#( best of the worst ) white

[obsessedwithstarwars]

Question for the DP fandom:

Do you think Danny’s hair turns white when it falls out? It’s technically dead cells anyway but when it naturally falls off his head, do you think it turns white? Because I think it would be hilarious if his hairbrush just has white hair, no black strands whatsoever, and his significant other thought the worst until they know his secret.

[peachyutdr]

i finished it, was kicked out of the game, and then spent the next 10 minutes drawing this. i will now go take a shower, most likely cry, and then go through the emotional turmoil of convincing myself to reset so i can do a geno run. i hate it here :D

[trulynamelessworld]

Y'all I need peak 2016 (but actually good) Avengers Tower fics where they're all living together like the weirdest roommates to ever exist.

Ya feel?

No I do not care what romantic pairings there are, I just need everyone alive. Bonus points if they heavily feature Natasha or if it's from her point of view. I don't mind a bit of angst, but I need the funny.

Thanks!

[knittedbond]

friends at the table fans are absolutely the most insufferable type of fan. no question about it. we KNOW we're insufferable too, and very loud about it. the niche we have carved ourselves is too great. a PODCAST (hard media for people to get into) about playing ROLEPLAYING GAMES (weirdo nerd interest to get into) and not even the mainstream ttrpgs but the indie ones that 75% of the already niche weirdo subculture don't know about, and every season is about insane gay people and grappling with huge philosophical concepts and the world changing and also freaky weird shit like a guy who is all bees and mechs that keep you alive for a hundred years. and yet its the best media you could ever consume and you desperately need other people to talk to about it otherwise the little bugs in your brain will DIE. of course we'll fight a war with the shrek cats and be fucking insane about it. of course we will

[triglycercule]

dust with a fucked up savior complex save me dust with a fucked up savior complex SAVE ME!!!! he's literally sooo savior complex coded. he killed his underground to "save" everyone and stop the human from killing them. he thinks that it's better that he does the murdering instead of the human because he has better intentions. he's sad at the beginning (rightfully so) but savior complex dust really gets so much cooler when you add in the fact that dust eventually started to LIKE killing his underground 😭😭 like just..... imagine a manic dust who's gone mad going around claiming he's helping everyone with what he's doing when he's really,,,, not. soo cool.,,, (like dude how are you SAVING people if they don't exist after you've killed the person who was killing them. there is nobody to be safe but yourself anymore) (can you tell this was inspired by the one comic of dust killing his papyrus and saying "it was better if i did it" or something)

but also also on the other hand,,,,, revenge fueled dust??? he's gotten SO bitter from the repeated resets and genos that he's genuinely bitter enough to risk it all to stop the human. he doesn't have pure intentions in this one. dust doesn't claim he's saving anybody with what he's doing murdering them all. he KNOWS it's bad and wrong and hypocritical but he does it anyways because he wants to not only stop the human but to make them suffer. he purposely wants them to keep coming back after killing them just so he can kill them over and over and over and have them experience a fragment of the suffering he did with having all of his friends and family killed. but i think a revenge fueled dust (in contrast to savior complex dust) would be a lot cooler if he still felt shitty for killing everyone. it's painful to do but hate is stronger than love and dust's hate for the human is MUCH stronger than his love for the underground atp

[p0rk-guts]

Sometimes I get so genuinely confused at how some Hazbin fans consider it to be a phenomenal show. Thinking back on when it wasn't nominated for that Emmy. Like why are we surprised??? I have my own love-hate relationship with the show but no matter what I see through my rose colored glasses I'll always understand that it is a fundamentally poorly made show. Plenty of good building blocks (voice actors, animators, song writers, composers, etc.) used to make a structural disaster of a building. Is that not. Obvious to us all

I mean these are the same people who when confronted with Vivienne's terrible actions will plug their ears and keep on sucking her dick like there's no tomorrow so it's no surprise they do the same thing with her show

[somepancakeonline5377]

God I’m so sick of JSchlatt haters being like “erm isn’t he racist? 🤓👆” “isn’t he republican🤓👆”

NO HE IS NOT

HE MAKES EDGY STUPID JOKES THAT ARE SO CLEARLY JUST THAT, STUPID EGDY JOKES. “Erm he still shouldn’t have said it 🤓👆” THE MOST POPULAR FORM OF “EVIDENCE” WAS SOME SHITTY THUMBNAIL THAT WAS CHANGED AND A JOKE SWAGGERSOULS MADE BE FUCKING FOR REAL. ITS SO OBVIOUSLY JUST A EDGY JOKE GROW THE HELL UP.

