So how would I start building an underwater city?Just kidding. The real topic is wall murals. Recently had to give up my office for the baby and moved down to a comfy basement corner. I planned on walling off my section and making it a cozy bioshock themed area with a wall mural set to look out on rapture. Anyone have experience with wall murals or recommendations?
>>1610090I'd actually like to talk about the feasibility of underwater cities from an engineering perspective. How insanely expensive and time consuming would that be?
>>1610090Have you considered trying to get a print of rapture on like was paper and adding lighting behind it. I feel like if your going for a mural of rapture it might be worth adding some effect like backlighting to it.
>>1610091Retardedly expensive, ridiculously time consuming and the upkeep would be never ending. Look into the price of the concrete they use for building in water then do the math for just one ten story building for a starter.>>1610093Actually a cool idea. I know you can get wall decals based on photos. You could probably place LEDs in spots to make them look like distant lights.
>>1610096I might have to steal this project idea
>>1610098You do you mang. I'm just trying to see of anyone has experience with this kind of thing before I start.
>>1610090Its 1920's sorta Art Deco. So find a load of art deco stuff you like, shove it in. Might even be able to cheat underwater the same way Disney did, panel, water with bubbles, panel, done.
>>1610091>distantYou might as well dig it underground under the sea.
>>1610106Yeah, I did a bunch of research into the art deco theme and it can be done pretty easily. Not fucking with water or bubbles. That's just asking for water damage. As I said I really just made this thread to see if anyone has done anything with screenshots blown up as wall decals. Figure someone on this board has done it.
>>1610090>So how would I start building an underwater city?Shipping containers submerged in water.
>>1610163And use imitation crab meat as the mortar. I got that yeah.
>>1610154Ah, I'm with you now. A large print might cost you way too much, might be worth looking into custom printed wallpaper instead if you want general details, then maybe a print for specifics (a fake window for example).
>>1610154There won't be a picture with high enough definition to blow up to wall size my friend someone will have to custom make it, Also I hope money is not an object
>>1610200Upscalers exist now.
>Steel frame anchored underwater>net and plastic sheet>inflate with oxygen >repeat as necessary
>>1610280Inflate with air not oxygen
>>1610091once the old girl starts leaking, she aint ever gonna stop.
>>1610091>How insanely expensive and time consuming would that be?>insanely expensiveThe question answers itself. You're dealing with moderate to intense pressures all day that vary constantly with waves and tides.Common building materials like reinforced concrete will still crack and you'll have to deal with that. And also you need an air lock, a way to get down, a caisson to build a foundation, etc
>>1610090What materials would you want to make it out of? Colored rice? Colored paper peices? A few dozen printed out photos of it all blown up to massive size then taped together? Woven rug? You can even just get a school projector, cast the image onto the wall and paint it directly. Though, I recommend painting it on something like plywood so you can move it if needed.>>1610091It is actually less expensive to live in space.
>>1610200Buy a cheap hdmi projector, connect to PC with a mural/design your like and project the scene onto the wall.Trace over it with pencil and then finish it with whatever mural painters use.
>>1610091Building in space is probably cheaper.
>>1610344>It is actually less expensive to live in space.ISS is pretty damn expensive.
>>1610344>It is actually less expensive to live in space.Actually, it isn't. There are thousands of people living underwater right now vs six in space, and the ISS is more expensive than all the nuclear subs in the world. An underwater city would be outrageously expensive and impractical, but it would be feasible so long as it's built to be maintained. Space is easier from a structural engineering consideration, but it's really expensive to get stuff up there, and that more than offsets the difference.
>>1610466>>1610459Living 10 meters underwater is doable. Living at the bottom of the ocean is more expensive than the ISS. This is due to the fact that every 10 meters the pressure increases 1atm. The ISS only has to deal with containing 1atm of pressure. An underwater city would need to withstand dozens of atm of pressure. You'd not have the beautiful domes you see in science fiction. You'd have a dark rabbit warren made of small capsules and tunnels, looking much like the ISS, ironically enough. You couldn't have open pressure since the human can't handle that for very long amounts of time. It would need a full complement of redundancies, life support, constant resupply, etc. If you want autonomy then it'd need to be powered by nuclear so you could use grow lights and such.Yes, it would be more expensive than the ISS. Don't confuse running cost for original cost. The ISS was put up pretty cheaply. It uses solar, not nuclear.
>>1610502>The ISS only has to deal with containing 1atm of pressure.I think there may be a number of other things the ISS has to deal with famalam.
Should have known better than to start with that bait. Threads slowly going to hell.>>1610188That may be a better call. I only want to make one wall look like a rapture view so a smaller window may be more feasible. >>1610200Hoping to keep it within 2 to 3 hundred. I dont want to spend a ridiculous amount on fantasy decor.>>1610420That seems like the most legit idea so far. Nice one anon.
>>1610091An actual city? The costs would be ridiculous.A city in the vein of the Kowloon walled city? I think it could be doable.
>>1610090the best materials to use would malleable, permeable, gel-like surfaces. probably next-generation technology, or current off-market tech. stuff that has an affinity for the saltwater and doesn't resist (therefore crack) with the variable pressure, but rather, gentle molds with it.
>>1610200You can get someone to vector the image for you. Some people on these boards do it for free.>>1610420...then do this.
>>1610503None of which are as bad as say 1,000psi trying to crush your underwater smoke shack.
Have you ever considered a fish tank?
>>1610870$10,000 a pound to get there is pretty bad.
>>1610999Yet, underwater habitats don't last and are always underfunded because it is far more expensive. And, those are the very very shallow ones. Like this tiny one cost about $16 million (inflation adjust) and it isn't even pressurized at only 50ft/15.24m depth (2.524atm). La Chalupa research laboratory I think is the largest (still tiny) and was originally submerged to 500ft/152.4 (16.24atm), but was moved to only 30ft/9.144m (1.9144atm) where it now stays as an underwater hotel for scuba divers. It is pretty cheap, but considering that it is literally a giant concrete cinderblock with a couple holes and no pressurization it is no wonder it is ultra cheap and still in operation.Costs begin when you start going deeper and have it pressurized. Those costs are extreme. Just for a tiny submersible like a Triton 3300/3 the cost is about $25 million, but you can't live in those for longer than 12 hours.
>>1610285What you talking bout? Sounded like the perfect place to spark up a fat one.
>>1610459The ISS is estimated to be the most expensive single object ever built in human history
>>1611482Wtf? How is it more expensive than the pyramids? In value OR labor cost?
>>1610285No, oxygen.t. Apollo 1 gang
>>1611721Ancient Egypt at it height was extremely poor by modern standards. The monuments look impressive, and they were impressive for the technology available, but they're small fry for modern economies, which do things like the Three Gorges Dam and the Interstate Highway System. The Pyramids are fly specks in comparison. And when we get to things that actually push the limits of modern technology, things can get really expensive. A manned spacecraft may have a million parts that need to function flawlessly, made of exotic materials that tend to be a bitch to work with. They are typically hand built one at a time and subjected to OCD-level quality control. Simply producing the materials used in spacecraft takes metallurgy, other materials science, and process control (vacuum-processed metals, say, or clean-room manufacturing environments) that have only been available for a few decades and require considerable infrastructure of their own. And then we get to the big cost: rocket fuel. The vast majority of the mass of a rocket sitting on the launch pad is fuel, typically requiring complex production and storage itself. The Space Shuttle used 4.4 million pounds of fuel to deliver up to a 65,000 pound payload. It took quite a few trips to build the ISS.
>>1610090I've always wanted to try making a realistic fake window. >glass block wall>green, blue paint on wall behind glass>3 sets of LEDS for east, noon, and west light direction, get them to fade between each other on a timer
>>1610091Everything would have to have 2 separated layers between the people and water and the structure would need to be built such that panels could be swapped out with little effort
>>1610154get a huge fish tank and then put a print on the backside of a rapture skylinecan then add rapture themed shit inside the tank etcjust an idea but this seems easier to me than a legit wall with water