Jump to content

How does your avatar look today ?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Nalates Urriah said:

But, I do think that for the newbies this is a good starting place.

Β  Β If someone came to me asking where to get started with photography, I'd probably point them towards builder's brewery instead to have them learn how to manipulate basic prims, and how to work with the lighting and texture tabs in the build menu - in one class you'd make any of those gadgets obsolete.

Β  Β I'd also suggest they avoid many of the photography blogs out there, as oftentimes people make things more complicated than they need to be. You can learn some basic tricks and rules of thumbs through any RL photography guide just as well, in terms of framing, zoom, aspect ratios, bokeh, etc.

Β  Β Aaanyway, to adhere to the topic - here's how my avatar looks today. Just a snap taken whilst attending a mer-meeting.

Mermina.png

Β 

  • Like 15
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 40.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is my current avatar. She's an Usagi Child ^.^ Β 

i was wondering around a SIM one day, and some dude private messaged me tellin' me he loved my look... he was very polite and kind, asked me to stop running and turn my AO off for him, so i did... the

Not a GREAT picture but i was working on this avi last night. :3 I'm obsessed with my face.

Posted Images

3 hours ago, Nalates Urriah said:

About learning photography, lighting, and doing back drops... Focus Magazine has gotten together a show for SL photographers:

https://www.seraphimsl.com/2021/04/30/everything-to-up-your-photography-skills-is-at-the-focus-photography-fair/

http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Holly Kai Estates/164/124/3801

I am finding interesting new things for posing the avatar, heads, eyes, etc.

Thanks for the links. I already used the Holly Kai spot for some photos with one of my anime avis. I'll check that out ASAP. :)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Orwar said:

I was looking at that earlier, and whilst I quite liked the idea of the theme, it's just .. Not actually a whole lot of usable stuff.

I'd agree, generally. And there were some creators I'd like to have seen as vendors who weren't. More of the high-end backdrop and structures creators would have been good.

On the other hand, this is a pretty new event, and Focus isn't really in the commercial business. I hope they keep it up, and that it improves each year, because it does have the potential to be interesting and worthwhile.

On the subject of DIY vs. commercial products for photography . . . well, I'm mostly DIY nowadays. I do have a commercial lighting system that I bought early on (not a really expensive one, however), and which I just no longer use for the reasons you state. I don't even use AnyPose very often anymore. The one commercial HUD I that I do use for pretty much every shot is the Lelutka Axis HUD, which I find pretty indispensable.

On the other hand, I know people, and not noobs at photography, who swear by some of these products, and who evidently (from the quality of what they produce) use them very well. So, YMMV? If a L$1500 HUD is what works for you, go for it!

But I think I would suggest to those just starting out that they not lay out huge amounts for commercial items, but start simply and cheaply. If they then decide, having played with simple point lights and projectors and such, that they would like an expensive system, they are at least doing so from a relatively well-informed position.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/29/2021 at 8:50 PM, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Great pic, and a good use of infamous (and much maligned) "Dutch angle"!

Is that what it is called? Is that the same as the side ways shots that everyone is doing now?Β 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Tarina Sewell said:

Is that what it is called? Is that the same as the side ways shots that everyone is doing now?Β 

Well, yes . . . and no.

The Dutch angle originated, as I understand it, as a cinematic effect, and was/is used to create a sense of tension, or action, or movement, or disorientation. Or stuff like that.

But strictly speaking, it doesn't generally turn the camera 90%, or anywhere even close. The sideways pics that seem to cause so much consternation are really extreme uses of the Dutch angle, and it's not always clearly to me why it is done, as I'm far from sure that it is always adding meaning to the pic. If I had to guess -- and to know, you'd need to ask every individual who does this -- the pic is tilted 90% (or close to) because it ensures a higher resolution for the body, which is generally vertical. Computer screens usually use a "landscape" aspect ratio, so you can get more of the body in, or at least more detail in, by turning the figure to conform with that.

A lot of people seem to get very exercised about this. I myself find it dull if it's overused, and kind of pointless unless it is obviously contributing to the effect of the pic, but . . . meh. Whatever. My chief objection might actually be that I have to turn my head sideways sometimes to make out the detail in an outfit properly.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
11 hours ago, Tarina Sewell said:

Is that what it is called? Is that the same as the side ways shots that everyone is doing now?Β 

Well, yes . . . and no.

The Dutch angle originated, as I understand it, as a cinematic effect, and was/is used to create a sense of tension, or action, or movement, or disorientation. Or stuff like that.

Β  Β Calling it a 'Dutch angle' is actually a pejorative expression sprung from the English contempt for the Dutch after the Anglo-Dutch wars in the 17th and 18th centuries, a bit the same as 'Dutch courage' (alcohol-induced attitude) and 'Dutch wife' (prostitutes).Β 

Β  Β An alternative name for it is the 'German angle', due to the heavy use of twisted angles in German silent era expressionist film, with the idea being the same; create unease in the viewer through the distortion of reality. To many people today, that style is just known as being a part of the 'Burtonesque' due to how it has influenced the very popular works of Tim Burton.

cabinet.jpg?w=1200&h=680&crop=1
Β  Β The Cabinet of Dr Caligari, 1920

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mina-on-a-beach.png

Β  Β Re: buying backdrops with images, here's how you make your own.

Β 

  • Like 12
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Orwar said:

Β  Β Calling it a 'Dutch angle' is actually a pejorative expression sprung from the English contempt for the Dutch after the Anglo-Dutch wars in the 17th and 18th centuries, a bit the same as 'Dutch courage' (alcohol-induced attitude) and 'Dutch wife' (prostitutes).Β 

Β  Β An alternative name for it is the 'German angle', due to the heavy use of twisted angles in German silent era expressionist film, with the idea being the same; create unease in the viewer through the distortion of reality. To many people today, that style is just known as being a part of the 'Burtonesque' due to how it has influenced the very popular works of Tim Burton.

cabinet.jpg?w=1200&h=680&crop=1
Β  Β The Cabinet of Dr Caligari, 1920

Oh, hm. Well as old as I am, I have never heard of that. I guess it is not the angle I am talking about then..Β 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Well, yes . . . and no.

The Dutch angle originated, as I understand it, as a cinematic effect, and was/is used to create a sense of tension, or action, or movement, or disorientation. Or stuff like that.

But strictly speaking, it doesn't generally turn the camera 90%, or anywhere even close. The sideways pics that seem to cause so much consternation are really extreme uses of the Dutch angle, and it's not always clearly to me why it is done, as I'm far from sure that it is always adding meaning to the pic. If I had to guess -- and to know, you'd need to ask every individual who does this -- the pic is tilted 90% (or close to) because it ensures a higher resolution for the body, which is generally vertical. Computer screens usually use a "landscape" aspect ratio, so you can get more of the body in, or at least more detail in, by turning the figure to conform with that.

A lot of people seem to get very exercised about this. I myself find it dull if it's overused, and kind of pointless unless it is obviously contributing to the effect of the pic, but . . . meh. Whatever. My chief objection might actually be that I have to turn my head sideways sometimes to make out the detail in an outfit properly.

I agree though, I find it overly used as well and find them annoying. I was looking at a whole flicker photo stream from someone and every photo was set at a 90.. I appreciate your insight. Most helpful.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Richard Parkes said:

Let NO expense be spared! I don't care who knows it!

@Eva Knoller, you know you want me! Resistance is futile!

Billboard-Blank.thumb.png.a02675ff3804fb0af867a8310f8c6822.png

I’m very flattered, but you know I’m taken. πŸ˜‚

  • Haha 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...