always
đ©” avery cochrane đ©”
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
Show & Tell
Claire Keane

tannertan36
trying on a metaphor

⣠Chile in a Photography âŁ
No title available
sheepfilms

PR's Tumblrdome
The Bowery Presents
we're not kids anymore.

bliss lane

blake kathryn
Jules of Nature

pixel skylines
ojovivo
Game of Thrones Daily
Noah Kahan

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Indonesia

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Belgium
seen from United States
seen from TĂŒrkiye

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Singapore

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from Belarus

seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
@lenetaylor
always
There's something about lazily studying Mandarin Chinese that's made language learning seem far more approachable. It would be cool to be fluent one day, but I've always been clear with myself that I don't have an actual goal with this besides maintaining a streak in my language app for a certain amount of days. I can quit whenever I want, which is remarkably good at making me not quit. Sometimes I have days where I study Chinese for hours because I'm having a good time, but mostly I'm lazily plucking at this language for sometimes literally a one minute a day. After a year of doing that, even though Chinese is so difficult and different from English, it turns out I can still get from knowing absolutely nothing to knowing slightly more than nothing in a pretty short period. An incredible jump in knowledge with not that much work. In fact, the gap between English and Chinese is so vast that microscopic progress feels incredible. When I have to write out literally any pinyin by memory, and I get 75% of the letters and none of the tones correct, I feel like a genius. Today I almost spelled éłäčäŒ/yÄ«nyuĂšhuĂŹ correctly on my first try, and I wanted to call everyone over to see how I effortlessly nailed two-thirds of it.
It's much more encouraging than any of the "easier" languages I've studied. My primary emotion when studying Spanish was embarrassment that I was still so bad at Spanish. Meanwhile, now I'm like, "If I can suck at Chinese, I can suck at anything," which is very inspirational because doing something really, really badly means that you are in fact doing it. I saw an ad for Hebrew language learning course and had the realization that I could probably get really, really, really, really bad at Hebrew in what, a couple months? The thought made me very excited. I could get horrendous at any language in a couple months. I could get horrendous at anything. With a little time and not that much effort, I could nail two-thirds of shooting a basketball. The sky's the limit, but if you don't care about getting all the way up there, one inch off the ground can still be pretty impressive.
studying languages other than the one(s) you speak natively is so good for your brain. even if you suck at it. even if you forget half of it. even if you have to learn the same things over and over. it will bring you joy if you don't think you have to win!
goes double for languages not closely related to your own (ASL, Klingon, Finnish, Basque, Esperanto). all languages are amazing!
Hunter S. Thompson aims at his IBM Selectric typewriter, Woody Creek, 1989
He knew.
Independent bookstores, and booksellers, get a lifeline just when they need it most.
Independent bookstores around the country have a particularly clever lifeline, one perfectly suited to the unprecedented moment we find ourselves in. The strange part? It came into being just weeks before the World Health Organization declared the coronavirus outbreak a pandemic, and before the bookstores started closing up shop wondering if theyâd reopen at all.
The lifeline in question is called Bookshop.Â
In simple terms, itâs a super clean, user-friendly online bookstore whose raison dâĂȘtre is supporting independent bookstores â not simply with exposure or resources (though thatâs certainly a factor), but with cold hard cashâŠ
:0
From their Choose a Bookstore tab
also available in the uk now
always use Bookshop!
cake is such an underappreciated band. i canât believe we brought back low rise flare jeans before we brought back cake in the top 40
iâm just saying cakeâs music would be widely regarded as so sexy if it wasnât for all the mariachi horns and vibraslap and the vocalist didnât always sound like he was explaining his suicide plans to a gun store clerk in sacramento. the world wasnât ready for them
The fact that it sounds like a dispassionate reading of a terrorist manifesto is a feature
Shoutout to my favorite genre of TOS episode:
âŠI canât think how it took me so long to run across this. I feel privileged to have been found by it. đ
So very, very many episodes of Trek deal with humanity and computers and artificial intelligence. It still amazes me how something made over 50 years ago is so poignant today.
He would and it would
Do you have any tips for getting Kirk's face right? You draw his likeness so well, and it's something I've heard others also struggle to get his face to look right, so I would love some tips if you have any đ
First of all, thank you! And I'm glad you asked *pulls out a 50-slide powerpoint presentation*
How to Draw Kirk
I've heard a lot of people say that Shatner's face is difficult to draw because of his soft features or because his weight fluctuated throughout the show. I actually have a theory of my own that I haven't really seen discussed before.
