• Annoyed_🦀 @lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Absorbs all the light in the universe as well as other universes

      Nice, finally something to fight Superman with.

    • Flipper@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      ·
      18 hours ago

      I’m getting the feeling he really doesn’t like Anish. Every page I’ve looked at has Anish mentioned. The anal apocalypse is especially for him. The glow in the dark pigment is free, if you can prove that you are associated with him to share the light.

      Do they have some big feud going on?

      • lime!@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        122
        ·
        18 hours ago

        most artists dislike the entire idea of copyrighting a color for the singular purpose of limiting its use to one person. some people care more about copyrights than others.

        • oasis@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Pretty sure vantablack was patented not copyrighted. It’s also possible that is wasn’t either and just was really hard to produce. Afaik vantablack isn’t really designed to be be painted and requires quite specialised equipment.

          • BCsven@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            57
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            They sell it as a paint, however : “Controversy arose when Surrey Nanosystems granted Anish Kapoor exclusive rights to use Vantablack in artistic applications. Many artists voiced opposition to his monopoly over the substance.”

            • blargh513@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              63
              ·
              17 hours ago

              Thats the beef. If you try to get or use it, Amish Kapoor will typically take legal action.

              Also, hes never really made any compelling art with it either.

              He’s the guy who made that big silver sculpture in Chicago. He intensely dislikes that everyone calls it The Bean because he named it Cloud Gate. Really, he made a giant sculpture in a public place that is shaped like a massive shiny kidney bean and is big mad that people call it a bean. Seems like hes kind of a thin skinned baby.

              • oasis@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                14 hours ago

                If I remember correctly the company that gave him permission to use vantablack never gave him the ownership of it.

                So presumably Amish couldn’t do anything personally about it.

                • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  This is drama from a decade ago so don’t take it as gospel: Iirc, the contract Kapoor signed with Surrey gave him the right to enforce the patent when used in art or aesthetic design applications. I can’t remember if he sues as an involved party on behalf of Surrey or if he somehow has the right to sue directly, but the effect is the same. Basically Surrey didn’t want to deal with enforicng it, and signed over that as part of the exclusivity deal.

      • BCsven@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        17 hours ago

        The company that makes the paint version of VantaBlack licensed it only to one guy to use, the art community felt that was unfair. Thus the pink, and I think a new black etc.etc.

    • Pat_Riot@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Culture Hustle’s chrome makes not metal things look like metal, not metal colored, look like metal. Also Semple’s glow pigments are intense.

    • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I see this posted a lot and I get the feeling that this guy just makes a big deal about the other guy being an asshole so he can make money for himself. He seems like just as big of an asshole haha

      • Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Who knows. It’s harmless drama if it’s a marketing gimmick, or they could just be rivals playing off each other. Childish, sure, but spite can be motivating — the guy does make great quality products.

        Like James Randi and Uri Geller. Randi made a career out of debunking snake oil salesfolks but there was no question about how much he despised Geller.

        • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Yeah his paint is good. I got the black though and it’s just a matt black lol. Maybe a little darker than some other matt blacks.

          The pinkest pink sure seems pink but there could be a pinker pink how do you measure pinkness?

          I’m more of a hot pink person myself. I would try the hottest pink for sure.

    • niktemadur@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      But first you must face the Captcha test to prove that you are, in fact, not Anish Kapoor.

      Meanwhile Kapoor, not using a VPN - “Curses! Foiled again!”

      EDIT: Has this ever happened to you? That’s why I use AnishKapoorVPN, you are just a few clicks away from being able to jump through so many hurdles it’ll make your head spin.
      Try AnishKapoorVPN today, and tell them Anish Kappor sent ya, use the checkout code VantaVantaNyahNyahNyah.

    • PrimeMinisterKeyes@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Serious question: If his black is the blackest and absorbs all light, why does that gadget/ trinket in the second video on this site cast a gray shadow? To my understanding, it should either cast a completely black shadow, or no shadow at all.

      • salarua@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        17 hours ago

        The reason the shadow is gray is because light is bouncing off the other surfaces in the environment. The shadowed area isn’t receiving direct light, but it is receiving reflected indirect light.

      • Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        I don’t know where you got that idea.

        Your logic assumes there’s only one light source, no atmospheric dispersion, light is a particle, and everything around the object is non-reflective. And it’s moved to a white background, something we know reflects light.

        Edit: This sounds bitchier than I intended so I’m adding in: questions are great and I upvoted you for it.

      • Krudler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        Imagine how shadows on earth would look if our sun was actually a cosmic LED bulb array with 9 bulbs.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umbra%2C_penumbra_and_antumbra

        Any light source they’re using isn’t a single beam of photons, it’s a cast cone of light. Actually multiple cones because mostly it’s LED array lighting.

        So there’s an (effectively) infinite number of shadows because it’s being hit by photons coming from multiple angles, from multiple little light cones.

        The shadows form a distributed pattern behind.

        There’s other factors like scattering within the media the photons travel through (air) as well as refraction.

        e: I tried to make it make more sense. Its about understanding that a light sources are cones of light hitting from many angles at once.

      • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        17 hours ago

        On the backdrop you mean? That would be from light refracting off of other places in the background and converging behind the gadget, partially illuminating the shadow.

    • Krudler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Oh wow, what a huge memory triggered! The total prioritization of whiz-bang on that site.

      Shot me back to 1998(?ish?) where I met an absolutely amazing artist who started with street and scene art, huge airbrushed murals, and moved into digital media. He was an absolutely drug-addled, unprofessional lunatic. But also the best, if you could ever as the creative lead, draw a circle around him. We made a lot of games that were very bog-standard mechanically, but he took the creative design to places nobody had been in terms of visual game design. I love/hated him and I affectionately called him Mad Dog and it stuck at work lol

      This website reminded me of his personal side project Dr Wash. I remember him showing off his site to me, which at the time was truly a marvel of what could be done artistically on the Web. After browsing every section and page, I was left with one question to him: What is it you actually do or sell?? I meant it! lol

      This memory hit me when it took me 30 seconds of mystery meat navigation, then no-scrollbar but need to infini-scroll down to hopefully find textual information that actually says something. Etc. Some things never change haha