I’ve got a couple of books of Gorey newspaper comics and art that I inherited from my grandma, and they’re absolutely amazing.

I also adore the tribute album by The Tiger Lilies: https://www.tigerlillies.com/the-gorey-end

Feels very Edward Gorey ♥️

Ah, so that’s what they did to the “president”!

I would recommend watching:

• Only Lovers Left Alive (Jim Jarmusch)
• Vampire humaniste cherche suicidaire consentant (Ariane Louis-Seize)

And What We Do In The Shadows, as others pointed out.

Oh, thanks for the recommend!

I’ll be sure to have a look. I like where I’ve got things; but I’m always happy to discover new tools!

Yeah, the game mode is currently disabled because I’m working on updates, and it’s broken for the most part.

I’m planning on getting it up and running and starting to draw the pixel art assets soon, once I have finished writing the content for the site.

I edited the post to make this clearer.

As for my personal details; I’m OK with that stuff being online since it already is if you look hard enough; and have done some trickery to obfuscated it from most bots and scrapers, which is enough IMHO.

My issue with this illustration vs “the dress” is that in the dress, the background is bright, not a darker blue.

In theory, this illustration just serves to show that nobody should be seeing “the dress” as white and gold. Thy do, and that breaks my brain, but I still feel that there is no logical way for that to be justified (and yes, I read all the research).

I’ve been using it for a few years now. Asides from a bit of performance issues (which the team are actively working on), it’s the nicest feeling file manager I’ve used. I strongly recommend giving it a go. And it’s free, so just give it a try!

Shrugs in Waterfox.

Approves in waterfox.

I’ll add to this that s01e01 (especially) is an absolute masterclass in character animation and motion. The whole series is incredibly well animated, but that first episode is clearly the place where they were experimenting with things, and it’s beautiful!

For that to work, the light would have to be exactly behind the dress (it is coming from the top based on what we can see), and the surrounding room dark. Otherwise you get “light bleed” along the sides of any curved object due to reflection and ambient refraction.

Like I replied to another comment, how can you explain that the surrounding environment is yellow then? Based on this diagram, white+gold could only work if the rest of the image was lit with blue light… which it clearly is not.

deleted by creator

The right side is white near the top (nearly pure white, likely sunlight overblown by the photo), there is some generally dark clutter with a spot of red, and then a white or pale beige lit with yellow-ish lighting.

The “beam” is either some light wood, or just the shadow on a ledge; it is made brown-ish because of the yellow lighting’s illumination but lack of exposure to the exterior backlighting.

The dress on the left is white and black. Made yellow and dark-ish brown-ish by overexposure and strong yellow indoor lighting.

Fundamentally, and the science points to this, you are likely seeing the environmental yellow as actual colors, and not the result of lighting; which I understand on paper… but I cannot see a scenario where blue lighting would produce a bright yellow when overexposed; even if there is yellow in the actual object colors (because blue-ish light would tarnish the warm colors to light grays or possibly light greens I guess)

Genuine question then: for you, what colors are:

• the general environment on the right?
• the horizontal piece sticking out on the right? (a piece of wood, or the shade on a ledge I guess)
• the dress(?) on the left?

I am used to manipulating digital images (photoshop, 3D, etc.). Even in the gifs that supposedly show how people can see both by changing the exposure and warmth, I still see black and blue… just even more overexposed. I do not personally know a single person who manipulates digital images frequently that sees white and gold. (anecdotal)

I know some people have “shifted” their view at some point… and I still cannot fathom getting this wrong, or changing how it can be seen. Even when scientists break down how it works, my brain just points out the overexposed background and bright yellow lighting, and is convinced roughly 50% of humanity is just trolling.

The part that kills me is how the dress(?) behind it on the left has the same black and… actual white… and people don’t seem to notice that. How‽

Edit: to be clear, I am genuinely curious here.

You can look up URL parameter structure online, but the short version is that you use ? if it is the first parameter (no other ? in the URL), or & otherwise.

So you can use:

• https://google.com/?udm=14 and then search for something.
• https://google.com/?q=question&udm=14 by adding it with an & after an existing search

I recommend adding a custom search engine to your browser with this baked in. It’s incredibly easy in Firefox and it’s derivatives, with a ton of tutorials online.

Yep. There’s TONS of nerd tricks for this sort of stuff that would make people’s lives way easier, but are somehow reserved for geeks and nerds (like how you can actually make Windows decent by saying you’re in the EU and using O&O ShutUp10++, Power toys and that kind of stuff).

It’s a URL parameter that forces Google to only show search results, like it used to do. No AI crap, no “widgets”, no bullsh*t.

You can configure most browsers to include this in searches by default, effectively making Google decent again.