never-ending gallery

[Geoffrey]

'ben hur' made a big impression on me, the part when charlton heston was given water. we didn't see jesus' face, and that was what made it so memorable. not everyone needs everything spelled out to them, and the entire scene would have been spoilt if all was revealed. thank god robert powell was not around back then.
------------------------------------------------------
"i don't consider myself a pessimist, that's someone who's expecting it to rain - and i already feel soaked to the skin"

https://youtu.be/cDoyywKt1_0

[LisaLCFan]

'ben hur' made a big impression on me, the part when charlton heston was given water. we didn't see jesus' face, and that was what made it so memorable. not everyone needs everything spelled out to them, and the entire scene would have been spoilt if all was revealed...

They probably didn't show his face simply to avoid the endless commentary, criticism, and controversy that would undoubtedly have arisen (no pun intended) over their choice of actor to portray the role.

[Geoffrey]

They probably didn't show his face simply to avoid the endless commentary, criticism, and controversy that would undoubtedly have arisen (no pun intended) over their choice of actor to portray the role.

or it could be that they did actually film the actor's face, but cut those shots out after he demanded a raise in his wages. they also cut his name from the credits.

[LisaLCFan]

...or it could be that they did actually film the actor's face, but cut those shots out after he demanded a raise in his wages. they also cut his name from the credits...

Could be -- I have no idea what the reason was -- I was actually being a bit facetious!

I've never actually watched Ben Hur in its entirety, just bits and pieces on TV over the years -- those hours-long biblical melodramas have never been my thing. I did watch the clip you provided, above: "cheesy" is a word that comes to mind.

[Geoffrey]

I've never actually watched Ben Hur in its entirety, just bits and pieces on TV over the years -- those hours-long biblical melodramas have never been my thing. I did watch the clip you provided, above: "cheesy" is a word that comes to mind.

i think i watched it through once, long time ago - and 'cheesy' is a description that fits perfectly. more palatable when it first came out, but nowadays recognised more correctly as hollywood stereotypical. the chariot race near the end is worth an occasional viewing, even if only for studying the way it was filmed. we can agree on hours-long biblical melodramas not being interesting, even short ones seem long and dull. could be that choosy people like us are simply doomed to be spiritual outlaws, unable to join the happy herd. well, as you wrote a while ago: it is better to be a dissatisfied human than a satisfied pig.

[LisaLCFan]

...could be that choosy people like us are simply doomed to be spiritual outlaws, unable to join the happy herd...

I actually prefer happy individuality to happy herdery -- to me, being a member of a herd (spiritual or otherwise) is where doom would lie -- what a horrible fate that would be, and one that I have always been very pleased to have avoided! And, incidentally, there certainly can be satisfaction in being "human"(in JS Mill's definition*) -- one just has to have high standards and the ability to fill one's life with things that meet them!

*In the words I quoted previously from JS Mill, he was responding to critics who accused him of advocating "pig philosophy" in his writings on Utilitarianism, for Mill asserted that the best life is one in which a person maximises their happiness/pleasure, and minimises their unhappiness/pain. Unenlightened critics equated "happiness/pleasure" with simplistic and base desires that are nothing more than lowly hedonism fit for a pig. However, Mill distinguished between lower and higher forms of pleasure, arguing that the pleasures of a pig (or a fool) do not have as much value or weight as do the pleasures of an intelligent and discerning person -- a "human" (or a "Socrates") -- and for the latter, pleasures can and do include intellectual and moral pursuits/activities/attitudes/etc., that can create great amounts happiness for those who do and have such things -- greater happiness, indeed, than what a lowly individual would get from their lowly pleasures.

And so, for Mill, the members of a herd, with all of their simple, base pleasures, may actually be less happy overall than individuals who pursue superior pleasures, for one or two superior pleasures may have much greater value and thus yield far greater amounts of happiness for the beholder than dozens of less-valuable basic pleasures enjoyed by the unwashed masses.

I shall leave it to the rest of you to decide for yourselves what you think of Mill's notions. What I have written is simply in response to Geoffrey's comments, as well as clarifying Mill's views on the subject, for those of you who may be interested in a mini-lecture on 19th Century English Philosophy! Cheers!

[Geoffrey]

I actually prefer happy individuality to happy herdery . . .

interesting. will return to this. meanwhile . . .
-----------------------------------------------------------
awful how thoughtless people can vandalise wonderful old relics

"don't drink from that cup, it's all caked and cracked along the rim!"

