Thread 11339992

Post your original doujins or captioned images. Hand-drawn or AI is fine, as long as it’s your work and includes text or some form of sequential storytelling. WIPs are welcome. Share ideas, resources, feedback, drafts, or finished pages.

How many images do I need to start a thread again? Five?

does anyone have a retard-proof caption guide? when gooning my mind is basically nothing but captions, but i have enough shame to not just open mspaint and put single-color text over an image
>>11339994
the /gif/ sticky >>>/gif/28738089 (posted april of this year, i guess replacing the old one) only says:
>2. Contribute 2 or more additional related images when starting a thread (in addition to the OP).
i feel it used to say something like 5 as well, but i guess that was the old sticky, so they gave people more breathing room only this year. >>>/h/8560405 and >>>/e/2957918 don't mention any such thing

>>11339999
never mind i'm blind. i just skimmed them. rule 5 of the /h/ sticky vaguely says to "contribute a decent amount of board-related material", and the fourth hyphen under /e/'s "/e/cchi is NOT for" says to post 6. that must be where people got it from (maybe the old /gif/ sticky as well)

>>11339999
I'd like to know how to do this properly too. I'm using Inkscape with the Ames font. They kinda work, but I don't think they look right.

>>11339999
Use GIMP, you can either download a few fonts used by typesetters (wild words,etc.) or use standard fonts just nothing crazy unreadable or distracting. Pick images that have a lot of empty space on the sides for text, or expand the canvas and add a separate section to put the text on the right or left side. To keep the text readable either add in drop shadow or a "bubble" style like in >>11340072 . Easiest way to do either is to right click your text layer in the layers menu and click alpha to selection. For drop shadow you just click and drag the selection, then fill it with a dark color in a separate layer underneath the first one. For bubble text you do alpha to selection, then grow selection by a pixel or three, then create a new layer and fill the selection.

>>11340131
Good font. Very good font. Now, I just need to draw better word balloons and some SFX fonts to make this look right.

pee/smegma warning. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11322154/#11326247

also, there is a futa-specific caption OC thread (that bans ai) >>11312231, for anyone interested

>>11340131
thank you, anon!!! with much difficulty (and procrastinating) i managed to do a "drop shadow" caption in gimp. i originally planned to do a variant with "bubble" captions, too, but it was so much effort just doing "drop shadow" that i figured i wouldn't bother unless someone really wanted to see it. .xcf of the caption here (not that there's much to see, but still):
https://files.catbox.moe/a9i5sn.xcf

i didn't understand how to pull up a drop-down menu of the fonts in gimp, so after looking up "wild words font" and downloading the first one (a .zip with three versions of it):
https://dafont.style/download/cc-wild-words-roman-font.html

i installed them (manually, by dragging them into the font windows folder like the gimp manual said, when i could've just double clicked them then clicked "install" instead...), then when searching "wild" in gimp and it didn't show up, i thought i needed to restart my pc. i looked it up and saw some mentions of it (but also some people claiming you didn't have to), so i did it anyway. the font still didn't show up. i then somehow arrived at realizing that since the fonts are named "CC Wild Words", that they ONLY show up if you search "c". and without figuring out how to see a drop-down of the fonts, i was none the wiser. so that was great. but, we got there

i kept moving the image when trying to move the caption, so i looked it up and learned the "move tool" can be toggled to "move the selected layers" instead, which helped a lot. when retroactively editing captions, i learned i could hide the drop shadow caption layer, to avoid accidentally clicking it instead. i didn't know (and still don't know) how to standardize how offset the drop shadow layer was, so i just eyeballed it, unfortunately, which was time-consuming and tedious

>>11340072
>bumbkins
minor spelling mistake.gif

>>11341283
cries in ESL.jpg

I'm relying on paint over and img2img to do character consistency. Surely there has to be a better way.

>>11339998
When the hyper-muscular, dom futa is actually just a bratty sub

>>11339999
I use IbisPaintX on my phone, because I use my phone for porn while lying in bed
You can see what I've made in the futa caption thread >>11312231 (Any of the ones accompanied by a greentext are mine) and with a bit of work you can make edits easier than you could using GIMP with a mouse (you can see a smegma edit I did in the futa caption thread, and drawing action lines is easy too)
It's fairly simple to use and you don't need the premium version since ads aren't invasive. The most tedious part is finding the fonts, because they are all laid out in a single column list that you have to scroll through
Resizing the canvas is simple as well as moving the layers. I've only used GIMP a little bit, but it's very intuitive a lot of the time (moving a layer also moves the selection window which is annoying and rather than figure out how to fix it I just gave up on it)
Hand drawn text bubbles are also tedious, so I've been using the shape drawing tool (which you can find on the top right of the screen)
You can then use the filter tool to draw an outline on the drawn bubbles

>>11342309 cont.
But if you're interested in WIPs, here's a collage of a few that I started working on
All but the galko one I intended to write a short story for, which is partly why I've put them off a bit since a few I didn't want to write the same thing over and over, and some of the others I wanted to write in multiple POVs (which I've been making a python program to assist with)

And speaking of it. A while ago I was going to make an automated captioning thing in python (letting you select existing speech bobbles or draw your own to them have text auto center and wrap within) but ended up not bothering when I started using IbisPaint for edits and got fairly good at it to the point there was no reason
I could maybe still make it if people wanted something very simple that would let you resize images and the canvas
I've also been working on a vector art program in python, so it may end up being a feature include on that. i.e. letting you have a text fill for a shape that will automatically do centering and wrapping

>>11342327 cont.
But that collage is about half the images I've prepared to make
I have just as many that I've only downloaded or I've put together and not yet figured out the captions

Together those are only about half the ones I think I could make
I've been going through r34 and favouriting any that I think have potential
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=favorites&s=view&id=443279
by which I mean I think I could make a story line out of them or caption the existing sequence. (many would be redundant as they cover the same themes)
One in particular I've been thinking of was Xipa's Blue Archive sets, because I think it would be funny to write about the sensei's moral degradation into becoming a free-use sex toy

These are fantastic. Do you post on X or DA?

>>11341244
hot as fuck
more like this pls

my second caption. original from >>>/trash/slop:
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/73954510/#73958188

in trying to learn how to standardize the "drop shadow" offset, i learned of the "ruler" tool, but unfortunately i only realized that it provides a "snap" function for the "move" tool after having done all the "drop shadows", so i only bothered using it to move some captions around in the end. but had i known, it'd have sped up the tedium of adding "drop shadows" by a lot
>>11343419
thank you, anon!!!! you actually inspired me to make my second (and maybe last ever) caption, haha. i shared that caption in three places and only got one (1) positive (You). i shared it in a slop discord and four different people just kind of hivemind reacted that the caption was pure yapping. i know irony and dogpiling is just standard discord behavior, but it still bummed me out. but regardless, this might be the last caption i ever make... sorry. i only wanted to edit slop (derogatory term for ai-generated images), and pee and smegma in slop is rare enough as is, especially with it being deplatformed by civitai and rule34. but dickgirl pee/smegma slop is extremely rare, and that one i made a caption of had foreskin, which i literally requested someone make in >>>/d/ddg for me specifically because i thought it was unprecedented. i just don't even have any material to make captions of anymore. this is without considering that ai doesn't tend to understand smegma, so sometimes it's literally just very bad, so i wouldn't want to even save it, let alone make a caption out of it
>>11342309
>>11342327
hi, i'm sorry. i'm super bad with procrastinating, so even though i read your reply right away, i couldn't be arsed to check the caption thread for your captions... sorry. but i just did, and the pee one >>11319019 is crazy good!!! unapologetically, casually peeing on someone during sex is amazing!!! but, the font you use has no anti-aliasing (smooth edges), which breaks immersion, i think

>>11339995
I kinda really like this concept

>>11343758
>has no anti-aliasing
It did. The problem was that the filter tool that adds a stroke, despite having anti aliasing, sharpened the edge (could have been I used "both" instead of "outer"). I fixed this in later ones by just duplicating the text layer and applying the stroke to the lower one.

The peeing I mostly found funny, but I do like the asymmetry. I edited it to only have one pissing, and I like doing the same for cumming since it's a bit repetitive when almost every artist has the characters cum in sync.

>>11343808
wow, i see what you mean about having edited the pic to only have one of them peeing:
https://gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=8995614

so you edited her eyes closed, a pouting mouth, and even the anger vein? you're insane. and, i can't agree with subject matter in porn just being "repetitive" out of context, but for this, coincidentally i do find only one party peeing on the other to be way, way, waaay more casual, especially with you having given her a distinctly angry expression, as opposed to the kind of struggling-to-keep-herself-composed-while-in-pleasure expression she had before. only one party peeing affirms way more that she's being peed on without her consent, which, again, to do that during sex is insane. it really elevates it by a lot!!!

i actually ran out of space in my last post, so i couldn't really reply how i wanted, but i went to install ibispaint a few months ago and found that while the mobile app is free, the desktop app is limited to only one hour of use a day. i just checked and it's still the case, visible on the website itself:
https://ibispaint.com/product.jsp
>Windows Version Tier Comparisons
>Usage Time
>Demo Mode
>One hour per day
even though it's embarrassing, i know it took me way longer to make both the captions i have so far. i also had a scare where i only noticed a huge spelling mistake in my first caption (i spelled "concerned" like "concernered") probably only literally after i thought it was ready to post, despite rereading it so many dozens of times, so now i reread everything dozens of times more before posting, then still worry i misspelled something. i even looked up "hikikomori" for my second caption, but absentmindedly spelled it "hikki" (two Ks) anyway, then only after posting searched "hikki" to confirm that that's how people usually spell it. but my point is that i linger too much when making a caption to make one in an hour. maybe i could pirate it, but for now gimp is okay. i'm still learning it

>>11343758
>>11343808
>>11343813
Why go through all that when you could've just used Inkscape. It's free.

>>11343844
how do you get the "bubble" text? from the anon's instructions for that and "drop shadow" earlier, in gimp that would have to be done manually too

>>11343844
What a kind hearted and dutiful futanari wife
I would like to see more of her and her culinary expertise

>>11343847
Write something. Look the the right. Stroke paint, and mess around with stroke style.

