Sunday, March 16, 2014

play in someone's perfume garden and this night's the last you'll get

Okay, had a moment over the last couple of days where the slight discordance between the last banner (which took me, no lie, about two weeks to put together) and the backdrop (which I put together in maybe fifteen minutes, max, because I couldn't find anything exactly the right shade) became an !INTENSE!ANNOYANCE! that had to be dealt with OMGOMGRIGHTNAAAAOOOO...So, I changed things again. Now we have a different skulls-and-flowers background, and a banner that goes better with everything, and this should keep me happy for the next few months...with any luck.

No trains in view, though. Le sigh.

As usual, with any background change, let me know if anything's too objectionable, blah blah blah, you know the drill.

Meanwhile, back in Neverwinter...
[Zone] ForcedNameChangeAgain@raistlin00: send me all your crap ill sell it and send you the money
[Zone] Gravious@graviouz: sounds like scam
No, really? What gave it away?
[Zone] Storm@durandal112: Go change your name
I tend to agree. The problem is, when the mods in Neverwinter change someone's name, they make it something bland and (relatively) inoffensive. Usually comprised largely of numbers. How'ver, that name, that means someone either created a character from scratch with that name, or paid in Zen--which is bought with RL funds, not in-game currency--to change their name to that. Either way, that is a chosen name.

And that's disturbing.

Later on, this gem scrolled up:
[Zone] orberon@orberon2: rofl who made this trees saved alot off poligons
Yeah, I'll just...I'll just leave that there, to molder away in peace.

Also, "Orberon". Let that sink in for a bit.

Lastly, I came across one of the odder Victorian photo compilation articles I've found for the last few months--this one in particular covering the curious Victorian custom of parental camouflage. The thing I found so interesting about that set of photos, though, is that most of the hidden-mother shots I've seen they're actually hidden. I mean, they blend in nearly perfectly in many cases. In most of the photos in that link, though, you can see hands, legs; occasionally it's the father being hidden, which I found very unusual. Is this just a choice of the photographer in question? Were the kids just impossible to keep still unless they saw a part of the parent? Were these the equivalent of Sears studio shots, where X photographer has to make a quota of Y photographs every day, and must rush everyone through as quickly as humanly possible?

Sadly, we will likely never know. But they are different enough from the "norm" for this style, I thought I should mention them. And if you've never heard of hidden-parent photos, well, there's a vast array of links available by searching hiddem mother or hidden parent photography; in fact, there's even a Flickr group devoted to the topic that has a spectacular array of photographs and tintypes devoted to this particular style. Enjoy!

No comments: