Post images of beauty (quote pics sparingly) - see Mod warnings in OP

Harrybelafonte

Eamonnator wrote: »

https://eurocyclist.wordpress.com/about/

This is another set of rules for you to ignore.

The rules are for keeping, not ignoring. All hail the rules.

Biker79

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

The rules are for keeping, not ignoring. All hail the rules.

110%.

Brian?

cletus wrote: »

Why does the tyre brand have to line up with the valve?

And water bottles should match the bike?

Because there's a completely arbitrary set of rules about how a bike should appear in a picture.

Brian?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The frame is absolutely lovely but does nothing for me as a whole.

Is the frame nice though? It's a pretty standard looking frame that was painted in an acid trip.

magicbastarder

the paintjob is usually 80%* of how good a frame looks.

*completely arbitrary figure, main thing is it's above 50%

Brian?

magicbastarder wrote: »

the paintjob is usually 80%* of how good a frame looks.

*completely arbitrary figure, main thing is it's above 50%

Depends on the frame material though.

Steel frame: 50-80%
Ti frame: 0%
Carbon frame: 14-28%
Aluminium frame: doesn’t matter. They’re an abomination that never look good.


You want arbitrary, that’s arbitrary.

Biker79

I've seen aluminium frames that are much more dignified than carbon. Absolutely.

Eamonnator

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

The rules are for keeping, not ignoring. All hail the rules.

I was, of course, trying to be sarcastic.
All Hail The Rules.

Brian?

Biker79 wrote: »

I've seen aluminium frames that are much more dignified than carbon. Absolutely.

No you haven’t. You just think you have. They’re an affront to aesthetics

cletus

Eamonnator wrote: »

I was, of course, trying to be sarcastic.
All Hail The Rules.

Pity I was taking you at your word. Particulary as many of the rules in each list contradict each other.

Do the rules apply to gravel bikes, or are they not "road" enough. Perhaps the rules need to be updated?

Regardless, I think I shall contine to wear baggy mtb shorts and spd shoes with ankle socks, and take pictures of my bike from the non drive side

CramCycle

Brian? wrote: »

No you haven’t. You just think you have. They’re an affront to aesthetics

My Stevens Vuelta was beautiful, therefore you are wrong

Brian?

CramCycle wrote: »

My Stevens Vuelta was beautiful, therefore you are wrong

You have my sympathies. It must be difficult to live with such delusions.

Edit: I googled it. The Stevens Vuelta wasn’t actually that ugly. It was barely and abomination at all.

Biker79

Brian? wrote: »

No you haven’t. You just think you have. They’re an affront to aesthetics

Sir...I think you might need your eyeballs re-calibrated.

at1withmyself

Less talking & more images to back up your arguments please!!!!!

Harrybelafonte

cletus wrote: »

Pity I was taking you at your word. Particulary as many of the rules in each list contradict each other.

Do the rules apply to gravel bikes, or are they not "road" enough. Perhaps the rules need to be updated?

Regardless, I think I shall contine to wear baggy mtb shorts and spd shoes with ankle socks, and take pictures of my bike from the non drive side

Gravel bikes don't count. They're the spawn of miscegination and those who ride them, outcasts, destined to spend their days roaming roads and paths in a world where their halfbreed abominations have no clear place.

/s again

Plus, you should always take a photo from the drive side, unless you're embarrassed by it, it's an essential to overall aesthetic of the bike, no?

Harrybelafonte

Confirms my respray colour choice

cletus

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Gravel bikes don't count. They're the spawn of miscegination and those who ride them, outcasts, destined to spend their days roaming roads and paths in a world where their halfbreed abominations have no clear place.

/s again

Plus, you should always take a photo from the drive side, unless you're embarrassed by it, it's an essential to overall aesthetic of the bike, no?

Does that mean I don't have to follow the rules?

Normally I would take drive side photos, but now that Ive been told I must, I'm itching not to

MojoMaker

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

That's a nice neo-retro, a Colorado?

Brian?

cletus wrote: »

Does that mean I don't have to follow the rules?

Normally I would take drive side photos, but now that Ive been told I must, I'm itching not to

Take drive side photos but don’t align the crank arms properly. That’ll drive them nuts.

magicbastarder

even worse*, flip the image horizontally so it looks like the drivetrain is on the wrong side of the bike.

*better

Harrybelafonte

MojoMaker wrote: »

That's a nice neo-retro, a Colorado?

Yes, Colorado II I think

eeeee

I have a stunning alu bike with a custom paint job.
There are as many alu beauties out there as carbon.
I mean the bowman palace is a stunner!

Harrybelafonte

Daroxtar

I know it's got disc brakes but that paint job.....

Harrybelafonte

cletus

What bike is that. It's very beautiful

magicbastarder

those tyres look a little too close to 'thunder butt' for comfort.

MojoMaker

Beauty might be stretching it a bit alright. Marmite for sure, but not ugly.

cletus

I really like it. I might actually love it

Harrybelafonte

cletus wrote: »

What bike is that. It's very beautiful

https://theradavist.com/2018/11/2018-philly-bike-expo-sim-works-dopo-off-road-tourer/