Brilliant.Great. That's the point. And when we say that we accept everything with an open mind and don't reject out of hand. That sounds like what you're saying and it sounds like we're arguing from the same precept. But, to return to the point, that's not cubism.
(
mofaha ┐( ˘_˘)┌ ʅ(́◡◝)ʃ,
Sat 18 Jun 2011, 5:34,
archived)
Funny thing is, it is.And with no wiggle room either. It can be said that he did not use the full range on any single image in that set, but together they fit in with the model as he defined it.
(
Tahkcalb ω∞ for sigs,
Sat 18 Jun 2011, 5:38,
archived)
Indeed! Pesky things with their silly corners and shit.Mind you, what I've done to it might have broken the Cubism in it.
( Tahkcalb ω∞ for sigs,
Sat 18 Jun 2011, 5:48,
archived)