Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
Comments?
Box-cutters
- Thread starter Oleg Volk
- Start date
- Status
Comments?
sm
member
Oleg, I like the contrast and message. I'm wondering if the second message in regard to airlines needs to be more ...simple.
"Today brigands armed with box cutters have proven successful against an airplane full of passengers" .
"Today brigands armed with box cutters have proven successful against an airplane full of passengers" .
Moparmike
Member
I like it, but whats a brigand? Remember I am a product of the public educational system.
Agree with 1973. You sort of have to lead people to the conclusion these days.
Agree with 1973. You sort of have to lead people to the conclusion these days.
Brian Dale
Member
LH side: maybe substitute "knives" for "box-cutters?"
Great work, Oleg.
Great work, Oleg.
sm
member
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=brigand
brig·and ( P ) Pronunciation Key (brgnd)
n.
A robber or bandit, especially one of an outlaw band.
I like the box cutter reference because of 9/11, Arming of pilots, and the kid of late whom admittd to putting the box cutters on a plane. Box cutters associate a terrorist image in people minds, think they always be associated with that image and 9/11 ... just my thoughts.
I'm thinking Oleg is conveying a message on persons being able to be resposible vs the gummit not allowing them to be. ie TSA, slow pilots training, gun laws...etc.
I like the contrast Oleg...good work as always
brig·and ( P ) Pronunciation Key (brgnd)
n.
A robber or bandit, especially one of an outlaw band.
I like the box cutter reference because of 9/11, Arming of pilots, and the kid of late whom admittd to putting the box cutters on a plane. Box cutters associate a terrorist image in people minds, think they always be associated with that image and 9/11 ... just my thoughts.
I'm thinking Oleg is conveying a message on persons being able to be resposible vs the gummit not allowing them to be. ie TSA, slow pilots training, gun laws...etc.
I like the contrast Oleg...good work as always
Trisha
Member
Outstanding.
tiberius
Member
They had box cutters 100 years ago?
Excellent, excellent point. Disarmed passengers can't even resist boxcutters.
The image on the left doesn't create enough contrast for me though. The model does not look "1903" at first glance to me. The pistol is definitely appropriate...
And might an image of the Towers burning make the point on the right, stronger?
The image on the left doesn't create enough contrast for me though. The model does not look "1903" at first glance to me. The pistol is definitely appropriate...
And might an image of the Towers burning make the point on the right, stronger?
sm
member
duh, dumb me I see the box cutter on LH not being time relevent....
straight razor ?
straight razor of yore wielded by brigand vs box cutter today used by terroist
straight razor ?
straight razor of yore wielded by brigand vs box cutter today used by terroist
lazhuward
Member
I really like the basic idea.
On the left, I'd prefer the chick to be holding the revolver in a passive position, sort of lying sideways on her leg; like she may have to use it in an extreme situation.
Everything else about the pic is great.
The subject should be handling the gun, though.
On the left, I'd prefer the chick to be holding the revolver in a passive position, sort of lying sideways on her leg; like she may have to use it in an extreme situation.
Everything else about the pic is great.
The subject should be handling the gun, though.
ReadyontheRight
Member
It would be nice if the lady was traveling -- maybe walking outdoors by some trees -- and handling a firearm. Or putting it into a purse. OR she's putting the pistol into a purse while opening a door.
Left: "A century ago, brigands with knives and swords had no chance against even a single armed traveler."
Right: "Today, what chance do terrorists with boxcutters have against 100 unarmed airline passengers?"
Another winner Oleg!
Left: "A century ago, brigands with knives and swords had no chance against even a single armed traveler."
Right: "Today, what chance do terrorists with boxcutters have against 100 unarmed airline passengers?"
Another winner Oleg!
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 22,509
Not that I'm an expert on fashion, but her hair style doesn't seem right for the Victorian era (photos of soldier's sweetheart or sister or mother often appears in the Civil War books I read). Unsure about the fashion too (most closed neck and buttoned high). Trivialities set aside, the message is great and I'd modify it along the lines of re1973 or readyontheright's suggestion.
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
I'm not sure what the message is.
I've seen the type face too many times. If it were an interesting Helvetica-esque face, I wouldn't object, but it's been used too many times by too many advertisers for too much stuff.
I don't understand the various point sizes.
I like the color a lot, although I think the aircraft would look better in the air. The model's hair style isn't a century old. Women wore their hair in much more elaborate styles even around the house in those days. Her dress and pose and expression are convincing.
