i can just write whatever the fuck i want here?

@chiefcolorathletetoad

25.7K posts

cherryhatter-deactivated2015072

KICK THE CAN!

Let’s play the biggest game of kick the can on the internet.

To kick the can, reblog it. I wanna see how long this can go on for.

the oldest reblogs for this post that i can find are from january 2nd of 2013. this can has been getting kicked around tumblr for almost 13½ years now

And yet somehow this is my first time kicking it!

Hey, so, here's a bunch of alternative covers for the 3rd (and last) volume of "Les Songes du Roi Griffu", the french fantasy comic series I've been drawing since 2020.

@zenorae worked on this last volume with me, and I couldn't have asked for a better partner in this final stretch of the journey. We did illustrations n°3 and 4 the way we did the book : I did the thumbnails, she did the sketch and I did the inks.

thestuffedalligator

Genies can only grant wishes that are things that an ordinary person could do, just better and faster. The jinn are the creations of a divine being, and so they are part of the divine plan and cannot defy the natural order of things; a wish granted by a jinni can’t turn the day into night or the sea into yogurt, but if you wish for a temple to be built, a jinni will build it by hand, the way men do, and have it done in a day.

If you need a wish granted that defies the natural order you gotta catch a leprechaun, because no god was involved in their creation whatsoever. They just kinda showed up one day in the nineteenth century. The Aos Sí have no idea what their deal is

You’re not hiding this in the tags buddy

i don't hide things in tags i simply allow the proletariat to determine whether it is praxis to make my statements heard.

maggiedeshiboux

the other reason the leprechaun shoots the king of england in the head is that, unnatural abomination against God and Fey alike or not, it's still Irish

if i was born 500 years ago i would have been speculating that the two dudes who went to get firewood together were fucking

chat, how long do y’all think 500 years is. Romeo and Juliet was written in the 1500s. 500 years is not the Stone Age.

why do u think people stopped collecting firewood after caveman times

imsobadatnicknames2

Many such cases

In cyclops world the teens have a trend where they play "we are young" by fun and when he says "give me a second i" they put a second eye on random celebs like cyclops shane dawson

tyronepowerbottom

couldn't sleep, so I put on an episode of Twin Peaks................... um

it actually is Thursday the 23rd

The final boss of “learning social skills” is seeing someone online say something about a special interest of yours that’d be the literal perfect opportunity for you to talk about it but deciding not to do it because the person made the comment so long ago it’d be kind of weird to reply now. If you can restrain yourself, you’ll be awarded the “King of Acting Normal” prize on national television by the president. Or so I’m told.

I COULD tell you why cartoons from the 30s have more fluid animation than modern 2D cartoons, YouTube user ѕᴡeettree675. I could tell you better than anyone! In fact, I want to do it so badly I could eat my own hand! But I won’t because you’ve said this a year ago in the comment section of this rather mid Electro Swing song and it’d be a little off-putting of me. This is how Jesus felt on the cross, btw.

THANK YOU!!!

Alright! There are two aspects in which most of today's 2D animation and the 2D animation made in the 30s differ from each other and those are method and purpose.

Method is rather straightforward. I think most people know that cartoons used to be animated in paper, inked and painted on transparent acetate sheets called "cels", and then photographed. This process was somewhat automated during the years in various small ways but, at its core, it remained the same since its invention in 1914 up to the 1990s! Here are a few scenes from a 1938 documentary showing how Popeye cartoons were made, in case you’re not that familiar with traditional animation:

These days, though, you can make cartoons without using any paper whatsoever. They’re made digitally. And it was through animating digitally that a new method of animation that cut back significantly on the amount of drawing needed was created: puppet animation, also known as rigged animation, popularized by the well known digital animation program Flash.

In puppet animation, not unlike in 3D animation, a character is rigged with movable joints and changeable body parts is created. Then, a bank of expressions, hands and certain poses is made for it. After that, the artist only needs to change them around instead of redrawing everything from scratch, as if they were posing a doll. Frame by frame animation never really fell out of usage and there are many cartoons that still employ it, but puppet animation is very popular at the moment due to being an efficient way of cutting costs and production time without a significant drop in quality in the final product. A lot of cartoons nowadays are fully animated this way, especially those aimed at younger children. If you’ve ever watched, say, Peppa Pig or Bluey with a younger relative, you’ve watched something 100% puppet animated!

As you can see, puppet animation doesn’t necessarily look less dynamic than frame by frame animation. However, having to adhere firmly to the character models doesn’t leave much room for stylistic deformation, which can make the movement look a little “stiff” at times, especially if we’re talking about simpler character designs. So, while it’s not a hard rule, if you compare a current puppet animated cartoon to a cartoon made in the 30s, the latter might look more fluid, even if only on account of having been animated frame by frame.

But you’ve probably noticed that even current frame by frame animation isn’t as “bouncy” as 30s cartoons were. Animation made in the 30s had a knack for making things look elastic and rubbery and unable to stay still and that’s where the purpose comes in. Simply put, we don’t highlight the same things we used to do back then in cartoons nowadays because… the public doesn’t watch cartoons for the same reason it did back then!

