Hmm. Thought I had posted a response but it didn't go through. It was something like

I won't argue that it's rife with potential for abuse. But all a cop needs to search your vehicle during a traffic stop is "probable cause" - so let me ask you this: When is the last time that you, a friend, family member or co-worker got pulled over and had your/their car searched?

Rife with potential for abuse does not mean rife with abuse.

And case in point: I just got back from a ride on my motorcycle that I had parked in some extra space next to my car. I was putting the cover on it when a painter (they're here to paint the covered parking) came up to me and asked in what was only barely passable broken English if I could move my car further away from the cover they were about to paint. It was something like "you move...car? We paint...spray....over there....we cover bike easy.... car big." I'll leave out the pronunciation effects like "jew move" so as not to be an ass, but let's say I had to think about what he was saying to actually understand it.

my point is this: This guy could very well be an illegal, and probably is. It's no secret that they're hired for unskilled labor such as this. While yes, he is working, if he is indeed illegally here, it means he's not paying taxes. That means if his residence catches on fire, he receives free services from the fire and police departments. I'm not saying that you or I would get a bill, but they are funded by our tax dollars. If he catches a stray bullet from a near-by gun fight, he goes to the hospital on our tax dollar. To be a little more realistic, bear this in mind: If a Mexican crosses our border illegally only to have birth three feet across it, that child is now an American citizen, and will receive post-natal health care in our hospitals on our dollar. This happens ALL the time.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Anime is a huge area of art - saying it's "shit" is like saying all impressionists painters are "shit" - completely useless statement that indicates that you are not qualified to have a meaningful opinion on this.

I wouldn't classify myself as an Anime fan- but I recoginize art when I see it - some good, some bad.

I've said it before- but at the moment it's very cool to hate on Anime- buecause it was so red-hot over an extended period of time- and now we're on the downward side of that spike- so faux-hipsters attempt street cred by proclaiming their eternal hatred for it. Fashionistas bore the hell out of me.


>> ^dannym3141:

But anime is shit... doesn't matter how many japanophiles downvote this comment, it's still shit.
OMG will mikichan and pikichan get tikichan and tatusan out of the evil clutches of lord motochan?! OHNOES.
That is the exact plot of every anime, don't even deny it!

Re: Kulpims

If a thinker thinks and a painter paints, do fingers fing?

Re: Everyone else

That, along with the brick of weed, should keep him busy through the roast.

Apparently, I'm in the wrong job. I need 'body painter' on my resume.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Red House Painters, Have You Forgotten, Songs for a Blue Guitar' to 'Red House Painters, Have You Forgotten, Songs for a Blue Guitar, Amelie' - edited by calvados

He's always been one of my favorite artists, and not only for his outrageous chameleon-like performances. The man has such a broad range of interests and talents that it blows my mind. He's been an actor, a painter, a singer, a songwriter, and a narrator, and the worst he's been at any of them was competent.

>> ^TheFreak:
People like this are why I can't stand most artists. For every person who masters a medium and develops incredible skill you have a hundred people who just throw clay at a wall and let serendipity do their art for them.

>> ^MycroftHomlz:
^that's ignorant.


Although my experience is lacking in sculpture, this area of thought flows through many mediums. As a painter, and while at art school, I went through this same thing. I would separate it into three groups. Ones that can, Ones that can and have moved on and those who just can't.

Now I paint very realistically. Some like it and some don't. I've been told by some to just give up and become a photographer if I want that level of realism. I understand the opinion but don't agree. Some people get to a point and master a form and then feel the need to break it down and stray from the realism. It is hard to create good impressionism without first knowing your form.

At the same time, and I've seen up close, first hand. There were many people who were in school with me, who just couldn't draw and had no intent in learning because they just found it too hard. They spent a lot of time drawing stick figures and challenging others as to "what is art" they had the concept but no real talent or craft.

Those who can't master a skill, still enjoy and use the arena. Is it successful if no one buys it? I don't know, I just know what I like.

love love love red house painters.

Thanks a lot for the ID.
Much appreciated!

In reply to this comment by mauz15:
>> ^grinter:
anyone know who painted the first image.. the back lit, translucent waves?


