Tumgik
#Insights
moonastro · 2 months
Text
your fs's cute habits
pick a picture
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
left to right(top)-> 1,2,3
𖤐⭒๋࣭ ⭑how to choose an image? take a deep breath, close your eyes, RELAX, and let your intuition do the rest.
𖤐⭒๋࣭ ⭑remember, you can be drawn to more than one picture!!
°DO NOT take this as literal, take everything with a grain of salt as this is purely and intendedly for entertainment purposes.
°Don't be afraid to give feedback and opinions about this post (as i would entirely appreciate it).
° This is a GENERAL reading, take what resonates and leave and pass on what does not!
⁺˚⋆。°✩₊✩°。⋆˚⁺
pile one
they might have a smirk to their smile, or have this instinctive smile that they do that is unique to them. i don't know, it feels very cute though. like i see them doing it whenever they get shy or get suddenly happy. Also, along with that will be their laugh. they may have a distinctive laugh that they do. they may hit (in a friendly way) when laughing or they may get weak and pretend fall, and so on. i do see them being dramatic with it though😅. your person may randomly say what's on their mind without any context. like it will become so normal to you guys that you will either go with it or just ignore it. by random i mean like continuing a conversation you guys had 30 minutes ago and they add to it, or they purely just bring up the time when they were a kid and such. in public, i feel like they will be quite shy, they may unintentionally hide behind you especially if you are talking with someone or walk slightly behind. they may be a slow walker too, its not because they are slow but they get distracted easily. by the nature, the birds, the cars, the buildings etc etc. very much new soul vibes, taking in everything around them. they can be a collector and have a collection of little figures and items. it is their possessions and they will protect their collection with all their heart and take time to correct their positions and such when accidently moved.
⁺˚⋆。°✩₊✩°。⋆˚⁺
pile two
awk, this is too cute, so your partner may blush quite often. it may be from embarrassment, anger, stress, or getting put in the spotlight. you may find it cute because it can make you love them even more and it may make you feel like they are like more genuine?? anyway, they may space out quite often, probably just blanking out and staring into abyss. this may be a habit and they may have a nickname given from spacing out so much 😅. like for example, you may ask them a question and they reply with mumbles and when you say 'did you even hear what i said' they come back and go 'huh' or 'no, sorry'. you may laugh at it because you find the way they look doing it cute. you may find it cute when they get mad. they may have a face that they do or do a gesture that you notice each time. its giving me every time when they're angry you cant take them seriously and then they get even more mad. the way they eat/chew may be significant, so they may pout/ make a cute face when eating.
⁺˚⋆。°✩₊✩°。⋆˚⁺
pile three
okay, so pile 3, your person is giving very much clueless energy. i feel like most of the time they may not know what you may be talking about but they still contribute to the conversation so you wont feel upset about it. but i feel like you will always ask them if they know what you mean and then they'll admit that they don't! but i do see you laughing it off and telling them that they can admit if they don't get it. oh, they are really into structure and have really organised drawers, closets, shoe racks and so forth. you may find it cute how they keep it VERY organised and are serious about it too. you may find their concentrated face cute lol. they do portray this youthful energy so they might express those characteristics through their actions. they definitely don't like to argue and will let you win every single time which may feel frustrating sometimes but they just avoid it at all cost and feel there is no need for it. it can make you feel guilty about it though and make you want to take care of them. at the end of they day you laugh it off and find it cute. they may have trouble with their vision and may squint a lot- you can tend to make fun of them cutely for it. like, every minute of they day you see they squinting at EVERYTHING and that can catch you off guard and make you laugh by their cuteness. this is a very fun/ laughter couple so there is a lot of laughing and giggling involved.
⁺˚⋆。°✩₊✩°。⋆˚⁺
thank you dear soul for reading this!! it is greatly appreciated, and i hope you all are doing well and enjoyed this post🤍.
