|
|
Post by Nicer Atom on Nov 9, 2009 8:00:58 GMT
[641]I wonder if Jeanne was using stibnite surma when the portrait was painted. The robots illuminate their shrine with desk lamps and flashlights. Is that awesome or terrible?
|
|
jon77
Full Member
Posts: 245
|
Post by jon77 on Nov 9, 2009 8:03:44 GMT
Hmm... Jeanne's eyes are also green...
Lots of zooming in in this chapter.
|
|
ecomono
Junior Member
like tuning in a radio
Posts: 83
|
Post by ecomono on Nov 9, 2009 8:05:40 GMT
SW/WS is a meteorological robot designed to take minute readings of the ambient temperature, cloud structure, etc. How this fine level of perception affects its appreciation of (and reaction to) the portrait remains to be seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by zbeeblebrox on Nov 9, 2009 8:05:42 GMT
Makes me wonder if there's more to the painting than just a picture. There are lots of ways to hide code in images...
|
|
|
|
Post by Amethyst on Nov 9, 2009 8:15:17 GMT
Now that I think about it... are most of Diego's robots with green eyes?
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicer Atom on Nov 9, 2009 8:17:22 GMT
Now that I think about it... are most of Diego's robots with green eyes? Actually, the first models seemed to have blue eyes. Like here. Most of the ones without colored eyes seem to have some blue on them, like Boxbot1's feather (please don't make me link a Boxbot). |
|
mike
Junior Member
"Fighting evil improves the children's moral character."
Posts: 58
|
Post by mike on Nov 9, 2009 8:23:55 GMT
Well, score one for Casey-- he called S1 still being there in front of the shrine!
|
|
jon77
Full Member
Posts: 245
|
Post by jon77 on Nov 9, 2009 8:45:20 GMT
Makes me wonder if there's more to the painting than just a picture. There are lots of ways to hide code in images... Nice idea! |
|
|
|
Post by eightyfour on Nov 9, 2009 8:51:57 GMT
There is something in Sky Watcher's eye in the last panel. Looks a bit like a faint reflection of rows of ones and zeroes. Makes me wonder if there's more to the painting than just a picture. There are lots of ways to hide code in images... I believe you may be on to something there. |
|
|
|
Post by judgedeadd on Nov 9, 2009 9:02:37 GMT
JEANNE = SKY WATCHER
|
|
|
|
Post by fuzzyone on Nov 9, 2009 9:03:12 GMT
But to hide code in a painting WITH A BRUSH reflects the work of a master that would make Leonardo DaVinci jealous. Then again, we are discussing a man who was able to make articulate, emotional ROBOTS... a very, very long time ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by sinewmire on Nov 9, 2009 9:34:48 GMT
That's a particularly beautiful page. I'm in awe.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mezzaphor on Nov 9, 2009 9:38:00 GMT
Now that I think about it... are most of Diego's robots with green eyes? to have blue or white eyes. Modern-day robots tend to have green, amber, or red eyes, though I would assume that most bots can alternate between the three, as Doorbot demonstrates. And Adminbot has white eyes, as if he were designed to look like he's wearing spectacles. |
|
|
|
Post by Ulysses on Nov 9, 2009 10:40:18 GMT
Is it bad that the first thing I thought on seeing this page was "All those lights are going to damage the painting..."?
Eightyfour is right, there are ones and zeros in Sky Watcher's eyes. Whether they're supposed to be 1s and 0s, or if they are just the underlying design of his eyes, I do not know. I'm leaning towards the latter though.
|
|
|
|
Post by agasa on Nov 9, 2009 10:42:04 GMT
There is something in Sky Watcher's eye in the last panel. Looks a bit like a faint reflection of rows of ones and zeroes. Makes me wonder if there's more to the painting than just a picture. There are lots of ways to hide code in images... I believe you may be on to something there.  You are right. But they're not only ones and zeroes, it seems. Some kind of alphabet, but most definitely not the latin one. |
|
|
|
Post by nikita on Nov 9, 2009 11:02:27 GMT
Doesn't look like a code to me.
