thefuuuucomics:

Submitted by iamkitchykeith

lesstitsnass:

eschergirls:

morangopagen submitted:

I was browsing around my picture folder and I found this picture. It’s one of the few comic books I actually purchased, and what got my attention was how nice was the cover (this picture). The nice coloring, the folding, lightning… but then, seeing this picture today… I realised something that made me say “oh NO”

The BUTTS AND BOOBS POSE!!!

And oh gosh this one. This one is extremely painful, Jesus Christ.

Someone please redraws this for the glory of love.

AUGH!  There are pictures that are submitted to me where I just go “OMFG” and make an actual noise in real life when I see it (usually “AHH!”) and this is one of them.  Good lord, that’s EGREGIOUS.  I grew up as a huge Rogue/Gambit fangirl, but this really overrides any sense of “awwwww” I have, it’s so distracting (to say the least.)

CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!

First, skeleton and analysis: 

Next, fleshing it out: 

Third, how Gambit’s arm should now be:

Because if it weren’t for that, this would be a beautiful illustration indeed. But yes, the snapped spine (especially bisected by the cloak to make it more painfully obvious) is utterly distracting from the beauty of this piece. 

(also the fabric doesn’t work right between her breasts and her butt crack goes up way too high, but I’m nitpicking)

skyward-princess:

PSST HERE IS MY BRIBE

also sorry i had to stalk your gpoy tags

I APOLOGISE FOR THE SHITTY APPROXIMATION.

AM I YOUR FRIEND YET? :D

OH MY GOD YOU ARE POSSIBLY MY FAVOURITE PERSON EVER RIGHT NOW 

:D Glad to know you liked it hahahaa~

(Source: goldintoblack)

allskiesblue:

sempermaria:

Re-reblogging because reasons.

-casually interjects-

While most of this is correct, your photos are high contrast.

Exposure is what ultimately affects colour balance, and in your photos there is a high contrast between ‘light’ areas and ‘dark’ areas.

This is not the case in the Korra picture.

In the Korra picture, even the darkest area of the picture is very light.

This means the picture is effectively ‘over exposed’ and has no darker areas to differentiate her(?) darker skintone.Her hair is blonde. It is not brown in this picture, it’s lighter than my hair and my hair is a strawberry-blonde.

A light source like this does involve high-concentrated light, you’re correct, but it should also have incredibly dark, sharp shadows as well, and I’m not seeing that.

If the light in the picture was behaving in the way you’re claiming it is, we would see that. A high-contrast difference between light and dark colours that express her darker skintone. We don’t see that.

We see the exact lighting conditions that would occurr for someone with light hair and white skin.

Darker skin is very rich in colour and has a higher threshold before over-exposure happens. As you demonstrated in your pictures above. For me to be over exposed, all it takes is a photo in direct (harsh) sunlight. For someone with darker skin, it takes a high wattage bulb, very close to the skin, and there is a high contrast differential between areas of high concentration and low concentration.

Something about the art was irritating me, and I agree with you.  It’s just that the initial objection to the fanart (making her so pale because of the contrast constituting as whitewashing) was something I disagreed on because, like you said, to make a darker-hued (in this case skin tone akin to an Inuit’s) skin appear so ‘white’ was because of the light emitted by the fire.  And admittedly, it should’ve used darker shadows to demonstrate the same lighting effect to have avoided the objection entirely in the first place.

It’s just the because of the accusation of whitewashing left right and centre of fanart of PoC characters (though unmistakably there are many various examples out there of deliberate whitewashing) it does leave me a little apprehensive of making any future fanart of such when overlooking something as simple and yet very important to demonstrate lighting and color will earn me attacks and accusations of racism / shadeism.

Granted the OP (if I read the right posts) was unwilling to concede to the lighting being wrong in some aspect, however the initial accusation was aimed towards the actual lighting and the choice of color (or lack thereof) itself and not the missing contrasting dark shadows.

I suppose the lesson is to understand the criticism and not immediately come to defense of the art, but see that people see something wrong with it and, while they may not be pointing it out accurately, reviewing the art and seeing what could be wrong could solve the problem without resulting in something as messy as the many Korra / PoC char fanart arguments that arise.  