644 notes · View notes
zaebucca · 5 months
Text
About scale, process, palette and canvas: a few considerations on pixel art as a medium
User moredogproblems answered an interesting and legitimate question by another, DiscountEarly125, regarding my work and canvas size. He also perfectly isolated two central concepts of pixel art, which are scale and process. Canvas size, which was the theme of DiscountEarly125's specific request, is more of a dependent variable to those two aforementioned concepts, rather than a starting point. I hope the following considerations I shared may help or prompt some other ideas, but this is what I could come up with 15-ish years of experience with pixel art (and a few more years of art and media studies). I was quite in the mood of writing down these few thoughts that have been floating for a while. I apologize as this may also result in a confusing wall of text, but it is all part of a my work and research, and I would love to polish all the material, hopefully with some thoughts, insights from other colleagues, as well as pictures and materials!
A. Scale and canvas size It is true that the bigger the canvas, the more distance one may visually create from pixel art, but I personally think this is to be possibly considered a matter of perceiving pixels, rather than a fundative problem of the medium. In fact I concur with the idea of "process makes the medium" rather than identifying pixel art as how (evidently) pixeled the result feels. The general picture, or the sum of pixels, though, is a really important matter to the medium nonetheless! Pixels themselves work in relation one with another, so it's their overall result that gives context and makes the subject recognizable. This relationship between pixels links back to all the art fundamentals that each artist is taught, from color theory to shape and composition - and so on. So, the canvas size debate usually boils down to a matter of scale or necessity of your subjects. As long as the dimension (canvas) of your subject (as in: a drawing of an apple, a character sprite, a mockup environment) allows you to operate, control and keep an eye on the quantity (number/area of pixels together) and quality (color, shaping of multiple pixels, texturing obtained through color and shapes) of isolated single pixels or pixeled areas, you're in the pixel art universe. The other way around to define the matter of scaling: in order to be operating pixel art fundamentals and techniques, your subject has to be on a scale that allows you to apply principles of pixel art within the space of your canvas and your personal style. These very same principles, or basics, can be applied with different results and extent to bigger and smaller canvases alike, each with their own specific difficulties and variables. It is important to adapt your scale when learning, and trying classic canvases per subject like "16x16px" (standard tile or character sprite unit, tied to older consoles and screen ratios, it's a bit complicated there) is always a nice idea - they also tend to be industry benchmarks and necessities so in case you'd like to consider a professional output, that's very useful.
Scale also applies to the array of colors, and there lies the concept of palette: a number of single hexadecimal hues we are using for each single pixel. Any single pixel can have one hexadecimal color only.
Consequentially it is absolutely true that either a huge canvas or a palette too broad may prevent a viewer from perceiving immediately the "nature" of your medium, namely seeing square pixels, recognizing a certain amount of color - or more thoroughly recognizing that you made some choices for each subject on a pixel level. What could possibly happen on a huge canvas (without zooming in) is that you can't really grasp the pixels, but just the "overall picture" - and that may not differ too much from digital, raster art, which is of course also based on pixels. Therein appearently lies a sort of threshold that is really hard to pin down for us pixel artists, as it depends on screen size, visualization methods, distance, filters and lots of other inherently subjective parts.
This kinda is my case sometimes: I make big environments (possibly too big, and too detailed in each part I tell myself) that are a sum of many lesser parts: both tilesets and sprites that relate (but not strictly adhere) to a basic space unit that is 16x16pixels. You can indeed consider scale in a broader sense as a subdivision or magnification issue, much alike squinting your eyes to focus on a picture's overall contrast or, conversely, analyzing its fundamental parts with a magnifying glass, and then a microscope - an analogy as follows:
a. the picture as a whole is like a colorful rock that you can analyze by magnifying its grain. b. the characters, geographical elements and textures, works like the different substances that compose the rock and give its visible characteristics grain and complexity, c. single pixels constitute the very atoms of those previously recognized substances.