Why Does Kirkâs Face Keep Changing?
Outside of drawing middle-aged men from the '60s making out, I actually work in film. And if there's one thing film school gave me, it's an obsession with focal lengths.
A camera lens doesn't just determine how much of a scene you seeâit also changes how faces are rendered. Generally speaking, the smaller the focal length, the wider the field of view (and the stronger the perspective distortion). In my experience, people with softer facial features seem to change appearance more dramatically across different focal lengths. The transitions between planes are softer, so perspective changes become much more noticeable.
During filming, the cinematographer switches between different lenses depending on what the scene needs. For example:
25-28mm â wide shots of the bridge, corridors, establishing shots.
40-50mm â medium shots and the majority of dialogue scenes.
75-100mm â close-ups and reaction shots.
It might be a bit difficult to grasp the difference between focal lengths if you're unfamiliar with the concept (at least it was for me when I first started filming, lol), but once you start noticing it, it becomes automatic.
One of the best examples can be found in Is There in Truth No Beauty?
This is Spock's distorted POV. We can see the entire bridge, several characters in full body, and Jim standing very close to the camera. Notice how his proportions are exaggerated: his head appears much larger, his body smaller, and the center of his face is enlarged (see how the ears almost disappear?).
My best guess is that this shot was filmed somewhere around an 18-20mm lens to create that unsettling feeling.
Technically speaking, this perspective distortion isn't created by the lens itselfâit's created by camera distance. Wider lenses placed closer to the subject make the distortion much more noticeable.
Now compare that to a standard dialogue shot from later in the same episode.
Here, we only see part of the background, and the characters look much more natural. Perspective distortion is minimal, so this is probably somewhere around 40-50mm.
And finally, the classic close-up (Space Seed).
Most of the background disappears, and Kirk's face gets slightly flattened around the cheeks and temples area (and ears are much more prominent!). This is probably an 85mm, which is why it feels so intimate.
Sourcing References According to Focal Length
This realization genuinely helped me a lot and changed how I use references.
I work in a semi-realistic style, so I try to get as close to the actor's actual appearance as possible. That means I spend... an unhealthy amount of time digging through hundreds of screenshots on TrekCore (seriously, if you draw Trek fanart, I can't recommend it enough).
The problem is that you'll almost never find one screenshot with exactly the expression you need: one might have the perfect smile, another has the eyes, and the third one is the perfect inspiration for the hairstyle.
The trap is that those screenshots might all have been shot on completely different lenses.
You can end up referencing Kirk's lips from an 80mm close-up and his eyes from a 25mm wide shot. Individually they're correct, but together they don't quite look like Kirk anymore.
Now, whenever I'm gathering references, I try to match the focal length to the type of drawing I'm making. If I'm drawing a full-body piece, I mostly collect references from wider shots. If I'm painting a portrait, I mainly look at close-ups. Of course, subject distance from the camera also matters, since it can be used stylistically.
But a rough rule of thumb is:
25-28mm â Full-body shots with lots of visible environment.
40-50mm â Medium shots. This is the workhorse lens throughout TOS and generally the closest to natural human perspective.
75-100mm â Close-ups.
Just keeping that in mind made Kirk's likeness way more consistent for me.
How I Shade Kirk
Beyond that, Kirk actually has several really distinctive facial features that are worth emphasizing:
the forehead muscle lines
classic straight nose
hooded eyes
very defined lips
When I'm studying references, I pay close attention to how those features catch the light in different lighting setups.
Then, I simplify everything into large blocks of value. I outline those shapes, cross-hatch the darkest areas, leave lighter transitions where the light diffuses, and then do the blending... a lot of blending... like... a lot of blending and building up the values...
I personally try to avoid using the airbrush as much as possible because I find it gives me less control over the tiny planes of the face. But that's definitely just a style preference and part of my own shading process.
Shatner is still a surprisingly tricky person to draw because light behaves so softly across his features. But understanding focal lengths made an enormous difference for me over the last two and a half years I've been drawing him.
Hopefully this was helpful!
And sorry for the accidental TED Talk đ
here's a great explanation of why it's so hard to capture Shatner as Kirk, and why it often ends up as Kirk-not-Kirk. It's so funny to me that the original Mego action figures from the 1970s were some of the best at looking like Shatner!
Follow the money behind America's data center boom. Track 2,300+ projects, PAC spending, and the politicians who sign off on it.
Reasons for hope: Lots of amazing people did a ton of work to make this fantastic, fully interactive resource available - because no matter how bleak things seem, there are millions, and millions of people doing everything they can to protect both the world and their own communities.
You can use this to view and subscribe to updates, project statuses, and for at least some of them even whole dossiers. This is an amazing resource, I highly recommend checking it out
"STAR TREK" S1E3 - "Where No Man Has Gone Before"
@lenetaylor Where would you put this on the list of Most Beautiful Photos Of Jim Kirk? Because to me this feels like a top 3. Holy cats heâs beautiful here.
Definitely top 3! This scene has all the ingredients for Extremely Hot Kirk: sweaty, ripped shirt, dirty.
Thank you for sharing!
(Bonus: this episode, Where No Man Has Gone Before, has a LOT of sexual tension between Kirk and Mitchell, who's also pretty hot.)
Rather than distinctly male or female, the human brain is much more like the heart, kidneys and lungs â basically the same no matter the sex of the body it's in.
rb to make a biological essentialist mad <3
âThis collapse is a telltale sign of a problem known as publication bias. Small, early studies which found a significant sex difference were likelier to get published than research finding no male-female brain difference.â
the notes on this are toxic - to help clear up any misunderstanding, hereâs the actual science paper:
With the explosion of neuroimaging, differences between male and female brains have been exhaustively analyzed. Here we synthesize three dec
in short: brains are brains
Putting this on my good news blog, because yeah, you know what?
Proof that sexism, transphobia, and bioessentialism are biologically incorrect is absolutely a reason for hope - for society and for the world
âBecause the truth is, tech doesnât have an image problem. It doesnât have a message problem. It has an intention problem. Whatâs wrong with the axe murderer who broke into my house is not that he hasnât successfully persuaded me to buy into his narrative. Whatâs wrong is that heâs trying to kill me with an axe. Similarly, when you launch a product thatâs designed to put millions of people out of work, block access to sources of verifiable truth, replace human creativity with slop, and lower the barriers to every sort of atrocity, the problem isnât that you havenât told the public a good story about those things. The problem is that you are trying to do them.â
â The 40 Most Rage-Inducing Problems in Tech
By wearing this watch you confirm that you are not Anish Kapoor
The Fence has published an exposé on Stuart Semple (of Anish Kapoor 'feud' notoriety) which they have been working on for six months.
investigation reveals Semple / his studio / his partner Emily Mann (who's described as acting as his 'enforcer' in his business) :
mishandled ÂŁ400k grant of public money intended for a public gallery, allowing the money to flow freely between the public project, his own personal studio and personal projects such as Culture Hustle (his online business selling paint etc)
underpaid or failed to pay many of his assistants to the tune of several thousand pounds each.
former assistants have taken him to court and he simply hasn't bothered to show up and he's threatened to sue former assistants who asked for their back pay
repeatedly funds ambitious projects that never see release eg Abode, an 'Adobe-rivalling' suite of creative software (he claims he still intends to release this)
encouraged a cult-like atmosphere at his studio in Bournemouth
was frequently in debt and having to negotiate with bailiffs etc for his debts while at the same time crowdfunding various projects
ran fake social media accounts boosting Semple and his work
The portrait that emerges is one of decades-long scam artistry tbh and someone who's juvenile, manipulative, narcissistic.
The Fence btw is a decent fairly small-circulation quarterly magazine from the UK which specialises in satire, investigative journalism, culture, and fiction. You can read the piece in its entirety if you register (which is free).
a few links:
The Fence's newsletter from April discusses this article & how Semple has tried to muddy the SEO waters
Semple threatened to sue The Fence for publishing this story - many of you are American so here's the relevant UK law on defamation.
& the subreddit r/culturehustle is worth a look to get an idea of just how badly run his paint business is
Holy fuck.
I had a feeling something was up with him, but like, I assumed it was going to be something slightly sketchy, not...this.
I got some of his paints when he first announced the mirrored paint.
The first thig that put up a solid red flag was the shipping material. It's cool that he has custom boxes for his studio, it looked really neat. Then I opened it and sae things like "Not for bean boy" printed all over the inside of the box.
Between Mirror, hyper pigments, and black 2.0, none of them were as extremely out there as the videos on his site made them seem. The colors are vibrant, the black is dark, and the mirror is shiny. But the level the videos showed them at are not levels I can recreate.
So like, he exaggerated as an advertising scheme. Alright, shame on him.
But reading that... Yeah. I don't expect him to sell anymore stuff.
If I remember correctly his whole beef with Anish Kapoor was over a misunderstanding about Kapoor was making sure no one could use vantablack as opposed to the reality that Kapoor was the only person who was licensed to handle vantablack due to its dangerous radioactive properties. Pretty dumb. Also, I kinda like cloud gate, it's neat looking in person.
The lab which actually owns Vantablack (which is not a pigment but a substance that has to be applied in a lab) chose one artist to work with to demonstrate its properties. The exclusion wasn't Kapoor's choice. He was just the artist they chose.
MARK HAMILL Corvette Summer (1978)
@katherynefromphilly always for you
The History of Paul McCartney's ID Bracelet (part i: the beginning)
(part ii) (part iii) (part iv) (part v: correction)
(25 June 1963 © Peter Hall)
(hello, i come from yonder [beatlestwt] where i sometimes do silly threads deep diving into nonsensical things. i thought it might be worth pulling it over to tumblr, despite tumblr giving me flashbacks to being 15 years old and witnessing dashcon in real time. anywho, this was formatted for a twitter thread so the paragraphs will be a bit funky, but i also added a bit more detail in places - hope you enjoy!)
paul's ID bracelet holds somewhat a mythical status - a myriad of unanswered questions ranging from who gave it to him? what does it say?? does he wear it during the anthology doc?? well settle in and buckle up, we're gonna be looking at a lot of photos to try and solve the case
first and foremost, a note on methodology: i primarily used beatleschronology dot ru to go day by day thru the 60s to trace The Bracelet, then i used the paul mccartney project, getty images, & the like after. it ainât perfect but itâs something.
we are gonna go on a chronological journey and try and answer key questions along the way. good? good! let's start at the beginning - cast your mind back to the early 1960sâŠ
the first question to answer: is this the first image of paul wearing the bracelet? and better yet, when was it taken?? well, unsurprisingly, it's complicated. (photo by mike mccartney lest he banish me to the pits of that dodgy firm pinterest)
this photo (taken by mike mccartney) is sometimes dated as december 1960, largely due to a caption in mike's 1982 book 'thank u very much', which says the following:
the âfour monthsâ in hamburg therefore places it in dec '60. now i don't want to call mike a liar, but let's look at other pictures taken of paul around that time (first pic astrid, second mike mike mike)
im sorry to say but there is no way that image is from 1960 - man has a moptop for christs sake!! thats gotta put it post '61 at the very least. looking at other mike photos in 1962, the aesthetics are bit more similar
however, having now extensively looked at paul's hair from this period, i propose that the bracelet image *might* have occurred on his 21st while he is getting ready for his shindig. Thereâs a certain full moptopness to it that is moreso â63 coded imho.
ultimately, i don't think there's any compelling evidence that the image occurs wildly before paul's 21st on 18th june '63. so, onwards to the birthday, aka when The Bracelet Arrives on the Scene (photo by mike mccartney!!!!!)
the bracelet itself is a classic ID bracelet (which was the style at the time). we canât see the inside inscription but we can see the outside says paul. the colour flip flops from gold and silver depending on the photo so weâll just say it was ~metal~ (photo from c. jun '63)
id bracelets were advertised in teen mags like Rave in â65. similarly, ireland's saturday night paper noted ID bracelet popularity among celeb men in dec '64
from the 18th jun '63 onwards, the bracelet doesnt leave paul's left wrist (apart from in november, maybe due to touring reasons). so, this suggests it was a gift from *someone* for Paul's 21st. but whoooooo?
four main camps have emerged in The Bracelet Theory: 1. it was a gift from brian epstein 2. it was a gift from jane asher 3. it was a gift from john lennon 4. it was a gift from mike/jim/some other family member
the gift from eppy idea stems from the fact that ringo is also pictured with an ID bracelet throughout the â60s. some have speculated that maybe eppy gave all the beatles a bracelet, but john and george simply didnae wear theirs (ungrateful gits)
however this is unlikely/untrue due to the simple fact ringo stated that his bracelet was a gift from his mumma for *his* 21st birthday (7:49):
so, lets turn our speculative eyes to jane asher as the gift giver - it appears at paul's 21st birthday, a few months after they start dating, and he is then seen wearing it consistently thereafter. in dec '63, the daily record published this:
case closed?? well, one could argue itâs not a direct quote from jane so there is some wiggle room butâŠitâs quite compelling evidence tbh. it doesnât mean we can completely rule out Other Gift Givers, but there isnât any great evidence to counter itâs *not* from jane
(for those yelling at the screen about its appearance in later decades hold yer horses weâll get there!!!)
paul wears the bracelet at least once a month for every month in 1964 - through tours, photoshoots, and filming a hard days night it doesnât slip off that dainty left wrist. from jun â63 - dec â64, that Bracelet is his no 1 left wrist support (apart from a blip in nov â63)
post â64? well babs, youâll have to go to pt ii for that
ALL. OF. THIS.
hey friends where is that picture of boromir with the gondor flag except its a pride flag?
Couldnât find it so I made another because youâre right that itâs a crime and itâs definitely my duty to remedy it