*waits for next page*
|
|
Klex
Full Member
[REDACTED]
Posts: 170
|
Post by Klex on Nov 9, 2009 11:42:26 GMT
But to hide code in a painting WITH A BRUSH reflects the work of a master that would make Leonardo DaVinci jealous. Then again, we are discussing a man who was able to make articulate, emotional ROBOTS... a very, very long time ago. My suspension of disbelief only goes that far ;D I'm sure he used etherical means (he already did to animate the robots). |
|
eldras
New Member
Pestis eram vivus...moriens tua mors ero
Posts: 15
|
Post by eldras on Nov 9, 2009 13:33:27 GMT
Is it bad that the first thing I thought on seeing this page was "All those lights are going to damage the painting..."? I had the same thought XD. But to hide code in a painting WITH A BRUSH reflects the work of a master that would make Leonardo DaVinci jealous. Maybe Diego programmed a robot to do it? I wonder what will happen in the next page, as it seems like Skywatcher is about to have an epiphany rigth now. |
|
|
|
Post by Yin on Nov 9, 2009 13:41:06 GMT
Wild prediction: Sky Watcher goes apeshit, driven crazy by Jeanne's beauty, and rips up the portrait with its nice sharp forelimbs.
What? What are you looking at me like that for?
|
|
|
|
Post by Vratislav on Nov 9, 2009 13:43:45 GMT
Well, there can be some message painted under the upper layer of the painting. Such things might be visible in ultraviolet or infrared spectrum, or in different invisible wavelength. And the Sky Watcher is supposed to see in much wider spectral range than other robots (or people). Btw., at the observatory, where I work, we have some sky watching robot. Nevertheless his design is more BoxBot-ish than the Praying mantis style :-) See www.radiometrics.com/3000A%20%2B%20Flatirons.jpg |
|
|
|
Post by agasa on Nov 9, 2009 13:56:04 GMT
Well, there can be some message painted under the upper layer of the painting. Such things might be visible in ultraviolet or infrared spectrum, or in different invisible wavelength. And the Sky Watcher is supposed to see in much wider spectral range than other robots (or people). Your theory clicks in my mind like clockwork. Good job, sir. But still, to SEE you need a light source, and among that flashlights and desk lamps i've seen nothing that can emit UV light, or am i wrong? I'll call him MailboxBot. |
|
|
|
Post by Casey on Nov 9, 2009 14:19:55 GMT
Is it bad that the first thing I thought on seeing this page was "All those lights are going to damage the painting..."? I had the same thought XD. I did too... you're not alone! Well, score one for Casey-- he called S1 still being there in front of the shrine! Thanks, Mike... actually I don't really believe in the idea of rewarding predictions anymore though... it seems like it makes people really over-speculate and over-analyze things. Besides, mine was an easy prediction to make, since S1 has no CPU to make him walk around. Plus his job in life seems to be done. |
|
|
|
Post by Seth Thresher on Nov 9, 2009 14:32:44 GMT
Yeah I dunno. I'm suddenly getting the vibe that the painting may well get destroyed eventually... Love this page, as always  |
|
|
|
Post by idonotlikepeas on Nov 9, 2009 14:33:40 GMT
Which actually highlights an interesting thing about the Court bots. Diego's designs are artistic and fanciful. A real, utilitarian weather robot would look just like what you pasted here. There is absolutely no reason it has to look like a grasshopper any more than you need an bot designed for administration to look like it has glasses, a bot designed for landscaping to look like a cow, or a bot designed for being terrible to look like a box. The way the robots are designed doesn't just have to do with making them good at their jobs, but making human beings feel like they're good at their jobs. The administrator bot doesn't need glasses because it has poor vision, but giving it attachments that look like glasses makes a human being react to it in a more appropriate way since glasses are associated with a certain type of person. The grasshopper shape gives the weather bot the opportunity to go where it likes and to be basically invisible (since most people don't look at or think about insects unless they're being pests) while still plausibly having lots of eyes and antennae. The cows wandering the lawn make things seem more naturalistic even though they're there for burning (with lasers or laser wit). The box... well, I guess someone could just put a bag over it so we don't have to look at it. |
|
|
|
Post by haggidubious on Nov 9, 2009 14:43:05 GMT
I remember Robox visiting the shrine, but has a Boxbot been seen to enter the sanctum to see the portrait?
(Hopefully the lights on the picture are low/no heat LEDs or something!)
Love the cinematic cuts from Sky Watcher to the painting!
|
|
|
|
Post by wanderer on Nov 9, 2009 15:07:17 GMT
But to hide code in a painting WITH A BRUSH reflects the work of a master that would make Leonardo DaVinci jealous. Then again, we are discussing a man who was able to make articulate, emotional ROBOTS... a very, very long time ago. How do we know it was made with a brush? It could have been done just with some very advanced computer-controlled painting machine. We call things like that "printers" these days, but it would take a VERY nice one indeed to properly print a portrait onto canvas and make it look like a normal painting. But since we're talking about Diego here, I would consider that to be the most likely answer. |
|
|
|
Post by Vratislav on Nov 9, 2009 15:16:09 GMT
Well, there can be some message painted under the upper layer of the painting. Such things might be visible in ultraviolet or infrared spectrum, or in different invisible wavelength. And the Sky Watcher is supposed to see in much wider spectral range than other robots (or people). Your theory clicks in my mind like clockwork. Good job, sir. But still, to SEE you need a light source, and among that flashlights and desk lamps i've seen nothing that can emit UV light, or am i wrong? Right, I have missed this. The real sky emits some amount of light on almost all wavelengths. In the cellar, there must be a source of the light.... unless the painting is emitting itself (possible) or the Sky Watcher is able to emit some UV (that I consider improbable, because I see no purpose for such ability at the Meteo-Mantis). ...I only hope that no radioactivity is there. I recall a scene of unknown (but pretty good) Czech SF novel "The Voyage of Blind Birds" (Cesta slepých ptáků). There are paintings of "birds" made on cave walls by aliens. They served as illuminators for these aliens who see in roentgen wavelength. These paintings were so radioactive that only a hour in the cave might cause death. In the novel, the heroes found out this radioactivity after they had spend a night in the cave system and some of them got quite severally ill. (Nice horror reading when I was ten  ) |
|
|
|
Post by Ptollu Vux on Nov 9, 2009 15:24:05 GMT
But to hide code in a painting WITH A BRUSH reflects the work of a master that would make Leonardo DaVinci jealous. Then again, we are discussing a man who was able to make articulate, emotional ROBOTS... a very, very long time ago. How do we know it was made with a brush? It could have been done just with some very advanced computer-controlled painting machine. We call things like that "printers" these days, but it would take a VERY nice one indeed to properly print a portrait onto canvas and make it look like a normal painting. But since we're talking about Diego here, I would consider that to be the most likely answer. Considering that the Donlans designed some sort of computer that acts as a database for programs that are able to run in real, everyday space as "magic", I'm pretty sure basically anything can be done with etheric technology. Brush, or computer, there's definitely something about that painting that only the robots can see... we just have to wait for one to tell us what it is. |
|
|
|
Post by Vratislav on Nov 9, 2009 15:25:23 GMT
Which actually highlights an interesting thing about the Court bots. Diego's designs are artistic and fanciful. A real, utilitarian weather robot would look just like what you pasted here. There is absolutely no reason it has to look like a grasshopper any more than you need an bot designed for administration to look like it has glasses, a bot designed for landscaping to look like a cow, or a bot designed for being terrible to look like a box. The way the robots are designed doesn't just have to do with making them good at their jobs, but making human beings feel like they're good at their jobs. The administrator bot doesn't need glasses because it has poor vision, but giving it attachments that look like glasses makes a human being react to it in a more appropriate way since glasses are associated with a certain type of person. The grasshopper shape gives the weather bot the opportunity to go where it likes and to be basically invisible (since most people don't look at or think about insects unless they're being pests) while still plausibly having lots of eyes and antennae. The cows wandering the lawn make things seem more naturalistic even though they're there for burning (with lasers or laser wit). The box... well, I guess someone could just put a bag over it so we don't have to look at it. In fact, the Mailboxbot (general name is radiometer) has really eye-catching mechanics inside (unfortunately, I couldn't find a photo without cover) and a boring box over you can see on the photo. The cover is necessary to achieve some durability of fine mechanics that cannot stay uncovered. But I ma sure: if the job of another real robot should contain much interaction with common people or even with customers (like waiter-bot), then the design should have the effect You describe. No one would be fully satisfied when served by robotic waiter who looks like mailbox  |
|
|
|
Post by the bandit on Nov 9, 2009 16:36:19 GMT
Love the cinematic cuts from Sky Watcher to the painting! Cinematic like Ferris Beuller? (@1:30) |
|
)