You see, animation was created in the 1890s, but the 1930s were when it truly blossomed as an art form! Cartoons went from being made entirely by a single person from being made by a group of artists, each taking care of different aspects of the animation process. This allowed cartoons to become longer and the animation more refined. 24 frames per second became the norm. Designs that looked the best on screen were established, which gave us the so famous half-dressed animals with black fur and white masks characters that we still associate with cartoons nowadays. This meant that animation went from looking like this:

Joys and Glooms (1921)

to looking like this:

Bimbo’s Initiation (1931)

in the span of a decade! Did you ever notice how 30s cartoons usually don’t have much in the way of a plot or dialogue and are mostly mainly animated to a song? Ever wonder why even the background elements were animated? That’s because people didn’t really watch cartoons for the plot back then. They watched them because they were drawings that moved to sound! Both animation and the ability for film to have sound were so new, the appeal was that it existed in the first place! So the focus was on maximizing movement and synchronization with the background music.

It’s been almost 100 years since then, though. The public isn’t AS impressed by the fact you can make drawings move in of itself anymore (unless they’re a little unwell about cartoons like I am, that is), so now animation focuses more on interesting plots and exploring different art styles rather than on just making sure everything is ready to dance. That’s why we don’t see things in cartoons like buildings randomly coming to life as much anymore. A pity.

Reblogging for fascinating cartoon lore and also to contest the premise that it's weird to reply to old comments. Once you release a post into the wild, it becomes a thing that others can respond to in perpetuity. OP might no longer be interested and might not reply, but that's immaterial - the point of discourse is not always (or even often) a direct dialogue with the original poster.

eohippus-moropus

Reblog to save a life with girl-on-girl action and also Dr. House is there (I don't have context for this screenshot I haven't seen this episode)

saxifraga-x-urbium

Boris "professional idiot" Johnson wanted to build an island airport in the immediate area.

it's fucking visible

This post requires authentication to view.

It is fun to learn.

Hey what the fuck

You weren't kidding they've been trying to get the masts off for 5 years and keep getting foiled because there's probably bombs leaking out of her

Fun fact: Doxing myself but I live in the blast zone if that thing ever goes up! It's even immortalised in a local artwork:

@tatzelwyrm

theglowpt2-deactivated20200101

oh you think your life is hard? try being a gay rat living in france who hates your dad and just wants to cook

why did this post make me realize there are no female rats in this movie

actually there is, she has one line at the end when she says “how do you know?”

ok I just skimmed though the movie again, and here she is in the beginning, she just doesn’t say anything, and you wouldn’t guess she was a girl because they didn’t do that weird humanizing, tits and longer eyelashes thing that most movies with animals do.

i’m pretty sure that all the female coded rats are the smaller rats, which is apparently accurate to real rats. Remmy is also really small. after going though the movie I realized that there are only five rats that have actual lines. Remmy, Emile, the dad, the really big bodyguard rat, and the rat at the end. whack.

>girl rats are smaller

>Remmy is smaller

>Remmy is trans

remmy is trans and his father accepts that but not his passion for cooking

loopityboop-deactivated20221117

remmy: dad i think im a boy

dad: sure son

remmy: also im tired of eating literal rotted garbage

dad: you w h a t

Dad: no daughter of mine is going to cook!

Remmy: actually dad I’m a boy

Dad: thank you for telling me I support you

Dad: NO SON OF MINE IS GOING TO COOK!

throwback to that time in my existentialism class where the professor asked ‘who thinks hell is other people’ and half the class slowly and meekly put their hand up

then the prof was like ‘…i mean who originally said it’

annabellioncourt

there are some posts that sound utterly made up for the joke or for the notes, but this one I whole heartedly believe

Sounds right to me…

That quote is amazing to me in that it’s quoted completely accurately and yet in a way that means something completely different from what it meant in context.

(Sartre was claiming that Hell was other people. He was not claiming that other people were hell.)

…I can’t actually tell what distinction you’re drawing there. Can you expand?

The line comes from No Exit, which is set in Hell. Spoilers for No Exit follow

In particular, three people who have been condemned to hell are trapped eternally in a room together. And at first they think they got off easy without any pitchforks or fiery lakes or anything. But over the course of the play they discover that they have been chosen very specifically to have neuroses and character flaws that interact with and torment each other.

Each one needs the approval of a second in an unstable RPS cycle so that any time one of them might be satisfied by a second, the third swoops in and ruins it.

And when they figure this out, one of the characters expresses his understanding, that hell isn’t physical torture. “Hell is just—other people.”

So the point isn’t that other people, generically, are hellish; it’s rather that you can build a hell out of other people.

But when I hear people quote it, it’s usually sort of an introvert-pride thing. “Other people are hell; you should spend time alone.” And that’s not the point at all. It’s a statement about how bad unhealthy relationships can be, not a statement about how all relationships are unhealthy!

See also Sartre’s own comment here:

“hell is other people” has always been misunderstood. It has been thought that what I meant by that was that our relations with other people are always poisoned, that they are invariably hellish relations. But what I really mean is something totally different. I mean that if relations with someone else are twisted, vitiated, then that other person can only be hell.

diapordias-deactivated20180627

Reblogging for the original post which was hilarious and also for that explanation which is beautiful

Another big point in No Exit is that the characters find out at the end that the room they’re in is not locked. They could just leave, but they’re each of them incapable of just leaving without winning their arguments. So really, hell is when we stay in dysfunctional relationships that harm us, when we can’t just leave other people be and move on.

im gods weakest faggot

i’m gods strongest tranny let’s team up. what if we called ourselves team rocket

im gods most literate cat can i join

the-problematic-trolley

I’m a straight up mob boss with a lioness for a pet, you’re all hired.

pinkfire-chacarera

my yellow rat and I find this really offensive and problematic

wobbuffet

-

Love you alyx n gordon

More redraws lololol

i can just write whatever the fuck i want here? @chiefcolorathletetoad - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag