Messages

Actually, I think the face could work, it just tends to look off because the features are pushed to extremes.  Keep facial proportions in mind (such as eyes recommended to be roughly halfway down the head), and I think a more natural look will fall into place. 

The hairstyle works, but I do get a bit confused about the length.  With it so close to the head and no differentiation between bangs and sides it gives me the impression of long hair tied back in a ponytail, except that the front seems to have bangs that go below the chin and cover the eye.   

overall style aside, it seems it should come out from the head a little bit, but I can see where that'd be difficult with so few pixels.  Hopefully one of our pixel-deities will come around and poke some dots around.

To be fair, I think celebrations concerning having food / excess right before a season infamous for the lack thereof isn't really specific to any particular religion.   I can't say that I've ever thought of Thanksgiving as a religious holiday, despite services based around that theme.  It's more of a time to appreciate what you've got and be thankful to the deity / intelligence / mother earth / life itself that allows the opportunity. 

It's a bit of a romanticized version of it.  Its origins were pagan (surprise), and involved revelry, celebration and feasting.  However, the celebratory feast with the natives did occur, for basically the reasons mentioned.  The banquet varied from the "traditional" dinner that many Americans have.  The holiday was not celebrated annually as the next year's hardships (poor harvest, etc.) didn't allow for anything resembling feasting or celebration. 

It was next celebrated after the Revolutionary War, in 1777, but wasn't officially a holiday until the latter half of the 1800's.  As far as being during the currently scheduled time, that wasn't in place until 1939. 

It's a nice sentiment regardless of historical nit-pickings, and the holiday pays quite well when you have to work it.

Remarkably well-put, Rui (and the place would be likely "Base," though in the US we have some with the quaint name of "Camp"). 

I have to swim along with the school and say that I wouldn't be able to/want to if I could possibly refuse, but don't necessarily know what I'd do if 1)under duress and 2)my life or that of my friends/family was at stake. 

The justification of the death of the spy is illogical.  If you're in a position to serve as executioner, then he's likely already been caught.  If not, then you're equally in a position to catch him.  This prevents him causing more death or destruction.  His death, at this point, would only be a vengeance killing - something I can sympathize with but cannot support. 

I've served in the military and asked myself questions in this realm for several years.  Every time we went for rifle training I realized what I was training *for*, and found it more and more abhorrent.  I joined to support family, and kept my fingers crossed the whole time that there wouldn't be a conflict while I was in.  Thankfully, there wasn't as I got out in December of 2001 (escaped by the skin of my teeth).  Good experience, life-changing, hoping I've never got opportunity to do it again. 

I must begin, of course, by pointing out that I love this film. Quite brilliant, even though I don't always know why.

I must continue, though, by pointing out that it's not public domain and the file we're all discussing is pirated and quite illegal. And Don Hertzfeldt does not approve of that, for those of you who might care more about that than about copyright laws.

Sorry.

While a legitimate concern, others like myself would never have been exposed to his work (I'm considering the DVD, if not some stuff to make me a merchandising whore) if it weren't for the illegitimate copy.  It's also of such poor quality that it's nearly useless for duplication, just enjoyment. 

A quite valid observation and reminder nonetheless though, sir.

"This translation is provided as a service. eBay cannot guarantee its accuracy."
not sure if that explains the inexplicable spelling.

He's from the UK.    Additionally, if you view in the original language, it reads the same. 

I reported to eBay as well.  If they were real copies v. all crammed on one DVD, it'd be quite the tempting auction.

There are still enough people on dial-up that even Talkie games are often released in a no-voice form.  Seeing as how it's not too difficult to add voices after the game and dialogue is finalized, why not get the game (at least in rough form) hashed out first?