That painting was made by none of the painters mentioned in the description. The painting is a brightened portion of Moon and Sea by the Russian artist George Dmitriev
http://www.artrussia.ru/artists/picture_s.php?pic_id=4880&foa=f&sort=&page=5
http://www.artrussia.ru/artists/artist_s.php?id=435&foa=f

>> ^grinter:
anyone know who painted the first image.. the back lit, translucent waves?


That painting was made by none of the painters mentioned in the description. The painting is a brightened portion of Moon and Sea by the Russian artist George Dmitriev
http://www.artrussia.ru/artists/picture_s.php?pic_id=4880&foa=f&sort=&page=5
http://www.artrussia.ru/artists/artist_s.php?id=435&foa=f

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Frida Kahlo, painter, surrealism, Mexico, Diego Rivera, biography' to 'Frida Kahlo, painter, surrealism, Mexico, Diego Rivera, biography, monobrow' - edited by ponceleon

this was just A.W.E.S.O.M.E,thanks for contributing to this thread my friend.
and remind me never to engage you in an argument.
till next time..
namaste

In reply to this comment by dannym3141:
>> ^mentality:

Sure we don't know exactly how the bain is intended to work, but we can still know that smashing in your skull with an icepick will damage your brain. Similarly, we know that certain drugs like meth will damage your brain.

Of course, stopping something from functioning is obviously a worse state than having something functioning, but this example is obviously flawed - and in two ways.

Way the first:
If you beat a brain with an icepick until it stops functioning, that is obviously a worse state of affairs than when you began - but we are referring to percieved 'damage' rather than a cessation of function, so either this isn't your point, or it's an invalid point

Way the second:
There are of course cases of head trauma leading to an IMPROVEMENT of brain function - such as a return of senses (hearing, sight). Also operations on the brain resulting in a businessman becoming an accomplished painter virtually overnight. Just because all icepick-head collisions we've ever seen have never resulted in a brain enhancement doesn't mean that it can't occur, as we can see in these examples that the possibility is there. It just takes the RIGHT KIND of icepick blow.

Science gives us accurate models of how things work. Maybe reality is a lie that God crafted to fool our senses, but that kind of metaphysical argument is the realm useless and neverending bullshit.

No, i think you misunderstood my point. My point is nothing to do with God. It's a scientific idea and i know scientists that agree with me. In fact, i don't think there's a scientist that would disagree because .. well, because it's true. I will have to drastically simplify the idea in order to explain it well here.

If we see a sequence of numbers 3 5 7 - and we think they are a series of odd numbers increasing. We can see that there may be numbers beyond 7, but at the moment we are incapable of identifying it. Time passes, technology improves, then we get the next number in the sequence and it's an 11 and we realise that it's a sequence of prime numbers. Although our system accurately described what we could observe to begin with, the system failed when we discovered something new.

That's all there is to it. As a practitioner of science, you MUST perform experiments with an open mind. To do otherwise is to taint your observations with your own bias and is poor science. Tomorrow, we may find that all our theories are not necessarily the most accurate theories. Continued below...

Pssst: science never claimed that the earth was the center. We know better now because our claims are based on actual fact and observation. Science: 1, Philosophy: 0.

To carry on from above, this has proven true in the past. Theories that were raised showed us accurate results. Then we found a case where they DID NOT accurately predict the results, and we had to throw the theory away and adopt a new one. If you would like to nitpick examples then i will give you a better one - that of the classical view of atomic structure vs. the modern view.

We used to think that the nucleus of an atom was solid, and now we think that it is made up of protons and neutrons. But wait, those again are made up of quarks. Wait, are the quarks made up of strings!?

It is not the goal of science to look into the nature of being. That is the job for religion and philosophy. Stop dismissing science because it cannot answer the unanswerable.

Firstly, i have never dismissed science for not being able to answer the unanswerable. I think you have an idea in your head that i somehow approached this from a religious standpoint and that is your downfall in your 'debunk'.

Secondly, semantics aside, i think science has a duty to look into the nature of being whenever possible. Check out the anthropic principle - i think that's a little bit to do with the nature of being. You could argue it, and i'll accept that, but i still think it does. If it's possible for science to shed any light on the nature of being, then it will, people won't go "THAT'S NOT OUR REALM BOYS LEAVE IT ALONE!" Philosophy is philosophy, and science is science. If the two can help each other out, of course they will, and of course we don't know that the answers won't be helpful to each other

But, of course, that was never my point, i simply reply to it as you raise it

--- Please don't ask me to cite examples, you can find them for yourself ---

>> ^mentality:

Sure we don't know exactly how the bain is intended to work, but we can still know that smashing in your skull with an icepick will damage your brain. Similarly, we know that certain drugs like meth will damage your brain.

Of course, stopping something from functioning is obviously a worse state than having something functioning, but this example is obviously flawed - and in two ways.

Way the first:
If you beat a brain with an icepick until it stops functioning, that is obviously a worse state of affairs than when you began - but we are referring to percieved 'damage' rather than a cessation of function, so either this isn't your point, or it's an invalid point

Way the second:
There are of course cases of head trauma leading to an IMPROVEMENT of brain function - such as a return of senses (hearing, sight). Also operations on the brain resulting in a businessman becoming an accomplished painter virtually overnight. Just because all icepick-head collisions we've ever seen have never resulted in a brain enhancement doesn't mean that it can't occur, as we can see in these examples that the possibility is there. It just takes the RIGHT KIND of icepick blow.

Science gives us accurate models of how things work. Maybe reality is a lie that God crafted to fool our senses, but that kind of metaphysical argument is the realm useless and neverending bullshit.

No, i think you misunderstood my point. My point is nothing to do with God. It's a scientific idea and i know scientists that agree with me. In fact, i don't think there's a scientist that would disagree because .. well, because it's true. I will have to drastically simplify the idea in order to explain it well here.

If we see a sequence of numbers 3 5 7 - and we think they are a series of odd numbers increasing. We can see that there may be numbers beyond 7, but at the moment we are incapable of identifying it. Time passes, technology improves, then we get the next number in the sequence and it's an 11 and we realise that it's a sequence of prime numbers. Although our system accurately described what we could observe to begin with, the system failed when we discovered something new.

That's all there is to it. As a practitioner of science, you MUST perform experiments with an open mind. To do otherwise is to taint your observations with your own bias and is poor science. Tomorrow, we may find that all our theories are not necessarily the most accurate theories. Continued below...

Pssst: science never claimed that the earth was the center. We know better now because our claims are based on actual fact and observation. Science: 1, Philosophy: 0.

To carry on from above, this has proven true in the past. Theories that were raised showed us accurate results. Then we found a case where they DID NOT accurately predict the results, and we had to throw the theory away and adopt a new one. If you would like to nitpick examples then i will give you a better one - that of the classical view of atomic structure vs. the modern view.

We used to think that the nucleus of an atom was solid, and now we think that it is made up of protons and neutrons. But wait, those again are made up of quarks. Wait, are the quarks made up of strings!?

It is not the goal of science to look into the nature of being. That is the job for religion and philosophy. Stop dismissing science because it cannot answer the unanswerable.

Firstly, i have never dismissed science for not being able to answer the unanswerable. I think you have an idea in your head that i somehow approached this from a religious standpoint and that is your downfall in your 'debunk'.

Secondly, semantics aside, i think science has a duty to look into the nature of being whenever possible. Check out the anthropic principle - i think that's a little bit to do with the nature of being. You could argue it, and i'll accept that, but i still think it does. If it's possible for science to shed any light on the nature of being, then it will, people won't go "THAT'S NOT OUR REALM BOYS LEAVE IT ALONE!" Philosophy is philosophy, and science is science. If the two can help each other out, of course they will, and of course we don't know that the answers won't be helpful to each other

But, of course, that was never my point, i simply reply to it as you raise it

--- Please don't ask me to cite examples, you can find them for yourself ---

That's all we need to know pims, all we need to know

Issy, my god I think we're on the umm... fourth episode of season 3 and it's AMAZING! Lost is just surpassing itself in every way too, woohoo bout frickin time.

