 2008, 6:36 pm

awesome.

shando · Post by **shando** » August 22nd, 2008, 10:11 pm

Ditto. I've had fantasies about doing stuff like that, not with centerfolds, but with various things. That's really cool.

Marc Majcher · Post by **Marc Majcher** » August 22nd, 2008, 10:32 pm

shando wrote:Ditto. I've had fantasies about doing stuff like that, not with centerfolds, but with various things. That's really cool.

Back when the centerfolds thing and Debris came out, I threw together some Perl scripts to mash together a set of images, and they all come out looking cool and ghosty like that. If you got ideas, I can hook you up with some code.

arthursimone · Post by **arthursimone** » August 22nd, 2008, 11:14 pm

i hate context in art
phooey!
fie!

if an image is beautiful, it's beautiful
discussing the process is like dissecting a frog and in the process killin' it

Justin D. · Post by **Justin D.** » August 23rd, 2008, 12:10 am

arthursimone wrote:i hate context in art
phooey!
fie!

if an image is beautiful, it's beautiful
discussing the process is like dissecting a frog and in the process killin' it

To you. To some, it's part of the art. To others, the process is an art in itself.

Also, knowing where that ghostly (angelic) image comes from gives it a really interesting subtext that can be interpreted different ways.

Miggy · Post by **Miggy** » August 23rd, 2008, 12:39 am

majcher wrote:
shando wrote:Ditto. I've had fantasies about doing stuff like that, not with centerfolds, but with various things. That's really cool.
Back when the centerfolds thing and Debris came out, I threw together some Perl scripts to mash together a set of images, and they all come out looking cool and ghosty like that. If you got ideas, I can hook you up with some code.

I'm not the most code-literate person, but i'm super interested. I'm working on a project right now for an album that is trying to take new forms of abstraction form photos of the guitar. Can I take you up on this some how? In the most minimum invasive way possible? Please?

Roy Janik · Post by **Roy Janik** » August 23rd, 2008, 1:14 am

majcher wrote:Back when the centerfolds thing and Debris came out, I threw together some Perl scripts to mash together a set of images, and they all come out looking cool and ghosty like that. If you got ideas, I can hook you up with some code.

Hook me up with some code.

shando · Post by **shando** » August 23rd, 2008, 12:56 pm

arthursimone wrote:i hate context in art
phooey!
fie!

if an image is beautiful, it's beautiful
discussing the process is like dissecting a frog and in the process killin' it

Says you. Many say differently. You also neglect to say if the image presented is beautiful.

The word genocide sounds beautiful, but the context of the word changes my impression of it.

Rev. Jordan T. Maxwell · August 24th, 2008, 1:24 am

wow...that's gorgeous. the work itself is kind of hauntingly beautiful, and in context i'm staring at hundreds of boobs at once. i LOVE art!

arthursimone · Post by **arthursimone** » August 24th, 2008, 3:58 am

shando wrote:
Says you. Many say differently.

many are also mormons!!

ha! take that!!!

I win!
My aesthetic preferences are right!!!
you cannot argue with this.
If you try and argue with me it only proves my point that I am right!!!
take it!
eat it!
winner: simone

mpbrockman · Post by **mpbrockman** » August 24th, 2008, 6:27 am

Hmmm, I would have figured the image would've been blonder.

Jules · Post by **Jules** » August 24th, 2008, 9:28 am

Justin Davis wrote:

Also, knowing where that ghostly (angelic) image comes from gives it a really interesting subtext that can be interpreted different ways.

That's what struck me about the image, it looks angelic to me too, and sort of hypnotic, but then the realization that it was layer upon layer of naked women...well I had mixed feelings...one was that after so many women perhaps one just can't differentiate them at all, and also how sort of soothing the tone was to me, and maternal, that the female form is just amazing. And its too early for this.

But very cool.

shando · Post by **shando** » August 24th, 2008, 10:29 am

arthursimone wrote:
shando wrote:
Says you. Many say differently.

many are also mormons!!

Many are also self-important weirdo loners. I am eating it. I obviously know nothing about art.

KathyRose · Post by **KathyRose** » August 24th, 2008, 10:32 am

mpbrockman wrote:Hmmm, I would have figured the image would've been blonder.

Might have been more of 'em, but everyone knows that blonde is the recessive gene ... I was more impressed by the consistency of the spray-on tans.