RE: Fiat 500 roadster concepts
Discussion
Seems like there is a lot of ignorant and uneducated people on here.
Firstly, using the word "gay" as an adjective instead of a noun is prejudice. It should not be tolerated.
My second point would be that any person can express an opinion on a design. It is entirely a different matter that the critic does not accept moments of inspiration and the form that follows, no matter what draft that comes from the original kernel of inspiration as being anything other than something from inside the mind of an artist. That the object exists in reality to provide reference points for further renderings is not important. Jean Baudrillard speaks about this in his text, 'Simulacra and Simulation,' stating from his three orders of simulation that the second order of simulation - The Hyper Real - that simulations can recreate that which it attempts to simulate, but encapsulates something within it that is not present within the original object. It is more, accentuated, sharper, crisper, anything more than the original. But this is ignoring the most simple observation of all. Much like artists who draw preliminary sketches of great sculptures or the cartoons painted by Michael Angelo, any diagram, plan, preliminary sketch or design can be considered Conceptual, with a capital 'C.' It is from the mind, it is a concept. Whether it emulates that which already exists or whether its eventual form differs from the concept is matterless. The concept is.
Read a book, visit some art galleries, then come back on PH with an educated opinion.
Firstly, using the word "gay" as an adjective instead of a noun is prejudice. It should not be tolerated.
My second point would be that any person can express an opinion on a design. It is entirely a different matter that the critic does not accept moments of inspiration and the form that follows, no matter what draft that comes from the original kernel of inspiration as being anything other than something from inside the mind of an artist. That the object exists in reality to provide reference points for further renderings is not important. Jean Baudrillard speaks about this in his text, 'Simulacra and Simulation,' stating from his three orders of simulation that the second order of simulation - The Hyper Real - that simulations can recreate that which it attempts to simulate, but encapsulates something within it that is not present within the original object. It is more, accentuated, sharper, crisper, anything more than the original. But this is ignoring the most simple observation of all. Much like artists who draw preliminary sketches of great sculptures or the cartoons painted by Michael Angelo, any diagram, plan, preliminary sketch or design can be considered Conceptual, with a capital 'C.' It is from the mind, it is a concept. Whether it emulates that which already exists or whether its eventual form differs from the concept is matterless. The concept is.
Read a book, visit some art galleries, then come back on PH with an educated opinion.
porsche200471 said:
Seems like there is a lot of ignorant and uneducated people on here.
Firstly, using the word "gay" as an adjective instead of a noun is prejudice. It should not be tolerated.
My second point would be that any person can express an opinion on a design. It is entirely a different matter that the critic does not accept moments of inspiration and the form that follows, no matter what draft that comes from the original kernel of inspiration as being anything other than something from inside the mind of an artist. That the object exists in reality to provide reference points for further renderings is not important. Jean Baudrillard speaks about this in his text, 'Simulacra and Simulation,' stating from his three orders of simulation that the second order of simulation - The Hyper Real - that simulations can recreate that which it attempts to simulate, but encapsulates something within it that is not present within the original object. It is more, accentuated, sharper, crisper, anything more than the original. But this is ignoring the most simple observation of all. Much like artists who draw preliminary sketches of great sculptures or the cartoons painted by Michael Angelo, any diagram, plan, preliminary sketch or design can be considered Conceptual, with a capital 'C.' It is from the mind, it is a concept. Whether it emulates that which already exists or whether its eventual form differs from the concept is matterless. The concept is.
Read a book, visit some art galleries, then come back on PH with an educated opinion.
Not from round these parts are ya kid? Firstly, using the word "gay" as an adjective instead of a noun is prejudice. It should not be tolerated.