That being said, the issue that this particular art just does plant a seed of apprehension when I do make my own fanart of characters like Korra.  I know the lesson is to learn and grow, as with all art, but if it does get easily objected to so vehemently and messily as this one did (amongst many others), then it does make me a little anxious to post it.

In retrospect, I sincerely apologise for drudging this up again.  The issue of skin color in art and just in general has been a bee in my bonnet for a while since I first read this post and though people are oft content to let things like this lie quiet once it’s died down, I’ve brought it up again which isn’t exactly always a pleasant thing for people.

(Source: damnlayoffthebleach)

pornjunkyard:

dumbthingswhitepplsay:

damnlayoffthebleach:

yarnlass:

damnlayoffthebleach:

http://bekuh.tumblr.com/post/20038239165/baddragonborn-boobermensch

The link is to a Korra fanart and the discussion that followed.  I thought it might just be simpler if you reblogged it. I give this link instead of the original because I thought you might like the chance to respond to some of the comments.

TayTay: 

OH LAWD, I CAME ACROSS THIS ONE. 

……. THE BLEACH….

THE BLEACH IS ALL UP JUST IN THERE 

AND I BET PEOPLE ARE LIKE, OMGAHH IT’S ZE LIGHTING

NO… NO… FIRE DOESN’T MELT MELANIN

- Ugh, shall take a peek at the convo… 

But, what the whole CAPSLOCK CREW to take a gander at it first

BTW: 

THIS IS KORRA REACTION UPON FIRST SEEING THE ARTWORK AND THE PRETTY COLORS

BUT- ONE PIVOTAL COLOR IS MISSING

BROWN….

I FEEL YOUR PAIN KORRA

I FEEL IT 

somebody i pissed off in the comments keeps sending me anons.  this one made me laugh it’s so preciously obvious how much of a clue they haven’t got.

TayTay:

OMGAH THE ANONZ IS SO RIGHT LYKE OMGAHH IT’S THE LIGHTING LYKE OKAY- LYKE- I NOTICED.. NAOW BEAR WITH MEH… I NOTICED THAT WHEN IT’S REALLY BRIGHT OUT… OR LYKE I TURN THE LIGHT ON…

SOME PARANORMAL ACTIVITY GOES ON WITH MY MELANIN… LIKE IT FRICKEN DISAPPEARS 

KSTEW AND I BECOME TWINSIES…

IT IS THE STRANGEST THING… 

FIRE DOESN’T MELT MELANIN

DEAD

FOREVER

Ok i wanna use this chance to talk about somethign really important when it comes to the depiction of light, color and shadows in a visual work. I  hope this can help all the people (both artists and people who enjoy art) who are unsure how to go about this. First, some basics  about light and  color.

Color, unlike most people would think is not an inherent characteristic within objects, unlike concept like form or texture it depends completely on the reflection of light that hit objects around us and wich bouncing rays  arrive to our eyes, and then the sensory stimuli is interpreted by the brain. . The inner workings of the eye can be summed by these stages

1. Trichromatic image capture: colour information is recorded by the responses of the L,M and S cone cells in the retina.

2. Opponent processing: responses from the L,M and S cones are converted into three signals, for brightness, yellowness vs blueness, and redness vs. greenness respectively, the latter two providing our perception of hue and saturation.

3. Processing for colour constancy: information on hue, brightness and saturation from throughout the visual field is analysed and resolved into an interpretation of the hue, brightness and saturation of the illumination, and the hue, value and chroma of the visible surfaces.

Basically our eyes only have the types of cells that can recognize only certain types of wavelenghts in a ray of light, those being Red, green and blue, the union of all of them creating white light. Of course eve nthen that doesnt mean that theyre inherently blue or red or green, or any color we can percieve, its jsut our brain adapting to interpret the stimuli of light that way. Anyway.

This type of colored light mixing is called additive, because it works by adding light.

Light rays, ill keep it short for the sake of simplicity, are made of different kind of wavelenghts as ive said, and the objects act as some sort of lets say, filters, absorbing certain wavelenghts and bouncing other ones!

Heres  a silly chart

Mixin paints by this principle is mixing “filters”, its called subsractice color mixing because it takes away light.

Now taking this into account we can guess rather faithfully how light would bounce with other objects.

With this principle we can gather that red filter (red filter being an object that absorbs green and blue color and bounces red) plus red light = a really saturated boucned light, almost as strong as the source light.

But the opposite also applies- A red filter + (green light)= almost no light boumced, the object will look desaturated and dark because of it.

But as any filter ! any object can get clogged of light in that case their absorbing properties doesnt apply anymore and light just bounces off makign the oject look “light” or with a color near in hue and lightness to the source light. Depending on the kind of object’s reflective surface, this can be achieved with less or more brightness of the source of light. For example, try seeing people as they are under the light sun, their hair will turn really light and yellowlike because of the high reflective qualities of it, as we said thats because theres so much light and its so bright that it “clogs” the filters and the light just bounces pure. The same can happen with skin with the right quantity of light and the right hue, thats why in cloudy days all seems washed out and desaturated, and in sunny days everythign just JUMPS with color!.

To finish this, ill jsut put a real life example.

No, no friends, dont be scared, my cheek is not turning white! Its just the magic of color happening!

The light source is a yellow light,  and with my brown redish skin as weve said, should make it look orange and saturated and for some parts of my face IT DOES! but look at the part directly facing the light, takign the brow of it! it looks almost white!. At this distance and with this much light, my skin is reflecting much more rays from the source, making my skin look clear, almost white/yellow.

Heres some other examples!

Here my hair is taking the brow of light, and therefore reflects most of the light shot at it, giving it a yellow almost white  look, similar to the source. My face, takin the yellow light that bounces from the table im on upwards to my face takes an orange look because my skin doesnt oversaturates on light.

So basically, you have to take matters when depciting a scene

1.- What kind of light source im going for, is it a stron like or a dim one, what color is it and where is it placed?

2.-.The object who id under this light what kind of light it reflects? would it be accentuated by the light or not? What kind of surface it has? is it rugged? shiny? slick?

3.- Learn where to place your highlights, highlights are always the color of the source light! and only appear under certain conditions, itheyre the spice of the picture and if you go overboard or too subtle on them can make the piece lose a lot of strenght.

Anyway, i hope this has been of help to people still trying to figure out how color works, if you think this is too shallow, yo ucan always look at this!

http://www.huevaluechroma.com/index.php

It gives am uch more in dept explanation about the nuances of light, shadow and color than i could ever give.

Re-reblogging because reasons.

pornjunkyard:

dumbthingswhitepplsay:

damnlayoffthebleach:

yarnlass:

damnlayoffthebleach:

http://bekuh.tumblr.com/post/20038239165/baddragonborn-boobermensch

The link is to a Korra fanart and the discussion that followed.  I thought it might just be simpler if you reblogged it. I give this link instead of the original because I thought you might like the chance to respond to some of the comments.

TayTay: 

OH LAWD, I CAME ACROSS THIS ONE. 

……. THE BLEACH….

THE BLEACH IS ALL UP JUST IN THERE 

AND I BET PEOPLE ARE LIKE, OMGAHH IT’S ZE LIGHTING

NO… NO… FIRE DOESN’T MELT MELANIN

- Ugh, shall take a peek at the convo… 

But, what the whole CAPSLOCK CREW to take a gander at it first

BTW: 

THIS IS KORRA REACTION UPON FIRST SEEING THE ARTWORK AND THE PRETTY COLORS

BUT- ONE PIVOTAL COLOR IS MISSING

BROWN….

I FEEL YOUR PAIN KORRA

I FEEL IT 

somebody i pissed off in the comments keeps sending me anons.  this one made me laugh it’s so preciously obvious how much of a clue they haven’t got.

TayTay:

OMGAH THE ANONZ IS SO RIGHT LYKE OMGAHH IT’S THE LIGHTING LYKE OKAY- LYKE- I NOTICED.. NAOW BEAR WITH MEH… I NOTICED THAT WHEN IT’S REALLY BRIGHT OUT… OR LYKE I TURN THE LIGHT ON…

SOME PARANORMAL ACTIVITY GOES ON WITH MY MELANIN… LIKE IT FRICKEN DISAPPEARS 

KSTEW AND I BECOME TWINSIES…

IT IS THE STRANGEST THING… 

FIRE DOESN’T MELT MELANIN

DEAD

FOREVER

Ok i wanna use this chance to talk about somethign really important when it comes to the depiction of light, color and shadows in a visual work. I  hope this can help all the people (both artists and people who enjoy art) who are unsure how to go about this. First, some basics  about light and  color.

