That’s quite exactly what they were going for actually. Lo-res graphic to represent hi-tech. Somewhat like military camo is now pixelated for no practical reason.
nah, you’re totally off topic. I was responding to looks. sorry for distracting you away from looks by mentioning practicality. on practicality, the reason for the cybertruck panels is they’re stainless steel. on looks, you didn’t reply. since you avoided that topic, i suspect you’re another sheep who jumped on the “ugly” bandwagon and aren’t able to say much more than “ugly ugly ugly”. no interest.
Neither pixellation nor digitization contributes to the camouflaging effect. The pixellated style, however, simplifies design and eases printing on fabric, compared to traditional patterns. While digital patterns are becoming widespread, critics maintain that the pixellated look is a question of fashion rather than function.
That’s quite exactly what they were going for actually. Lo-res graphic to represent hi-tech. Somewhat like military camo is now pixelated for no practical reason.
Just because you don’t know why digital camouflage exists doesn’t mean it has no practical purpose.
nah, you’re totally off topic. I was responding to looks. sorry for distracting you away from looks by mentioning practicality. on practicality, the reason for the cybertruck panels is they’re stainless steel. on looks, you didn’t reply. since you avoided that topic, i suspect you’re another sheep who jumped on the “ugly” bandwagon and aren’t able to say much more than “ugly ugly ugly”. no interest.
Simplified design and easier printing sounds like a very practical purpose.
At the cost of drip? Very much not worth.
Drip or drown, baby 😎
That paragraph seems to contradict itself. “ease of printing” is a functional concern, even if it doesn’t affect the camo while in use.
deleted by creator