- Registered User
Member for 12 years, 5 months, and 25 days
Last active Sat, Feb, 1 2014 01:06:14
- 40 Followers
- 3,984 Total Posts
- 75 Thanks
Jul 11, 2011Posted in: Off-Topic
Not sure where you got 1980's from. The only time-period influence in this work was the late 1800's early 1900's. The scratchy texture and muted colours are made to imitate old photographs - potentially from that era - without being totally black and white (aka: boring).Quote from Beer
good job bords well done. but the font size at the bottom.. i think it should be much more better if it is on the same size. color combination is good, hmmmm the main title is not centralized... and the main title again, it should not be at the back of the girl, its should be at at front. try to make it a little bit bigger, put the 2011 or what you want to put at gray scale color text at the very bottom (before the border). and lastly, if you are trying to imitating 1980`s poster, you should edit the photo as well or for example you can render it on black and white or same color as the two soldiers at the bottom right corner, since you already have a scratchy thing or i guess its a texture (my suggestion is create the same color of the two soldiers at the bottom since they are the only element that is different and much more 1980`s look.. its realistic!). . . .
>> make the photos look like 1980`s!!! edit edit .. damn i really love graphic arts
If the title were to be in front of Clara (the woman) it would look bad. People are more important than words. Always. At least in this line of work.
The photo of the soldiers is from World War I (1914) and is a real photo, not a drawing/painting. It is very relevant to the piece (as is the green smoke). Chlorine Gas plays a major part of the play, as the main character - Haber (the big guy) - is its inventor. The play focuses a lot on the process through which it was invented and the subsequent guilt he feels.
All three of them are lead characters - which is why they made it onto the poster when others did not. There are three reasons in my mind that Clara should be in the front.Quote from Don_guillotine
Only thing that slightly irks me is that because the woman is smaller than the man (I would assume the man is the lead character), I think it would look better if both small characters were in the back and the man was in front (aka the lower left corner). Now my eyes are confused when the bigger-sized character is in the back and at the same time behind the woman.
I like the color scheme -- and the play seems interesting. Shame it's in Canada ;).
- During the story, Clara kills herself as a result of her husband, Haber (the main character), inventing Chlorine Gas which is used to kill hundreds of thousands of people during World War I. This puts both her and the gassed soldiers (the two things Haber feels guilty for) in front of him, where he is looking down with shame/guilt.
- With both smaller images behind him, they would be two obstructed (having to make room for eachother).
- What Magistrate said...
Thanks to all who commented (and continue to comment). I welcome this criticism as it allows me to really think about my choices. I try not to think too much while designing and generally just go with my gut. It's interesting to examine the thought process afterwards.Quote from Magistrate
I like the title where it is. Elements in the picture draw the eyes to the title naturally: the movement of the mist, the (lead?)'s eyes, etc. The positioning of many of the elements creates a right-beveled arc that apexes at the point of the title. Anything else I would've pointed out was already addressed.
Jul 11, 2011Thanks for the response, man. That bottom section was bothering me, but wasn't sure what to do with it. This is probably mostly because I was working on it at like 3 AM, rather than a normal time of day when I can think straight.Posted in: Off-Topic
Here's an updated version. Let me know what you think...
Jul 10, 2011Hey guys,Posted in: Off-Topic
So here's some stuff from the play I'm working on right now (Producing). I took these photos for promotional purposes and designed the poster from scratch. Let me know what you think.
(Click for Full Size)
Jul 5, 20118/10. Super cool that it's animated - and props for Fallout! I agree that there's a bit much going on. Perhaps if you chose one of those two guys (rather than both) and got rid of the other.Posted in: Off-Topic
Also the "I'm about to choke a b***h in hea!" quote and ASCII character kind of take away from it a bit, tbh.
Jul 2, 2011Posted in: General DiscussionQuote from kdt05b
I appreicate the discussion and thank you for the point's you've made. I'll certainly consider them in all future posts. I honestly hadn't really thought about how dated some of the points I'd made were.
As an aside about being an agnostic. And again, this is by no means an attack on you or anything. But if you are not looking for the truth (whatever you find to be your truth) then you will remain an agnostic forever. Just a thought.
There's nothing wrong with being an agnostic. I have found my truth. My philosophy is such that I believe human beings are too flawed and our perceptions too limited to ever really know anything for sure - as such I cannot fully deny or accept any god.
Jul 1, 2011I continue to disagree with your idea of what constitutes a society. There are countless Muslim people who do not live in primarily Muslim countries or Arabic countries and live life by very different rules. There are different ways to take Islam, just as there are different ways to take Christianity, Judaism etc. Islam is only a part of someone's culture, and there are extraordinary differences between a Muslim living in Palestine versus a Muslim living in Canada (for example). To lump all people of one religion together as if they all had exactly the same culture is a bit ridiculous, in my opinion.Posted in: General Discussion
Again you're talking about "an area" that is "pure theocracy" etc, you're still not naming any particular place(s). The entire Middle East is not run by militant Islamist groups or Muslim dictators (especially in recent years as things have begun to change there). Three are some countries with a lot of freedom in terms of culture and religion - just as much as you might find in America. Just as an American might look down at someone for being a foreigner or for being non-christian or non-white (not all Americans, obviously, but some) so to might some of the people in these nations do the same for non-muslims or non-arabs, but that is true almost anywhere.