Color, unlike most people would think is not an inherent characteristic within objects, unlike concept like form or texture it depends completely on the reflection of light that hit objects around us and wich bouncing rays  arrive to our eyes, and then the sensory stimuli is interpreted by the brain. . The inner workings of the eye can be summed by these stages

1. Trichromatic image capture: colour information is recorded by the responses of the L,M and S cone cells in the retina.

2. Opponent processing: responses from the L,M and S cones are converted into three signals, for brightness, yellowness vs blueness, and redness vs. greenness respectively, the latter two providing our perception of hue and saturation.

3. Processing for colour constancy: information on hue, brightness and saturation from throughout the visual field is analysed and resolved into an interpretation of the hue, brightness and saturation of the illumination, and the hue, value and chroma of the visible surfaces.

Basically our eyes only have the types of cells that can recognize only certain types of wavelenghts in a ray of light, those being Red, green and blue, the union of all of them creating white light. Of course eve nthen that doesnt mean that theyre inherently blue or red or green, or any color we can percieve, its jsut our brain adapting to interpret the stimuli of light that way. Anyway.

This type of colored light mixing is called additive, because it works by adding light.

Light rays, ill keep it short for the sake of simplicity, are made of different kind of wavelenghts as ive said, and the objects act as some sort of lets say, filters, absorbing certain wavelenghts and bouncing other ones!

Heres  a silly chart

Mixin paints by this principle is mixing “filters”, its called subsractice color mixing because it takes away light.

Now taking this into account we can guess rather faithfully how light would bounce with other objects.

With this principle we can gather that red filter (red filter being an object that absorbs green and blue color and bounces red) plus red light = a really saturated boucned light, almost as strong as the source light.

But the opposite also applies- A red filter + (green light)= almost no light boumced, the object will look desaturated and dark because of it.

But as any filter ! any object can get clogged of light in that case their absorbing properties doesnt apply anymore and light just bounces off makign the oject look “light” or with a color near in hue and lightness to the source light. Depending on the kind of object’s reflective surface, this can be achieved with less or more brightness of the source of light. For example, try seeing people as they are under the light sun, their hair will turn really light and yellowlike because of the high reflective qualities of it, as we said thats because theres so much light and its so bright that it “clogs” the filters and the light just bounces pure. The same can happen with skin with the right quantity of light and the right hue, thats why in cloudy days all seems washed out and desaturated, and in sunny days everythign just JUMPS with color!.

To finish this, ill jsut put a real life example.

No, no friends, dont be scared, my cheek is not turning white! Its just the magic of color happening!

The light source is a yellow light,  and with my brown redish skin as weve said, should make it look orange and saturated and for some parts of my face IT DOES! but look at the part directly facing the light, takign the brow of it! it looks almost white!. At this distance and with this much light, my skin is reflecting much more rays from the source, making my skin look clear, almost white/yellow.

Heres some other examples!

Here my hair is taking the brow of light, and therefore reflects most of the light shot at it, giving it a yellow almost white  look, similar to the source. My face, takin the yellow light that bounces from the table im on upwards to my face takes an orange look because my skin doesnt oversaturates on light.

So basically, you have to take matters when depciting a scene

1.- What kind of light source im going for, is it a stron like or a dim one, what color is it and where is it placed?

2.-.The object who id under this light what kind of light it reflects? would it be accentuated by the light or not? What kind of surface it has? is it rugged? shiny? slick?

3.- Learn where to place your highlights, highlights are always the color of the source light! and only appear under certain conditions, itheyre the spice of the picture and if you go overboard or too subtle on them can make the piece lose a lot of strenght.

Anyway, i hope this has been of help to people still trying to figure out how color works, if you think this is too shallow, yo ucan always look at this!

http://www.huevaluechroma.com/index.php

It gives am uch more in dept explanation about the nuances of light, shadow and color than i could ever give.

fuckyeahhistorycrushes:

Tomoe Gozen

Tomoe was a rare female samurai warrior (onna bugeisha), known for her bravery and strength.