>>11343850
anon, this is insane... gimp is stuck in the dark ages... i thought i'd be using gimp for stuff beyond captions, like pride flag edits (which would demand warping for depth and perspective), and even outright drawing, if i'd be trying that with zero drawing skill or experience. but this would trivialize making captions, so idk how i can stick with gimp anymore...

>>11343850
anon, i installed inkscape, but my drop shadow (which i had to look up how to open [filters > shadows and glows > drop shadow]) is a dull grey, even when i set the "blur radius" to 0.0 px. my "shadow type" is "outer" like yours (i did check what the other options were to be sure). and your screenshot confused me for a while, but i eventually realized that "stroke paint" wasn't the tab you were on, so i had to enable it there before going to the tab in you picrel to fuck with it. but in cranking up the "width" in the "stroke style" tab after choosing "flat color" in the "stroke paint" tab, i notice that it's a shortcut for doing "stroke", in that the "stroke" occupies the font itself; it isn't like how doing it manually in gimp would do it, of the top layer being the text without compromise, and the duplicated text layer below being scaled up to provide the "stroke" effect. is there a way to do it without compromising the text itself?

it's definitely weird, though, because when you raise the "stroke style" "width" by a lot, it clearly expands beyond the scope of the text itself. but it also swallows the text, so. and is that speech bubble you did something inkscape streamlines too?

>>11343858
>drop shadow (which i had to look up how to open [filters > shadows and glows > drop shadow]) is a dull grey,
Blur color - A: 100
>stroke" occupies the font itself
Order: select the middle one

>>11343858
>speech bubble you did something inkscape streamlines too?
Just use the pen tool (press B) to draw it.

>>11343859
>Blur color - A: 100
thank you!!! i actually did click everything on the "stroke paint" tab when i figured to go there first, and noticed that affected the one there had a similar effect, but i only clicked on the equivalent tab on the "drop shadow" window once, so i would've never checked it again. thank you
>Order: select the middle one
oh, sorry. thank you. i was still conditioned to think those did nothing since i tried them without enabling them on the other tab first
>>11343860
i guess i kinda see the vision. it i make more captions i doubt i'd use that tool anyway, so it was more just curiosity than anything. thank you

moving text is a bit unintuitive to me. with "drop shadow" being just an effect on the text (so i no longer have to do tedious manual aligning bullshit between two dupes of text layers like in gimp), i can afford to just resize the text selection if i so chose, but in inkscape, only the bottom right right edge of the text selection (which is a diamond) resizes it??? the top right one (which is a square) is just cosmetic??? and there is an extremely small square just top left-ish of the text selection that i assume is just telling you where the bottom of the text starts, since it's too small to click on, so that's fine. so i had to look up how to move in inkscape, and learned of the "selector" tool, but i can't figure out how to make it like gimp, where as long as i click anywhere inside the current layer, it moves the current layer, and doesn't move the layer beneath it, if i were to say click between the text in the text layer. i right clicked "selector tool" on the top left and clicked "open tool preferences" and disabled "change layer on selection" and "change page on selection" but it didn't help. i then looked it up and going to edit > preferences > behavior >selecting, but i just don't even see anything that would change this, so i didn't even try. a reddit thread i found said they lock/unlock layers, but is that the only way?

>>11343862
Click object to select object. Click layer to select layer.

>>11343877
i was in bed on my phone trying to go to sleep, but i got up and recorded this video (and converted it to webm in ffmpeg, even though i thought 4chan supported mp4 now...) to show you what i mean, because i don't think you understood

>>11343889
Let me get this straight, you want to be able to select an object, move your cursor somewhere else, before moving said object?
What a very specific problem to have.
>Hold ALT+ L click

>>11343898
>>Hold ALT+ L click
can you explain what is supposed to be happening here? alt + L opens the layer menu drop-down for me

>>11343900
never mind, i realized anon meant left click. yes this is what i wanted, thank you. in gimp there is an option to have the move tool only move the selected layer, but i guess this is okay too

>>11343813
>you're insane
Not that much effort. I've made several other edits across a few threads. They're easy to spot based on the default IbisPaintX filename (as convenient as it is to use, renaming files is more effort than it's worth)
>>11298189
>>11319326
>>11336338
>>11314770
And I decensored two dorse doujin, those were a fair bit more work, but not as much effort as decensoring complex colour/shading like this one: >>11300218

>i can't agree with subject matter in porn just being "repetitive" out of context
Well that's probably the issue, since I've been using images to write captions and stories, having both characters cum at once would be limiting

>the desktop app is limited to only one hour of use a day
Interesting, I never even knew there was a desktop app. I got it on my phone because it's easier to do edit on my phone than on a laptop with a trackpad
There's not really any reason not to just use the phone, but maybe that's because I like relaxing in bed. I write smut in bed too, which is why I use a laptop since I have a small desk to use it in bed. I used to use my phone for that too, phone on a mount connected to a keyboard, but laptop has is better for programming too

>>11343844
Not free on phone. If I wanted something for explicitly making captions, I would make my own program. I was doing that, like I mentioned, but ended up not bothering. Text is easy, along with text bubbles. I could make strokes fairly easy converting the text image into an array, but figuring out the anti-aliasing with an array would be a little tedious.
I am working on my own vector art program for quicker image editing and more control. I was first making it with arrays, but it was quickly getting very complex and I realised I can do the features I want with just pygame's innate features. I could create filters with numpy arrays if I really needed it

>>11343758
>my second (and maybe last ever) caption
sad to hear but I understand where youre coming from with AI not understanding smegma very well and it being rare to see anyways
thanks for the caps

does anyone have any idea on how to edit smegma like this artist (mamimi) draws it (2nd link is the most high-res reference for it, but linking the full sequence anyway):
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=6324717
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=6324718
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=6324722
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=6324748
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=6324751

it looks very doable without drawing skill or experience. also, an editor once put me onto a "bruise" effect (using gimp) that i thought might work for smegma. pic related. i tried to isolate the parts of the convo that were about the "bruise" effect, but it still mentions "burn layer", which refers to the red effect around fresh tattoos, which is independent from the "bruise" effect, and only mentioned cause they were layering the "bruise" on a fresh tattoo. and by "blur" they meant "gaussian blur". but i haven't tried this yet, so some second opinions or independent opinions on how to do smegma would be nice
>>11343917
are you literally just drawing at this point? what the fug. especially for >>11314770. is that not just your art straight-up? i only hope to add smegma, and eventually tears (crying) when i can be arsed, but drawing tears is something i'd say is literally just drawing at that point. i specifically asked an editor once if stuff like changing expressions would require drawing skill and experience, and they told me it would, to even recognize potential contextual, immersive expressions and anatomy and stuff, yet you're doing so much more
>>11344295
ah, i'm glad you enjoy my two (2) captions, anon. the prospect of positive feedback is what inspired me to do them at all!! and, i'm hoping to add smegma to gens myself, so hopefully i can manage that yet, to increase the potential pool for captions by a lot. it's an arbitrary hangup for me to only want to edit slop, but it makes me feel confident in doing so

content-less bump (22h to be three threads away from being archived??? don't people insist /d/ is slow???)

>>11343758
hey anon, you inspired me to add some text to a gen. i think it elevates it a bit

>>11345132
it does!!! good job!!! i actually enjoy all sorts of taboo, so masochism is a good one to me, but i didn't really think anyone'd want to see that, so i didn't even consider potential stuff to caption for that, haha. but i'm glad you went for it!!! it really capitalizes on the fact that she's a horse girl, which makes it uniquely intimate

you might want to put a "stroke" (i think that's what people have been calling it ITT) around the sound effect text, for better contrast. and an anon ITT put me onto "inkscape", which automates the process (i added "drop shadow" manually in gimp by duplicating the layer, making the one beneath it black, and moving it a few pixels down and to the right, which was tedious, but inkscape automates that, too). i use "drop shadow" for my captions, but i'm not convinced it provides the best contrast, but currently i'm sticking with it as i wait for specific colors behind it to make it clear that it's not enough to provide sufficient contrast against everything, so i should switch

>>11344389
>are you literally just drawing at this point?
Drawing dicks an artist does not make
I've tried drawing other things, but the only thing I can reliably draw well is dicks. I have a few others it didn't let me link cause it said it was spam
>>11311951 >>11313534
>>11315724 >>11316689
This was my first attempt at an original drawing a little while ago: >>11292282
My skills are such that I have to draw and undo each line several times which isn't very efficient when it comes to drawing something a little more complex. That's why I'm making a vector drawing program so I can draw the line once and then sculpt it (like Blender's grease pencil) to the correct shape. Ideally skipping the need for sketching and issues with warping causing distortion.

The difficulty of an edit depends on the art style. I've done several smegma edits (mostly in the dorse thread), and have experimented with different styles. My latest was this one >>11316491
There was a point that I considered making a smegma edits thread, because I went through several artists and was making a sheet to explain their style. That was before the hack and during the time off I lost interest

I'm not sure how mamimi does their smegma. I could maybe get a bit closer with more practise, this was just a first attempt at the style. Maybe they draw the outline and then fill, or maybe it's just something easier to do with a pen and tablet rather than a finger and phone.
I think an easier style would be better to start out with, unless you want to spend a lot of time on it.
Here's the uncensored original image:
https://files.catbox.moe/ex7nr2.png
And full smegma/ahegao (with the eyebrows I forgot):
https://files.catbox.moe/4dshyn.png
And a lazy caption:
https://files.catbox.moe/d6hcl4.png

>>11345283 cont.
But as for learning things. Doing decensoring was how I became able to draw dicks (and is why I'm only really able to draw them)
You could try some of that, finding images or doujin you like and doing a decensor a day. (Black and white line art is easiest)
For how to draw the facial expressions, anime faces are very simple. So just look at an image and try to imitate the style (that's what I did for the face, eyes, and obviously the smegma). Just find styles you like and take the aspect from them. I don't use them as a reference (i.e. look at it while I'm drawing) but tab back and fourth (because again, I'm on my phone) which may help with actually learning the shapes.
Then you're obviously also trying to fit the style of the image being edited

>>11344389
Here was another attempt. IbisPaintX does lend itself well to making guides like this with its built in time-lapse feature. Although I do need to consider how long it leaves text on screen for. IDK how it determines the time of actions. i thought it was just a set amount of time per action, so I made lots of brush strokes when erasing, but it would seem it actually is actually real time as it hangs for a bit when I first opened the image
Making the shapes normally rather than reductively makes a bit more sense
(I was basically combining the blocking with the refining)
Taking a bit more care with the shadows and making the shapes more strip-like rather than all being teardrop-like makes them look a bit more realistic

Still not a perfect replica of the style, I think I do a bit too much smudging (although in other images by mamimi they do smudge more but also have less overall smegma)

Here's the full image:
https://files.catbox.moe/udqmbe.png

pee warning. original by 0.4 in >>>/d/ddg:
>>11345395
my third caption. i wanted to edit smegma into it, but i procrastinate about everything and was too lazy to even try before inspiration for the caption struck me, and idk when i will ever bother trying to edit in smegma, so i made this caption without it for now... sorry. maybe one day i'll make a catbox album of my captions and retroactively add the smegma version there, when i bother learning how to edit in smegma
>>11345283
anon, as usual for me, i read your posts right away, but procrastinated about doing something meaningful since then to manage a good reply to you, and i still haven't even tried to edit smegma yet... sorry. but, my jaw literally dropped watching that video on my phone. it looks SO GOOD!!! i guess looking at the catbox and having time for the shock to wear off, i wish there was more smearing, and more broad swathes of smegma. but i hardly imagined it was possible, as much as i hoped i could do it. but you really inspired me a lot. thank you so much!!! even though i procrastinate about ever trying... sorry
>I have a few others it didn't let me link cause it said it was spam
yeah, i don't get it. shortly after 4chan came back online in april, the max quote count was limited to probably 5, then it was definitely reduced to 10, which i tested here:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11302994/#11305095

then at some point it got reduced again to 5, which i tested here >>11338417. but you're quoting 7 right now, so either it's not actually 5 and is instead conditional, or has since changed. who knows
>I think an easier style would be better to start out with, unless you want to spend a lot of time on it.
i honestly thought theirs was of the easiest, since it didn't strike me as hand-drawn. but if you're saying otherwise, i believe you. but i will try theirs first anyway
>>11345289
literally drawing seems beyond my forte, haha. but thanks for having faith i could do it, despite myself

>>11346035
anon, this is super good!!!! i feel bad saying you inspired me when i have yet to even try... sorry. but it does help, a lot!!!! really!!! thank you!!!! i really have never felt more inspired to try it, even though i probably still won't right now... sorry. but i hope to soon enough!!! sorry again.

>>11346041
That's alright, I like making the smegma edits

>>11346040
>but i hardly imagined it was possible
Big Hentai doesn't want you to know that it's all just pixels, anyone can put them their
For some context, the first took me half a day (I'm a bit out of practice with decensoring)
The second took 2-3 hours
You get better with practice (and reflecting on what you should have done). In time, you could probably make a smegma edit in under an hour

>honestly thought theirs was of the
In my studies on drawn smegma, I rank mamimi at a level 3 in terms of complexity

Level 1 - vague shapes, basically no effort
> Pic related

Level 2 - defined shapes, requires some thought
CheeseCrumbles
Masso Nullbuilt
DittoChad
PervYourBrain
Kunaboto
Bukimimata
Jajala
Robyra
nnff

Level 3 - complex shapes, requires some degree of skill in art
Mamimi
Hero Neisan
Dama Shipwreck
BcDickChix
AngelAuxes
Canvas Solaris

Level 4 - very complex shapes
Fellatrix
Muchin
Omnithyrst
Milk Flaker
Zyldark
1235
CyberBoi
Ereraero
Sep
925kyohei
4era7

Level 5 - bordering realism, basically need to be an artist
Ecchi-Graffiti
Picturd
Albatross
Rampage0118

>literally drawing seems beyond my forte
Believing you can is the first step. I didn't think I could make edits until I made them. Just do something simple, decensoring line art is fairly easy. While it won't make you into an artist, if it helps you realise you can do it then it serves its purpose. Cleaning up AI gens is something else fairly easy, also practical. I find I have the least mental hangups regarding that because you're not trying to think about what the artist was intending - it's the work of a soulless machine, thus it is not sacred and free to be defiled by your hands (but hopefully improved)

>>11346054
anon, i think you should've formatted the artist names to be on the same line... this post is taller than my screen, and i'm on a 1080p monitor... i didn't even know 4chan lets you submit posts this tall... but, i recognize honeybread!!! the smegma in this sequence by them lives rent-free in my mind:
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=8079768
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=8079779

i guess zooming into it, it does look possible to do without drawing skill or experience, especially because the foreskin only allows so much opportunity to depict smegma, anyway. unless you just do what some artists do and put smegma on the outside of the foreskin entirely, like another of the artists you listed (Dama Shipwreck) did here:
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=9101980

but, i'm sorry, i really don't see how someone like angelauxes's smegma can be on the same level of difficulty as mamimi's. maybe i'm ust not familiar with their stuff, so across the board it can be layered and have complex lighting and mass and such. but i linked examples of what i hoped to do (again, namely the 2nd in the sequence i linked for it being zoomed-into the smegma):
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=6324718

and i would say there was literally no attempt whatsoever to make the smegma look 3D. there is some lighting on the underside of the dick to signify it being in the shadow, but that's it. compare to literally any angelauxes smegma (2nd is older, but doesn't have the VHS filter):
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=11243618
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=4692417

it's clearly 3D, and is in huge clumps as if it's a literal cake. it's literally so 3D that it's unironically dripping. i just don't see the comparison at all
>Cleaning up AI gens is something else fairly easy, also practical.
ah, well, i am interested in doing that, since it's all i plan to edit. so with that in mind, perhaps i'd try

>>11346061
>this post is taller than my screen
Ah, I'm on my phone so it looks normal to me, lol

>don't see how someone like angelauxes's smegma
Maybe my opinion would change if I tried to draw it, but I've tried Mamimi's style a couple of times and still not gotten it right
In the complexity I am considering things like lighting and shape for how long it would take to make and how long it would take to learn. I think once you learn either style, they take about the same amount of time.
Angel Auxes' style is made easier by it being 2-3 colour and one solid mass. All you really need to do to make it is a draw the outline in white. Then you go and draw the various shades to define the edges of the clumps. The amount of shapes you have to draw is pretty much the same as with Mamimi and most of the others in the level 3

>am interested in doing that, since it's all i plan to edit. so with that in mind, perhaps i'd try
Here's an example of what you could do. By no means is it the "correct" artistic decision, but simple things that take really no time at all. I did study art theory on YouTube a few years ago, maybe that helped with spotting things like lighting, and I do know anatomy fairly well also.
Making shitposts is also good practice since they don't have to be good. like I was making grotesque cock edits on trash on the cute boys thread a little while ago
https://desu-usergeneratedcontent.xyz/trash/image/1749/73/1749731616207.png
https://desu-usergeneratedcontent.xyz/trash/image/1749/74/1749741258709.png
https://desu-usergeneratedcontent.xyz/trash/image/1749/77/1749774229764.png
https://desu-usergeneratedcontent.xyz/trash/image/1749/77/1749777663130.png

>>11346077
>Ah, I'm on my phone so it looks normal to me, lol
if i copy paste your post into notepad++ it's 56 lines, and 30 of them are dedicated to a single artist name, which would've been reduced to 4 lines (30 total) had you put each level on a single line... i don't know what resolution your phone is, but playing with ctrl+shift+m in firefox to take a mobile screenshot, on a 1080 width screen you'd need 1013 height to view the whole post at once:
https://files.catbox.moe/3ahhl3.png

but screen width doesn't matter, anyway, since the problem is 50% of the height being one/two-word artist names. i already told you that on my 1080p monitor (and my browser full-screened) i couldn't see your entire post (the reason being the taskbar and browser title bar, menu bar, tabs, URL bar, etc., even though otherwise your post would fit on my screen). it was a sincere request. your post could be formatted otherwise to not literally just occupy as much space as possible

i got kind of exhausted formatting this post, so i don't really ave the energy to respond to the stuff you said otherwise... sorry. but i still have to believe that drawing 2D shapes must be easier than drawing 3D shapes, even if the 2D one uses different colors, and the 3D one doesn't. but i am saying this out of context, and you have experience, so it doesn't matter much, but i am just not convinced. i don't mean to be irrational, but i'm sorry if in practice i am

about your picrel, i didn't even realize you edited anything until i saw the line across the urethra and compared to the uncaptioned original. and i get you're just showing a proof of concept, but i think the shading on the upper breasts makes it look 3D; just removing them makes it look 2D, and wrong, to me. abs less defined is preference, but i see, now, that it can be done. idk about lighting to know if the dick highlights are wrong, but the detail is from nezumi's style, but ai can do both nonsensically, so it can be much, or just wrong

>>11346101
>it's 56 lines,
I'm just so used to using my phone that scroll down on the post wasn't something I considered a problem.
I used to write stories on my phone also, and did some programming, so reading only sections at a time is what I'm used to
But if I make any lists in the future, I'll make them horizontal

>drawing 2D shapes must be easier than drawing 3D shapes
Well it's all 2D, depth is an illusion and there is still depth in the flat drawing. I pointed that out in the second video (you'd have to pause to read it), that the shape of the smegma stranda change due to the curvature of the penis. They are ellipse shaped near the centre and teardrop shaped near the edges (where it's started to round and so the mound in the centre obscures the tail)
You could maybe get away with making the smegma look flat in an overall more flat style (it would look odd, like in my first vid, but not too noticeable) still you would want to consider the 3D shape of things to a degree

>i didn't even realize you edited anything
I should have put them wide by side
The shading on the upper breasts just looks odd since there's no reason (based on where the light in the scene is coming from) for there to be shadow there. A better way to het that same sort of effect may be to put more highlighting on the breasts, or you could add some texturing to the image overall as more "dirty" art styles will do this sort of random splotches that don't really make sense but can be appealing
Lighting is something AI still seems to mess up fairly regularly. It does depend on style, but typically you put the highlights on the highest point. So the double light on the breasts may also be wrong, unless it's meant to bulge in the middle, although long highlights can give the skin an oily look. The lighting along the shaft would also mean the whole thing is wrinkled
AI puts an equal amount of detail everywhere, and sometimes you may want to reduce some details to draw focus to others

