What are your most Controversial opinions?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
slavavov
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 5768
Location: Santa Monica

PostPosted: Sun Apr 25, 2021 10:22 pm    Post subject:

kikanga wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
slavavov wrote:
FernieBee wrote:
Audio cassettes aren't as bad as I judged them to be, back in the 80's & 90's: just use a quality (Type 2) tape and a quality deck (for recording).

Digital is always better than analog though. When you record anything on analog, it seems like there's always some loss of the original quality, and analog mediums don't age well either.


Digital is more perfectly replicable from iteration to iteration, but not necessarily from source to first recorded iteration.


I'm not going to pretend I'm some expert on this stuff. Because I'm not.
But I have noticed alot of the early 00's NBA footage is blurry crap to watch now. Moreso than recordings before it. I always figured it was cause they went digital, and the quality was still crap. And now in 2021, we can't fix a 360p or 480p video and turn it into 720p or 1080p. But remastering film recordings is actually do-able. We see it with old movies all the time.
I imagine music is similar. You can take from a record and make a 320 kbps (maximum sound quality) audio file with it now. But you can't get the same quality trying to take from a tape recording.

I'm not an expert on this stuff either, but with digital recording, I think there are different channels that they can use for different components of the song (bass, guitar, percussion, vocals, etc.). It seems that with digital recordings, each channel can be "positioned" so that you hear them from different directions, or separately if that makes sense. I don't think they can do that with analog, or at least cassette tapes.

I wonder if that's why a song on tape sounds lower quality than on CD or an MP3.
_________________
The Lakers and Dodgers are the reigning world champs.

As the Dead Kennedys once said, California Uber Alles.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
FernieBee
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 2927
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2021 5:18 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
Digital is more perfectly replicable from iteration to iteration, but not necessarily from source to first recorded iteration.

I like this description.

Even though I have never spliced tape, as I'm an amateur digital editor, I am fond of those people who made a living at it...in the 80's, mostly.

They were doing this:

https://youtu.be/rXEBDCX_O6M
(Analog Audio Editing with ReVox)

https://youtu.be/_TARpAdIjRM
(Editing Analog Tape)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
FernieBee
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 2927
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2021 5:23 am    Post subject:

This was done via splice-editing, only about three years ago:

https://youtu.be/GzrbQZVXRiw
(Running Redux - Berrios Beats)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
panamaniac
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 9895
Location: PTY

PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2021 8:25 am    Post subject:

FernieBee wrote:
Audio cassettes aren't as bad as I judged them to be, back in the 80's & 90's: just use a quality (Type 2) tape and a quality deck (for recording).


Cassette are a tad below vinyl in terms of quality. Because vinyl is bigger and denser, it's better suited for the analog world. Cassette is also analog, so a clean tape and a good player will get you close to the original recording in terms of depth and authenticity. Just sucks that the tape will oxidize (depending on climate) and generally has about the shelf life of cottage cheese through a radiator.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
FernieBee
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 2927
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 5:31 am    Post subject:

panamaniac wrote:
...vinyl is bigger and denser, it's better suited for the analog world. Cassette is also analog, so a clean tape and a good player will get you close to the original recording in terms of depth and authenticity.

Vinyl is so damn tasty. It's music to my ears (pun intended). I have a Stanton T.90 USB turntable, with an Audio Technica ATP-2XN cartridge, hooked up to my computer...just so I can digitize my 600 12-inch singles from the 1980's.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
non-player zealot
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Posts: 19843

PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 4:07 pm    Post subject:

I liked the slantback Sevilles. To me, they were more cool than weird. As I said in the comments, "I wanted one of those when I was a kid", the owner just replied, "I appreciate you (your kind)."

https://tinyurl.com/3pkyxrct
_________________
GOAT MAGIC REEL
SEDALE TRIBUTE
EDDIE DONX!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
non-player zealot
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Posts: 19843

PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 4:20 pm    Post subject:

panamaniac wrote:
FernieBee wrote:
Audio cassettes aren't as bad as I judged them to be, back in the 80's & 90's: just use a quality (Type 2) tape and a quality deck (for recording).