Seeing the environment, characters and sensing the pacing of the scene would probably help your actors as well. 
[Lacking talent in both acting and faking accents, I'll sadly pass on the opportunity, best of luck though]

If Blender's too confusing, try Anim8or.  Despite its 1337 name, it's pretty simple, especially if you're just talking about doing basic shapes layout.  With default + perspective & ortho views, as well as camera views and animation, it might be just the thing.  When rendering, it also can render an alpha mask for every frame. 

Thank you.  That made me so very happy for 9 minutes.  Now I am sad again.  So cold. 

Now I'm forever cursed with the image of Andail making out with furniture.

To me, it's all about investment.  Many people have started threads that share personal details (sometimes way too many) or a personal revelation.  Even the pretty pointless Ear Cyst thread by Geof revealed something potentially embarassing until you realize how very common it is (and how readily people discuss it when they themselves have that realization). 

When a thread doesn't invest anything that specifically pertains to the individual, people become indignant because they've (in essense) been asked to invest themselves in something that it seems the creator doesn't care about.  Why we haven't discovered that posts go away if they're ignored is beyond me. 

The height thread (to beat this one into the ground), could've been made more interesting with specifics, but more so if it were expanded with something other than a common factual statement.  Maybe instead of starting threads like this one, we could introduce a bitch-slap smiley and be a little more efficient about these things.  Let Fluke work on communication skills (which he has, obviously) and move on.   He's a scapegoat at the moment, but there've been more asinine personalities that've come and gone.   

Now if we could just fix DG, everything'd be swell.

I dug the figurines but never tried the game.  I think it was after my Xth model airplane that I realized the fun was in assembling/decorating it but then it becomes more shelf-fodder. 

The universe seemed pretty interesting, based upon the couple of games I played on PC years ago (was it called Vengeance of the Blood Angels or something?), and the newer game interests me a bit, though I haven't enjoyed an RTS since Starcraft. 

What kind of play is the boardgame? Like Risk or more D&D-esque with stats and such?

Nice job, suits the logo's style nicely. 

A couple experimentations of mine have turned out fairly crisply, here's my technique (I warn you, it's long and very nit-picky):

- First off, the t-shirt.  If it's new or has been washed with fabric softener, give it a wash.  If you don't consider it too much a waste, wash it by itself without soap (all clothes retain detergent from wash to rinse, so it's best to get that out if you can). 

-I stretch the shirt over a hard object (like a book or thin section of table) and rubber-band or tape it in back to keep it there.  You have to accomodate for the shrinking that will occur when the t-shirt returns to normal size, but it makes it a lot sharper with defects less noticable.  The important thing to to have an even pull all the way around, and not so much tension that you'll warp the fabric.

-I get the rough sketch done (probably on cardboard, which I cut out) and trace the lines onto masking tape.  I then use a razor to cut the design out of tape, with the angle of cut being more diagonal than straight.  This stops the liquid paint from running under the edge of the tape somewhat.  Don't get too attached to your razor, be prepared to ditch it if it starts having too much drag.  After using tape vs. cardboard, having a crisp cut is the most important thing.

-I smooth down the tape with a stiff, flexible object (I have a plaster spatula but anything that won't damage the tape will work).  If the designs several widths of tape wide, I plan an overlap in design.  For the centers of letters (like the middle of an "O" I cut out a separate peice, align and apply that. 

-I place cardboard or paper all over the front of the shirt, masking-taping the gaps and attaching the blocker to the tape from the design - now overspray's not an issue.

- I paint back and forth in even horizontal and vertical lines, intentionally taking the spray well past the design (this keeps the paint at uniform thickness).  Practice spraying a pattern on something so you can see where the thin and thick spray is. Use thin areas in the pattern for overlap. 

- I find it best to wait until it's fully dry before taking it off the stretcher.  I've tried in liquid state and usually end up smudging it. If it's dry, however, you could end up with wrinkling if you applied way too much paint. 

(Materials I usually have: t-shirt, isopropyl alcohol to rinse the area and remove residue, appropriate thinner for clean-up if necessary, 3M masking tape (varying thickness for different designs and thick in depth as well) the cheap stuff sometimes doesn't work as well,  a putty/drywall spatula for smoothing, and several razor blades. 