“B-but he’s homophobic/transphobic!!” THAT MAN HAS KISSED MORE MEN THEN YOU WILL EVER MEN OR WOMAN AND HE IS IN A PODCAST WITH A OPEN TRANS WOMAN. THE PODCAST IS SLEEP DEPRIVED AND HER NAME IS ASTROSIST, SHE IS AWESOME AND CLEARLY FRIENDS WITH JSCHLATT BECAUSE OF COURSE THEY WOULD BE THERE IN A FUCKING PODCAST TOGETHER.

“Well he’s an awful person/rebublican 🤓” ITS CALLED A PERSONA, JSCHLATTS WHOLE PERSONA IS THAT HE IS AN NEW YORKER ASSHOLE BUT HE ISNT ITS JUST FOR THE BIT. HE LOVES ANIMALS, IS GREAT WITH KIDS, ACTUALLY FUNNY, AND MOST DEFINITELY NOT A DAMN REPUBLICAN. ITS CALLED A FUCKING BIT. Okay he is from New York but I digress.

Anyway fuck JSchlatt haters who don’t know shit about him, I mean if you just don’t like him for his content that’s fine but to try and make him seem like a shitty person is just shit man. I’m a JSchlatt fan for life man🔥🔥

[maximura]

[ozonecologne]

.

[redlettermediathings]

[fairytale-poll]

MODERN ADAPTATION BRACKET WINNER ANNOUNCEMENT POST!!!

We have finished another tournament (or rather, two mini-tournaments!) Thank you guys for another great one, the results really surprised me this time around!! I apologize for deciding not to hold a Loser's Bracket & Mod's Choice poll this time around, but both will be back for the next tournament.

Before we go into the winners, however, I want to say that this blog is officially a year old! I opened submissions for our first tournament, Red Riding Poll, on July 26th of 2023, and the first rounds of the poll came in the early days of August 2023! Since then, we have hosted 4 tournaments (Red Riding Poll, Cinder Poll, Little Merpoll, & Modern Adaptation Brackets) and it's truly been a great experience! I can't wait to see how many more brackets we will do in the future :)

Okay, onward to the winners!

We will start with the Best Modern Bracket. The quarterfinalists for that one were Once Upon a Time and The Sisters Grimm! Once Upon a Time has been a decisive pick, being both on the Best and Worst brackets, but since it only placed in the Best bracket it must have some merit to it! :) As for the Sisters Grimm, it was definitely a popular choice and probably would've won the whole bracket if it did not have to go against the eventual first-place winner/that said first-place winner wasn't in the tournament. I've never read it, but if I were to give "fan favorite" award for this bracket it would definitely win it. Congratulations to fans of both of these fairytale crossover series for the bronze medal!

The semifinalists of the Best Modern Bracket was Hook! This is another one that I haven't watched, but Robin Williams' old movies are definitely great nostalgic picks (RIP). Though technically Peter Pan isn't a fairytale, I think that it is often listed with them enough that it should count, so congrats to Hook for carrying that win!

Finally, the winner of the Best Modern Bracket was none other than the magical girl classic, Princess Tutu!!! This is one of my favorite anime series that I don't see often, so I was more than surprised to see it not only submitted but win (and by a lot, too! It practically swept every poll it went against, even things like Ponyo which I really thought was going to carry the win due to how universally loved it is!) A delightful series that definitely deserves the love, I couldn't be happier to see that this little duck made it all the way to the gold <3

Applaud to the Best Modern Bracket winners!!! Now, get ready to point and laugh at the Worst Modern Bracket winners!!! (Or losers, in a way, if you think about it). Okay, but in all seriousness, if you like any of these listed for the Worst Modern Bracket, try not to take offense! This is all in good fun :)

The quarterfinalists for the Worst Modern Bracket were Avalon High and Sydney White! Sydney White was one of those that were in both brackets, but it only ranked in the Worst one. As for Avalon High, I have been told that the dislike for this one was more so for it being a bad book-to-movie adaptation, which is interesting to hear. Anyway, I haven't watched either, so I have no witty comments.

For the semifinalist, we have Hooked! Another Peter Pan adaptation in the 2nd place, go figure... Well, I feel as if this book was more well-known, it could've gone to #1 as people tended to have a lot of strong feelings on this. I admit, the summary doesn't make it sound too appealing to me... well, here it is with the silver for that!

The winner was obvious to me as soon as the bracket started. And I was right on the money, for none other than Beastly got the winning title of the Worst Modern Bracket! It has all the pitfalls of bad Beauty and the Beast adaptations that I've noticed and it's certainly quite infamous (especially after the Jenny Nicholson video)! I distinctly remember seeing the commercials for it on TV when I was a kid and thinking "that movie looks weird... is that what teens like?" Apparently not, since it didn't do so well! Nobody deserves the honor of being called the Worst Modern Bracket like this movie, good job!

aaaannnnndddd that's it for the modern bracket polls! Thank you everyone who participated. Our next tournament as voted on by you guys will be Best Fairy Godmother. I don't have a figure of when I will open submissions, but I would say at least two weeks. See you then! <3 <3 <3

[lovelierbitsoflife]

This summer, love gets royally complicated. #RWRBMovie arrived August 11.

RWRBonPrime instagram post

[fungus-no69]

“The term of 'almost deer' is really fitting, not but quite accurate. It was like a deer that someone who had never seen a deer drew, but only after someone else described it to them.” - u/Ampersand_Dotsys

Doodles

[spiderton]

quick lame archfiend of tolerance human. well as human as it can get

[batwynn]

Hello. So I have a genuine, honest question as someone who isn't an artist. I saw you made a post about AI art floating around Tumblr lately. How does one differentiate between AI-created art vs. ACTUAL art? Some things have been easier to notice than others (ie: YouTube videos and like, moodboards and the opening to Secret Invasions) but for art specifically, are there any key things to look out for that make it obvious it's AI generated? I do not support AI in any fashion but in this day and age I do find it increasingly more difficult to tell the difference between something that was created by AI vs. created by an actual person.

Hi anon! So, heads up this might be a bit long of a post but I wanted to point out some things that I don't see frequently mentioned in other posts about A.I stuff.

First things first: Look at their other 'art' pieces. If they have a generally consistent style, a consistent type of work (Realism vs ink art for example), characters you see more than once and from different angles, character sheets, etc. You're going to notice if someone suddenly switches from little ink doodles to fully colored and realistically rendered 'art'. Now, this doesn't mean everyone switching styles or mediums is A.I, but it means to take a closer look if you notice something vastly different than their usual stuff. More A.I. clues below!

For things to look for, there's a lot of different clues but generally you're going to notice a certain new car shine to everything. Everything will be a little too clean, even if the style they are ripping off is sketchy. Sketches will have crosshatching that doesn't really make sense or random lines in a place that an artist probably would not put there. That being said, here's some examples where that isn't as noticeable:

Here you've got your usual body/anatomy problems. (Plus some elements I'll talk about later as well. This one's got it all!)

Glitchy foot, glitchy hands. glitchy eyes. Strange proportions for legs that don't exactly fit a stylization, but more of an glitch. Now, of course an artist can draw 'glitchy' things like this either by accident or intentionally, but you really only see these types of things in A.I vs actual art of a similar style. Realism artists are generally not adding extra fingers or varying sized fingers, they're not rendering the foot to only have too many toes, missing toes, and the foot also... sort of part shoe. Unless art artist is otherwise intentionally including these elements, it's generally a clear cut example of A.I stuff. (For example: Different body types and disabilities exist, and there are people with different shaped hands, shorter/longer fingers etc. But you will also usually find some kind of info with the post about the person/character that will tell you about them that can clue you in on if it's A.I vs real art.) If the artists are drawing in a style with 'exaggerated' anatomy, you can almost always see that as a persistent and intentional STYLE in their art. If they aren't, this is something you'll really notice in A.I vs realism. It can be especially true with people who fully render realistic art because it's not in line with the style, and the relevant elements of rendering art this way. Artists who do realistic rendering at this level generally know their anatomy very well, and are going for realism in all elements of the art. Some stuff like the exaggerated long legs in women are kind of everywhere, but the hands, the foot, the lopsided winky eyes (I don't know how to describe it) are not things a professional artist rendering realistic art would generally do. It's just not in line with the style, or the ability/skill that the artist has worked on. (Again, unless completely intentionally and in line with the person/character.)

For 'real' life items like the tables below, you've really just got to ask yourself: Is this physically possible? Do all the elements make sense and actually work together in a real way?

Sometime it's hard to know if you don't have any experience with, for example, acrylic and wood table making. But there are things that just don't work in real life, and there are things that maybe someone can do, but even in the provided examples it just doesn't make sense to do. For example, the little 'tree' hanging from the bottom of the left table. Would that be possible? Probably. Would someone do that? Probably not. If you're really stumped, sometimes just looking up videos of people making that type of thing can give you a better idea of what actually works together, how it's made, etc.

Here's something that really helps when you're really struggling and zooming in for every detail: TANGENTS

Ok, so tangents in art are when you're drawing a thing, like hair, and it's lining up with a different object to the point where the visual line continues from one part of art to another and it looks really unrealistic/weird. Most artists figure out how to avoid this on their own just from noticing it and feeling uncomfortable with how it looks, while others learn via the internet etc. It can happen in anyone's art at any skill level, but the amount that it happens in A.I stuff is HUGE. It's almost every single image, and you can really notice it in places where something overlaps like hair or, from the above image with the money: there's two bills that just kind of bleed together. From the same image, you can also see how her hair bleeds into the wrinkles of her jacket in an unnatural way. Comparatively, you can see in the Hela art I did below that there are overlapping elements like the hair and the ribbons behind it that do not mesh or bleed together.

Something else to look at: Symmetrical elements that don't work right. So, this is kind of getting harder to see depending on what they're generating as a subject matter and the style they are using. As always, there is a disclaimer for this. Art does not always have perfect symmetrical elements in it.

For example: in the real world, this dude's coat would have more clean symmetrical elements. As it is a sketchy doodle, they're there but they're not 100% symmetrical. With a LOT of A.I stuff, you'll notice that something meant to be mirrored on the other side of the clothing, room design, etc. is actually completly wonky/incorrect or not even there at all.

For example, in this A.I we have missmatching elements on both sides. Not only in things that could be designed to be asymmetrical, but also things that 100% should be mirrored. The left side under the buckle on the shoulder has a diamond shape. The right has a weird spikey thing. The little leaf pattern on the gold lapel area appears to be just blobs on the right side. The left shoulder area has a button and additional little detail under the buckle area. It is not there on the right side. And, again, some of this can be intentional with real art. Her arm bands could be intentionally different, for example. But elements that clearly should be reflected on the other side and are very clearly not are generally a good clue that it's A.I. A few last moment things to look out for:

Styles that are recognizable someone else's whole thing. Example: The monstrosity that someone just generated that is supposedly Calvin and Hobbs. It's pretty easy to tell because it looks like shit right now, but generally if someone is ripping off a distinct style of someone famous, it's probably A.I or at least worth double checking.

Did they suddenly start doing ______? This could be anything, backgrounds, drawing horses, full color, etc. But if they're suddenly, overnight just BOOM they're 'drawing' in a whole other style, it's suddenly really rendered, and/or there's no 'growing pains'/work shown that they've started working on drawing the thing they never drew before... It's time to take a closer look. Last but not least, look for the language they use around the stuff they're putting out. A.I people are often... a certain type. They use a lot of that NFT bro lingo that can tip you off. The tags might be all over the place for styles, or tagging certain famous artist's styles, etc. They also can be a bit more blatant in the tags and just outright tag A.I or NFTs somewhere in there. And, in the end, if you really can't tell and you really love the thing and want to share it: Ask an artist. Or just don't share it.

Thanks for reading, and I hope this is helpful in some way!

[yandere-daydreams]

Book report anon here, yes you get it and the thotz are brilliant, nothing as petty as a lit student breaking out your analysis about any text and watching the stem fucker who kidnapped you because you're not smart enough to be on your own, flounder with nothing to counter you with

no because this is such a person beef to me that i've been holding in for actual years T-T i love and respect stem majors, but the .5 minutes of english tutoring i've done in college has only shown me that you people need to be forced to invest genuine emotion in art more often. do you know how sick i am of hearing that vladimir nabokov lolita is largely misinterpreted because it has an unreliable narrator. biting you biting you biting you biting. that shit wouldn't even fill the first paragraph. you're never going to make that two-thousand word minimal length. get hit by a truck.