Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Velocipedia

gianlucagimini.it

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 110 posts

Re: Velocipedia

#41

Post by rawTruthHurts »

logicrook wrote: post #32
ajuc wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me the most impressive thing is - these are not renders. (S)he had done it in photoshop.

Renders also mean drawings. Scott Robertson's book "How to render" does not explain how to press the render button in Blender, it explains how to actually draw (render) a concept art.

We already had grammar nazis. I guess it's time for the semantics nazis!

Re: Velocipedia

#42

Post by snori74 »

alkonaut wrote: post #34
mapleoin wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would draw it facing left and I think that's because of the way I learned to mount a bike: the bike-stand is on the left side so you need to have your last foot on the ground on the left side in order to pull it up.

This. It's the way you approach a bike to mount so that's the way it looks inviting in advertisements too. I'm not sure if "stand fixed to left side" is a rhs traffic thing or something global?

Same with horses, boats and airplanes... and yes, I think in all these cases it's the global convention.

Re: Velocipedia

#44

Post by rukuu001 »

ajuc wrote: post #23
rukuu001 wrote: post #16

I couldn't draw a bike until I started fixing them. And I rode every day :/ Besides that, the renders are beautiful.

For me the most impressive thing is - these are not renders. (S)he had done it in photoshop.

Arright, even more impressive :)

Re: Velocipedia

#45

Post by userbinator »

LoSboccacc wrote: post #31

it's hard to imagine people getting a bicycle this much wrong http://www.gianlucagimini.it/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Gian... not that I'd draw it with perfect mechanical fidelity, but there are bicycle defining parts missing there.

For a lot of people, "bicycle defining parts" probably means "two wheels and a seat", which is what all the drawings have in common.

I wonder what a machine learning algorithm would do with those renders if asked to identify pictures of bicycles, since all the drawings and renders are unmistakably bicycle-ish to people but also not "perfect" bicycles.

Re: Velocipedia

#47

Post by jadyoyster »

deprave wrote: post #46

I'm curious, why does he call them "men's bicycle"?

A "men's bicycle" is a bike with a diamond frame (as opposed to step-through for a woman's bicycle), but it's a silly name really. More to do with comfort vs. performance than gender.

Re: Velocipedia

#49

Post by OliverJones »

userbinator wrote: post #20

bicycles facing left: 75 % bicycles facing right: 25 % That's unexpected. For some reason I'd think more would be facing right than left, and if I were to draw one it would probably be facing right too. I don't know why but it seems to feel more "natural". I just Googled images for "bicycle" and 32 out of the first 40 were facing right. I noticed all the renders were facing right as well, even if the original drawing…

Movie convention... the cowboy rides the horse to the right when leaving, and to the left when arriving.

Re: Velocipedia

#50

Post by LeifCarrotson »

deprave wrote: post #46

I'm curious, why does he call them "men's bicycle"?

Because women may need to ride a bike in a skirt or dress (less commonly now, but the tradition persists), so they had bikes with an extremely low top tube to step through.
Post reply on HN