Cassette are a tad below vinyl in terms of quality. Because vinyl is bigger and denser, it's better suited for the analog world. Cassette is also analog, so a clean tape and a good player will get you close to the original recording in terms of depth and authenticity. Just sucks that the tape will oxidize (depending on climate) and generally has about the shelf life of cottage cheese through a radiator.


I recall a park bday party I went to in the late 90s where someone brought a few cases full of radio recorded stuff from the early 80s, all labeled by date. This was evidently someone who recorded from the radio week by week for years. It was an impressive collection. This was circa 98 and there were tapes from 80, 81, 82 and they were being played on a boom box kinda like old epis of Casey Kasem. Freeze Frame by J. Geils Band, Jeopardy by Greg Kihn, Bette Davis Eyes by Kim Carnes and so forth I remember being shook at the dates because I never had tapes that lasted more than a few years the way I treated em. Most of mine got melted in my car or garbled in cassette players. I've never had a knack for re-sleeving media be they tapes, CDs, VHS's, etc. I guess I'm more impressed than the anal-retentiveness of people who can save tapes for 17-18 years more than anything.
_________________
GOAT MAGIC REEL
SEDALE TRIBUTE
EDDIE DONX!


Last edited by non-player zealot on Tue Apr 27, 2021 6:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
non-player zealot
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Posts: 19843

PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 4:28 pm    Post subject:

kikanga wrote:


But I have noticed alot of the early 00's NBA footage is blurry crap to watch now. Moreso than recordings before it. I always figured it was cause they went digital, and the quality was still crap.


Part of that equation is that tapes got crappier and crappier the longer they were in service. Tapes from the early 80s are heavier and better quality for the most part. The sh they sold, even name branded stuff, in the 90s were lightweight gabbage. The oldest VHS tape I've ever gotten was from 81 and it's as heavy as a brick and the sleeve was about 5x thicker than the cheap sleeves of latter years. Tapes were treated and produced as if they were camera equipment back then. VCRs themselves also got lighter and cheaper than they were in the 80s.

A VCR in 1981 ran upwards of a G and by 86 they were still a few hundred bucks. Video stores would rent the damn decks, much less the movies then.
My folks bought one in 1986 at Price Club and it cost 400 bucks iirc. I still had that VCR a decade later. By the 90s, you could buy crappy ones for 100. Crap in, crap out. That's not to say that the signal generally sucked, even in early digital. When I make recaps of stuff from, say 2000, that I recorded and sleeved and never watched a second time, I still have to apply filters to it to improve its sound and appearance. The visual quality of a recording from the 90s to early 2K, digital or not, hinges greatly on the quality of the equipment, media, signal, and recording speed. By the time we got to recordable DVDs, NBA footage seemed to improve merely because if you REC'd it straight onto DVDs, you never had to contend w/ the jitter that was inherent in tapes (which only worsened w/ the tape's age and use). A solid, stable picture makes a big difference.
_________________
GOAT MAGIC REEL
SEDALE TRIBUTE
EDDIE DONX!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
non-player zealot
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Posts: 19843

PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 4:36 pm    Post subject:

FernieBee wrote:

Vinyl is so damn tasty.



Licorice pizza.
_________________
GOAT MAGIC REEL
SEDALE TRIBUTE
EDDIE DONX!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 29620

PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 9:55 pm    Post subject:

governator wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
governator wrote:
raw scallions and raw beansprouts are disgusting



They're everywhere in asian food... I pick them out

I respect your personal taste even as I contend it is objectively wrong.
_________________
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MPeP09FV3tk
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
C M B
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Nov 2006
Posts: 18715
Location: Prarie & Manchester, high above the western sideline

PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 10:47 pm    Post subject:

Banksy's art is lame.
_________________
http://chickhearn.ytmnd.com/

Sister Golden Hair wrote:
LAMAR ODOM is an anagram for ... DOOM ALARM
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
jonnybravo
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 27775

PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 11:07 pm    Post subject:

non-player zealot wrote:
kikanga wrote:


But I have noticed alot of the early 00's NBA footage is blurry crap to watch now. Moreso than recordings before it. I always figured it was cause they went digital, and the quality was still crap.