If you want to be more specific and say maybe Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, then I could agree with the notion of violent reprisal for non-Islamic beliefs, etc. When it comes to a 'ruling elite' - Hell, look at the Roman Catholic church and their papalcy!
I don't see how my personal religious beliefs enter into this discussion, but I will quickly address the matter so that people understand what I'm talking about: Agnostic Atheism is not an oxymoron. It means that while I believe in no deity or God, I am open to the possibility that one might exist. I find there to be little to no evidence that God, A God, or Gods exist - but my personal philosophy prevents me from speaking empirically on the matter. You can choose to think of me as a lazy atheist if you so choose, but it's not about being lazy. It's about deciding that there is not enough evidence on either side of the debate to make an intelligent decision.
Jul 1, 2011Posted in: General DiscussionQuote from kdt05b
Inspired not so much by the thread topic, but from the discussion that arose from Daemaro's post here, I thought I'd share a video I came across a couple months ago. Looking at it, it's actually been two years since it was uploaded, so maybe it's old news and I'm just really behind the times.
I don't know how to embed the video, so if somebody else wants to, it's this one.
What are your thoughts on this?
Living in the US, the way I see it, in not too many years, we'll either be owned by China, or in not many more years, we will become a Muslim nation.
Now before people tear into me (I don't think anybody here would, but all the "discussions" on Kotaku and Gizmodo and such make me want to add a disclaimer), I want to point out that I have nothing against Muslims as individuals. I do believe that as a society, you are in it until you die...or else. I also think that as a nation they are nothing more than bullies. You might have to dig to find information, but there is a reason why Nike is the #1 supporter of Muslims internationally, and in my opinion, from what I've read/heard, it is mainly due to threats of the infamous "jihad"
Now, I have never made a formal study of any of this. I just find all the little tidbits of information quite interesting. I welcome any- and everybody to correct me on points that are incorrect. So...back on topic...what are your thoughts?
Your errors and misguided ideas are quite numerous (esp. in regards to Islam). I myself am an agnostic atheist w/ no Muslim or Arabic ancestry, but I at least understand a few of these key facts:
Islam is not a society. It is a religion. You are not in it until you die anymore than you are w/ Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism. You can convert out of it just like any other religion. As with any other religion, you may or may not experience backlash based on the sorts of people you know.
Islam is also not a nation. Now, I'm pretty sure you knew this and weren't speaking literally - but then I must ask which nation you were speaking of. There are no nations that are 100% Muslim. There are countries with a majority, but to suggest that most of them are "bullies" anymore than most Western or Eastern powers is absolutely ridiculous. Look at America, Britain, North Korea, China. Those countries are dangerous bullies in their own rights.
What on earth does Nike have to do with anything? Where are you getting the idea that Nike is the #1 supporter of Muslims? That doesn't even make sense. Do you mean they donate the most money to mosques, that they personally fund Muslim people, or that they invest in Muslim-run countries/companies? You can't just throw such a vague and relatively meaningless fact into an argument for no good reason - so what's your reason?
A Jihad? Seriously? The Muslim world is going to hold a Jihad against Nike? Yeah - right. Not only does the Muslim world as a whole not condone any Jihads, Jihad doesn't even always refer to a "holy war" as most people in the West incorrectly assume. I believe it means "struggle" and there are many personal ways in which to experience Jihad.
At most one small group of Muslims might announce their hatred for Nike (who, btw, is a terrible organization that has and does abuse international child labour) - but how is this different than any other group announcing a hatred for any other organization? Should PETA or GreenPeace be denounced for hating companies that do animal testing? Should we assume that all Americans are associated with these groups and that they all believe the same way?
I'm glad you're at least open to listen to reason - but you've really got a long way to come. The American government and media has done an awful lot to skew your impression of foreign nations and exotic religions. The amount of xenophobia bred into Americans from birth is just shocking.
I sincerely hope you do some more research on Islam, the Middle East, and the world in general before you make any more such statements. I'm not going to go into anything further about Christianity or America or the idea that change is somehow evil, but I want to ask that you seriously consider your stance on all these points and really ask yourself where your beliefs come from and whether or not real facts validate them.
Jun 30, 2011I think the man is right to feel sorry and accept the fine - great.Posted in: General Discussion
I think the police are in the right to make it clear that they need the correct info off the bat - great.