My second point would be that any person can express an opinion on a design. It is entirely a different matter that the critic does not accept moments of inspiration and the form that follows, no matter what draft that comes from the original kernel of inspiration as being anything other than something from inside the mind of an artist. That the object exists in reality to provide reference points for further renderings is not important. Jean Baudrillard speaks about this in his text, 'Simulacra and Simulation,' stating from his three orders of simulation that the second order of simulation - The Hyper Real - that simulations can recreate that which it attempts to simulate, but encapsulates something within it that is not present within the original object. It is more, accentuated, sharper, crisper, anything more than the original. But this is ignoring the most simple observation of all. Much like artists who draw preliminary sketches of great sculptures or the cartoons painted by Michael Angelo, any diagram, plan, preliminary sketch or design can be considered Conceptual, with a capital 'C.' It is from the mind, it is a concept. Whether it emulates that which already exists or whether its eventual form differs from the concept is matterless. The concept is.
Read a book, visit some art galleries, then come back on PH with an educated opinion.
Back on topic, I like it. I have a little penchant for the Fiat 500 but I know I shouldn't...
300bhp/ton said:
Sorry I don't agree. It's not a "new" vehicle sketch. It's a sketch based on a current model, so physical structure, layout and dimensions are already a known thing.
Even more so when it appears they also have conceptual sketches of non Abath variants that 1) match the current models proportions and 2) Are hugely different in shape/proportion to the Abath one.
That said, even if it was a new car, it's still pretty pointless and stupid to sketch something that isn't going to be possible. Styling is one thing but not leaving enough room for an engine is slightly more than a little oversight.
You really think you know it all don't you?Even more so when it appears they also have conceptual sketches of non Abath variants that 1) match the current models proportions and 2) Are hugely different in shape/proportion to the Abath one.
That said, even if it was a new car, it's still pretty pointless and stupid to sketch something that isn't going to be possible. Styling is one thing but not leaving enough room for an engine is slightly more than a little oversight.
Clueless.
Well, if it was penned from the mind of a conceptual artist, his/her vision and scope for the creative was either limited by the 'canvas' or (as I am more inclined to think), they tried to create a slab sided more solid looking object required to carry off the intention of a roadster. Either way, it's a poor effort and one worth of at best a grade 5 CSE and a pat on the back with the consoling words of 'better luck next time Sergio, oh and keep off the Lambrini when you go near the quill.' It is hideous.
Grew up on a council estate in the North East of England. Quite a rough place. I weight 110Kg and 81% of that is muscle and bone. Started life as a welder and sheet metal worker, and I eat, sleep and breath cars. I'm as salt of the earth as they come. And none of these things have any bearing of the fact that myself and every other person on the face of this planet has a responsibility to not let the crap they've heard else where fall out of their own mouths. A university education helps, as well as having an open mind.
I'm not hacked of at your response to my message fella. I actually thought it was a really witty comeback. I suppose I am prepared to be a person from around anywhere, so long as that place isn't populated by idiots. I can't tolerate stupidity from people who are too lazy to be intelligent.
I'm not hacked of at your response to my message fella. I actually thought it was a really witty comeback. I suppose I am prepared to be a person from around anywhere, so long as that place isn't populated by idiots. I can't tolerate stupidity from people who are too lazy to be intelligent.
porsche200471 said:
Seems like there is a lot of ignorant and uneducated people on here.
Firstly, using the word "gay" as an adjective instead of a noun is prejudice. It should not be tolerated.
My second point would be that any person can express an opinion on a design. It is entirely a different matter that the critic does not accept moments of inspiration and the form that follows, no matter what draft that comes from the original kernel of inspiration as being anything other than something from inside the mind of an artist. That the object exists in reality to provide reference points for further renderings is not important. Jean Baudrillard speaks about this in his text, 'Simulacra and Simulation,' stating from his three orders of simulation that the second order of simulation - The Hyper Real - that simulations can recreate that which it attempts to simulate, but encapsulates something within it that is not present within the original object. It is more, accentuated, sharper, crisper, anything more than the original. But this is ignoring the most simple observation of all. Much like artists who draw preliminary sketches of great sculptures or the cartoons painted by Michael Angelo, any diagram, plan, preliminary sketch or design can be considered Conceptual, with a capital 'C.' It is from the mind, it is a concept. Whether it emulates that which already exists or whether its eventual form differs from the concept is matterless. The concept is.