Part of that equation is that tapes got crappier and crappier the longer they were in service. Tapes from the early 80s are heavier and better quality for the most part. The sh they sold, even name branded stuff, in the 90s were lightweight gabbage. The oldest VHS tape I've ever gotten was from 81 and it's as heavy as a brick and the sleeve was about 5x thicker than the cheap sleeves of latter years. Tapes were treated and produced as if they were camera equipment back then. VCRs themselves also got lighter and cheaper than they were in the 80s.

A VCR in 1981 ran upwards of a G and by 86 they were still a few hundred bucks. Video stores would rent the damn decks, much less the movies then.
My folks bought one in 1986 at Price Club and it cost 400 bucks iirc. I still had that VCR a decade later. By the 90s, you could buy crappy ones for 100. Crap in, crap out. That's not to say that the signal generally sucked, even in early digital. When I make recaps of stuff from, say 2000, that I recorded and sleeved and never watched a second time, I still have to apply filters to it to improve its sound and appearance. The visual quality of a recording from the 90s to early 2K, digital or not, hinges greatly on the quality of the equipment, media, signal, and recording speed. By the time we got to recordable DVDs, NBA footage seemed to improve merely because if you REC'd it straight onto DVDs, you never had to contend w/ the jitter that was inherent in tapes (which only worsened w/ the tape's age and use). A solid, stable picture makes a big difference.


I was waiting for you brotha lol.
_________________
KOBE
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 25780
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Wed Apr 28, 2021 8:24 am    Post subject:

non-player zealot wrote:
kikanga wrote:


But I have noticed alot of the early 00's NBA footage is blurry crap to watch now. Moreso than recordings before it. I always figured it was cause they went digital, and the quality was still crap.


Part of that equation is that tapes got crappier and crappier the longer they were in service. Tapes from the early 80s are heavier and better quality for the most part. The sh they sold, even name branded stuff, in the 90s were lightweight gabbage. The oldest VHS tape I've ever gotten was from 81 and it's as heavy as a brick and the sleeve was about 5x thicker than the cheap sleeves of latter years. Tapes were treated and produced as if they were camera equipment back then. VCRs themselves also got lighter and cheaper than they were in the 80s.

A VCR in 1981 ran upwards of a G and by 86 they were still a few hundred bucks. Video stores would rent the damn decks, much less the movies then.
My folks bought one in 1986 at Price Club and it cost 400 bucks iirc. I still had that VCR a decade later. By the 90s, you could buy crappy ones for 100. Crap in, crap out. That's not to say that the signal generally sucked, even in early digital. When I make recaps of stuff from, say 2000, that I recorded and sleeved and never watched a second time, I still have to apply filters to it to improve its sound and appearance. The visual quality of a recording from the 90s to early 2K, digital or not, hinges greatly on the quality of the equipment, media, signal, and recording speed. By the time we got to recordable DVDs, NBA footage seemed to improve merely because if you REC'd it straight onto DVDs, you never had to contend w/ the jitter that was inherent in tapes (which only worsened w/ the tape's age and use). A solid, stable picture makes a big difference.


Well I just learned alot. Thanks NPZ!
_________________
“No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man.” - Heraclitus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
FernieBee
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 2927
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Wed Apr 28, 2021 9:26 am    Post subject:

What's my IP?

IP address is 82.102.24.45 in Glattbrugg, Zuerich, Switzerland (8152)

VPN's are sneaky and fun, is my controversial opinion.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
FernieBee
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 2927
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Wed Apr 28, 2021 9:29 am    Post subject:

FernieBee wrote:
What's my IP?

IP address is 82.102.24.45 in Glattbrugg, Zuerich, Switzerland (8152)

VPN's are sneaky and fun, is my controversial opinion.



Now:
IP address is 91.195.99.170 in Bucuresti, Romania (020331)

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 29620

PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2021 5:12 pm    Post subject:

C M B wrote:
Banksy's art is lame.

