An archive of visual dialogue.

Designologue

Theme
mundane
Initiator
bharper
Conspirator
skoppy
A vintage image
Previous Theme
Next Theme
bharper

just a case of the Mondaynes…

17 years ago, March 27, 2003
skoppy

let the games begin.

17 years ago, March 27, 2003
bharper

fuck I hate flourescent lights… so mundane!

bharper

dont fight the rat race..

17 years ago, March 28, 2003
jeromius

what are those? mice?

too cute.

bearskinrug

They’re pretty cool!

heavy

almost as cute as the incorrect word choice. i like the starfish facing right at us though, nice touch!

bharper

what’s wrong with the word choice?

those are GERBILS!!!!!

creighton

if (“Your” != “You’re”){ return “Incorrect word choice”; } else { return “Your is not the same as you’re.”; }

Still like the image, though.

bharper

oh, thats not word choice. thats a typo~

inman

Creighton you’re such a codewhore! One problem though, what’re you returning to? I don’t see a function declaration… ;D

Aarseth

This image is awesome. Is that mouse mooning me??

Aarseth

You’re all giving it a 2? Come on now! Sure there’s some grammar (and spelling) issues, and the text bubble isn’t really pointed at the one guy’s mouth, but who cares? This is the most original image I’ve seen here all day.

bharper

it almost looks like he’s sniffing his word bubble.. :)

bearskinrug

just a question bharper - the linework and form on the gerbils are great - but why didn’t you apply that extra effort to the word bubble and text?

bharper

HERE is the reason the line quality does not match!

inman

So you didn’t create the gerbils? I think you have your answer Aarseth…

bearskinrug

Hmm - why does Gerbiliene wear a magic hat?

skoppy

so bharper, you find gerbils mundane?

just kidding, unless of course that’s true. in which case you are indeed one strange little monkey. anyhow here is my latest offering to our dsnlg. i really like, well at least for now, we’ll see how i feel about it tomorrow.

17 years ago, April 1, 2003
skoppy

i’m rather pissed that i couldn’t find a better way to control the compression on this image though. the text at the top looks a little off and i’ve got a banded shadow on my damn can now. it lookeded much better in photoshop. not that i think that it looks bad here it just looked better in photoshop before all the compression. so please feel free to rate this image as high as you like. in fact the higher the better. let’s see some 4’s skoppy wants some recognition damn it. oh sorry i’m rambling aren’t i? well i better go anyways. been nice talking to you. whoever you are.

creighton

I think this image is DOPE™ (that’s my new word for anything that has high qualities of ‘goodness’ or ‘beauty’ or ‘style’). Seriously, there is something about the look of this image that is just fresh. Bravo.

RevDrLuv

Dope huh? I think you may have missed the boat on that word being new by a couple of decades there foolio.

Nice image though. Is that can a photo or what?

skoppy

well thank you kindly creighton, i appreciate your kind words.

all right people let’s all take a cue from creighton now and pile on the praise. you heard it here first this image is DOPE.

and rev. the can is indeed a photo, retouched ever so slightly.

inman

I’m curious about this compression…if PNG is lossless where did it come from?

I have a feeling that you designed this on a Mac with the darker “Working CMYK” preview setting and now that you’re seeing it in a browser it is lighter than intended. No worries - at least 50% of your audience will see it as you intended…

skoppy

actually inman it was all done on a pc in the RGB colorspace.

jeromius

Is this image DOPE?

Word to your mother.

skoppy

word to your mother indeed.

skoppy

bharper

watch your finger…

17 years ago, April 1, 2003
bharper

skoppy: i dont find gerbils themselves mundane. i just had the idea to show the rat race.. or the never ending gerbil wheel… and thats all there was to that last one.. this next one is a bit darker, i think.

bearskinrug

bharper. What’s this?

jeromius

That one mundane bunch of elevator passengers - Is that guy in the lower left corner a midget? I can only see his midget hat.

bharper

its supposed to be a humorous, ultra mundane image.. laced with subtle humor and reference..

tacosaurus

Whoo.

skoppy

i couldn’t help myself they just screamed garage band.

hope to see you all at the show.