Far too finicky for most people to bother reading (let alone using) but there you have it.

I see some draw to the backgrounds. For retro-gamers & LA fans, it might be pretty cool.  If it weren't for the copyrighted art, it might do okay over at Threadless. 

I wonder if it'd still be presentable if it were posterized somewhat, making it less plageuristic and only readily recognizable to people who've stared at the backgrounds for hours.

Have to agree on the layout needing major work though, I certainly wouldn't want a t-shirt with aliasing on the shoulders, that's just odd.

Perhaps not a useful reply, but it's less likely that they're parked parallel (I'm thinking you mean perpendicular here) to the wall.  Particularly with a no entry sign at that end, it's likely a one-way road with parking at a roughly 30° offset.  He mentioned NYC, maybe perpendicular parking is more common outside the US, but in a cramped area like that, it's likely diagonal.

It's looking quite a bit sharper.  I agree that the horizon seems strange and that background more like the photo's might make it less movie set-like.  The blue rectangular buildings are, however, more aesthetic than vague brownish stuff in the background. I don't think I'd think about the horizon if it weren't for the photo reference though.   

I think it's time some artistic license was used and one of the dark cars' colored was changed.  Staring at it, it's easy to tell what's what now, but it's still confusing at first glance. 

For the tree's leaves (which, to me at least, look less artificial now) does ArtGem (that's the program, right?) support alpha or are you introducing haze by hand?  If the edges of the leaf bunches were faded somewhat into the background, it might not stand out as much.  Light and atmosphere of the scene probably wouldn't allow it to be that crisp. 

I would imagine it would at least have a gamey taste.

Sir, if you'd said you spent a week's worth of waking hours on it, it would be no less impressive.  Nevertheless here's the nit-pickery:

- I see what others mean about the black car towards the front.  I'm a little confused as to where some lines of it end and the next car begins.  How it looks to me is that all the cars are in the same perspective, but the black one's at a 90° vertical perspective so that the roof is only a pixel thick.  The dark colors of the car behind it lend to the confusion.

- The light-blue vehicle does look a little skewed, perhaps the rear 10 degrees further from the viewer.  It only stands out to me because of the bright high-saturation color.  Even if it's a very bright blue, nothing in the picture's catching that much light, so it looks out of place.  Maybe a lower sat color or overall fog layer?

- The house to the rear, most central to the viewer, the roof (particularly the bottom edge) stands out as higher saturation that other things at that depth, maybe a very subtle atmospheric layer? 

- The trees' leaves - look great for the most part, but some of the bunches look very circular, some more visible sky to break them up just a bit might help.  The tallest tree on the left suffers from this circular pattern as well as looking 2-dimensional.  It might solve two problems at once to vary the tone in the leaves to give them more depth.

- The aliasing on the closest house, the window frame and ledges have many jaggies.  Replacing the corner pixel with a color blending the ledge and wall shades might get rid of it. 

- The arched doorway on the center-view furthest back house: The door frame bottom on our left hasn't been treated with the same darkening/blending bottom as the rest of the buildings.

- The bottom sections of the house to the left, there's a visible edge there where it meets the ground, particularly enhanced by 1-2 pixels on the bottom lines that are brighter than the rest. 

- The window reflection technique leaves some windows looking fogged up rather than shiny.  Increasing this fog-effect is that you shaded the panels individually after the frame was in place rather than treating the window as a whole.

- The brighter circle of pixels around the sign with its back facing us almost gives it a beveled look.  The edge pixels also stand out a bit against the backdrop.

Of course, I wouldn't notice any of those in game.  The list of praises for the drawing would be much lengthier. 