"i'd howl at your beauty like a dog in heat"

[Geoffrey]

just one of many protesters outside ålesund's town hall yesterday

neil young: "old man take a look at my life - i'm a lot like you"

picasso: "all children are artists"

[Geoffrey]

tired of those drab old album covers? why not let photoshop brighten them up - ha ha ha!!!

[LisaLCFan]

tired of those drab old album covers? why not let photoshop brighten them up...

To your photoshopped creation, all I can say is: Colourful? Yes. Preferable? No.

Do you have software that merely colourises a B&W photo, while leaving the realism intact? Such a thing must exist.

[Geoffrey]

To your photoshopped creation, all I can say is: Colourful? Yes. Preferable? No.

Do you have software that merely colourises a B&W photo, while leaving the realism intact? Such a thing must exist.

i accept that the 'updated' image is gaudy, but not everyone agrees that pictures should always be just nice and pleasant.

there does, of course, exist software that will colour b/w images, although it's rather complicated stuff. it helps to be data competent, have knowledge concerning CMYK and RGB colour systems, understand a little about the pros and cons of raster versus vector graphics - and have a lot of enthusiasm.

my harddisk contains several software programmes, because some of them are better at certain things than others, so it is not uncommon for me to pass the same image from one application to another in order to arrive at an acceptable result.

so, colourising a picture can be done quite quickly, but explaining the process takes a long time. myself, i started by learning WPAP with coreldraw (as i have mentioned earlier), and simply advanced from there.

[LisaLCFan]

i accept that the 'updated' image is gaudy, but not everyone agrees that pictures should always be just nice and pleasant...

I like "gaudy" pictures, and I didn't say anything negative about your updated image (I actually like the colours!). I merely said that I preferred the original photograph, as an album cover, given a choice between the two. I also wondered what a merely-colourised version of the photo might look like (compared to your more creative digital version of the image).

Thank you for your reply!

[Geoffrey]

"goddam money, it always ends up making you blue as hell" - j d salinger
[picture slightly upgraded because it kept bugging me: longer face, stronger cheek colour, lower shoulder, etc.]

surprise pic arrived on my computer, sent by samantha terrell - a lady with whom i am unacquainted.
thank you to david o'nan for allowing me to illustrate both of his cohen-inspired volumes on condition i receive no payment.

[LisaLCFan]

...picture slightly upgraded because it kept bugging me...

Ha-ha, I've been there -- those pesky details that somehow grow more obvious and more annoying to the "artist" (I am using that word simply to denote the person who created the work in question), although I suspect that, in many cases, external observers might suggest that it was just fine as it was! I have had that experience both with pictures I have made and also with music I have recorded (or played for other people), almost always finding faults and thinking I could have done some aspect of it better, whereas whoever saw or heard what I did expressed only the most positive admiration.* I am undoubtedly a harsher critic of myself than others may be.

*One notable exception was a time, quite recently, when I played for another person a beautiful Bach Andante on my guitar, and I actually thought that I had "nailed it" -- I was quite pleased with myself for what I thought was a flawless and nearly perfect performance of a wonderful and complex piece of music (which I played entirely from memory). After I finished playing the piece, the listener sat expressionless and silent for what was, to me, a very long and awkward interval, and when he finally spoke, all he said was, "Can you play any campfire songs?".

[Geoffrey]

thank you for writing, lisa.

inbuilt into human nature is a subconscious need to feel good about oneself, and finding fault in other people's work (or behaviour) helps us to do that - as long as we disregard the fact that such thoughts are not good. therefore finding faults in one's own work creates a balance, and suggests fairness in one's judgement of others.

however, one should also remember that people who say positive things to you are not always honest, but are just trying to feel good themselves. this is not necessarily a bad thing though, because - providing you don't analyse it - it gives encouragement. it is not always easy to tell the truth, especially when it can be hurtful. i do not know what was on the mind of the gentleman who asked if you played any campfire songs after your bach recital. it all comes down to knowing someone, their personality and social intelligence, their sense of humour, whether they genuinely do not know how to use tact.

personally, in real life, if unacquainted with someone offering an unjustified negative response, i tend to take them at face value and then educate them by taking sweet revenge. giving someone a little 'payback' is actually doing them a valuable favour; helps them to understand how karma works. living in a small town as i do, it's not difficult to find out where someone lives, where they work or park their vehicle. there are a number of publications available concerning 'dirty tricks', and some of them give excellent suggestions on how to feel better after being treated badly. you just need to wait a while before doing anything.
--------------------------------------------------------
illustrations are never finished, they just stop being worked on.