Inspired to draw Little Red Riding Hood. Doodled on paper, did body+cape lines in Illus, picked colour pallete, then suddenly got bored.

So now there’s Little Red Riding Hood the Wicked Flasher.

Little Red Riding Hood the Flasher

In a week I’ll be moving along with Andrea and Anna to the new house.
Being a small town, the new house ‘at the opposite end of the town’ means that we have to walk all of fifteen minutes to get there from the current one.

My new room will be in the basement, a surprisingly nice wood-panelled little room in the corner, surrounded by cold unpainted cement walls and labyrinth-like ways leading to the washing room, the engine room, and some kind of a pit that I do not want to think what it was for.

I seem to always end up in a basement eventually.

At least this time, there will be no wall-to-wall cabinet filled with life-like dolls, their large glassy eyes fixed unseeingly toward a poster bed. My poster bed. No wonder why the family used it primarily as a storage room. ‘Creepy’ doesn’t even begin to cover it.

via Escribitionist and @celerachan

Likelihood of you being FEMALE is 40%
Likelihood of you being MALE is 60%

And how was this analysed?

Site Male-Female Ratio
google.com 0.98
youtube.com 1
facebook.com 0.83
flickr.com 1.15
tv.com 0.96
deviantart.com 1.02
mininova.org 1.63

Curiously, not many female visitors on Mininova? Youtube has perfectly distributed demography of viewers? Are blokes that interested in seeing what’s on TV? I thought random channel-surfing was a male-thing.

In any case, perhaps they forgot one ingenious invention in the history of internet:
Porn-site History wash :D

I’ve been browsing through Photography > People&Portraits, looking for a photo I once saw but forgot to +fav it. And then I got stumped by the sub-categories — they apparently didn’t mean the same thing to different photographers.

To my uneducated eyes, there’s little difference between ‘Emotive‘ and ‘Expressive‘ photos. Understandable, because the descriptions of these two categories leave the interpretation rather subjective.

In some other categories that should have quite clearer borders, however, I am utterly confused. I have no idea how ‘classical’ is defined in ‘Classic Portraits’ description, or ’spontaneous’ in ‘Spontaneous Portraits’. Reading the descriptions was educational, but hardly helpful.

In the ‘Classic Portraits‘ case, most photographers seem to see the word ‘classic’ and run away with it. This means the category is overrun by photos of people in period clothings, famous (or would-be famous) photos (as in being seen on the internet for a long period of time[1]), and some others that beg for a question: which dictionary are you using, exactly?

While browsing in ‘Spontaneous Portraits‘, I amused myself by imagining the photographer stopping the time to adjust the pose, arrange the props to his heart’s content, then flicking the time right on and shooting.Or surely, if there’s at least a single strand of hair out of place, a blade of grass stuck on the leggings, the photograph could be considered ’spontaneous’.

After awhile, the best practice for using DeviantArt Browse is to come up with my own descriptions, trying to match the categories with the general trends of posted works.

This is actually fun :)

‘Artistic Nude‘: more in-your-face nude than usual
‘Classic Portrait‘: photographer’s favourite works
‘Emotive‘: mostly moody-sad-contemplative close-ups and, unsurprisingly, lots of ‘emo’
‘Expressive‘: like emotive, but more mime-like
‘Miscellaneous‘: posted by honest photographers who admit to not knowing what the fuss these categories are about.
‘Costplay‘: clothes that normal people won’t wear to church on Sunday.
‘Pin up‘: I rather like this. It’s mostly girls in minuscule clothes with provocative poses, posted by frank photographers with no pretension to be ‘artistic’.

—-

[1] This generates even more confusion to me, since a measure of ‘long time’ is definitely relative on the internet, without the need to proof Einstein’s General Relativity Theory. Nowadays, something being circulated around for two weeks can be ‘classic’.

Patents need not all be technical.
Like this one.

*grins*

I wonder if Sock Monkey pattern was also patented.