I mean "atom" in the traditional, classical meaning of indivisible, fundative object. That's a "quantized" part of information, which for pixel art is ultimately color (or a binary value, like yes/no black/white). If you were, for example, to crop some parts of my work - let's say 160x144 pixels (a gameboy screen resolution in pixels) you would see the substances that are characters and elements of nature, and when you zoom in again, every atom becomes visible as a single entity of color. There are 29 different type of "atoms" in Ruin Valley as in different, singularly hexadecimal colors that work together in different combinations and shapes to create different substances and characters. 18 of them are used for the different qualities of the environment, and 11 more for extra hues for characters and other elements to pop out a bit.
It's really interesting to see how many pixel artists push this "threshold" of pixel art canvases to the extremely small or the extremely big, whereas, notably, palettes are less open to growth: it is indeed my opinion that pixel art tends to quantize color (quality) over than dimension (quantity). Palettes, notably, do not grow exponentially, but tend to a lower, fixed, controlled amount of individual values instead. This usually gives the artist the true possibility and toolkit through which is possible to think about/with pixels. In other words: color (or its absence) is the founding unit and identity of pixel art as a digital medium.
B. Pixels as process or pixels as objective? Pixels themselves (as strange as that may sound!) are not to be considered an objective of pixel art, I think, but the founding matter of its research as a medium instead. I think that making pixel art is not just devoting oneself to show those jagged, squarey areas or blunt edges that we all know and love: this is just one of the possible aesthetics that pixel art conveys or adopts - especially on small canvases. Pixel art is not about denouncing itself as pixels, but, rather, embracing the square, atomic unit to build an ensemble that conveys a content or a style. That's the important part of the discourse that emancipated pixel art into being a medium, and not just an aesthetic choice or style of representation. Again: process makes this medium. Speaking of that, I consider pixel art as part of a broader family of "quantized art", namely media that operate on/with "indivisible, founding bricks and unities" that can assume a certain quality (color, mainly) within a certain quantity (palette, canvas size) and in relation to its surroundings to describe something. This puts pixel art, with its specifics and with a certain degree of semplification, among other mediums such as cross-stitch, bead art, construction sets, textile art (on a warp and weft basis), (micro-)mosaics and others.
A classic threshold example of process vs objective: oekaki art. Oekaki art - which I love and also happen to make from time to time - doesn't really work or "think" specifically on a pixel base: it doesn't place pixels per se, but uses pixel-based areas and textures on bigger canvases with a certain degree of freedom, like one would normally do with brushes on raster digital art programs (adobe ps, gimp, clip studio and so on) in order to convey an aesthetic with fewer colors and a certain line style and texturing. That way, oekaki uses and knows pixels in a deep way, but doesn't see them primarily in a quantized way. As a result the "overall picture" shows pixels to a certain extent, and it's possible to recognize distinct pixels for each part, but the objective is not an analysis and use of pixel and quantized information, but the use of an aesthetic based upon accessibility of resources, their control and a certain rendering style.
A huge part of pixel art is its absolute accessibility: everyone with a fairly outdated computer or screen and a basic drawing program can study the medium. To be fair, it's indeed considering accessiblity that I highly support an inclusive approach to the term "pixel art" and I think traditional oekaki is a close, beautiful relative that builds upon the rules and techniques of pixel art and pixel rendering, yet keeping its identity as its very own medium - somehow like a dress may be built around/upon textile design. Anyway, boundaries are meant to be crossed and I think there definitely are lots of oekaki and pixel-based art that meet traditional pixel art mid-way - or further. I also think the "is it pixel art?" discourse possibly ensuing - and generally speaking any media belonging purist ontology - is a treacherous, slippery terrain leading to excesses, and this is not my focus today, neither am I able to tackle that subject extensively at the moment.