>>11346101
Figured I'd give it a shot, and yeah I'd say angelauxes is on the same tier as mamimi. While it's not a perfect replica of the style it's no worse than my replica of Mamimi's style of smegma. With a few more attempts and some reflection you could get half-decent results. I may even consider it to be easier, because that took me less time.
Sometimes, with art, you want to focus on the negative space or the forms colours (i.e. the shape highlights, midtones, or shadows make) rather than the whole of the image. You can also just do trial and error with a chaotic style like that to see what works. The time-lapse doesn't show undoes, so it looks a bit easier than it was, but it really just amounts to spamming dots to give it a complex texture

>>11346040
0.4 responded to my caption when i x-posted it in >>>/d/ddg >>11346043 and eventually told me that he found the contrast for the captions poor, so i made a "stroke" version (the original instead being "drop shadow". doing so also made me realize for the first time that i misunderstood anon's gimp instructions >>11340131, and was duplicating the text layer rather than using "alpha to selection". i don't know how to shrink a selection after i make a layer and fill the layer with color, and i don't know how to unselect a selection, to be able to preview how the fill layer looks. but i didn't know how to "grow" the text to achieve a "stroke" effect otherwise (i was still using gimp to make captions cause i was worried for how using inkscape would scale were i to start editing in smegma), so i at least understand the basics of anon's actual instructions, now
>>11346123
>>11346138
anon, i'm sorry; i haven't read your posts yet cause i'm ngl, assuming you didn't care for the tall post was stressing me out. i was gonna sleep on it first. but i don't want to seem like a cunt by posting and ignoring you, so i'll read and respond to your posts later, since i know you've done plenty to try to help me, despite my procrastinating about everything

>>11346233
>i'm sorry; i haven't read your posts yet
It's alright. It's simple enough to change my formatting, but I personally have always preferred more vertical posts than horizontal ones where you lose the line you're on by the time you look back.
I use new lines to break up ideas. When I've changed the topic somewhat.

Figured I'd try doing it in reverse, starting with shadows
Seems about the same

i made a catbox album for my three (3) captions so far:
https://catbox.moe/c/7vd589

i added "stroke" (outline, in this case black) text versions of each caption, and also realized that "merging" text layers in gimp before reducing the opacity makes the black text layer not bleed through the white, so fixed "stroke" and "drop shadow" versions are included

i actually incorrectly tried to fix the black text layer bleed-through by adding a white text layer on top, but obviously basic logic dictates that as long as the black bleeds through, the white is compromised. but it took me a second to realize that. but i recorded my screen as i fixed it:
https://files.catbox.moe/hwdnmf.mp4

i'm really feeling not having material to caption, so i might try editing smegma soon, even procrastinating as much as i do
>>11346233
>and i don't know how to unselect a selection
i learned this is bottom left of the "selection editor" at the top right
>>11346138
sorry, the lighting stuff you said in your post before basically entirely went over my head. i didn't follow at all, besides you saying that the light source should dictate where the shadows are. but, with your trying angelauxes' style of smegma, i see, now, that i was intimidated by it being 3D, but if you can depict 3D, it's doable. but i still think you're not seeing the distinction i do between angelauxes' and mamimi's smegma. angelauxes' smegma itself requires shading, because you need such to depict the smegma being clumps. mamimi's smegma does no such thing, so to me it appears 2D. i keep saying it without adding any new information, so i'm not getting it across any better. i get that for example, under the dick, mamimi's smegma gets darker because it's in the shadow. but the smegma itself does not have a physical mass that is casting a shadow, so to me it looks easier
>>11347327
i think there might be too much in this one, but to me these capture angelauxes's smegma perfectly (unless video quality is obfuscating the detail)

>>11347983
I've been trying out captioning using a soft highlight:
>>11346521
>>11346583
>>11347410
I think it looks fairly nice, in particular the first and last where I just added a stroke and then blurred it. It's fairly quick to make, which I also like. Although I realise now that the colour coding on the last image is almost imperceptible on my laptop. It stands out fine on my phone, IDK if that's just my old laptop being the issue or if it's because my phone is OLED.

>basically entirely went over my head
Essentially it's focusing on the silhouette, the outline of the thing instead of the details of it

>you're not seeing the distinction i do between angelauxes' and mamimi's smegma
I get what you meant: Mamimi's is more flat, while angelauxes' has depth and layers to it. I just don't think it's that important when it comes to the complexity of the drawing, because you still need to consider the 3D shape of the penis even for mamimi's style of smegma:
>pic related
You can see that the smegma is in strips, but the shape you see will be different depending on where it wraps around the cock. Although there is a lot more depth to Angelauxes' that I haven't been able to capture thus far (I didn't look at a reference on the second attempt, so I forgot how it was meant to look), I still think the level of complexity is similar (at least compared to the Komi one)

>i think there might be too much in this one
On reflection, I think it may be not enough. I was trying to go for it being that she scraped it off so it was covering. While the basics of the style aren't too hard to grasp, I keep noticing a lot of details that I miss, like how overall lumpy it should look or that it droops in places

my fourth caption. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11270977/#11273311

stroke (outline) text version:
https://files.catbox.moe/1znq4g.png
>>11348034
>Although I realise now that the colour coding on the last image is almost imperceptible on my laptop. It stands out fine on my phone, IDK if that's just my old laptop being the issue or if it's because my phone is OLED.
i can see it fine on my laptop, but my laptop does suffer from blown-out whites ever since updating from windows 7 to 10, and i quickly gave up on fixing it. but i just checked on my phone and it's good there, too. the colors are definitely muted, but nothing that is hard to see, unless the cream onomatopoeia color were for speech, in which case it'd definitely require a closer look to make sure you're not mistaking it for the the gold speech color, which would just be poor contrast
>I get what you meant: Mamimi's is more flat, while angelauxes' has depth and layers to it. I just don't think it's that important when it comes to the complexity of the drawing, because you still need to consider the 3D shape of the penis even for mamimi's style of smegma:
>>pic related
well sure, but i feel compensating for 3D space is the bare minimum to edit convincingly. i can't say i agree that drawing a band around a cylinder must be as complicated as drawing a bumpy band that casts its own shadows around a cylinder simply because they're both being added to a 3D space
>While the basics of the style aren't too hard to grasp, I keep noticing a lot of details that I miss, like how overall lumpy it should look or that it droops in places
yeah, angelauxes doing dripping smegma is insane. i think it's really underrated. i'm surprised you didn't consciously notice that before, haha. an image by them that stuck with me was seeing the smegma drip sooner than the cum (the smegma is horribly censored, so it's hardly worth looking at, but still):
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=5475051

>>11339992 (OP)
Made an edit to he more existential

>>11348299
>i can't say i agree that drawing a band around a cylinder must be as complicated as drawing a bumpy band that casts its own shadows around a cylinder simply because they're both being added to a 3D space
One thing I'm considering in the complexity is the effort to draw. Some could have relatively simple styles (like Zyldark or Canvas Solaris) but the amount elevates them in complexity because while it can be easy to replicate in a small scale it can be difficult to be consistent. So when comparing Mamimi to Angel Auxes, the amount of edges you have to draw may for a continuous mass of smegma may may end up being less than individual smears of it.
It could just be individual ability, if you try the two styles you may be right that Mamimi's is easier for you, but I found Angel Auxes' to be more simple.

>i'm surprised you didn't consciously notice that before,
I was mostly using the muscular futa one as reference, because I wanted to stick to futa to make a smegma thread have wider appeal. Had I tried to replicate it from reference directly, I could probably get closer, but I like to examine the image and then replicate it from memory so I'm actually building a skill rather than just copying. Primarily I was focusing on the way the lighting works, and I didn't check thr reference again for the second attempt. I'd have to give it a few more attempts while trying to focus on different details to eventually learn how to draw it innately.
I want to be able to do edits/drawings in this way (without reference via having ingrained the shapes in my mind) because I like to be as quick as possible as it was trying to compete with AI that inspired me to do edits and make custom tools.

>>11346138
Do you have links to the finished picture? Or a album or profile where I can find your edits in the future?

my fifth caption. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11279489/#11283039

stroke (outline) text version:
https://files.catbox.moe/f8n9u0.png

i'm shocked the original gen was under 4mb to able to be posted on 4chan losslessly. the original gimp .png export of this caption was 4.48mb and 4.39mb for the "drop shadow" and "stroke" versions respectively, so i had to use the following command in pingo (a png optimizing program) to get them down to 3.88mb (-13.31%) and 3.76mb (-14.26%) respectively:
>pingo -lossless "input.png"
>>11348628
>So when comparing Mamimi to Angel Auxes, the amount of edges you have to draw may for a continuous mass of smegma may may end up being less than individual smears of it.
ok. i see, and i understand. but i still think smegma itself not requiring knowledge on lighting would make it easier for me specifically. i wouldn't try angelauxes' style without taking a crash course on lighting. and for mamimi's smegma, i hoped to try the "bruise" cloud sorta thing generation method i posted a screenshot of an editor explaining to me >>11344389, so i would only have to learn how to erase it into the shapes i want, rather than draw anything outright. i know at a certain point "drawing" involves many skillsets like that, so it is still in practice "drawing" by some definition, but still, i hope to minimize the actual drawing skill (or knowledge) required, as someone with no drawing skill, so i still have my eyes on mamimi's smegma most of all (of what i'm conscious of, anyway)
>I was mostly using the muscular futa one as reference, because I wanted to stick to futa to make a smegma thread have wider appeal.
limiting references to futa only is tough, but, if you intended to show people the references, then, i see. but for the sake of art studies- where you're applying what you take away from the references elsewhere-, arbitrarily narrowing the scope demonstrably (as we just affirmed) risks misunderstanding the artist's standard

>>11348821
Well I was gonna upload all my edits to a catbox album, but either the site just happened to stop working or I somehow broke it by trying to upload 100 files at once on shoddy Internet.
I can't seem to upload anymore files. They appear in my list of uploads, but have no thumbnail or image. Maybe my account got flagged or something, IDK. Can anyone else use it currently? Whenever it's fixed I'll upload them

>>11348892
>i posted a screenshot of an editor explaining to me
Honestly I think you could simplify the process down to just using a multiply layer with some purples and blues.