I wasn't aware that the Catholic doctrine said that you needed a priest to get to heaven (no sarcasm here, learning actually).  The protestant doctrine (at least most) places the Pastor as an experienced man of God but with basically no capabilities beyond every Christian individual.  If need be, a person could be isolated and perform all necessary sacraments, blessings and prayers, though would start spiritually without the nourishment of regular teaching from Christian elders. 

What worries me about both protestant and Christian faiths is that a leader is leaned upon for so much and their word is taken as the word of God.  Being so used to listening, it can often take some time for people to realize when their leader is one of the low percentile of screw-ups.  Maybe God wants one person in the church to vote the opposite way in order to strengthen them, demonstrate his communication with them, or some other purpose beyond our reasoning.  Yet, with so much reliance upon a fallible man for guideance, it could be difficult to hear. 

I won't disparage a person's faith (not in seriousness anyway), so I'll stop with this: The Catholic church has had many of its ministers end up commiting what are seen as the worst sins even in the eyes of your average heathen.  The church itself is doling out slap on the wrists, publicly declaring contempt while looking the other way.  I freely admit that it's probably a very, very small percentage of the whole, but in an organization that's supposed to be the example of God to the world (just with any publicly-recognized organization) a small amount of dye colors a great deal of water.

You totally disagree with what I didn't say.  I didn't say to disregard it.  Your upbringing is a very important part of your adult life, whether it's learning from the wisdom of your elders and peers or overcoming their mistakes. 

I don't recommend disregarding everything in your past when defining yourself, that leaves you a rather uninteresting person whose opinions change on a whim.  What I did say, however, was that you shouldn't form yourself around these things, letting your identity be defined by the groups you're affiliated with, rather than being yourself with opinions you share with others.  If that's what you disagree with, then I must stand by my post and vehemently rail against those who make their decisions because they're republican, democrat, honor student, rebel, or any other affiliation one would care to make. 

A more religious-oriented example: If you vote based upon who your pastor or priest tells you to vote for, you're lost; a single molecule in a vast organism.  If you want religious (or other) guidance while you make life decisions, talk to God yourself and see what he wants (I've known several very good examples of this scenario). 

[People]

There's not much that's different except that the current President has neither the wit nor creativity necessary to invent lies and explanations that are either plausible or believable. 

The press could be lying? Amazing.  Our leaders might not actually give a cute little poop about us? Unfathomable.  Really, I find these recent revelations tiring.  People are deceived by media in its bulk. Many a person I've spoken to finds the manipulations transparent.  On a case-by-case basis, the lies are easy to see, when you compound the situation with varied types of media (Ranging from Fox Nooz to National Public Radio) distributed among a vast variety of people with a great many different backgrounds, it quite effectively keeps everybody deceived about one thing or the other. 

An argument that extremist views could be right is a bit of a paradox.  How can the extreme anti and extreme pro both be right?  If there's some truth to each argument, then the only reasonable position is the middle, or (in other words) think for your damned self instead of aligning yourself with a religious, political, racial, cultural, musical, technological pseudo-identity with a pre-stamped label only able to apply to the most superficial and 1-dimensional of beings.

For Americans against Bush, there's [making careful measurements, weighing factors, judging the balance] precisely [I think I've got it now] jack-shit you can do about it.  Why? Because our majority system currently has half on one side of the fence and half on the other.  The distinctions are largely of opinion, faith, and very black-or-white issues in the eyes of the people.  So, he's gonna be in office for the duration of his term.  After that, we get a chance to pick a new guy.  Maybe next time the selection will be better, maybe not.  My solution, in the interim, is not to concentrate on what I can do to oppose the current administration, but what I can do that's right (in my view) while under the current subset of federal and state laws.  Popular opinion says that you must be politically-minded when it comes to the top tier of politicians, but maybe 1 out of 10 people know the name of the mayor of their city.

Really, I wish the offense and defense in the Bush game would both either find something more constructive to do or (at the very least) provide a new perspective or original idea.  It's not like either side isn't staffed with liars and manipulators, it's just that you happen to agree with one side or the other.