C. Conclusions and a few good exercises Everything above may be farfetched or too complicated as a starting point. I tried to write all down as orderly as possible. The point of this (possibly discouraging) analysis and the reasoning between scale and process is that (pixel) art is about trying different canvases, and reasoning on one's subject and objective, rather than limiting oneself to presets sizes or styles. It's important to choose something that resonates with us and, in doing so, thinking about other, more interesting limitations: that's the discourse about quantity of space and quality in color. Limiting is the best possible exercise and one I wholeheartedly encourage: by doing so we are progressively delving deeper on the basics, as we learn the fundamental relationships between shapes and colors that we can achieve through pixels. A few good exercises that I too implemented in my own workflow come to mind: 1. Trying different canvases (or sizes) for the same subject (sprite, character art, illustration or so on). This helps a lot finding a comfortable size to apply pixel techniques, as well as getting a hold over fundamentals such as aliasing, linework, conventional representation and so on. 2. Trying different palettes for the same subject, both by varying colors themselves (therefore learning about values and contrast and readability, as well as atmosphere and mood!) or singular hues and their components, in order to discover possible relationship between them. Have fun! 3. Reducing the width of the palette progressively for the same subject: reducing the number of singular colors forces a reasoning on shapes, rapresentation. You may go from 1-bit art (just black/white) to 3 colors, 4, 8 and so on. We'll not talk about transparency as a singular color there, but if you happen to be interested in retro art, transparency counts to the palette size. This exercise is very useful in rendering, and possibly tricky. And definitely fun. :') 4. Choosing an objective and usage of our work: for example trying to learn about old pixel art limitations for games, in order to reason within specifics. Get inspired by traditional games (spriters-resource is your best friend here, in case you have a specific retrogame you're thinking of)! I will probably talk about limitations and style on another post. 5. Four eyes (and other multiples) are better than two: try to talk with people and friends and other artists you trust and feel comfortable with to get their point of view. This can be scary, I know, especially at the beginning. You're not forced to, of course, but if you do (in a safespace) there's lots you can learn about concepts such as readability, subject recognition, rendering and composition. Our eyes and brains get accustomed to something, and pixel art being a rather analytic medium made of synergies, subtle changes, limitations and conventions is especially tricky on the artist's eyes on the long term. Either way, the important thing about pixel art is understanding that this medium is about recognizing and enjoying the process rather than the eventual aesthetic and in order to do so the best choice is to start simple, small, with few colors and techniques at a time! Have fun and hit me up with your progress and considerations. :')
336 notes · View notes
glassrunner · 7 months
Text
HOLY FUCK THEY FINALLY UPDATED THE PHOTO OF RANDY AND RIVER 😭😭😭😭
Tumblr media
227 notes · View notes
julialametta · 2 months
Text
Tumblr media
one a day 66/366
"EIN BLICK" / "insight" / Vienna / Austria / ©Julia Lametta
99 notes · View notes
ruminiscence · 3 months
Text
Character Analysis of Johan Liebert - Monster, Naoki Urasawa (2004)
Tumblr media
In my opinion, Johan represents Jung's concept of the shadow, which is why both Tenma and Nina couldn't kill him in the end. Despite tirelessly, and relentlessly going after him. If they did end up doing so, they would be destroying themselves in the process. The constant fear on Tenma's face once he heard the buzz words 'monster' and 'inside of me' highlights his underlying fear. It is, of course, aggravating, considering how close they both were to killing Johan (multiple times, might I add). But, to them, it would have come at too high a cost.
Consequently, Johan was not the monster he and everyone thought him to be. The forgiveness Nina offered to Johan (as well as) Tenma’s acceptance (in a way) gave Johan that validation. In my opinion, Johan had an identity problem, not a complete lack thereof, as most people say. Johan completely understood how senseless the world is; the picture book from his childhood made sense of that senselessness. That narrative (mostly born from the book) gave significance to his existence, whether he knew it or not. I found it interesting that he went through several names throughout his life, but ‘Johan Liebert’ was recurring. Whether this is just for convenience's sake, I don’t know.
The scene where we see his reaction when re-reading the book (likely the first time since he was a child) furthers this notion. Johan's facial expressions are to be paid attention to, every single one, even if they barely change. We see the most significant change in his face in the final scene: that of sheer disappointment, hopelessness, and defeat. His master plan did not go accordingly; the plan was for him to be completely wiped off the face of the earth, rendered fictitious. The drunk man who unexpectedly shot him stripped him of that. So did Tenma, in not allowing Johan to kill/destroy his (Tenma’s) altruistic nature.