17 years ago, April 3, 2003
skoppy

wow this image doesn’t appear to be too popular at all, anyone care to comment on that?

i thought that i did a pretty good job of making a garage band esque flyer.

RevDrLuv

It does look garage bandesque, but thats not necessarily a good thing.

I am not a big fan of small red type on a black background. In order for that color scheme to work the type either has to be really dynamic or oversized. The picture of the band just has that look of “hey I got a stolen copy of photoshop and those filters are pretty nifty” look. But hey, you were going for amateur right? So I probably don’t even need to critque this.

Concept only counts for (maybe) half the score and since you were going for a less-than-professional look you shouldn’t worry about the rating.

bharper

see, this is a good illustration of a flaw in the raters on this sight. if, we assume that skoppy has the skills to use more then just the standard canned ps filters.. then we must realize that this has an ameateru look on purpose.. and therfore, it is self referential, and artisictcly valid.. so what gives? i mean, dont you guys appreciate subtlety? Sometimes, i try to do things that are other then ordinary and i find that you guys often lack the appreciation to apreciate it.. hows that for a sentance!

all that said… i think i agree slightly with Dr. Lub that this image, and some of my own from the past.. need something more then just the concept, or feel of a particular theme.. can anyone help me on this?

bearskinrug

Subtlety and clever concept are great. But unless an image is visually engaging, unless it appeals to the emotional, subconscious side that makes you “really like how something looks”, it’s just not going to get the ratings of a piece that is conceptually clever and visually engaging.

And are these concepts that clever? These images seem like a scattershot attempt at adhering to the theme. “Pick a mundane thing, make a mundane composition, use a mundane technique”…You guys did that in the first four images. Why not try going somewhere else in the next few?

Oh, and on another note: What do you really have to complain about? You may not be getting great ratings, but you’re getting a crapload of posts…

bharper

i personaly am not complaining. i am trying to figure out why my images consistently get poor ratings. not because i care about the rating, but because i want to create images people respnd well to.

as far as the theme of mundane.. i really wanted to do some images similar to David Lynch’s straight story.. images about nothing more then the mundanity of every day life.. and the beauty there in .. sometimes i get distracted by dumb gerbil jokes and go off on tangents based on comments.. but overall, i really hope to learn how to make images that people can relate to better.. and this seems like a safe place to do that..

bharper

i took a risk here.. made this image in flash.. took some advice and did something i hope is different. please let me know if its a hit or a miss.

17 years ago, April 4, 2003
skoppy

thanks for the all the responses guys. i really wasn’t complaining just trying to understand a little more about why people rate the images the way they do. much like bharper said i would like to create images that people respond well to.

i thought that img 06 worked really well and was just curious why other people may not have felt the same.

and the look of the image wasn’t created with canned PS filters per say but rather with adjustment layers and blending modes.

once again thanks for all the comments, i really do appreciate it.

skoppy

re-reading the comments i’d have to say that bearskin you sound like you are being a little harsh.

i appreciate the first paragraph that you wrote. after that i believe that i find everything a little offensive. all i was doing was asking for a critique, not a hefty request. this is only my second dsnlg and i’m still trying to get a feel for how things work around here.

i sincerely hope that i have misinterpreted what you said and that you wrote what you wrote with no malice intended.

until next we speak i’m off to think of a “clever concept” to close out this dsnlg with.

bearskinrug

I apologize if I came off harsh, Skoppy. I don’t mean to. And in actuality, image 6 was a step in the right direction. I should have mentioned that.

But it is legitimate criticism to challenge you gentleman to push these images farther than where you have already explored. I can’t apologize for that.

skoppy

i would not ask you to apologize for that. thanks.

jeromius

Man, anyone who uses Flash for drawing is a friend of mine. I think it’s rather underrated - but I do about 80% of my illustration work in Flash.

Very cool.

skoppy

and with this we are finished. ratings be damned.

17 years ago, April 4, 2003