>limiting references to futa only is tough
It was just going to be for the initial posts of the thread, since futa smegma probably has broader appeal. Although looking through some, it seems like Angel Auxes has several styles of smegma which makes me think he may not actually have a defined style and is just making it up each time.
That's something I came across when decensoring things. You occasionally realise that the artist may just have messed up stuff, as I would often get to the point where I'm trying to fix a line only to realise it wasn't one I drew. So a lot of artists are effectively winging it, not caring that much about absolute consistency in how they drew somethings. This is doubly true with AI gens. When you recognise this, it's easier to just do whatever and not try to limit yourself to the things you know how to draw, because if it works people won't notice minor flaws.

>>11348929
the catbox error is happening to me too right now, and was happening to me a few days ago. you can see a timestamp of people using litterbox instead for a moment in >>>/trash/slop here (scat warning throughout the thread, so do not click):
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/76852300/#76855050

it was annoying because i didn't know of any way to check whether it was up besides uploading a test image, going to my files, deleting it, then trying again later, which i made sure to do because i didn't know whether when catbox would figure itself out if reuploading the same file without deleting the broken version of it would consider it already uploaded in the form of the broken version. you can tell right away it's broken because on the upload screen it doesn't provide the URL, despite showing the empty box where the URL should be
>Honestly I think you could simplify the process down to just using a multiply layer with some purples and blues.
i don't know what that means, but, duly noted, for if ever i bother trying... i literally have no more content to caption, so i have to try soon

my sixth caption. original by ornateanon in >>>/d/ddg:
>>11349232
https://mega.nz/folder/IpUTXaxY#rvMo-9-VQt5m_ACJnw-ltA/folder/wp8g1CCD
>OrnateAnon's Gens > Gens > 00007-1917848068.png
stroke (outline) text version:
https://files.catbox.moe/vjdq7p.png

another gen i'm surprised was <4mb to be posted on 4chan, which i had to use a lossless "pingo" command on my caption of to be able to do the same

i was literally about to share this when i was super indecisive about the 3rd paragraph overlapping the girl when it didn't need to, which then triggered a literal hour of measuring pixel differences between the first two paragraphs, copying it to last two, then only after exporting realizing that the paragraphs aligning to the opposite side makes it look bad. i also think there's a lewdness in the 3rd paragraph overlap putting it right beside her nipples anyway. unfortunately i didn't realize gimp doesn't save undo history after closing the program, so my .xcf is after i fucked with it. my exports are from before that
>>11348931
>i didn't know of any way to check whether it was up besides uploading a test image, going to my files, deleting it, then trying again later, which i made sure to do because i didn't know whether when catbox would figure itself out if reuploading the same file without deleting the broken version of it would consider it already uploaded in the form of the broken version.
HOLY SHIT!!! i didn't delete the broken images as a test to see what would happen, and i CAN CONFIRM that the worst case scenario is true: even when catbox figures itself out, the broken files (that are very much STILL broken even though catbox is working right now) are considered as the file having been uploaded, so trying to reupload it now that catbox is working does NOT replace it with a fixed version!!!! scary stuff!!! rip to anything not uploaded under an account when catbox broke uploads

>>11348821
Here's the gallery:
catbox.moe/c/h3yc3o
I'll make a rentry post to explain what the edit was (and why in some cases) as well as link to the original
I won't bother with some of the edits like this which are just meant to explain things

>>11348931
>i don't know what that means
It means what it means. Using the multiply layer blend option (Gimp has it, but I'll still recommend IbisPaint on the phone as the superior of the two, unless you have a drawing tablet)
Use an air brush, keep opacity 10%, and keep it fairly large (I went up to 20% and shrank the brush which was a mistake). You could try adding texture with a textured air brush or a low opacity brush, but this was just the standard one which seemed good enough

>>11349746
wow!!! tummy punching is LITERALLY exactly what i was going to try to do as a test for the "bruise" cloud thing, since i assumed that way i wouldn't have to try cutting it up to use it as smegma!!! and that DOES look really good!!! but i thought the "bruise" cloud thing would have a more complex coloring pattern. i didn't really pay attention to how it would be generated (if generated at all), so maybe it wouldn't. i at least thought it'd be easier. knowing of a potential different method could only help, though, and whenever i stop procrastinating (and just making captions that have nothing to do with pee or smegma, which is my main passion, but i literally ran out of gens that include it after only two captions...), i'll finally have the keys to do all the smegma edits i want. just have to try... surely soon...

also, removing the "https://" at the beginning of links makes it so at least in firefox on desktop, you can't right click > "open link in new tab", which makes it inconvenient (i just tried it on firefox mobile and it offers no such functionality regardless, though). on 4chan if you have 4chan x it turns it into a hyperlink outright regardless, but on vanilla 4chan on mobile, the lack of "https://" makes it not turn into a hyperlink. here's a hyperlink to your album for vanilla mobile users:
https://catbox.moe/c/h3yc3o

rentry descriptions don't even support hyperlinks, so lowering the click-through rate (on desktop) even more is not great. and i once had the idea to make the first file in a catbox album a .pdf since they support hyperlinks, but even ignoring having to habitually upload a new one to replace it every time you wish to update it, the first file in the album being anything but an image makes the discord/twitter embed not have a thumbnail, which kind of sad, so i wouldn't do that personally, and instead just tank the virtually zero click-through rate

>>11349751
>removing the "https://" at the beginning of links makes it so at least in firefox on desktop
Lol, yeah I was writing this on my phone, copying the url from my laptop, so it was cut off. An issue of making edits on my phone while preferring to write on my laptop, having transfer files between is too much effort.
The links don't hyperlink with Brave on my laptop, so I didn't consider it

>rentry descriptions don't even support hyperlinks
What do you mean? Did you mean catbox?
I've been setting up linking on the rentry file to describe the edits and link to the originals, although the way I'm setting it up is fairly complex and is going to take a while:
https://rentry.co/ccedit
Images are a link to the full catbox image containing an image of the catbox thumbnail with the artist name as the hover text
Above may be a description which I have to colour white to be more legible while being part of the quote block
At the top is a tag explaining what was done and at the bottom are the links to the original

>>11349769
>What do you mean? Did you mean catbox?
yes, i did, sorry. freudian slip

>>11349769 cont.
Actually, it's not been that inconvenient to put all the thumbnails together, because I realised I could just write a python script to take all the links and then print them out in the format I wanted

images = []
thumbs = []

with open("in.txt", 'r') as f:
text = f.read()
i = 0
end = -1
while True:
i = text.find("href=", i)
if i == -1:
break
i = text.find("'", i)+1
end = text.find("'", i)
images.append(text[i:end])

i = text.find("img src=", i)
i = text.find("'", i)+1
end = text.find("'", i)
thumbs.append(text[i:end])

with open("out.txt", 'w') as f:
for i in range(len(images)-1,-1,-1):
f.write(">\n")
f.write(f">[]({images[i]})\n")
f.write(">\n\n")

Although I still had to go through and put them on the same line, and I think I will want to combine more just to save space a little

my seventh caption. original by foreskin anon in >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11231942/#11232019
https://rentry.co/Foreskin_Anon
>Foreskin Futas and Dickgirls > Docter Measuring (Erect).jpg
stroke (outline) text version:
https://files.catbox.moe/m93ksg.png

this one was actually too large for pingo to even reduce to <4mb with the plain lossless command (4.73mb down to 4.17mb [-11.72%]), so i checked the pingo website as a cope, and noticed the "-s4" part of the example lossless command in the screenshot on the homepage. i didn't try the "colortype/3" part of the command cause i couldn't figure out what it does, but i ran "pingo" by itself to learn the commands, then "pingo -help" to learn that "-s4" literally just allows you to take more time to compress it more (now down to 3.85mb [-18.56%]). so miraculously, picrel is a lossless edit

>>11345138
thanks, i'm usually churning stuff out for /slop/ purposes, but I've started to focus on thinking of "story" elements for gens

pee warning. original by blurry eyes in >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11314142/#11314202

stroke (outline) text version:
https://files.catbox.moe/74w204.png

my eighth caption

>>11349746
Much appreciated. I'm always on the lookout for new smegma content and your edits are really good.

pee warning. original from >>>/vt/vtai:
https://warosu.org/vt/thread/91834356#p91862415

stroke (outline) text version:
https://files.catbox.moe/4jfdy4.png

my ninth caption

I like this thread
I skimmed through all the discussion but as I get it, the best way to add a caption would be to use inkscape?

>>11351690
yeah. i recorded a video to post on another board the other day of me demonstrating that >>>/vt/103210511
https://files.catbox.moe/geumji.mp4

it was meant to be SFW, but i didn't realize that fucking changing window focus to the window below makes the window A LAYER BELOW BOTH OF THEM appear, so the furry futa porn tab i had opened was visible for one (1) frame 15 seconds in. so don't post this on any board but /trash/

>>11351694
cool thanks
normal imagegen gets boring after a while so maybe this will keep me interested
>the furry futa porn tab i had opened was visible for one (1) frame 15 seconds in
lol, I wouldn't know if you told me

it was VERY stressful, but after much stressing and giving up several times, i FINALLY figured out how to more or less do smegma with the methods in the screenshot of the editor teaching me how to edit i posted >>11344389. things i learned (in gimp btw):
-you can actually save selections (select > save to channel)
-you can change the color of "plasma noise" under "colors" > "colorize" (not understanding how to do this on the "plasma noise" window itself stressed me out so much and made me give up several times)
-the mini black/white boxes bottom left of the active foreground/background color boxes under your tools resets your foreground/background color to white/black (in case you're paranoid about your black/white being off, which i was for every caption until now)
-the bottom left corner of the canvas is the "quick mask" button
-to evade the brushes recommended in the editor instructions screenshot i posted from making the smegma entirely see-through, you can use them to select from a smegma-colored layer, as i did in my picrel here (not understanding this also stressed me out a lot

i was about to try drawing the smegma myself (giga stressing me out) when i realized i could do pic related instead. pic related is just a proof of concept; i'll hopefully be able to actually make it look good if i tried and added shadows and potentially a darker "stroke" (outline) and stuff

>>11352329
another thing to note, actually:
-in quick mask, white selects, and black deselects. so you can switch to black to correct selection errors. colors in-between are no good, for a reason i don't remember (this is mentioned in the editor screenshot, besides the fact that black is used to deselect. i watched a youtube video on it on 2x speed that said the same thing):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRHwyLcutyE

>>11352329
What's the reason for using the mask instead of just drawing?
If it's going to be just one solid colour, then the results would be the same.

>>11352344
oh, i think you're right. but my logic was the last bullet point in that post:
>-to evade the brushes recommended in the editor instructions screenshot i posted from making the smegma entirely see-through, you can use them to select from a smegma-colored layer, as i did in my picrel here (not understanding this also stressed me out a lot
i thought using quick mask would make it so none of the pixels in the selection would be see-through, but i guess logically it wouldn't do that, because you are still using the same brush. but i remember trying the brush and not liking how see-through it was, so i assumed quick masking a different layer to cut from it using the brush would be the solution. i must've just been using a different brush among those the editor in the screenshot i posted suggested, but not realized i'd switched. i thought since he recommended them all that they were all the same. so all i needed to not be stressed the entire time was just to choose a different brush and just draw with it. technology is super stressful for me. i assumed everything had to be complicated and hard

>>11352351
>but i remember trying the brush and not liking how see-through it was
Fair. I have noticed a difference, using IbisPaint, with the erase and the draw of the same brush. It seems the erase is always additive (working like an air brush) whereas the typical brush isn't and won't stack its opacity until you draw an additional line.
So this could be a similar thing happening with Gimp, probably it's coded in a similar way. There's probably something in the brush settings to fix it, and you probably want to figure out how to draw rather than how to undraw to make edits simpler and faster.

A semi-transparent smegma would work fine, because keep in mind the picture isn't zoomed in on the dick. A few artists come to mind that use transparent smegma: CanvasSolaris, PervYourBrain, and Sep
I also think you'd be better off using a simpler brush since it makes it easier to create your own shapes. I only really like those kinds (a pattern that automatically randomise) for adding textures to fog or some materials.
As you can see you can just use a round brush. I draw a few globs of smegma (as that's typically how artists draw the smegma seeping out of foreskin), with a bumpy look. Then on a new layer I lowered the brush opacity to make a smear between the globs (I like using 20-30% for fading colours like this), then I lowered the whole layers opacity. The next two steps are optional, which is I added an outline to make the globs a little more detailed (following the round shapes to make it looks like droplets clumped together) and finally adding a fog over the top

>>11352367
oh, if you were gonna go through the trouble of editing it, here's the original, from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11302994/#11304714
>Fair. I have noticed a difference, using IbisPaint, with the erase and the draw of the same brush. It seems the erase is always additive (working like an air brush) whereas the typical brush isn't and won't stack its opacity until you draw an additional line.
i don't know what an "air brush" is, but i managed to remember which brush i tried before i switched it without realizing that it changed the opacity. pic related. gimp must work differently, so i could've just layered it, but i thought all the brushes would be the same, so when i switched brushes without realizing, i thought quick mask stopped making the brush see-through
>A semi-transparent smegma would work fine, because keep in mind the picture isn't zoomed in on the dick. A few artists come to mind that use transparent smegma: CanvasSolaris, PervYourBrain, and Sep
idk who "sep" is, but i checked the first two, and, i see what you mean. but i don't like that, personally. i was trying to do it like the style in the gen of the first caption i did:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11322154/#11326247

it's clearly forfeiting mamimi's smegma to do it like angelauxes instead (3D, and casting its own shadow), but i wanted to add a lot of smegma despite the foreskin, so i felt i had to switch to angelauxes's style after all
>I also think you'd be better off using a simpler brush since it makes it easier to create your own shapes. I only really like those kinds (a pattern that automatically randomise) for adding textures to fog or some materials.
you're right. "fog" is essentially what the editor in the screenshot was using it for (a "bruise" template by doing so on a "plasma noise" layer), but i thought by using it i'd evade having to carefully shape it myself. looking closer at the same mamimi smegma reference, though, it's clearly manually done

I found an old edit I did back in mid 2024 https://files.catbox.moe/0sbv2l.jpg
I've made hundreds of edits at this point, but when I made that one (again on my phone, but using a different app) I'd made no more than a dozen. So here's something you could try, a little art exercise using the same artist:
>Decensor this image (use whatever program you're trying to get better with)
>Add simple smegma blobs like the ones I did here >>11352351 around the edge of the glans (blobs being 2-5 circle shapes combined)
>Make them big and add an outline to fit nishikun's art style
>Smear and fog are optional, because they don't really fit the style
>Bonus points: add a highlight of shadow to the smegma blobs

>>11352383
Meant to reply to myself >>11352367
as reference to the style (Oops)

>>11352382
>"air brush"
An air brush is a type of brush that does what I describe. If you lower the brush opacity and draw a line, when you overlap with an air brush it will add the line together unlike with a normal brush that won't get any darker.
Testing out Gimp, it doesn't seem to auto erase like an air brush, but you can enable this by checking Incremental in the brush settings

>Sep
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=12467554

Doing it manually works best. Even that Kunaboto style gen could be done by hand with a simple round brush. Once you've got the hang of, it'll get easier, you just have to be willing to do it which is why I suggest an art exercise. Decensoring lets you understand that art is just a bunch of lines and colours, no reason you can't fill it in yourself. It also gives you an eye for detail. Editing also forces you to figure out how to make things in the way the artists did.

>>11352388
ok, i see, now, that you literally just defined what an "air brush" is, sorry. and, i see, about sep. that's their only smegma drawing on rule34, but i guess that not all of their art makes it to rule34
>Once you've got the hang of, it'll get easier, you just have to be willing to do it which is why I suggest an art exercise. Decensoring lets you understand that art is just a bunch of lines and colours, no reason you can't fill it in yourself. It also gives you an eye for detail. Editing also forces you to figure out how to make things in the way the artists did.
i don't really have an interest in decensoring since i only plan to edit ai, which is uncensored (unless it isn't, i guess), but i did notice that the glasses in the gen i plan to do my first smegma edit for incorrectly extend the right side of the glasses frame down to her cheek, and the left frame of the glasses just melts into her eye, so i was maybe going to see if i could do something about that, but with no drawing skill or experience, i doubt it. i also plugged some tags in the image into gelbooru and noticed that she's a vtuber:
https://gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=list&tags=mako_fukasame
https://virtualyoutuber.fandom.com/wiki/Mako_Fukasame

and i noticed that her current model has bags under her eyes, so i hoped to edit that in, too. but realistically i will only try to do smegma, and maybe quickly give up on adding bags under her eyes, and probably won't even try fixing the two errors with the glasses frame

>>11352392
>that you literally just defined what an "air brush"
I could have explained it better. I don't know if Gimp has brush presets using that term, but that's what most other art tools I've tried call it. You can try it by enabling Incremental, but I don't ever find the air brush useful. Even when I'm making blended colours or gradients, I much prefer making stripes using 30% opacity brushes and then using blur.

>don't really have an interest in decensoring
It's just a useful art exercise for beginners. It's probably the easiest edit you can make, uncensored a bar censor on simple colours. That one is a little complex because the glans are mostly hidden, but that's what makes it good practice and is the same as the one I decensored.
It'll teach you not to view art as a whole image, rather as small abstract parts

You could choose an image you like to decensor, if that helps, I just figured supplying one would help avoid the issue I often have of being too indecisive and just searching forever.
When I want to practice, I use decensoring. I've done one Uno Makoto decensor, but attempted several others as a way of try to learn complex shading. While I still haven't got the hang of it, it does make doing simple things feel easier.
Here's one I've currently been working on. Not super difficult, mostly flat colours, but obviously a lot of work to be done. I'll add smegma when I'm done, I'm not certain the style. The method I do is:
1 Cover bar censors in high contrast colour
2 Make layer above and use as clipping layer (IDK if Gimp had that. It would be using the censor covering as a mask), and add the base colours (whatever the most dominant colour is)
3 Add layer above again (masked/clipping) then draw the details atop the base colours
4 Add more layers for the details, eg highlights, an top of the colours (or if you're lazy you can just use the one)
5 Add final layer to be the line work (you could do this first if you'd prefer. When decensoring the dorse doujin (https://e-hentai.org/?f_search=Uploader%3Aconcor) I found it easier to start with the lines, but with coloured stuff I prefer to start with the colours)

it was so fucking stressful and horrible. i wanted to kill myself even trying to draw smegma. i literally gave up several times, and stressed over it for hours. and i actually do have a drawing tablet, which made it less stressful than trying with my thinkpad's clit (which i gave up on immediately from the stress), but even so, i can hardly imagine it being any more stressful than it was. BUT, i eventually lowered my standards enough to halfway produce smegma i don't entirely want to kill myself over "drawing". i know gimp doesn't save undo history, so after saving the end result to the .xcf, i started recording, ctrl+z'd until the start, then ctrl+y'z until the end. i already closed the .xcf, so this is all i have anymore of the process

idk if i'll bother trying to do it again. i might just consider this the final edit, beyond trying to add bags under her eyes, which i did want to at least try doing. here's the full pic (just the smegma edit, without the caption, since, again, i wanted to try more before i consider this edit complete):
https://files.catbox.moe/w9xorv.png
and here's the link to the original again, for comparison:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11302994/#11304714

i'm gonna take a break right now to unwind, cause this seriously gave me grey hairs. also i'm pretty sure i only drew the darker lines in the middle with the same "alpha to selection" i used to "grow" the outline by 1 pixel (to fill it with a darker color on a layer below) active, but apparently maybe it wasn't, which is a fuckup

>>11353776
responding to myself, but in the end, he smegma ended up looking like this example by brendancorris/bcdickchix:
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=9913543

though obviously way worse, since i was stressing out so much about being able to do angelauxes' style (3D and casting its own shadow), so i just did lines randomly throughout to pretend i was making an effort to make it appear 3D. i still have to try to do angelauxes' style properly, but i literally just gave up and lowered my standards. i might have to take a crash course on lighting before i try again. this is ignoring that i can't draw the shapes i want, either, nor do i recognize what a good shape for a clump of smegma is

>>11353821
Looking up art basics may help, but this is why I think you should try something simple to build confidence.
It looks fine. You shouldn't be stressing so much.

pee warning. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11302994/#11304714

edit #10

i switched fonts from "CC Wild Words Roman" to "Pally Bold". i found it by searching "font*" (mind the asterisk for wildcard searches) on the archives, and i found a /g/ post that copy pasted a "design copypasta" that linked to a font site that offered free fonts (i didn't even know fonts costed money until i started looking for one on my own):
https://desuarchive.org/g/thread/106141301/#106180317
https://fontpair.co/fonts/pally

just as "wild words" did, "pally" actually came with three (3) different versions, in this case, bold, medium, and regular. i felt kinda scammed cause i was judging the fonts on the site by density, kerning, legibility; a bunch of shit, and i gravitated towards the bolder ones with more circular characters, cause i found them cute. so i just got lucky that this font used the "bold" version in its preview. i don't know if that's standard for fonts, or what. i might not have chosen it otherwise

the main thing for this edit was editing in the smegma. shit was so stressful, man. i had this caption ready on the 8th (four [4] days ago, one day after my last caption), but i felt my last caption was my magnum opus, so i didn't know where to go besides trying to finally edit in smegma. i can't honestly say i would have tried if i didn't have a drawing tablet i don't deserve. even then it was so stressful. i watched youtube videos on lighting in the hopes it'd help, which at least it reminded me of "bounce light" and taught me for the first time that colors shift depending on how harsh or dull the lighting is (so shadows should not just be black, nor just a lighter shade of the original, for example). but in the end, i could not draw intelligible shadows, and found that i could only extend the outlines to suggest its shape. i also wish i used lighter colors, and added more smegma. but zooming in isn't so embarrassing here, so i'll move on for now

>>11354707
i ran out of space, but picrel is the recording i took again (after saving the finished product to the .xcf beforehand, again, to make sure i didn't accidentally draw a stroke or something and be unable to ctrl+y my edit back to the present) of me editing in the smegma. i honestly think my first attempt at drawing it wasn't bad, looking at it after doing this attempt; it gives off more a feel of being dry and crumbly, as opposed to this second attempt of mine, which is more drippy. and i prefer that there is simply more smegma i my first attempt, which helps it look like a lighter color, too. but it wasn't what i was trying to do at the time, so i was embarrassed by it. but, again, it's just different, not worse, i think, now

i also didn't even try to add the bags under her eyes i wanted to, let alone fixing the two errors in her glasses. i also had the thought (though never said it out loud prior) to add precum (preferably cum, but i don't know if i'd be able to manage that), and i know it'd be far easier than adding smegma, since i checked how cham22 does precum, and it's literally just a white oval with another white oval inside it to depict the light refracting off it:
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=12588242

it would be super easy, but, i just can't right now. again, i don't even want to add precum, anyway; i wish it were cum. i'll just move on for now and hopefully develop the skill to do other things later, and hopefully do smegma better and easier and with less stress the more i do it

oh, i nearly forgot to say, but i also obviously finally gave up on "drop shadow" (even though for "wild words" i preferred it) to do "stroke" (outline) text instead. since the letters in this font are rounder (especially since it gives me access to lowercase letters), i think "stroke" just highlights the roundness, which i feel adds to the cuteness of it. i also considered inverting the font colors, but that wouldn't scale for coloring the words

>>11354709
three-part post is crazy. but anyway, i meant to also say that due to "stroke" (outline) being objectively more legible than "drop shadow" (even though i prefer the latter) along with me going for "stroke" now anyway since changing fonts, i retroactively removed the "drop shadow" versions of my captions from my catbox album, and swapped them around in my rentry so the "stroke" version is the one on the left, so you'd read it first:
https://catbox.moe/c/7vd589
https://rentry.co/ambihurts

i also meant to say that the font i switched to having lowercase letters drives the character density i'm afforded up by a lot for the same font size. were it all capitals "wild words" would actually be denser, but when using lowercase letters "pally" wins no contest. it's kind of a double-edged sword, because i was trying to keep the proportions of the font the same across all image resolutions and aspect ratios, so now i have way more opportunity to yap in captions than before. but i'll see how it goes

lmao this thread is just AIbros circlejerk, you can't even be bothered to pick up a pencil and make the stuff you like yourself, instead relying on a machine outputting good enough images for you

>>11354727
there is a futa-specific non-ai thread >>11312231

pee warning. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11237455/#11240787

edit #11

quick turnaround time on this one cause someone praised me for my last edit when i posted it to /vt/, but they asked me if i ever do captions of smaller or more realistically-sized cocks, and i don't think about cock size at all, so i tried to find the gen with the smallest cock i had inspiration to make a caption for

also, the capital "A"s in this font are killing me. i'd never seen them before this caption. why are they asymmetrical???? it's triggering my OCD so hard. if i saw it before making a caption using it i might've never given it the time of day literally just because of the capital "A". what the fuck. i might look for a different font after only using it in two captions

>>11354709
Main thing you probably want to do is add an black outline to the edges so looks more like it's part of the penis.
Then you could add a different colour outline to differentiate it a bit more from the foreskin and glans, but that's not as necessary.
I also think it'd look good to have a little shadow, giving it more depth, and removing where the highlight on the glans overlaps the edit is a good idea
Adding more shading to the areas where the glans also have shading is probably also necessary. That goes back to what I was saying about the penis being 3D.
Also, when the thing being edited has several tiers of lighting, you could add more to match, i.e. adding highlights to the smegma as well as shading.
Looks good though, but could also add fog/musk if you wanted her to look more stinky.

>>11354727
First one learns to draw smegma, then one learns to draw everything else.

>>11354955
anon, i think you have too much faith in my abilities. i am VERY grateful for your contextual help, even going so far to edit my edit without the original file (idk if it'd even be useful since we use different programs and i don't save selections, but still). it was your first suggestion in this post of adding the black outline that made me realize that feedback like this is something literally no one but you would even be able to put into words, let alone provide me: a beginner editor who should develop a solid foundation lest i continue on leaving a legacy where i don't even know how i can do better, and get stuck into bad habits

but i say all that to say that after all my procrastinating (and only bringing myself to try drawing an edit again when this thread was on page 9) i literally just did the exact same smegma i did the first time, on basically the exact same foreskin dick on another gen, and couldn't manage to do anything more. i'm flattered my smegma even looked 3D enough for you to be able to extrapolate from it, to add lighting to it. but seeing you do that, i remembered the stress i felt trying to do it myself in that very edit, before only coincidentally noticing that extending the corners to suggest its shape achieves some form of a 3D effect without having to actually consider lighting, so i did that instead. trying to add actual lighting again, i felt the same stress. i don't know if i can do it; i just don't have the eyes to understand the lighting 3D objects should have. i've watched a lighting video on youtube about it, but i just can't do it. i feel like a retard even trying

everything else you suggested i'm sure i can manage it if i tried, but adding lighting to the smegma is so stressful to me. i exhausted my trying-to-edit energy for the day, so i'll take a break for now. i'd post the same-one-smegma i did anyway, but gimp actually crashed, so i can't show the undo history. posting it in any form adds no new information, anyway

>>11355854
i ran out of space, but had a bit more to say, still. gimp crashed when i was undoing/redoing the "select" > "save to channel" thing, because i was trying to figure out how to put a selection under another layer, and even after watching a tutorial on it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2QqsoqNVuM

i didn't understand that the tutorial had nothing to do with what i was trying to do, because it dealt with the "channels" tab, not the "layers" tab (i guess the channels tab still has "layers", though, hence this false positive of a video showing up for me). what i actually had to do was "edit" > "copy visible", then paste it, which pastes the selection as its own layer, in the "layers" tab

the reason i was trying to do that was because the gen i was trying to edit has the dick leaking precum:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11322154/#11324705

i used "quick mask" to select only the parts of the precum that overlapped with the smegma i edited in (trial and error made me feel not selecting the black outline of the precum- which is to say, just letting the smegma go over it- looks a lot better), pasted that selection as its own layer above the smegma, then set the opacity of the selection to 30%. i think it looks okay, but i also have low standards as a beginner editor. i'd post it, but- again-, the smegma itself is literally just the same smegma i did the first time, so it adds no new information; it's literally just this precum thing that is any different

>>11354955
oh, sorry; i never commented on the fog thing, and this is the second time i could by now. i don't have any smegma references on hand, but whenever i think about fog and smegma, i think of this dama shipwreck smegma drawing where the fog makes the smegma have such poor contrast to me, and i hated it so much:
https://x.com/Dama_Shipwreck/status/1727532849551581240
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F_lt6EfXMAAit_e?format=jpg&name=orig

i considered it a huge shame, especially in comparison to the clean alt, which obviously has on such fog:
https://x.com/Dama_Shipwreck/status/1727532577160855935
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F_lrz8UW0AARVa8?format=jpg&name=orig

again, i don't have any smegma references on hand, so maybe i've enjoyed fog around smegma before, so maybe i shouldn't be so afraid to add it. but this to me fucked up the opacity of the fog so bad that i was scared to entertain it. but i guess there's no harm in trying

>>11355858
well, literally the first artist i looked at (payaazz) adds fog around their smegma (to be fair, this artist adds it to the dick, too, so it's clearly just heat, but still):
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=7529281

they also don't overlap it with the smegma (or dick) itself, really, so i could always do that if i wanted. so, i was just irrationally afraid of it, when i could not only try it, but not even overlap it with the smegma at all if i really wanted .so i'm glad anon brought it up again, since otherwise i'd've still never even entertained it at all, just cause one (1) example of it really stuck out to me as the image being worse for it

>>11355854
>anon, i think you have too much faith in my abilities
Abilities can change. I've made hundreds of edits at this point, so it's not a fair comparison of skills. The first step is just believing you can.
In my case that was the result of being homeless for a couple years where I basically became schizophrenic and started to believe I had to do everything myself. Thus I believed I could do anything any other human could with the same effort and focus (which is mostly true). Logically that meant I could make smegma edits too.
Now I don't think this is a necessary step, and I wouldn't personally recommend it. One just needs to find the mental state of being inquisitive and explorative. Just try different things to see how they turn out. You can see with the few smegma edits I've made I changed the style a few times, or even with the captions. It's all just pixels, and you don't have to share it. Perhaps you even shouldn't, again, I made several edits (some smegma) just for myself at first. I spent too long wasting time by fixating on how to make things for other people. Even now, I've been stumped with greentexts I think for that very reason - I've been thinking what other people want when I need to be focusing my own imagination/emotions to actually write with any ease.

