Credit for the Art
The original stop motion graffiti was created by anonymous street artist Blu
SCP-1446 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-1446
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-1446.
Are the pic and the gif for this article licence-free? It would surprise me if Blu doesn't hold any rights for the videos and any/all content coming out them. Also, unanimous artist? You just mentioned their name! In what sense?
I quite like this. I agree we do have other moving/living graffiti (TIL the singular is graffito) but this feels different to them.
- The quoted box at the seems to have extra line breaks; on my phone you end up with sentences chopped in half.
- What exactly are 'infrared limited goggle' and why have them? If they allow you to view the skip without coming under its influence that should be explicit.
- If the dry ice blasting units are for cleaning/controlling growing instances then say that as apart of the containment. The people responsible for containment shouldn't have to infer what they need to do.
- Unless Protocol 94-Wegner-Gyatso is a sure fire way to limit information leaks, the sentence "This makes SCP-1446 a risk for possible information leaks; security and exposure procedures should reflect this" doesn't really match up with letting level 3 staff or above contact the skip. And if Protocol 94-Wegner-Gyatso does mitigate that problem then this should be clearer in the description.
Edit: The AWCY reference feels a bit tacked on, but not so much I will change my vote
I've downvoted because while the gif is awesome, it doesn't work in an article. First of all, gifs rarely work in SCPs. Secondly, it's nice and artsy but enormously unprofessional. There's no way a place like the Foundation would use amateur stop-motion to document an anomaly. They would have a high quality camera set up on a tripod, not some dude with an SLR snapping photos every couple of seconds.
Beyond that, the gif really sums up the article, which isn't very interesting beyond it.
I don't mind that. If it's slow enough, a recorded video would be nigh useless. A stop motion summary like that would be far more useful than "Look! It moved a centimeter! Now let's watch the next hour…" Granted, this seems fast enough that shouldn't be an issue, but I don't see the stop-motion gif as being a problem per se.
In-universe, maybe that is a video clip in real time. 1446 happens to grow in such a way that it resembles stop-motion.
Just a possibility.
Still doesn't explain why the camera angle is different each shot. It's clearly stop-motion. And even if it were to grow in that way, that would need to have been mentioned in the article, which it isn't.
Fair point, stop motion growth should/would have been mentioned in the description.
I like a challenge…give me a minute…
How about this:
The film was made using a preliminary version of experimental protocols. The cameraman is the only observer, and he pays attention to the graffiti in short bursts then turns off the camera and ignores 1446. The thinking was that this would slow the growth to a manageable rate, or at least mitigate the possibility of total "wildfire" growth.
In-universe, this also should have been mentioned somewhere. But it's possible it is in the more fully detailed research documentation that isn't included in this summary.
As I said in chat, the whole article hinges on the .gif. That being said, this is a fairly good use of AWCY in their actual context (art), so upvoted.
Still hesitant between a +1 or no vote… OK, +1 because I do like graffitis…
I agree the video is cool, but does not look real. 50 square cm per second seems pretty fast to me and it would not need to be stop motion.
What exactly are 'infrared limited goggle' and why have them?
The way I understand, with infrared you see things according to their temperature and since the graffiti probably has the same temperature as the surface, then you won't distinguish it.
However I'm not sure about the dry-ice blasting. This can clean graffitis, but why is is necessary for the guards to have them equipped at all time? The way I understand, you stop it by stopping the observer, then you can take your time to clean it.
The goggles, yes, negate the chance of the guards acting as observers. The dry-ice blasting is a very quick, currently used method to strip surfaces of graffiti. It's faster than thinner, cleaner than sand and more ethical than killing the observers which, in the case of a breach, could be any number of people anyway.
@cuddles also
That was kind of my point, but I could have been clearer sorry. If the paint is the same temperature as the background then the goggles will be worse than useless, as the guards now can't see what they are cleaning or containing.
If the paint is still visible when using just the infrared spectrum, but not contagious, that should be stated.
If it is visible in infrared but still contagious then we are back to square one. The goggles, they do nothing (other than make the guard's life harder).
I see; I did not think of that. I am not sure what it means when it says the viewer must ''focus on the art''. Do you need to examine it and think about it and try to interpret it? If you think ''this is some paint on the wall and I'm gonna clean it'' are you going to be affected? I think it could be explained a bit more clearly.
At Vendor Xeno: When I said ''stop the observer'', I didn't mean to kill, but just stop them from looking at it. If it's a big group you could use tear gas or just shut off the light if indoors. Agents with goggles can control the people, then you could carefully clean the place, using a robot if you need.
(Coming soon: The Roomba Dry-Ice Blasting module!)
That's actually a good question. The tone of the story suggests that it should be contemplated as "art" but once you start panicking and thinking, "jesus god this paint's trying to kill me!" it doesn't stop, so as long as you were just thinking about it as a mess, graffiti, anything where you had to consciously consider it, it would trigger the effect. I think this holds since some art, particularly things like graffiti and similar vandalism, can be seen as challenging, intentionally offensive, counter-culture, etc., designed to cause reactions more than just art criticism.
Daaamn. I like the concept, even without the .gif. In fact, I felt that it added and extra layer of interest into the piece. Happily +1'd.
/forum/t-672398/scp-1446#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