Read a book, visit some art galleries, then come back on PH with an educated opinion.
all very well, but it's not actually a car, is it?Firstly, using the word "gay" as an adjective instead of a noun is prejudice. It should not be tolerated.
My second point would be that any person can express an opinion on a design. It is entirely a different matter that the critic does not accept moments of inspiration and the form that follows, no matter what draft that comes from the original kernel of inspiration as being anything other than something from inside the mind of an artist. That the object exists in reality to provide reference points for further renderings is not important. Jean Baudrillard speaks about this in his text, 'Simulacra and Simulation,' stating from his three orders of simulation that the second order of simulation - The Hyper Real - that simulations can recreate that which it attempts to simulate, but encapsulates something within it that is not present within the original object. It is more, accentuated, sharper, crisper, anything more than the original. But this is ignoring the most simple observation of all. Much like artists who draw preliminary sketches of great sculptures or the cartoons painted by Michael Angelo, any diagram, plan, preliminary sketch or design can be considered Conceptual, with a capital 'C.' It is from the mind, it is a concept. Whether it emulates that which already exists or whether its eventual form differs from the concept is matterless. The concept is.
Read a book, visit some art galleries, then come back on PH with an educated opinion.
you might want to appreciate it as art, as a simulation, as a 'concept' - but it's not even a 'concept car'
cars have to be realistic, because they have to be real
I love it, and it looks especially great when you compare it to the horrid 500C. An Abarth version could be a giggle.
Should also point out these are just sketches from a design school, NOT official Fiat images. Some sources have used 'imaginings', which is probably the best description; they are what a Roadster COULD be, not what it WILL be. Fingers crossed though!
Should also point out these are just sketches from a design school, NOT official Fiat images. Some sources have used 'imaginings', which is probably the best description; they are what a Roadster COULD be, not what it WILL be. Fingers crossed though!
Whiskey and tequila only. Helps to keep the body fat percentage down.
I would agree the design isn't original. It's a predictable use of current design cues. In graphic design terms it's as old as bleeding graphics to the page edge. (Sorry if that is your idea of cutting edge). But there again, very little pushes the envelope these days. Welcome to post-modernism folks.
People don't want original. They want the familiar, which is where we get retro from... and endless amounts of superhero movies. I even read last night they intend to remake The Mummy. Have things really got that F*****g bad.
I am sorry also if you don't like what I say. I genuinely mean that with no attempt to rebuff you with a sideways insult. It's a free country, which means people should be allowed to come on these pages and not have to read things that are offensive. Any kind of prejudice makes respond. I know my response is not what people expect on pages like these, but I don't back down to things I think are wrong.
What are your morals?
I would agree the design isn't original. It's a predictable use of current design cues. In graphic design terms it's as old as bleeding graphics to the page edge. (Sorry if that is your idea of cutting edge). But there again, very little pushes the envelope these days. Welcome to post-modernism folks.
People don't want original. They want the familiar, which is where we get retro from... and endless amounts of superhero movies. I even read last night they intend to remake The Mummy. Have things really got that F*****g bad.
I am sorry also if you don't like what I say. I genuinely mean that with no attempt to rebuff you with a sideways insult. It's a free country, which means people should be allowed to come on these pages and not have to read things that are offensive. Any kind of prejudice makes respond. I know my response is not what people expect on pages like these, but I don't back down to things I think are wrong.
What are your morals?
Fiat are you reading? Build this for the road:
Light weight panels, rear cage, track tyres, big brakes, a couple of carbon buckets & some 6 point harnesses.
Renault aren't going to do it again so you should! Launch it at the ring, get yourself plenty of magazine coverage& grow the brand.
