PT Rethink Your Life: The PT Social Thread: Episode II (image/gif-heavy)

I appear, I disappear.

 

Just like a force ghost.

 

In some of my earlier drawings, I found ways of posing him so that detail was ommitted, and others were a bit more cartoon-like, but I have begun to include more detail although perspective difficulties still limit my range of drawing (in most, he is looking right at the viewer). Luckily, I've saved dozens of images to use as references.

Anyway, if you are going to re-colour any of the films, as I believe in recognise the inherent superiority of film as a visual medium, I'd be in favour of what the person here is doing to the prequels; namely, adjusting the colour balance and whatever to make them look like they were filmed on film (e.g. here and here).

Edit — Damn you KaleeshEyes, do you look at OT.com as well?

 

I wouldn't mind seeing the entire film like that. It looks it its in technicolor just out of the 30s.

Anyone else notice how nervous Anakin is? Just look at how he is fidgeting his hands. Never noticed that before.

 

Or he's just fidgety

 

Digital images are either flat and lifeless or over-saturated and fake looking.
I've never seen a digital (stills) camera that can replicate the rich colours and depth of good old Kodachrome film.

 

The fact that he's nervous around Padme makes me like him even more. And sad about the way things end for them.
Let's not forget he's pined after her for what 10 years, and is finally with her. I'd be nervous too.

 

Grievous looks great digital or film...

(original)

(here)
(The colour of the lightsabers has been adjusted to match the OT, everything else following along)



Edit: I hate it when hot linked images thumbnail themselves

 

In short, SW looks awesome on digital or film: PT or OT. Or ST.

 

Except I don't like the PT colours palette at times. Too much red I think.

 

I'm pretty sure it was intentional to portray Anakin as an emotional basket case for AOTC.

 

Think I'll sign off of the laptop for tonight folks, though I might pop back up via tapatalk, you never know.

Goodnight!

 

For me, film's better than digital. Not only does film generally have better colours, but I find something about the perspective in digital images (at least 'home quality' ones) to be slightly 'off', as if objects have less depth to them or something. I also don't like 3-D. for similar reasons: to me, I find that it looks more like having multiple 2-D. images at different distances against a background.

 

Anyway, Anakin's fidgeting may or may not have been intentional (given the situation, I can see it), but I see a trend on this sight of people trying to claim that pretty much everything in a film has meaning to it — sort of like an E.U., but with meanings rather than backstories and descriptions. I think some people have trouble distinguishing meaning written into things from meaning that might come out after something is made (i.e. retrofitted meaning), and in some cases, I think they go even further than that and read into nothing.

But anyway, this is for Anakin Skywalker:

​

 

Well. I am not one of those people. At least, not yet
Nervous guys fidgeting isn't exactly rare. You see it often in romantic comedies.

Let's be honest. This is what Anakin feels like towards Padme in AOTC.

 

I hardly think an intentionally fidgety Anakin is PAREIDOLIA

 

AshiusX
No no no; always need something 70s or 80s:

​

 

Just don't consider what the lyrics are actually about...

 

Hey VJ. Doing alright. I'm procrastinating but I'm studying. Star Wars video binge watching helps relieve stress

How are you?

 

Well, our Prime Minister can take two minutes answering a question, and then act very impatient when an interpreter is translating his waffle despite said interpreter cutting it down to forty seconds:

​

 

goodnight folks!

let's hope wednesday ends in a bang

 

Well about still photography (not that I'm an expert), most varieties of film can't replicated the rich colors of Kodachrome, but Kodachrome was a color reversal film for slides. I think a lot if not most color reversal films have very saturated color, but most film is color negative, and looks much duller in contrast. And depth is probably mostly a function of the lens and camera. Bad lens + fancy film = bad picture even still. Also, if by "depth" you mean grain resolution, I've read 35mm slide reversal is only ~16MP equivalent (most 35mm color negative film like what you can get at drug stores is lower than this), and Nikon has entry-level DSLR's nowadays with 22MP resolution sensors. But resolution isn't everything. If you like Kodachrome though, they still make Fujichrome Velvia, but caveat emptor, it's like 30 US dollars a roll and I read processing is expensive too and you'll probably have to mail it in somewhere when you're done. And that's 36 exposures. For 30 bucks you can buy a 62GB memory card which can hold more than 1,000 uncompressed 16MP photos (48 MB each) http://kb.sandisk.com/app/answers/d...ictures-that-can-be-stored-on-a-memory-device. Color reproduction aside, you can't beat the convenience and cost-effectiveness of digital. I hear color reversal film is hard to take pictures with, and film is hard to take pictures with period. I've thought about getting into film photography, but probably won't. It'll take forever to get good at photography period anyway, and I still have to pay for gas. And I've heard my mom complain enough about how much of a pain it was to have to buy rolls of film just to take cheapo snapshots back in the film era in the '80s when there was no alternative. Film is too hipster-y and too rich for my blood.

Edit: Oh and speaking of '70s music:



I saw that record at Barnes and Noble and I wanted to get it.

 

I feel like I'm going to come out of this semester knowing less than I did last year.

 

And then, seeing what people are like these days, that might not be a good thing...