Ok i'll start you off then if I must.

This was one of the weirdest things to happen. I was young and reckless and completely rebellious and decided one day to jump the train with my friend to London. She knew some fellas up there who would put us up and I briefly knew who they were and had met them so wasn't particularly concerned. We spent the hour and a half there wedged in the loos smoking out of the window and drinking a bottle each of white cider, bleeeech. By the time we got there I was pretty wasted already, and it was a hot day etc. Wandering through London taking buses to get to this mobile phone shop they all worked in together. Eventually they finished up for the day and we went home to her friends place, by this point I had been given a few spliffs on top of the cider and was really not myself at all. Anyway, when we walked into this apartment there was this guy who was all dressed up in overalls painting the place.

Kelly's friend introduced him just as Steve and that he was doin him a favour decorating his place out for him as he'd not long moved there. He was a total hottie and I was drunk and stoned so had clearly lost any inhibitions and was flirting outrageously. As the evening went on he finished up and came in and sat down to eat with us and get drunk. Of course I was being a total slapper, and he seemingly didn't mind at all. Basically we got a bit frisky and all that jazz but when it came down to it (literally) there was no way I was going there his penis was abnormal and by that I mean gigantic! Scared the living shit out of me. Luckily he wasn't a bad guy and just laughed and we fell asleep all being well.

Next day I got made a complete twat of. Somehow the staff at the home I was living in had gotten hold of Kelly's number and rang her Mum who had done a 1471 when Kel phoned her the night before and gave the number to my social worker. So the next morning this guy who's flat we're in gets a very shitty phone call telling him that he had two underage girls who have run away, one in local authority care and that if he didn't take us to a police station so we could get home they would ring the cops and get them arrested. So yeah that was horrible, especially seeing as i'd lied about my age haha. Fucking embarrassing, but I was glad to get out of there after that. We had to wait in the police station until they could get a taxi driver who was willing to drive all the way to London from Bournemouth and then back again. Some stupid red tape funding issues stopped us just getting a taxi from London as it was going to be Social Services paying it, not us outright. Eventually some guy got there, and we fell asleep in the back of the car.

Woke up to find ourselves off road somewhere in the New Forest!! We absolutely shit ourselves, neither of us had a phone. All the lights were off and the driver was passed out in his seat, it was about 2am. We demanded he wake up not trusting him or the situation, it all felt very weird. He tried to tell us he was just needing a nap or he couldn't drive but we both started crying and panicking, so the poor bastard was left with little choice. Finally got home, acted like the little twat I was when they started questioning me about where I had been and what i'd been doing, as if they had no right to worry about me, god I was such a prick sometimes haha.

So I got lumped with paying that whole bill off, took me nearly a year to finish. As far as I was concerned though, it had been a little adventure and something in me when I was young craved independence so much I didn't think twice about doing stupuid stuff. The end of this story was the weirdest part...

This Steve had through his friend told Kelly a few times he wanted to meet up with me again and blah blah. I was never interested, mostly cos unless I was drunk the male species pretty much perplexed me even up until I was about 17! Turned out it was a good job I never went there. About 6 months later I get a phone call from Kelly telling me to turn the fucking tv on NOW. The Cook Report was on, some investigative journo Roger Cook used to go around doing exposes on stuff, he was one of the first people to do a show such as that. And there he was, this Steve. Turned out he wasn't a painter and decorator, he was the owner of a chain of phone shops and he had fraudulently made hundreds and thousands of pounds in stolen and contract phones. Jesus Christ

I'm not sure what the moral of this story is, but I can safely say I've never been as reckless since!

Thank you, guys. This is all digital - I'm sure work wouldn't appreciate it if I used real paints there, as messy with them as I am. The newer stuff is done in "SAI" paint tools, a japanese program that suits me just fine for most everything.

I used to use other tools such as painter (I think spoco's was done with it Spoco's was done with ArtRage primarily), but they tend to crash like the dickens.

The 3d things was a project I was working on in Zbrush.

In reply to this comment by dag:
Wow, that's really fantastic stuff - I love the style. Is it all digital? What do you use to do your art?