Controversial counterpoint: it's okay.
_________________
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MPeP09FV3tk
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 29620

PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2021 5:13 pm    Post subject:

Onur Tukel is the best, most fun mumblecore director.*



* Bujalski only really shined as he moved away from mumblecore.
_________________
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MPeP09FV3tk
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 48345
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:27 pm    Post subject:

C M B wrote:
Banksy's art is lame.


It’s not controversial when you simply reveal you are clueless. I get it, conceptual art is hard. Stick to dogs playing poker and you’ll be fine.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
non-player zealot
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Posts: 19843

PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:18 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
C M B wrote:
Banksy's art is lame.


It’s not controversial when you simply reveal you are clueless. I get it, conceptual art is hard. Stick to dogs playing poker and you’ll be fine.


There's a lot of art, even some that sells for high figures, that contains less of a discernable commentary on anything than Banksy's stuff does (overall). There are many successful names you could choose to argue this, but take Richard Diebenkorn for example. His geometric blueprint like paintings/etchings are all high dollar pieces. When I look at them, I strain to understand what they represent or if they are a commentary on anything. I can understand the visual appeal, however, but the immediate reaction to seeing his geometric paintings is 'Huh?..." And they go for millions.

Banksy is criticized in part because he can be blatantly obvious and critics find his messaging trite and maybe art school teen-rebel-ish. That monumental piece he did with the stuffed animal heads sticking out of a truck bed (looked like the kind of truck they haul livestock off in to be slaughtered) accompanied with real, distressed animal sounds was interesting, I thought. It drew a number of reactions and emotions to it, I found it amusing and disturbing at the same time. They showed it in a documentary and little kids would be terrified of it while adults would laugh when the seemed to understand the surface level message. Something like that shows he's a talented artist beyond using stencils and despite his use of sentiments that may or may not be trite. He's more of a Warhol type artist. He likes statements more than making timeless, aesthetically interesting art. A lot of people to this day think Warhol was full of S w/ his soup cans and Brillo boxes and now pop art is uber popular and universally accepted. Jackson Pollock was initially called a kook by early critics who didn't think his drip technique fit the true definition of "painting". Maybe Banksy will turn more critics into proponents as decades go by.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Diebenkorn
_________________
GOAT MAGIC REEL
SEDALE TRIBUTE
EDDIE DONX!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
C M B
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Nov 2006
Posts: 18715
Location: Prarie & Manchester, high above the western sideline

PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:20 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
C M B wrote:
Banksy's art is lame.


It’s not controversial when you simply reveal you are clueless. I get it, conceptual art is hard. Stick to dogs playing poker and you’ll be fine.


dogs playing poker is lame too, yet, not as trite as banksy's stuff
_________________
http://chickhearn.ytmnd.com/

Sister Golden Hair wrote:
LAMAR ODOM is an anagram for ... DOOM ALARM
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
non-player zealot
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Posts: 19843

PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:25 pm    Post subject:

C M B wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
C M B wrote:
Banksy's art is lame.


It’s not controversial when you simply reveal you are clueless. I get it, conceptual art is hard. Stick to dogs playing poker and you’ll be fine.


dogs playing poker is lame too, yet, not as trite as banksy's stuff


Dogs playing poker is a brilliant masterpiece that suggests that we are all dogs playing poker; that...life itself.......is dogs playing poker.
_________________
GOAT MAGIC REEL
SEDALE TRIBUTE
EDDIE DONX!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 88446
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2021 9:24 pm    Post subject:

You gotta know when to hold em and when to lick em.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 18068

PostPosted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 4:40 am    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
governator wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
governator wrote:
raw scallions and raw beansprouts are disgusting



They're everywhere in asian food... I pick them out

I respect your personal taste even as I contend it is objectively wrong.


Thx lol, my wife gives me side eye every time I put them aside
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 48345
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 12:52 pm    Post subject:

non-player zealot wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
C M B wrote:
Banksy's art is lame.


It’s not controversial when you simply reveal you are clueless. I get it, conceptual art is hard. Stick to dogs playing poker and you’ll be fine.