I don't think the man should have been fined $500. That is EXCESSIVE! They were obviously going to check that footage anyways, and did not simply take him on his word, so I don't see how this delayed the investigation. The only delay would have been the two minutes it took to write the poor sucker a $500 fine.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Dec 9, 2008Posted in: NewsQuote from "Siaynoq" »Whoopsy daisy. I had messaged him earlier asking him to reduce it. It's still too big in my opinion. I don't think any signature should be taller than an avatar is. It can be wider obviously, but shouldn't be taller.
I tend to agree, although maybe expand it by another 50 pixels. (200 tall).
I guess it'll be something to discuss at the upcoming staff meeting.
Dec 9, 2008Posted in: NewsQuote from "LinkX" »Agreed Goodguy, your avatar looks badass with transparency. And agreed Jetrall, best to make sure nobody abuses the avatars before bringing back animated avatars, though I would of led by example and had nobody with animated avatars. ;D
Meh. Only one staff member has one at the moment anyways. It's mostly the fact that I want to limit the amount of server strain for now, seeing what we can handle, before I allow everyone to upload animated avatars (they take longer to load and are much larger files).
Quote from "kefka666333abc123" »FINALLY. Why were they removed in the first place?!?!?!?
To reduce server strain anticipated by the announcement of Diablo III when we had literally thousands of new users. As it was, eliminating avatars proved not to be enough.
Quote from "Num3n" »to keep avatars i believe we should remove all pictures from sigs, and make it a bannable offense to upload one (not perma banned but say 2 days). and for the avatars we have a limit of up to nearly 500 KB. for a gif or jpeg you need tops 5 KB... so perhaps we should lower it to 10 KB maximum.
that way we can permanently have avatar's.
anyways i dont see why we cant do this. the smaller avatar file size doesnt affect anything in any way. and huge ass sigs piss me off, escpecially as most of the time they take up the entire screen. and no my screen size isnt a problem as its 24"
ie http://www.diablofans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16140 Deathmars' sig.
There is a signature size limit, and Deathmars' sig is just under it.
Dec 9, 2008Posted in: NewsQuote from "goodguy8705" »I recommend implementing a certain post requirement for animated avatars. Possibly something like 1000+ posts.
A good idea. My only hesitation with setting something like that up right now is that VBulleting essentially sucks ass and I'd have to make a new UserGroup and move everyone with over 1000 posts into it. It might just be easier to wait a few weeks, see if people decide to behave with the avatars and if so, grant them to all.
Jul 14, 2008You questioning my moderation buddy? Please tell me you are.Posted in: News
Also, you have been one of the most complained about members on this site as of late. You troll, flame, and get into off-topic arguments quite frequently - not to mention flodding the moderator Reported Posts section.
You're walking on thin ice right now. Don't push it.
PS: Enjoy your numerous infraction points for this thread.
Jul 14, 2008That's enough off-topic discussion in here! I'm talking about Drake Tristan and akse mostly, but some of you others joined in too.Posted in: News
Drake, you are just as guilty of 'trolling' - which I don't think you actually understand the meaning of - as akse.
May 1, 2008I think El Carnicero was kiddingh guys....Posted in: News
Quote from "drevny" »2 or 3 years ago, "blizzard is just done music for next diablo, they will anouce it" - nothing happen, last blizzcon - "hey blizzard will annouce new game, they say that in 2007 will be annoucmnetS, so maybe blizzcon ?" - nope, nothing, now WWI and again, it's the same thing, same story, only new date, dont be so naive please
Why would anyone expect D3 to be announced in Korea over SC2? Only an idiot would expect that.
Besides, if you're gonna be such a pessimist, why don't you just leave and not try to drag us all down with you? Gtfo, please.
May 1, 2008When did I say D3 would be announced at WWI? I never said that I was sure it would be. However this IS the first thing that's pointed to the possibility, and I think it's worth keeping in mind.Posted in: News
Stop being such a jaded cynic please, goodguy.
May 1, 2008Lowly? Good lord man, you're the star of the show. You're so talented and I wouldn't have been able to do this without you.Posted in: News
May 1, 2008Posted in: NewsQuote from "satanita" »It really WAS NOT WORTH TO WAIT ALL those 2 weeks ONLY FOR THAT NEWS!!!!
diablofans.com = fail
admin = noob -.-
Obviously you are incapable of connecting the fact that Blizzard finally buys Diablo3.com right before WWI.
May 1, 2008Yeah, somehow I've manged to remain fairly low-key in all of this lol. It was actually myself and Atrumentis working together to create the layout you're seeing now (minus the banner).Posted in: News
We will also be working together on the later full site design.
All the images on the site were either made entirely by us or created by one of us and edited later by someone else. A huge hand goes to Atru though. Most of my work was coding/editing/cropping etc. Some original images by me though.
Look for more on the upcoming design and in the days to come. I'm currently working on getting all the design elements updated/fixed as many things were lost in the transfer.
May 1, 2008Like I said, I just made it larger due to request.Posted in: News
May 1, 2008I made it larger as people were requesting a larger font size.Posted in: News
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.