Did I mention I like the color a lot?
I've seen the type face too many times. If it were an interesting Helvetica-esque face, I wouldn't object, but it's been used too many times by too many advertisers for too much stuff.
I don't understand the various point sizes.
I like the color a lot, although I think the aircraft would look better in the air. The model's hair style isn't a century old. Women wore their hair in much more elaborate styles even around the house in those days. Her dress and pose and expression are convincing.
Did I mention I like the color a lot?
BluesBear
member
In the olden days, in cooler weather proper ladies carried a "muff" in which to warm their hands. Many smaller revolvers of the day were advertized as "muff guns". Perhaps a photo of a lady with just the rearmost portion of the revolver in her hand just outside the muff would get the message across?
Also I second the razor idea. Perhaps a boxcutter shown under the airplane to reinforxe the razor blade?
I actually had to tell some people after 9-11 just exactly what a boxcutter was.
Also I second the razor idea. Perhaps a boxcutter shown under the airplane to reinforxe the razor blade?
I actually had to tell some people after 9-11 just exactly what a boxcutter was.
Stickjockey
Member
Have to agree about the lady's clothing. The pistol is mid/late 19th century(?) She should be in a high-collar, puffy-sleeved outfit with an hourglass corset and a bustle. Her current outfit looks to be about mid 16th/early 17th century.
Love the message, though.
Love the message, though.
Hmm ...
That would seem to connect the revolver and the boxcutter as tools of the attacker.
How about three frames.
Frame 1: an individual in period dress walking along, or perhaps boarding a conveyance (train, boat, etc) with the overlayed image of the revolver.
Caption: A century ago, travelers could carry defensive tools to fight off attackers.
Frame 2: a picture of a metal detector, a guard wanding someone or maybe an X-ray machine. Something symbolizing the airport "security" arrangements.
Caption: Today, airline passengers are denied the means to defend ourselves.
Frame 3: The twin towers burning
Caption: This is progress? (or something like that)
Just my thoughts.
MagKnightX
Member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2003
- Messages
- 867
First, a content comment: She does look more like a medieval barwench with better hygiene.
Second, a stylistic comment: the Rule of Thirds could be well applied here, in my opinion. Also, a larger airplane might be better.
Second, a stylistic comment: the Rule of Thirds could be well applied here, in my opinion. Also, a larger airplane might be better.
Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
Got some other images which I'll try combining. Will simplify the caption, too...next version coming shortly.
Mark Tyson
Member
I don't think I understand the message. Are you suggesting that we start allowing all passengers to board airplanes armed?
Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
I don't recall any moves to outlaw carry on trains even after the "great train robbery"...why would places be any different. Bodyguards for VIPs carry on private planes, so they must think that an in-flight firefight is still alesser risk than a terrrorist takeover.
BluesBear
member
Why not Mark?
What maks an airplane any different that anywhere else?
I still think a metal detector is needed though.
BEEEEP!
"Excuse me ma'am are you carrying a firearm?"
"Yes I am"
"Do you have a CCDW license?"
"Yes I do, here it is."
(pause to actually read and confirm)
"Thank you ma'am you and your children have a nice flight."
What maks an airplane any different that anywhere else?
I still think a metal detector is needed though.
BEEEEP!
"Excuse me ma'am are you carrying a firearm?"
"Yes I am"
"Do you have a CCDW license?"
"Yes I do, here it is."
(pause to actually read and confirm)
"Thank you ma'am you and your children have a nice flight."
Idaho
Member
I like the *notion* of comparing what was to a traveller available in the past to what is available today. However, my reaction to the photo and caption on the right was "NO CHANCE." Part of the reason I think the airport security regulations are ludicrous is that "today" (i.e. post-9/11) I believe that a terrorist armed with a box cutter, knife, pistol, or even machine gun is almost certainly going to be mobbed by the passengers, whether or not the passengers are armed.
I believe a big part of the reason 9/11 "worked" for the terrorists is that all the sheeple believed they would be flown to Cuba and held for a day or so as hostages, then they'd go home. Few imagined that the acts the terrorists had in mind were possible, so the passengers were passive. The story of Flight 93 shows what informed passengers will do.
So, if you are trying to say that modern travellers ought to be allowed to be armed (with which I would agree), then I don't think your caption does it.