There's a lot of art, even some that sells for high figures, that contains less of a discernable commentary on anything than Banksy's stuff does (overall). There are many successful names you could choose to argue this, but take Richard Diebenkorn for example. His geometric blueprint like paintings/etchings are all high dollar pieces. When I look at them, I strain to understand what they represent or if they are a commentary on anything. I can understand the visual appeal, however, but the immediate reaction to seeing his geometric paintings is 'Huh?..." And they go for millions.


Totally understandable. Such works aren't about discernible representation or obvious commentary. The works of Abstract Expressionists are about the act of painting in and of itself . . . the concept art itself. They are questioning, "what is a painting?" This lead to the all-over paintings of Pollock and the like - no composition other than border to border, brushless splotches plopped on to the canvas. The act of paining, not what the painting is "of"—"action painting". Fields of color that aren't representations of shape or form, but play off traditional concepts of horizon. In other cases it's about the brush stroke itself. The stroke is the stroke and nothing else. It represents nothing other than the fact that the act of the stroke took place. Appreciation (or at least understanding) comes from the knowledge of what the personal motivations of the artist are. That's why I gravitated to the study of the AE's and the Dadaists. It's about deconstructing the traditions and "rules" of painting and sculpture. Artists like Rauschenberg combined both into his investigations of painting and sculpture, literally calling them "Combines". These concepts formed more "representational" art forms that came later like Pop Art, where the works depicted something, but the depiction wasn't the point.

Quote:
Banksy is criticized in part because he can be blatantly obvious and critics find his messaging trite and maybe art school teen-rebel-ish. That monumental piece he did with the stuffed animal heads sticking out of a truck bed (looked like the kind of truck they haul livestock off in to be slaughtered) accompanied with real, distressed animal sounds was interesting, I thought. It drew a number of reactions and emotions to it, I found it amusing and disturbing at the same time. They showed it in a documentary and little kids would be terrified of it while adults would laugh when the seemed to understand the surface level message. Something like that shows he's a talented artist beyond using stencils and despite his use of sentiments that may or may not be trite. He's more of a Warhol type artist. He likes statements more than making timeless, aesthetically interesting art. A lot of people to this day think Warhol was full of S w/ his soup cans and Brillo boxes and now pop art is uber popular and universally accepted. Jackson Pollock was initially called a kook by early critics who didn't think his drip technique fit the true definition of "painting". Maybe Banksy will turn more critics into proponents as decades go by.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Diebenkorn


The thing that really worked against Banksy with so many was, rather than simply breaking down what art and painting is like the AE's etc., he also made it about a criticism of the art world itself—almost attacking the people in the culture, the purveyors, critics and "experts".
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
non-player zealot
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Posts: 19843

PostPosted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 2:13 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:


...That's why I gravitated to the study of the AE's and the Dadaists. It's about deconstructing the traditions and "rules" of painting and sculpture. Artists like Rauschenberg combined both into his investigations of painting and sculpture, literally calling them "Combines". These concepts formed more "representational" art forms that came later like Pop Art, where the works depicted something, but the depiction wasn't the point.


Solid. You DID major in art. I saw the movie "Pollock" by Ed Harris and he mentioned Alexander Calder in it. He created the mobile. He wanted to integrate movement and varying perspectives into his sculptures and now mobiles are an understood thing and most people probably don't even consider them art even tho they began as it.

Warhol is an interesting case because his concept was mass production of the same appropriated image (usually pop culture images) and in practice, he had his studio people choose the colors and had them produce his screenprinted Maos, flowers, soups, Marilyns, etc. He called down to the print shop and asked for xyz and gave the screenprinters control. That's partly why his authenticaton board stopped authenticating his canvasses. It's hard to tell because of the above if Andy did the work or his people or if his concept of having his people do it WAS his work. One of his old print shops reproduced some of his stuff from old negatives on an episode of VICE a long time ago. They still had the old 70s/80s machines they used and they saved his negatives of Jackie Kennedy etc. They even found the same 1980 dated acrylic paint and made exact replicas that would serve as originals in Warhol's concept.
_________________
GOAT MAGIC REEL
SEDALE TRIBUTE
EDDIE DONX!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32  Next
Page 29 of 32
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB