noise dept.
sheepfilms
No title available
Phantogram Three
The Bowery Presents
Sweet Seals For You, Always
The Bright Sessions
h
š©µ avery cochrane š©µ
d e v o n
tumblr dot com
romaā
occasionally subtle
Fieri Frames
#extradirty
ellievsbear
Love Begins
Show & Tell
Sade Olutola
Keni
seen from Moldova
seen from Italy
seen from Chile
seen from Ukraine
seen from Singapore
seen from United Arab Emirates
seen from United States
seen from Australia
seen from Brazil
seen from Peru
seen from Spain
seen from Colombia
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Australia
seen from Brazil
seen from Iraq
seen from Kazakhstan
seen from Jordan
seen from United States
@shatter-it-sky-blog
MOVING BLOGS!!!
I know I had a few followers of different interests, so Iām linking my new blogs on here one more time before I go. NEW HIPPIE BLOG:Ā Itty-Bitty-Flower-ChildĀ NEW COPLAY/ANIME/PERSONAL BLOG:Ā vanilla-bunniesĀ NEW BAND BLOG:Ā juneday-parade
MOVING BLOGS!!!
I know I had a few followers of different interests, so Iām linking my new blogs on here one more time before I go. NEW HIPPIE BLOG:Ā Itty-Bitty-Flower-ChildĀ NEW COPLAY/ANIME/PERSONAL BLOG:Ā vanilla-bunniesĀ NEW BAND BLOG:Ā juneday-parade
MOVING BLOGS!!!
I know I had a few followers of different interests, so Iām linking my new blogs on here one more time before I go. NEW HIPPIE BLOG:Ā Itty-Bitty-Flower-ChildĀ NEW COPLAY/ANIME/PERSONAL BLOG:Ā vanilla-bunniesĀ NEW BAND BLOG:Ā juneday-parade
MOVING BLOGS!!!
I know I had a few followers of different interests, so Iām linking my new blogs on here one more time before I go. NEW HIPPIE BLOG:Ā Itty-Bitty-Flower-ChildĀ NEW COPLAY/ANIME/PERSONAL BLOG:Ā vanilla-bunniesĀ NEW BAND BLOG:Ā juneday-parade
MOVING BLOGS!!!
I know I had a few followers of different interests, so Iām linking my new blogs on here one more time before I go. NEW HIPPIE BLOG:Ā Itty-Bitty-Flower-ChildĀ NEW COPLAY/ANIME/PERSONAL BLOG:Ā vanilla-bunniesĀ NEW BAND BLOG:Ā juneday-parade
MOVING BLOGS!!!
I know I had a few followers of different interests, so I'm linking my new blogs on here one more time before I go. NEW HIPPIE BLOG:Ā Itty-Bitty-Flower-ChildĀ NEW COPLAY/ANIME/PERSONAL BLOG:Ā vanilla-bunniesĀ NEW BAND BLOG:Ā juneday-parade
Nagisa chose the Halloween costumes
ā¢Nature, hiking, wilderness, camping, medievalā¢
ā¢Nature, hiking, wilderness, camping, medievalā¢
hi im sky and this is where i blog about cosplay and anime and cute things (Ć¢ĀĀĆ¢ĀĀæĆ¢ĀĀĆ¢ĀĀæ)
go follow it or something we can be friends ok bye
u wot m8
English proverb (via poliokitty)
Transgender Teenage Couple Transition Together (via The Huffington Post)
A pair of teenagers from Oklahoma might seem like your typical young couple, but their love story is unlike many others. The transgender couple actually transitioned together.
Just two years ago, Arin Andrews and Katie Hill hadnāt transitioned yet. The two had struggled with their identities throughout childhood; Hill had struggled with bullying. Then one day they met at a trans support group, after each had begun the transitioning process, and they fell in love.
Found this ridiculously sweet story today and wanted to share it with my followers.
10knotes:
M&Ms Droplets
now thatās what photography should be aboutā¦ not a black and white picture of someoneās shoes
The top picture is full of M&Mās. Theyāre bule, red, orange, green, yellow, and brown.
But in the bottom picture we clearly see thereās white, pink, and even purple candies in the bowl.
The bottom picture is of gumballs! This concludes that the bottom picture is not taken with that camera at all. Iād even go as far to say that it was edited in photoshop with a filter!
Yes the above image and the below image are not the same photograph being taken. This is rather obvious.
BUT Mr. Wright there is one thing you overlooked. Examine the droplets on the bottom image. None of them are from the same angle. This is a natural occurance when looking through water droplets.
Is it not possible that the photographer took the second image first?
Would it not be more probable that when asked HOW it was taken he/she took the above image of their setup Using M&Ms, something much more common in a household rather than many gumballs, something they may have just bought for the original photo?
So to claim it was not taken with the same camera is indeed a long shot Mr. Wright.
Thank you for your time.
Really Edgeworth, is that youāre argument.
Arenāt you overlooking the fact that there are no pinkĀ M&Ms. This proves undeniably that these are not, in factĀ M&Ms, but some other kind of candy.
And one other thing, I find it highly improbable that not one piece of candy is facing so the M logo is on the candy.
So in conclusion, there is no way these are possibly M&Ms.
hey mister I think youāre confuuuuuuused. Edgeworth agreed that they werenāt M&Mās. He was just refuting that there is a possibility there wasnt any photoshop used and that the above image was only depicting the method used in the bottom image.
I think someone might be getting a little senile hehehe
Everyone seems to be walking around the accusations by examining whether they are or arenāt M&Ms. That is not whatās important. What we should be looking at is instead, the so-called droplets, compared to the background image.
The angles within the droplets do not realistically coincide with one another! As well, I donāt spend much time staring at drops of water, but I can surely say Iāve never seen such clarity in any water droplet. Also, as in the former picture, there is an obvious fogging on the glass, surely caused by whichever process was used to spray the water. Where is the fog?
On top of all that, the drops are amazingly tiny compared to the anonymous-candy. One could argue the sheet is further away than in the āexampleā pic, but the blurring of the candies definitely objects to that. We could also try to assume that the spray method used in the āoriginalā photo caused much tinier water spots, but are we to believe that the photographer was so careless that they couldnāt recreate the correct droplet size in the āexampleā? Surely, they should have been able to cause at least a closer resemblance.
Sure seems like they went out of their way to showcase the methodology of how the photograph was taken, yet neglected to go far enough to ensure it could be a like-comparison?
Rather unlikely!
Actually, Mr. Godot!!
Well, according to the properties of light and the way itās refractedā¦
If you mirror it the right way, they line up just fine!
Aahā¦ these M&Mās droplets
So colourfulā¦ reminds me of the days of my youth!
the red ones remind me of my hemorroidsā¦ *cough*
I have found some new evidence though the original image source suggesting this second image has been tampered with!
This image clearly shows candies that correspond to the colours commonly found in M & M sā¦ Ā The edge of the bowl is visible, as are some āMā symbols, if you look closely.
This suggests the second image in the original is perhaps just a fabrication based off of the second.
Thereforeā¦
It is clearly a fraud!
You shouldnāt jump the āfraudā gun just yet, Wright. If your source is really the corresponding photo to the first, then the āgumballā picture in question might not be at fault. To put it bluntly, it might just be a copycat.
To put it another way, this could just be a case of a mistaken and mismatched photoset..
With all the evidence provided, I think itās safe to assume this case could be solved: The candies in the second photograph are not M&Ms, but the photo itself was not exactly tampered with. It was just a completelyĀ separateĀ photo of separate candies, possibly just misplaced in this set by the original poster, who was completely unaware of the mismatch!
Hold it right there everyone.
There is..
A PUZZLE HIDDEN IN THAT BOWL OF MISLEADING CANDY.
I cannot, not reblog this. It is amazing!
OH. MY. FUCKING. GOD.
I read this entire post every time it crosses my Dash. Just amazing.
ur gross
thank
freedom post
picture of an eagle
unoriginal insult
go away canada
