Metanet Forums

From most to least recent:

Excellent.

Ooh, I remember the Slappy one. It's totally better then the one I made for him. ';--

Well, they are very good.
I liked one you made to LV.

Some blue_tetris images for those who missed out.

Stock + text = fad Unless you're blue_tetris

Chase: Fixed.

I must say, blue_tetris, you've become my favorite imager on Metanet.

minitrue wrote:The content of this message has been determined by Minitrue to be doubleplusungood crimethink and its creator will be terminated. Memories of this message will be corrected by Miniluv to restore goodthink.

<3 southpaw

The first one is brilliant.

Tunco123 wrote:Well, they are very good.
I liked one you made to LV.

How come that LV used that sig after I mentioned it?

:)

That last one is simply amazing.


Can I request a sig blue_tetris? Whatever you wish.

Dave is making sigs?

Last one is brilliant though.

...these are all tacky and hideous, except for the Slappy one, which is passable.

Come on, it *is* a fad (WHATEVER CHASE).

incluye, verbal warning. No flaming or trying to provoke something.

Techno wrote:incluye, verbal warning. No flaming or trying to provoke something.

Duly noted. I was trying to counteract all the fawning adoration Dave was receiving—which, in my opinion, was happening not because the images were good but because of the maker's status. I understand if I went overboard, though.

incluye wrote:

Techno wrote:incluye, verbal warning. No flaming or trying to provoke something.

Duly noted. I was trying to counteract all the fawning adoration Dave was receiving—which, in my opinion, was happening not because the images were good but because of the maker's status. I understand if I went overboard, though.

Ah I see. You were simply trying to correct Tunco.


Carry on, blue_tetris.

incluye wrote:

Techno wrote:incluye, verbal warning. No flaming or trying to provoke something.

Duly noted. I was trying to counteract all the fawning adoration Dave was receiving—which, in my opinion, was happening not because the images were good but because of the maker's status. I understand if I went overboard, though.

I know. :/

I don't consider it an image unless something was actually done besides pasting a stock and adding text, but that's me. I know most of you guys aren't the same way.

Hideous? I think the word you're looking for is clever. They're not the kind of signatures you kids would enjoy, certainly, but that's because I couldn't fit enough Yugi Ohs and pokey-mans into them.

Anyhow, incluye, I think people genuinely enjoy some of the things that I do without trying to patronize to me. Maybe someday you'll understand that I'm not the overwhelmingly likeable guy with no talent you have me pegged to be.



Also, these aren't stock images plus text. They're heavily modified from the original to give a quicky or interesting effect--lighting added, clarity provided to areas that were hard to view, Slappy's image pasted swiftly into non-Slappy environments. Stuff normal people care about. Additionally, the selection process for the images to be used as the basis is quite rigorous and, as such, I pick better images than everyone else would. Funnier images, that. Some of the recent ones are just crops from the original Rugrats pilot, with no alterations, because I found them and wanted to share them with my online friends.

You're all the worst kind of people. If you want signatures, just ask, though. I'm getting more into the imaging thing as of late.

blue_tetris wrote:Anyhow, incluye, I think people genuinely enjoy some of the things that I do without trying to patronize to me. Maybe someday you'll understand that I'm not the overwhelmingly likeable guy with no talent you have me pegged to be..

No, no, you're not nearly as overhyped as, say, Twilight. I acknowledge that your role here is basically to hold up the forums with one hand and strangle fully grown bears with the other.

blue_tetris wrote:Hideous? I think the word you're looking for is clever. They're not the kind of signatures you kids would enjoy, certainly, but that's because I couldn't fit enough Yugi Ohs and pokey-mans into them.

Radical! Out of sight!

Clever? Well, they're certainly a departure from the norm: you nailed that part. That isn't always a good thing, though.

blue_tetris wrote:Also, these aren't stock images plus text. They're heavily modified from the original to give a quicky or interesting effect--lighting added, clarity provided to areas that were hard to view, Slappy's image pasted swiftly into non-Slappy environments. Stuff normal people care about. Additionally, the selection process for the images to be used as the basis is quite rigorous and, as such, I pick better images than everyone else would. Funnier images, that. Some of the recent ones are just crops from the original Rugrats pilot, with no alterations, because I found them and wanted to share them with my online friends.

Indeed. They're also oversharpened, undersharpened, washed-out, oversaturated, or lack a focal point. And I notice that none of them have borders, which bothers me. The thing is, Dave, that they *look* like stocks + text, and none of these images is something I'd use for a signature.

Yahoozy:


Alright...what *is* that? It looks like a woman's head protruding from a futuristic refrigerator. It's JPG artifact-ed, uber-oversharpened, and the text is *tacky*.

Techno, were you actually talking about the most recent image he posted when you said it was simply amazing?

incluye wrote:No, no, you're not nearly as overhyped as, say, Twilight.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Whoa.

Cool images, b_t. Some are pretty amusing.

Edit: Apparently incluye was referring to the book series. Withdrawn.

Pheidippides wrote:

incluye wrote:No, no, you're not nearly as overhyped as, say, Twilight.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Whoa.

Cool images, b_t. Some are pretty amusing.

Thanks.

I'm not going to entertain an argument with incluye. That's silly. I'm just going to post images for people. Weird that he'd try to make it something else.

EDIT: Okay, incluye is creating arguments in other threads for no reason, too. I don't feel as bad, then. I'm just gonna keep making images and using the response I get from the non-whiny majority (as opposed to the whiny minority--nay, singularity) in my ambition to continue making kitch content.

incluye wrote:none of these images is something I'd use for a signature.

You won't. But many, or rather, all but you would like to.

In all seriousness (as if I wasn't serious before, pssh), these sigs are very original, something completely out of the ordinary. incluye, you conformist!

Dave, do you use Gimp or PhotoShop?

I use Gimp. :x

This one is my favorite.

Since you're taking image orders, may I request a super-awesome one?