Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

James Toney vs Sam Langford

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #81
    Originally posted by Ascended View Post

    you mean vision not mind
    Like an early organism you can detect a shadow passing before you, right?

    Comment


      #82
      Originally posted by Slugfester View Post

      Like an early organism you can detect a shadow passing before you, right?
      Is that what you consider right?

      Comment


        #83
        Originally posted by Ascended View Post

        the angle use of cams/effects/cam quality upgraded alot from chaps time vs 70s-80s
        ​​
        Oh, so now it's the angles that made Chaplin walk that way on film, not the speed and quality?

        Comment


          #84
          Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

          Oh, so now it's the angles that made Chaplin walk that way on film, not the speed and quality?
          What does walking have to do with what I said? Your comment doesn't make any sense. You slow person. Everything that has advanced with people can't all be looked at the same way, which makes your comment invalid. so stop

          I'm specifically talking about camera effects, camera quality, and angles used with cameras in general, not a person walking, so stop acting ******.yes in all these areas they advanced alot from his time vs 70s-80s movies/shows prove this as fact

          Acting was horrible in chaps time compared to even the 50s and 60s, which I consider the best as far as face expressions goes and acting. Alot of people do for the same reason
          So you're an idiot like always.

          Last edited by Ascended; 04-11-2024, 06:44 AM.

          Comment


            #85
            Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

            So you think Charlie Chaplin really walked like that, and walking has advanced, not film, since that time? That's what you're telling me, right?

            And please don't tell me what I see as trash. I see your posts as trash if that helps clarify anything for you.
            Lol. Mistaking advances in motion photography since 1910 for advances in a 3,500 year old art since 1910. A newbie mistake.

            Great post.
            JAB5239 JAB5239 likes this.

            Comment


              #86
              Originally posted by Ascended View Post

              What does walking have to do with what I said? Your comment doesn't make any sense. You slow person. Everything that has advanced with people can't all be looked at the same way, which makes your comment invalid. so stop

              I'm specifically talking about camera effects, camera quality, and angles used with cameras in general, not a person walking, so stop acting ******.yes in all these areas they advanced alot from his time vs 70s-80s movies/shows prove this as fact

              Acting was horrible in chaps time compared to even the 50s and 60s, which I consider the best as far as face expressions goes and acting. Alot of people do for the same reason
              So you're an idiot like always.

              You can't even see you are derailing your own ****** argument. You agree camera's have improved. Therefore given the poor quality from back then effects the way you see fighters fight. You can't have it both ways dopey. You've been owned yet again.
              them_apples them_apples likes this.

              Comment


                #87
                Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

                You can't even see you are derailing your own ****** argument. You agree camera's have improved. Therefore given the poor quality from back then effects the way you see fighters fight. You can't have it both ways dopey. You've been owned yet again.
                have been owned in you're mind, you forget words don't work on me, and my vision still sees obsolete tech and flaws, which means I can't be proven wrong unless you can alter video, delete it, or make my vision horrible.
                Can you do that?

                I never agreed to anything I said what's on video as always

                Comment


                  #88
                  Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

                  You can't even see you are derailing your own ****** argument. You agree camera's have improved. Therefore given the poor quality from back then effects the way you see fighters fight. You can't have it both ways dopey. You've been owned yet again.
                  Pretty sure he's ****ing with us bud. No one's this obtuse.

                  Comment


                    #89
                    Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

                    You can't even see you are derailing your own ****** argument. You agree camera's have improved. Therefore given the poor quality from back then effects the way you see fighters fight. You can't have it both ways dopey. You've been owned yet again.
                    60s cam in black and white remember you said color matters to so color+better cam quality compared to 30s-40s and I see these guys don't have the same obsolete tech/flaws and way more advanced but I been owned? Interesting
                     
                    Last edited by Ascended; 04-11-2024, 07:17 AM.

                    Comment


                      #90
                      Originally posted by Ascended View Post

                      60s cam in black and white remember you said color matters to so color+better cam quality compared to 30s-40s and I see these guys don't have the same obsolete tech/flaws and way more advanced but I been owned? Interesting
                      Color adds depth. It's the camera speed that makes fighters from earlier eras look wonky. You already know this though because I've taught you well. If it were just black and white with no improvement in camera speed everyone would still be walking around like Chaplin. Don't worry, you don't have to thank me!!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP