rmc523 Posted July 25, 2019 Share Posted July 25, 2019 (edited) https://www.autoblog.com/2019/07/25/2021-chevy-traverse-spied-new-face/ Looks like it's getting a Blazer-esque front end and Malibu-like taillights. Edited July 25, 2019 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted July 25, 2019 Share Posted July 25, 2019 7 minutes ago, rmc523 said: https://www.autoblog.com/2019/07/25/2021-chevy-traverse-spied-new-face/ Looks like it's getting a Blazer-esque front end and Malibu-like taillights. ...and gets hit with the ugly stick as it falls out of an ugly tree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted July 25, 2019 Author Share Posted July 25, 2019 2 minutes ago, twintornados said: ...and gets hit with the ugly stick as it falls out of an ugly tree. I find the current iteration to be handsome. I generally HATE the split headlight look, but I will say the Blazer is by far the best implementation of that look in the industry, IMO (not that that's a high bar to cross). I'm cautiously optimistic it'll look ok here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blwnsmoke Posted July 25, 2019 Share Posted July 25, 2019 I am curious, why do they blur the people out if they are out in public? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted July 25, 2019 Share Posted July 25, 2019 Don’t worry though the gauges will have the same font as a 1986 Z28. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 Blaverse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 I think the current Traverse has some Explorer styling characteristics in it. Perhaps they are adding some elements from the 2020 Explorer ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted July 26, 2019 Author Share Posted July 26, 2019 (edited) 18 hours ago, blwnsmoke said: I am curious, why do they blur the people out if they are out in public? I presume it's because you need signed consent to publish a photo of someone. The same reason on TV shows you see people's faces blurred, say on a show like Impractical Jokers - it's because they didn't get consent from those people to be on the show. For example, I was featured in that Ford magazine they send out (or they used to, not sure if it's still a thing) a few years ago when me and some other Flex owners did a meet up. It was a short blurb and photo of us, but all three of us in the photo had to sign a consent form for it to appear in the magazine. That said, I don't know why they had to blur out their arms - usually it's just faces. Edited July 26, 2019 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blwnsmoke Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, rmc523 said: I presume it's because you need signed consent to publish a photo of someone. The same reason on TV shows you see people's faces blurred, say on a show like Impractical Jokers - it's because they didn't get consent from those people to be on the show. For example, I was featured in that Ford magazine they send out (or they used to, not sure if it's still a thing) a few years ago when me and some other Flex owners did a meet up. It was a short blurb and photo of us, but all three of us in the photo had to sign a consent form for it to appear in the magazine. That said, I don't know why they had to blur out their arms - usually it's just faces. But yet I can be in public and video tape anyone and post it on facebook etc. Being a little naive, what's the difference? If you are out in public, you have zero right to privacy etc. If you look at the 2nd pic, their faces are not blurred (although a logo is over them) and can make put their looks. There is nothing stopping me from taking pics of people in public and posting them online. Movie stars are constantly harrassed and posted online without being blurred (paparazzi)... same thing IMO. Confused... Edited July 26, 2019 by blwnsmoke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted July 26, 2019 Author Share Posted July 26, 2019 35 minutes ago, blwnsmoke said: But yet I can be in public and video tape anyone and post it on facebook etc. Being a little naive, what's the difference? If you are out in public, you have zero right to privacy etc. If you look at the 2nd pic, their faces are not blurred (although a logo is over them) and can make put their looks. There is nothing stopping me from taking pics of people in public and posting them online. Movie stars are constantly harrassed and posted online without being blurred (paparazzi)... same thing IMO. Confused... I don't know? I was just guessing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 1 hour ago, blwnsmoke said: But yet I can be in public and video tape anyone and post it on facebook etc. Being a little naive, what's the difference? If you are out in public, you have zero right to privacy etc. If you look at the 2nd pic, their faces are not blurred (although a logo is over them) and can make put their looks. There is nothing stopping me from taking pics of people in public and posting them online. Movie stars are constantly harrassed and posted online without being blurred (paparazzi)... same thing IMO. Confused... You're not a business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 1 hour ago, akirby said: You're not a business. Bingo! And not doing it for profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted July 28, 2019 Share Posted July 28, 2019 On 7/26/2019 at 11:31 AM, rmc523 said: I presume it's because you need signed consent to publish a photo of someone. The same reason on TV shows you see people's faces blurred, say on a show like Impractical Jokers - it's because they didn't get consent from those people to be on the show. For example, I was featured in that Ford magazine they send out (or they used to, not sure if it's still a thing) a few years ago when me and some other Flex owners did a meet up. It was a short blurb and photo of us, but all three of us in the photo had to sign a consent form for it to appear in the magazine. That said, I don't know why they had to blur out their arms - usually it's just faces. My guess is to cover a tattoo which could also identify an individual as they are unique. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.