“Tomoe was especially beautiful, with white skin, long hair, and charming features. She was also a remarkably strong archer, and as a swordswoman she was a warrior worth a thousand, ready to confront a demon or a god, mounted or on foot. She handled unbroken horses with superb skill; she rode unscathed down perilous descents. Whenever a battle was imminent, Yoshinaka sent her out as his first captain, equipped with strong armor, an oversized sword, and a mighty bow; and she performed more deeds of valor than any of his other warriors.”

— The Tale of the Heike

negacrow:

pariahsdream:

Actually, that can be explained with ~SCIENCE~

The sketchiness of line art mimics the natural lack of clarity in our peripheral vision. When we look at the real world, our high definition fovea can only focus on a small area at a time. By having a very clean line art, it creates the unnatural feel of high clarity over a large area that’s not possible when we look at real life, therefore line art tends to appear stiff and not as appealing as the sketch. This sketichiness technique was first utilized by impressionists to create an optical illusion of motion (along with other techniques like equiluminance).  

Source: Vision and Art: The Biology of Seeing by Margaret Livingston

There you see? All of you who never finished a sketch before? You were doing it right all along. Proven by science!

 Huh! The more you know.

(Source: fyeahartstudentowl)

fuckyeahfanficflamingo:

[Post the best idea you ever had (Fanfic Flamingo) No one likes it]

the-unpopular-opinions:

Words like these have more then one meaning now and I understand they are hard to stop using once you start. I’m not saying people should stop, just be respectful of others feelings.

Anon please.

Anon please.

I’ve stopped using the word ‘fag’, unless referring to the original word, ‘faggot’, meaning ‘branches or twigs’ usually used in reference to kindle.  Even then I never use it since modern context it’s derogatory for ‘homosexual’.  Retarded I still use from time to time, but like the OP said, I never use it in front of someone I know if sensitive to that sort of thing.  I have never had ‘nigger’ or any similar word in my daily vernacular because I just don’t.

I still unfortunately use ‘gay’ as a word to describe something that upsets me, like if someone over charges me for a product, I would say “That’s gay.”  I know it’s incorrect, and in front of my sister I tend to be careful when to use it.  She knows I don’t mean to offend, but because of high school, it’s managed to become a bit of an everyday word for me.  Mostly because instead of swearing “That’s shit” or “Fuck that” I chose to use ‘gay’ since it was less frowned upon.

Which in retrospect is kinda unfair.  Back in school we say “Nigger” or “Shit” or “Fuck”, we get slapped with detention, or suspension for repeated use, but we loudly and repetitively use the word gay (obviously in an expletive context, not an outing or libelous situation) and teachers shrug and go “meh”.  :|  Sometimes they even join in (true story; a girl once called something gay and the teacher enthusiastically agreed - and it had nothing to do with homosexuality whatsoever).  Which, though as seemingly minute an issue as it is, I think is one of the major reasons a gay person would have the worst time in high school, whether they’re in the closet or not. 

High school, everyone’s still young and impressionable, no matter how unique a rebellious snowflake they think they are.  When shit like that gets treated the way it is, it’s easy for teenagers to think that being who they are is somehow a bad thing and repress it, whether by suffering quietly under a growing depression, or even taking it out on others, i.e. bullying.  By the time they reach adulthood, that negativity’s been so hard-wired into their systems that it would be difficult to think otherwise.  It really is a lucky thing to be able to find someone before then who can tell you and agree with you that no, it’s not okay to suffer quietly under that kind of environment and that they think it is cool to be who you are with them.

Anyway.  I blergh’d.  My two cents on things.

thingsorganizedneatly:

SUBMISSION: Cucumber Sandwiches. :)

fuckyeahskyrimthings:

I love Skyrim and it would be super badass to learn these but this legit made me laugh. 

Submitted by: A Random Chomp

You know, I was gonna argue, then I realized that since Akatosh himself created the dragons and made them immortal, they don’t reproduce. 

This means that there are no dragon vaginas (which, on an only slightly unrelated note, means no dragon penises - sorry Paarthurnax/Alduin, Paarthurnax/Odahviing, and Alduin/Odahviing shippers), therefore this is mostly correct.

Damn.