Johan's perfect suicide ultimately fails because he is not the nameless monster he believed himself to be; this is shown merely in the fact that he does not kill (nor even think about killing) Nina & Tenma; he realised that they are the only two people to understand him in this world. This also explains Johan's bizarre attachment to Tenma from the get-go (which also makes a lot of sense). In the scene where we listen to the tape, we're made aware of Johan's desperation; he does not want to forget 'Anna'; he believes they are the only two people in the world. Later on, Tenma was added to that list. Hence, every other person's life is rendered meaningless to Johan; this is the reason for his remorseless killings, of course. He killed everyone that could eventually be tied into his and Anna/Nina's existence, and arguably Tenma, too.
I also think Johan eventually lets go of this (seemingly) obsession with names in the final scene. Whether the last scene of him and Tenma speaking was a dream or not remains significant. Before Tenma reveals his potential real name to Johan, the subject is changed. This is when we learn about the biological mother's sacrifice. Despite her not choosing to sacrifice Johan, he still doubts the decision. All of this is to say that perhaps the failure of his perfect suicidal plan was, in fact, the real success after all. He successfully kills everyone who does not know him but knows of the nameless monster's existence. This explains why the only two people on this earth who did are still alive and were eventually saved emotionally.
In a way, they also saved Johan too. Hence the *seemingly* peaceful disappearance from the hospital. He just wanted to be understood. This is also why I believe he asked Nina to shoot him as a child and then again all those years later. His mother placed this seed of doubt, which he seemed confident in, but because of Nina's existence, he could extend this and not be entirely solid in this sense of doubt. He latched this on to Nina's being, hence merging their identities. As a child, he did seek her forgiveness despite his contradictory actions (asking to be shot). When she finally offered forgiveness in a similar situation later on, the doubt was gone. That little spec of forgiveness and acceptance was all he needed. Acceptance is not to say that he wanted her or even Tenma to accept his actions; hence, Johan says, 'We can't turn back now' when Nina does forgive him. Other people and their deaths (at his hands) simply did not matter to him; he was utterly indifferent to it. So evidently, that one thing mattered to him, which he mostly did not believe to be real; it turned real, giving him what he had so desperately been looking for since childhood. He is saved. The only three people that mattered in the show (concerning Johan's essence) are saved. 
97 notes · View notes
lovelightwords · 4 months
Text
Tumblr media
76 notes · View notes
modernwritercraft · 20 days
Text
Could anyone give me some insight into celtic culture? Their beliefs, deities, rituals, symbols and the meaning etc, just anything at all
Tumblr media
32 notes · View notes
indeedgoodman · 5 months
Text
56 notes · View notes
enchantingseer · 4 months
Text
New Year's Eve ( Closed )
🎀🎄🎁🔔
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Free Pyschic Reading
🔮🪞🌕✨
Rules to Participate :
1.Answer the Below Questions
How are you feeling?
What makes you happy?
One wish you always had ?
Define yourself in a word !
~~~~~~~~~~~°~°~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~°~°~~~~~~~~~~~
2. Reblog, Like & Share This Post
~~~~~~~~~~~°~°~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~°~°
3. Reading will be short in 3-5 lines
Tumblr media
Note : After these participants get their readings no further details would be available regarding any other topic as if you want to have more readings follow me as I will keep bringing topics which are distinct as I am a psychic intuitive energy reader and
As I do, write naturally as I channel my sacred😇🔮 gifts
11:11 ✨
I also do paid readings if you want details DM me !! ✉️
47 notes · View notes
4dkellysworld · 7 months
Text
Consciousness is Silence
Student: It's like when you ask the question, "Who am I?" there's a kind of a blank spot, a blank space before anything comes up is that what you say consciousness is? Robert: Space is consciousness, correct. The space in between "Who am I?" is the real self. Abide in that. If you continue the practice, after a while, the space will grow longer and longer and longer. You will say, "Who am I?" and pause and you will sooner get lost in consciousness. Then you start thinking again, and you go back to "Who am I?" and there'll be another long space, until "who am I?" stops completely and you become yourself. So as you continue the practice, the space in between becomes longer and longer. Student: Robert, is the Self clear space or a blank or the perceiver of the space or the blank? Robert: The space is not a blank. It is not a perceiver. It is nothing that you can qualify. Nothing that you can discuss. Nothing that is known. For space to be known, there has to be a knower. And as long as there's a knower, that's not it. So you have to go beyond that. To silence. Consciousness is silence. Silence is consciousness. They're both the same. Student: Robert, in a sense the space is not an 'It', but I and that is a problem in a sense, that we see it as it and not I? Robert: You exist. You exist where there is space and you exist where there is 'I'. So who exists as space? Who exists as 'I'? Ask the question. Who exists? Confer. Follow the existence. Follow the 'I'. And you will come to nothing. You will come to consciousness by itself. But do not believe that the void is it. Many people experience the void and they think the void is it. But don't you exist in the void? (tape break) (Robert continues) ...there is nothing that can be explained. As long as you can explain it, it's not it. So what is left? Silence, quietness.
from Robert Adams satsang
76 notes · View notes
I kind of have a feeling that the reason Snape took on stuff like the unbreakable vow was not just because he wanted to do good in his very difficult way and because he had compassion for women and children on some level and because he didn't fear death. I have the distinct notion that the hand he extended for the unbreakable vow was also a hand he took. Not consciously I think but certainly subconsciously. It was the hand of a woman who offered him a way out, who offered him a way to die. I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't have killed himself because he would consider this weakness and he seems to despise weakness deeply. He also didn't want to die in a useless way I would think, just dying of a random illness or something was probably not his first choice even though I think it's not far fetched that he had suicidal tendencies since his childhood and who could blame him, there wasn't much love in his life ever.
But dying for a good cause, something he himself considers good and worthy, now that's another thing. I think he loved his mother and I think he had a comparatively good relationship with her even though it probably wasn't that close. But seeing this theme reappear in his life I would just dare to make that claim.
And I think he really couldn't deal with his big negative feelings and there was so much hopelessness, so I think dying a hero was, from his standpoint, really the best way out.
51 notes · View notes
devilroute · 9 months
Text
transgender should be a horror genre
84 notes · View notes
claryteatoetwo · 7 months
Text
Many people suggest that they realized their life's passion at a young age. Recently, I began to wonder what it was that I was passionate about as a child. There was no occupation that I could remember exciting me into a state of focused intention. As a child, I did not fantasize about becoming any one occupation. My only long term goal was to become absolutely reasonable.
At a young age I was prone to recognizing the seemingly infinitely contradictive nature of people's biases. It drove me to reject all forms of authority. My brain would formulate intricate arguments against the ideologies of others, no matter their stance. It took some time and experience to realize that EVERY ideology has inherent faults. Upon this recognition, I would refrain from going against the biases and ideologies of others and instead, accept them as parts of a grand picture. We do not contain the inherent ability to recognize that every single one of our assumptions contain faults due to their individualized definition that separates them from all other things. Each ideology does not take into account all others by default. I take all ideologies into consideration, recognizing their relative value as well as their inherently faulty nature. Through this, I can be absolutely reasonable, as long as I am mindful of my own conditioned human responses and affinity toward ideological assumptions.
64 notes · View notes
dragongril98 · 23 days
Text
When the souls are crossed, roots are connected it forms a duo. They stay strong despite the phases and the seasons. Appearance becomes in vain. They become pleasent to meet infront of GOD.
Tumblr media
22 notes · View notes
j4jml · 1 month
Text
Tumblr media
“We carry inside us the wonders we seek outside us.” - Rumi
The Wonders 20/03/2024 © All Rights Reserved by Jamil Hussain
21 notes · View notes
glassrunner · 2 months
Text
“touch the other arm and travel to the realm of shadow” i played dark souls, dark souls 3 and bloodborne and you think i’m gonna touch something to get sucked into another world? fool me once, shame on you, fool me four times and i might just be a masochist bc HELL YEAH IM GONNA DO IT
27 notes · View notes