Perhaps putting the modern photo into past tense would help - something to the effect that those on the planes on 9/11 should have had a chance to defend themselves, should have had arms allowed. If I can think of specific verbiage I will let you know.
Keep up the good work - I always enjoy seeing your latest product.
I believe a big part of the reason 9/11 "worked" for the terrorists is that all the sheeple believed they would be flown to Cuba and held for a day or so as hostages, then they'd go home. Few imagined that the acts the terrorists had in mind were possible, so the passengers were passive. The story of Flight 93 shows what informed passengers will do.
So, if you are trying to say that modern travellers ought to be allowed to be armed (with which I would agree), then I don't think your caption does it.
Perhaps putting the modern photo into past tense would help - something to the effect that those on the planes on 9/11 should have had a chance to defend themselves, should have had arms allowed. If I can think of specific verbiage I will let you know.
Keep up the good work - I always enjoy seeing your latest product.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 22,509
Speaking of corsettes...
When I was at Conner Prarie last week, the Clothing Curator, Erika, led a group of us on a tour of their storage area. She had arrayed on the table some period clothing for both men & women.
I didn't catch everything she said about corsettes but they evolved over the time. Originally they were designed for back support much like those things the delivery guys or wearhouse guys wear. The stiffener was either reed or bone. Their interpreters report them to be comfortable and supportive when having to do heavy chores. At one point the hourglass was in (can't remember when) but at another there was one that pushed the breasts way up and the desired figure was tapered like a cone. It all depends on the time frame.
Same with the dresses. The "puffy" sleeves were in for a while and then went out. Didn't pay too much attention as to when that was either.
Erika also had men's shirts out for us to see including an overshirt (worn over regular shirt & trousers) when working. They were pull over much like a sweatshirt and came down to about the knees. The buttons on the sleeves were very high on the cuff - that is, closer to the elbow than it is to the wrist like today's shirts (ha, I paid attention there).
According to her, Kevin Costner's Dances With Wolves is a terrible movie for period clothing. She pointed out that pants of the period went up to about where the nipple line is - much higher than what we wear today (provided we pull our pants up and don't let it sag and show our cheeks like the kiddies do).
My favorite is a bicorne (sp?) hat ala Napoleon. Unfortunately, there's no documents on it or clue as to when it was worn. I suspect it's either a militia or part of a "civic" uniform. From the holes on it, it appears to have had lace around it at one time.
Authenticity is a must and everyone at Conner Prarie is loaned one set of clothes after which they must fabricate their own (by hand) within a year's time. Said pattern and material must be approved in advance and the finished product is inspected before the interpreter is permitted to wear them. Little wonder Erika is called the "Stitch Nazi."
When I was at Conner Prarie last week, the Clothing Curator, Erika, led a group of us on a tour of their storage area. She had arrayed on the table some period clothing for both men & women.
I didn't catch everything she said about corsettes but they evolved over the time. Originally they were designed for back support much like those things the delivery guys or wearhouse guys wear. The stiffener was either reed or bone. Their interpreters report them to be comfortable and supportive when having to do heavy chores. At one point the hourglass was in (can't remember when) but at another there was one that pushed the breasts way up and the desired figure was tapered like a cone. It all depends on the time frame.
Same with the dresses. The "puffy" sleeves were in for a while and then went out. Didn't pay too much attention as to when that was either.
Erika also had men's shirts out for us to see including an overshirt (worn over regular shirt & trousers) when working. They were pull over much like a sweatshirt and came down to about the knees. The buttons on the sleeves were very high on the cuff - that is, closer to the elbow than it is to the wrist like today's shirts (ha, I paid attention there).
According to her, Kevin Costner's Dances With Wolves is a terrible movie for period clothing. She pointed out that pants of the period went up to about where the nipple line is - much higher than what we wear today (provided we pull our pants up and don't let it sag and show our cheeks like the kiddies do).
My favorite is a bicorne (sp?) hat ala Napoleon. Unfortunately, there's no documents on it or clue as to when it was worn. I suspect it's either a militia or part of a "civic" uniform. From the holes on it, it appears to have had lace around it at one time.
Authenticity is a must and everyone at Conner Prarie is loaned one set of clothes after which they must fabricate their own (by hand) within a year's time. Said pattern and material must be approved in advance and the finished product is inspected before the interpreter is permitted to wear them. Little wonder Erika is called the "Stitch Nazi."
- Status