Here's hoping.....
Light weight panels, rear cage, track tyres, big brakes, a couple of carbon buckets & some 6 point harnesses.
Renault aren't going to do it again so you should! Launch it at the ring, get yourself plenty of magazine coverage& grow the brand.
Here's hoping.....
Now then Hugo. I agree in some respect that cars have to be real. A metaphysical car would be s
t at getting you to the shops for a pint of milk. All I was trying to explore was someone else's determinations as to whether the drawing was conceptual. Well... it's a drawing. So because it isn't an in-the-flesh car it is, by its very nature a concept. No more, no less.
There must be thousands of designs that have made it to production that are not faithful recreations of the original sketch. Some marketing type could well have put it to a designer type, "let's follow mini's example and ride the gravy train to spin off town." Kerching!
The designs don't have to be exact, they only have to be dynamic, exciting, etc, etc.
Let's put it this way. If you and three other people were asked to design this car, and you really wanted your design to be put into production, would you be Mr Adernoids-Anally-Retentive-Precise-to-the-Final-Detail-designer or would you sex it up to be the winner?
Some would say, "I wouldn't draw it if the design was not to be fully realised." Good for you. That is a standard and you are standing by it.
Others would say you have to be in it to win it. Win the competition to see whose design is accepted first and then fight for the car to be kept as true to your design as possible, taking into account the cost of manufacture, reliability of design, ease of manufacture, practicality to the end user (I have a Megane that needs the front bumper removing to change the front light bulbs).
There is a simple rule to any creative project. It requires collaboration. Designers with an ego never get out of their bedroom. Designers who have ambition and vision begin with compromise, and then one day, after they have established an incredible portfolio of designs, he or she creates their Zonda.
Everyone has to start somewhere.
t at getting you to the shops for a pint of milk. All I was trying to explore was someone else's determinations as to whether the drawing was conceptual. Well... it's a drawing. So because it isn't an in-the-flesh car it is, by its very nature a concept. No more, no less.There must be thousands of designs that have made it to production that are not faithful recreations of the original sketch. Some marketing type could well have put it to a designer type, "let's follow mini's example and ride the gravy train to spin off town." Kerching!
The designs don't have to be exact, they only have to be dynamic, exciting, etc, etc.
Let's put it this way. If you and three other people were asked to design this car, and you really wanted your design to be put into production, would you be Mr Adernoids-Anally-Retentive-Precise-to-the-Final-Detail-designer or would you sex it up to be the winner?
Some would say, "I wouldn't draw it if the design was not to be fully realised." Good for you. That is a standard and you are standing by it.
Others would say you have to be in it to win it. Win the competition to see whose design is accepted first and then fight for the car to be kept as true to your design as possible, taking into account the cost of manufacture, reliability of design, ease of manufacture, practicality to the end user (I have a Megane that needs the front bumper removing to change the front light bulbs).
There is a simple rule to any creative project. It requires collaboration. Designers with an ego never get out of their bedroom. Designers who have ambition and vision begin with compromise, and then one day, after they have established an incredible portfolio of designs, he or she creates their Zonda.
Everyone has to start somewhere.
porsche200471 said:
Seems like there is a lot of ignorant and uneducated people on here.
Firstly, using the word "gay" as an adjective instead of a noun is prejudice. It should not be tolerated.
What a load of rubbish!!Firstly, using the word "gay" as an adjective instead of a noun is prejudice. It should not be tolerated.
'it's been a very gay day today' - gay used as an adjective, no prejudice
'that bar is full of gays' - gay used as a noun, prejudice
Ignorant and uneducated, there's a lot of it about!
ImDesigner said:
You really think you know it all don't you?
Clueless.
No I don't think I know it all. Not even close. But please explain to me the logic of sketching something that has exactly 100% no chance of working or being possible. Even more so when based on a current model of know dimensions.Clueless.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff