if you got to assign a future occupation to each member of the new directions, what would they be?
addison harris - belly dancer
adelaide devereaux - odur judge
adrian cruz-dumont - sports mascot
ali vogel - singing waitress
blaine anderson - consierge
catrina clark - soccer mom
david karofsky - truck driver
finn hudson - magician
freddie merrick - drag queen
hunter clarington - pole vaulter
jake puckerman - mime artist
jesse st. james - professional high school student
keke akana - mystery shopper
kc - zumba instructor
lizzie jules - background actor
mason mccarthy - yeti researcher
marley rose - fortune teller
max moore - bodyguard
puck - firefighter
quinn fabray - fireworks designer
rachel berry - professional yodeler
ryder lynn - live art model
sam evans - porn star
sebastian smythe - nanny
spencer porter - stunt double for children
sugar motta - sugar baby
taylor lincoln - undercover agent
tina cohen-chang - professional bridesmaid
7 notes
·
View notes
Here's what I'll say regarding choice of worship music (and I'm not 100% sure where I'm going with this, so bear with me): I think it's very easy to get burned out on specific kinds of worship, no matter what they are. And that kind of burn-out is hard.
I grew up at a church that did 95% CCM for worship, and after a while it either (a) exhausted me emotionally or (b) bored me. By the time I hit high school, I really really struggled with corporate worship because it felt as though I wasn't responding as I was supposed to. Getting to sing mostly hymns at the church I attended at college was a huge breath of fresh air, and it helped me immensely in terms of re-orienting my heart towards Christ-centered worship (as opposed to me-centered worship.) For the first time in my life, I found myself listening to Christian music on my own time during the week.
I watched the recent Jesus Revolution movie with mom over the summer. Her family started attending Calvary Chapel (then-nascent hippy church in Orange County) midway through her childhood, and she got really excited talking about the difference between the hymns she remembered from early elementary school ("we sang the whole hymnal rather than selecting for the really good ones like they do at your church") and the much more dynamic music that came out of Maranatha and other early "contemporary" Christian groups. She actually played me a whole bunch of the songs she grew up with the next morning. They sounded horrifically cheesy to me, but she got real joy out of it and even ended up texting a few songs to my aunt.
And yet, my mom has remarked a whole bunch of times to me that she really can't stand current CCM; that she desperately misses singing the old hymns. I look at myself and my own experience and I can totally see myself coming back to some of the CCM songs I grew up with and encountering Christ through them all new again. As recently as last month, I had a really beautiful experience driving back from a concert crazy late at night with my sister and listening to some of the old Chris Tomlin and Hillsong stuff that I hadn't heard in a while. It brought me back to a sense of incredible comfort and safety nestled up against God like a baby chick. Do I want to worship with that sort of music every week right now? No, definitely not. But it has its place.
Obviously worship transcends something as incidental as music genre. It's an expression of why we were created: glorifying God and enjoying him forever --- and yet, because of the fall, it's really easy to get burned out on specific expressions of worship. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing so much as just a symptom of the fall. I also think that people who are really burned out on a particular kind of worship can be really, really obnoxious about it. I know I was for a while, and I still definitely have my hangups with CCM.
But like- I don't think it's so much about judgement or superiority towards the kind of worship music that you're burnt out on as it is just the overwhelming sense that that kind of worship music felt exhausting and this kind of music actually feels like I'm able to worship again. I know when I started singing hymns at church, it just felt like I'd found the Rosetta Stone. I was suddenly so much less in my own head on Sunday mornings and oh my goodness singing to God was a joy again and I can't remember but I don't think it's ever been a joy like this before has it?? It was almost like my head was spinning with some great new revelation and when I was obnoxious about it it was mostly a manifestation of my being like Why didn't anyone ever tell me it could be like this? Why isn't everyone singing hymns? It's just so much better this way!
Mostly, it just feels like saying "don't be overly critical of how other Christians like to worship" kind of. Misses the trees for the forest, if that makes sense? Like, it's accurate to the big picture, it's absolutely a true and worthwhile thing to say. But at the same time it kind of rankles for me because it misses how it feels to be truly and deeply alienated by the kind of worship you're exposed to.
For better and for worse, worship is (I think) the spiritual discipline that engages the emotions most directly. The feeling of being in a group of people all worshipping together, and your heart just isn't responding right no matter how you try to re-focus and orient it? It's one of the loneliest feelings I know.
76 notes
·
View notes
More Michael Fitz music! As much as I love that last song, Die Wand, I transcend to a new level of ecstasy when he sings in his "native language", Bairisch, instead of Hochdeutsch. Long live dialects. Long live music sung in dialects, particularly. It's SO meaningful to me, I legit get emotional about this sort of thing.
So, obviously, I could listen to the gorgeous sound of his voice singing in his own language in "Hinter meiner Stirn" a thousand times in a row and never get tired of it. (Plus, that little melodic guitar riff on the chorus is just... chef's kiss.)
1 note
·
View note
I think in this new age of A.I. the general public is going to need to increase their photography and lighting literacy. The response to this photo has just been a shit show.
There are people pointing out perfectly normal edge lighting and misunderstanding how reflections work.
First the plane is parked at an angle. The tail is farther back than the nose. But also that is a curved surface and it tapers. It's reflecting the area to the right of the photo.
And the bottom of the plane is reflecting what is directly underneath. Which is the tarmac, not the crowd.
It should also be noted that photo was shot with a very telephoto lens and everything is super compressed. The crowd appears much closer to the airplane than they actually are.
But then someone who should have good understanding of lighting said this...
And now I'm worried for her clients. Because that's very... wrong.
Well, wrong-ish.
First, let's try to understand why this photo is setting off some alarm bells.
The crowd toward the rear is in shadow, but they are still very well exposed. But then there is also a bright light source creating a strong edge light on them. Looking at this photo with just the context of what is in it, there are some things that seem uncanny.
The information we do not have is the people in the shadow area are inside a very brightly lit airplane hangar.
So they have artificial light blasting them from the top.
But that light is still much dimmer than the sunlit areas outside so they appear in shade. But we are used to shade being much darker than areas in direct sun. So the balance seems off in our brain. We expect the people to be darker because we don't have the context of the bright hangar lights above them.
But the other issue is that the photo was post processed. It wasn't manipulated. The pixels weren't changed. But the exposure balance was altered.
If I were to guess, the original photo looked more like this...
But newer digital cameras can have 13 to 15 stops of dynamic range. And if you shoot in RAW, you can easily lift shadows and bring down highlights. You can balance the exposure so the dark parts aren't as dark and the bright parts aren't as bright. This photographer might have overdone it a bit in this case, but this is a fairly standard edit used to bring balance to photos.
And lastly, where does the edge light come from?
Edge lighting or backlighting or rim lighting (all the same) should probably be called wrap-around lighting if you want to be more accurate.
It comes from a homogenous light source that is larger than the subject being lit. So with my knife photo, I placed it on a large LED panel light.
The light source was bigger than the subject so it wrapped around the edges.
And I'm afraid the airplane is not nearly large enough to create a light source to wrap around everyone in the crowd. It isn't even reflecting direct sunlight. So I'm sorry to say that lighting designer was mostly mistaken despite the confidence.
The light source is... everything.
That entire red area I highlighted is the light source.
As well as everything above and everything to the sides.
And the biggest aspect of that light source would be the sky above. I think people always forget the sky is a light source. If you are seeing blue, you are seeing light. And I guess the plane is included in that, but that entire highlighted red area is so bright, and so filled with sunlight bouncing around, that it creates basically a giant softbox. It becomes a huge single light source for the people in the hangar.
If you look at footage taken from way inside the hangar, you can see the camera adjusting exposure for the crowd inside, but look at what happens to the sunlit area outside.
What does that look like?
A giant softbox.
A single homogenous light source blasting light inside the hangar.
The sun is so incredibly bright that even when it is not directly lighting something, the light just bouncing around outside is enough to overpower the very bright hangar lights.
So, what have we learned from this?
Perhaps people should hire me to be their lighting designer.
Though I'm sure she is actually very talented. She seems to work with stage lights and this is more physics and photography.
Phystography.
4K notes
·
View notes
iwtv doing the 'evil version' of popular romance tropes is so funny to me.
there's only one bed? well what about there's only one coffin because the other one got thrown off a window as a direct fuck you to the love interest?
enemies to lovers? yeah because one of them has been psychosexually tortured by the other and in retaliation ruined his marriage.
exes to lovers? sure but their separation is due to one of them murdering the other and then entering a new 77-year relationship out of spite with the guy who killed his daughter.
age gap? and it's the oldest and the youngest character but NOT in the way you think.
friends to lovers? eh probably not but you get a friend pairing and they bond over getting their memories fucked with by their shared boyfriend.
guy who hates everyone and likes only you? how about a guy who won't subject anyone to the horrors of vampirism EXCEPT you because you pissed him off THAT much?
grumpy x sunshine? how about theatre kid x guy who fucking HATES theatre kids and yet dates TWO of them?
forced proximity? try being in a 70+ year relationship with a guy you find maddeningly BORING just to spite your ex!
4K notes
·
View notes