photography boxing: e19896 v. Stanley Edwards
- Thread starter alef
- Start date
Thamesmead. February 2004.
Two huge tanks full of shit:
A box full of ideas:
Piles of crap and false promises:
I have a new super cool website to build. I'll pop out with a compact digi camera later and post some more pics for you here. But, please don't write about me anywhere other than here.
Two huge tanks full of shit:
A box full of ideas:
Piles of crap and false promises:
I have a new super cool website to build. I'll pop out with a compact digi camera later and post some more pics for you here. But, please don't write about me anywhere other than here.
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
just out of intrest stanley seeing as you recent rants abotu stealing others works with out permission have you got bentleys permission to use their registered trade mark... in that image??
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
just out of intrest why havent' you learned ot resize images correctly for the web...e19896 said:
GarfieldLeChat said:
No. Fucking well go and report me to Mr Bentley. Then tell the BBC. Then come back and read the thread all about 'If You Were Going To Nick a Logo' I posted a couple of weeks ago.
I have no conscience about pissing about with a Bentley logo.
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
hmm you still don't understand the whole copyright angle do you...Stanley Edwards said:
more over weren't you pissing about recently about other people taking shots of graffitti and asserting that the photographer had no rights as it was a dirivertive of some one elses works... so you'd be donating that image to bentley freely if they asked for it then i hope... you know to actualyl live by your own concepts... or is it that you are infact a hypocrit....
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
btw if you were going to nick it at least do it nicely...
GarfieldLeChat said:
Fellow artist = respect.
Manufacturer of fuel guzzling mega trucks for the filthy rich = FUCK OFF.
And, that awful shit you posted above is spoiling a fucking good boxing thread. Delete it now.
Please.
GuerillaPhoto
Active Member
my opinion on the first two photos is that the first one just looks like a screen shot mid way through using the cropping tool in picassa lol.
As for stanleys I think it is an interesting concept and he has used it in the perfect situation.
As for stanleys I think it is an interesting concept and he has used it in the perfect situation.
i don't particularly like either of them - stanleys makes me want to see the whole image unmessed with
pretensiousartists un-nerves and unsettles me because it has completely kicked off my doors of perception, driven in a huge soundsystem that says **MiNdFuCk** up the side and proceeded to make me question my perspective on life
where is that nice paul russel, i liked his photos
pretensiousartists un-nerves and unsettles me because it has completely kicked off my doors of perception, driven in a huge soundsystem that says **MiNdFuCk** up the side and proceeded to make me question my perspective on life
where is that nice paul russel, i liked his photos
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
hmmm so there's no design merit in the flying b symbol which is presumably why you ripped it off right...Stanley Edwards said:
pretentious hypocrite...
waffling bollcks as per...
Chorlton said:
That's exactly what it's supposed to do. In it's original site it was simply a link to the original photograph. Trying to encourage website users to take the time to download a larger image and give it more viewing time and consideration. There's a link in this thread somewhere. That isn't a representation of the printed photograph - just a graphic and web navigation experiment. Or, summat
Original here: http://www.freewebtown.com/johncolley/gracias/LivingColour/large/066.jpg
It's a photograph of a series exploring a road trip idea from the heart of Andalucia to the developments of the coast.
Full set here:
http://www.freewebtown.com/johncolley/gracias/index.htm
GarfieldLeChat said:
It's a play on the idea of Totalist Angels wings. That's why I ripped it off
Although the Bentley emblem originally represented a Falcons wings.
e19896 said:of course i do
still working on the images it will blow you all away me know because me is good fucking good best thing on urban ever, you have been told..
Right, you've done Graffiti and Che Guevara. Anything original to say?
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
no it wasn't .... i have the orginal statue it was based on at the parents atcually it's allways looked like that... (in actauality it was the rejects statuette of the sprit of escasty for rolls which WO saw and inverted the wings on it added the B and away you go ... I'll photograph it next time i'm there if you want..)Stanley Edwards said:
firky said:
let's see one of your from scratch renderings then please firky...
GarfieldLeChat said:
What a fucking plonker.The original 'statue' represented Falcons wings. A reference to Speed and flight re; Bentley's early days as manufacturers of racing cars and suppliers of aircraft engines. Rolls Royce may well like people to think that Bentley's are RR rejects but, the original 'statue' was a unique commission based on Falcon wings.
Why do you only ever post here to try and tell others they're wrong? You only show up your own ignorance every time.
e2a; The original was designed by a motoring artist of the time - Freddie Gordon Crosby. He was a friend of the founder of the company.
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
erm no love i think you'll find actually that most historain agree that the design was created by Freddie Gordon Crosby in 1911 some 8 years before WO even started the company... as WO was a good frined of Freddie Gordon Crosby he then gave the design to him...Stanley Edwards said:
The original 'statue' represented Falcons wings. A reference to Speed and flight re; Bentley's early days as manufacturers of racing cars and suppliers of aircraft engines. Rolls Royce may well like people to think that Bentley's are RR rejects but, the original 'statue' was a unique commission based on Falcon wings.
Why do you only ever post here to try and tell others they're wrong? You only show up your own ignorance every time.
all your showing is you inherent pomposicty and you in ablity to use google to find out the simplest of historical facts... they certainly aren't falcon wings an seeing as the origin of the statue was closley connectected to WO i'm inclinded to beleive their word over yours but it's fine i should beleive some one conitnually wrong attempts to mislead others with most of their posts on anything other than their own musings and who is half cut most of the time... do us a favour stanley... you fool no one... get sober and stick to what you do best pretious posturing and navel gazing... don't try and teach your grandmother to suck eggs on subjects clearly outside of your understanding or circle...
GarfieldLeChat said:
So you admit you were wrong.
I just Googled and read and cross referenced with stuff in my memory from days when I was a motor racing obsessed teenager. I used to collect old car badges. Possibly something that lead to an interest in graphic design and corporate logos etc.
Was there ever a Bentley statue like the one you say you have at your parents house?
You won't try and deny that the original RR Spirit of Ecstasy was actually designed by Charles Robinson Sykes as an entirely separate commission? They don't even look alike.
firky said:
You know why that is?
To fool the immitators.
GarfieldLeChat said:
This is the funniest bit. "Hey, Mr Bentley I just happen to have a perfect emblem for your new company. Even incorporates a 'B' and pair of Falcon wings. You can have it for your new company if you like". Perfect.
I think you'll find that many company identities and logos are created long before they start trading even today. Helps to attract investors.
mauvais said:
Thanks for that.
The inverted colours was a bit of a navigational experiment. Sadly, I'd guess that over 90% of visitors to the site didn't get what I was getting at
The whole Totalism thing is a bit of a joke. I'm currently redesigning a new site that will bring together five different web projects as one. More than happy with the interface, but I'm struggling to make the content and navigation gel throughout.
Don't consider myself to be a good graphic designer. I've worked with good graphic designers and don't ever see myself being that good. Think the new site is an improvement in many areas mind.
mauvais
on reddit or something
The site's not so bad really; bits of that gallery you linked to are hard to read; dark grey on black etc. You have to guess you have to click the photos to pop them up. Little things, and remember I have less obvious issues than someone who doesn't use computers so much. I am fussy though cos I've done it myself.
Fair play anyhow; I spent months getting my website all nice and usable, but I haven't managed to put any photos on the bloody thing - which is worse!
Fair play anyhow; I spent months getting my website all nice and usable, but I haven't managed to put any photos on the bloody thing - which is worse!
Similar threads
