4 ms·
Some considerations by watching the video in the post. I think testing stills with fixed lighting is pointless: once the light starts flickering through the fo
by carlob 12y ago
Some considerations by watching the video in the post.
I think testing stills with fixed lighting is pointless: once the light starts flickering through the foliage, or the time of the day changes this things will become very obvious.
Note how the video is not really a video, but a series of morphed stills, I'm sure that a moving viewer and binocular vision will make those things much more obvious.
Why not just get them painted by some artist? Make them beautiful instead of trying to camouflage them.
- iSnow 12y ago>Why not just get them painted by some artist? Over here in Germany they do this in quite some cities: http://frankkoebsch.wordpress.com/2012/10/05/bemalte-trafohauser-2/ http://frankkoebsch.wordpress.com/2012/10/05/bemalte-trafoha... http://www.juliusbaasner.com/architektur.php?projekt=1 http://www.juliusbaasner.com/architektur.php?projekt=1 http://www.appolloart.com/2014/04/28/stadtwerke-bernau-lieben-es-auch-verspielt/ http://www.appolloart.com/2014/04/28/stadtwerke-bernau-liebe... One can debate how beautiful the results turned out but some painted transformer stations or communications boxes gave me a smile upon seeing them here in Berlin.
- holajr 12y agoLiving in Taiwan this was also the first thought that came to my head: Isn't there already an efficient, sympathetic, and good solution to this problem? Painted Box (Taiwan): http://bit.ly/1if5VOb http://bit.ly/1if5VOb Painted Boxes (World): http://www.ettoday.net/news/20130828/262333.htm http://www.ettoday.net/news/20130828/262333.htm Painted Boxes (London): http://www.fundesign.tv/view.php?aid=3893 http://www.fundesign.tv/view.php?aid=3893 I would much rather see a mural that offers a reprieve from its surroundings than to at some point realise the concrete ugliness I'm staring at is simply a facade created to ensure my vision of any concrete ugliness is not, in fact, obscured.
- Aqwis 12y agoReminds me of the painted high rises in Prague: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2b/Jahodov%C3%A1_od_Pra%C5%BEsk%C3%A9.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2b/Jahodov%C... Just painting harsh concrete architecture with some simple patterns can make it a lot more pleasant and humane.
- Rapzid 12y agoI think the point isn't to try to hide the objects, but make it blend in. I agree with your points about lighting and video edits BUT., I believe even if they can maintain a modest fraction of this effect in real life, the impact and application of this will be huge. You don't need to not be able to tell it's there at all for it to improve the aesthetic dramatically.
- okamiueru 12y agoIt's even worse than that. The cubes are generated and overlaid on the image based on textures from the images. In other words, the lighting from the scene on a real textured cube would look nowhere near as good as what it is shown. Just consider that the cubes in these images leave no shadows or affect ambient occlusion, nor are they self-shadowed. The article and problem is interesting in itself, but the portrayal of how effective this would be in real life is greatly exaggerated.
- quesera 12y agoAgreed. Also, unless these public-space eyesores are in the desert, tundra, or on open ocean, you have the problem of seasonal foliage changes. Not to mention snow. Neat visual effect though, and there are certainly good applications for the tech -- but I'm going to say that "public eyesores" ain't one.