And when I say focusing on what they focused on, it's what I've been trying to say about seeing the parts of an image rather than the whole thing. Dama Shipwreck doesn't think "How do I make a Dama Shipwreck image?" He thinks of building the image in the way he likes. You can't emulate the end result or fake the steps, you have to do the same process and understanding what/why obviously helps. It's perhaps the problem with the AI fans. "Art", to them, means an image, "art" doesn't mean skill - the process to build and artwork. It may go deeper though, as even when I've used AI I'm thinking about the processes involved and how it works (because I am programmer brained).

pee warning. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11322154/#11324705

captionless version:
https://files.catbox.moe/imdbex.png

edit #12. i added the smegma

as i said earlier when stressing over this edit, for the precum i just used "quick mask" (in gimp) to select the precum that overlaps with the smegma (deciding that not selecting the black outline of the precum looks better), pasted that as its own layer above the smegma, then set the opacity of the selection to 30%. it doesn't look great, but i found that the dark skin color of the glans (cockhead) looked really bad when surrounded by such light-colored smegma, but i don't have the skill to do smegma that covers the entire glans in smegma (i was thinking fading rings like lipstick deepthroat), plus i always want to add a ton of smegma, so i'd need to find references that add a lot of smegma despite the partially-retracted foreskin to see how they do it to try emulating it, so my solution for now was to just add a lot of fog in the color of the smegma, despite my originally specifically not wanting to add even the slightest fog over the smegma itself at all. it's clearly just obfuscating my lack of skill, but it's all i could do for now. i'll try doing mamimi's style of smegma next, rather than this failure of attempting to do angelauxes' style that i've done for this and my previous (first) smegma edit

>>11355984
anon, i think you and i are just built different. i have no excuses, let alone unfortunate circumstances demanding i step up or perish, but i just procrastinate and stress and give up (the scarce instances i actually try), then look for a compromise, which i settle on and become complacent in. i did eventually get around to trying- even if only after procrastinating until i couldn't any longer-, but i'm not convinced that my attempts to add shading even helped. my attempt at glare was so embarrassing that i just hid the layer and gave up on it without even trying to do it justice. i tried making the outer outline darker, but at least the color i tried looked worse to me, so i didn't do it. i forgot about adding shadows outside the smegma to make it cast its own shadow beyond of the scope of itself, so i did that right at the very end. i think my attempt looks okay. i just sampled the color of the shadow the gen already used for that area and drew in more shadow using it. i guess that might've been the proper way to do it anyway. but coincidentally, i found that adding fog all over the smegma and glans made it look better, because i felt the glans would look better covered in smegma, so this was my cheap way of kind of giving off the same feel. so it hid my sins

as i said before, i literally just did the same smegma method i did before, so it's not like you could add any new information on this one, anyway, since it's just a matter of me managing to employ the tips and suggestions you gave me the first time. but i don't know if i can do it. i see that you can do it, but i just can't. and, i am sorry your circumstances were so unfortunate. i am sorry. you are much stronger that me, to be able to become your best self when afforded the least opportunity to do so. i wish i could say i am similar, but i'm not confident i am, or can be. but i'm trying a little anyway, sometimes, after procrastinating a lot, and stressing when i actually do try. i don't know

edit #13. original by 0.4 in >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11310109/#11312529

my 10th edit flirted with this dialogue, so i was inspired to take it to its logical conclusion

>>11357119
>i think you and i are just built different
Maybe, but there's no reason you can't make a renovation. Outside of the autistic savant, most people have to build the skills to draw things. I couldn't do what I do now just a couple years ago. I had much the same problem with not being able to define the shapes (and still can't with original drawings). That's why I think you should try individual globs, because thinking about the smegma as a contiguous mass may be what's causing issues.
In this case, you gotta think of where the smegma is coming from. It's under the foreskin, and the foreskin is wrapped around the glans. So the smegma should be under the precum (which I show by adding a blur, making sure the highlight is is on top). That's relatively simple. The more subtle detail is that from this angle the smegma would be obscured partly by the tip of the penis (making it flat on the internal left side) as well as obscured by the foreskin on the right side. You don't really have to add a shadow, It's such a small detail that it would be missed anyway. You could also try different degrees of outline, I think it looks better with a black outline, but more thick in the rightmost edge.
Here it is with the image:
https://files.catbox.moe/7t366q.png
I make this by just saving the image and pasting it on top, because cropped the image in IbisPaintX will automatically make the video smaller res, rather than editing the full scale image then have to crop a full video afterwards.

I procrastinate also, I have a lot recently but that could be some lifestyle changes I need to fix, or just burnout from doing too many edits and greentexts. I manage to limit it by forcing myself to have less distractions - having no games to play (outside of boring mobile games) means it's more fun to program, write, or draw.

pee/rape warning. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11306933/#11307551

edit #14
>>11357500
oh, wow; i see what you mean about the precum. i thought i figured out the black outline, because my first attempt included the black outline in what to select and put over the smegma, and i thought making it translucent (which was the method i settled on to work around the precum) looked so bad. but, i see, that where the black outline isn't transparent, it looks really good, and must be what i felt was missing in my trying to preserve the integrity of the precum

and, i could tell that the left side of the foreskin was obfuscating stuff from our perspective, whereas the right side wasn't, but i still wanted to add a gratuitous amount of smegma, so i just ignored that. i tried to preserve that kinda by making an effort to make the smegma on the left less girthy than the smegma on the right, but since i drowned the whole thing in cope fog anyway you can't really tell. i purposely avoided providing a non-fog version of the edit, since i felt you couldn't add any new information on how i could do it better (considering i either gave up on your tips or didn't feel i did them confidently at all), and didn't want to appear as if i was trying to bum the same thing off of you... and, honestly, after exporting them (caption and captionless) just now, i feel it looks so bad because- again-, i feel the light color of the smegma looks so bad against the dark skin color of the glans. so idk if i even want to share them. i think i'm happy with my obfuscating fog cope. i just feel i have to learn a style that can do strokes of smegma to do dark skin justice, so doing that edit was doomed from the start, to me

making the precum a cohesive thing makes it better, too, i think. but i can't imagine ever doing things like that yet, but it's interesting seeing you do it, to affirm it's possible, so i can be on the lookout for opportunities to do things like that one day

edit #15. original from >>>/d/ddg:
>>11357592

edit #16. original by foreskin anon in >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11253313/#11256218

lossless version:
https://files.catbox.moe/e94g9n.png

this was the first edit i did that even the slowest compression in "pingo" (image optimizing program) couldn't shrink down to 4chan filesize limits, so i had to use lossy commands for. i didn't even know .pngs could be lossy until now. the command i used was the following:
>pingo -quality=75 -s4 "Yukari and Ran (Touhou).png"

edit #17. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11270977/#11271310

i made this caption for the culture (phimosis supremacy!!!). it hasn't caught on yet, but surely one day it will...

pee/smegma warning. original from >>>/vt/vtai:
https://warosu.org/vt/thread/103402359#p103432146
>https://files.catbox.moe/s427b4.png

edit #18

pee warning. original from >>>/d/ddg:
>>11358851

edit #19

trans warning. original from paheal:
https://rule34.paheal.net/post/view/6647392

edit #20

trying to figure out how to make the text have an image inside it (in gimp), let alone how to make /only/ specific text from a text layer have an image inside it was so stressful for me. but i eventually learned that i can crop the image layer to only cover the text i want to have the image, so the entire text layer being selected doesn't matter. then when watching a tutorial on how to put an image inside of text, i was so stressed-out by it not working, but i eventually realized that it was because i had "invert mask" selected on the "add layer mask" window, which the tutorial i watched didn't mention to untick:
https://youtu.be/vCz2aNP8tU8?t=58

then it worked for me. as well, i couldn't find a version of the gradient trans pride flag i wanted to use that was even wide enough to be used as a flag, and i found that the blue color was way too narrow to provide much freedom with it, so i found the highest-quality version of it i could:
https://assets.clip-studio.com/en-us/detail?id=1803340
https://assets.clip-studio.com/en-us/description/1803340/img/b26c786a96-f34b-6dbf-ed47-b60acf5f17.png

and extended the width of it from 2k to 10k pixels in mspaint, then opened it in gimp, doubled the canvas size height (2k to 4k) while checking the "center" option to put the flag in the center... then exported it as a .png and expanded the edges in mspaint by sampling the blue on the very edge pixel and paint bucketing in the white space, because i didn't want to bother figuring out how to use the paint bucket tool on alpha backgrounds in gimp. here's the trans pride flag asset i bootlegged together:
https://files.catbox.moe/6gckel.png

all in all, this was way, way, waaaay too much effort to make a trans caption on a transphobic board, but at least i know how to do it and have a trans pride flag i can reuse, i guess

>>11359124
i ran out of space, but i also learned that scaling down an image and scaling it up (in gimp) loses information (after switching from the "scale" tool to something else; you can fuck with it losslessly as long as the scale isn't "saved"), which is scary... so to keep the flag in original quality i had to constantly undo all the way back to importing it, and scaling it down from absurdres to smol res, which was extremely tedious and annoying, but thankfully i realized i could take note of the exact width of the scale and plug the proportions in the next time, and as long as i put it back where it was, it's fine. i plugged in a 45 degree rotation for the flag each time i used it, so that never changed. also i learned to not care for lossy transformations until i figure out how i want it, then i only have to undo back to the import once and just make sure to only scale once, so the transformation actually used is lossless

another thing is that for the text i wanted to have an image inside it, i had to turn that text black (the color as the "stroke" i use) so it just behaves as the "stroke" layer, rather than bleeding white through it and looking bad. i don't know how to make arbitrary text in a text layer invisible for this to scale for all use cases, but this works for my use case, for now, at least

>>11359124
>https://assets.clip-studio.com/en-us/description/1803340/img/b26c786a96-f34b-6dbf-ed47-b60acf5f17.png
i didn't realize this was broken until now. i guess their way of preventing downloading until you sign in breaks it. but if you view it from the page itself you can save it just fine, but maybe the resolution was manually lowered. i didn't think of that. i assumed i somehow bypassed their sign-in requirement and saved the original res. it doesn't state what the res should be anywhere on the page

edit #21. original by meitabuu on rule34:
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=12128742

smegma warning. original by 0.4 in >>>/d/ddg:
>>11359960

edit #22

pee/rape warning. original from >>>/trash/slop:
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/71716182/#71716971

edit #23

>>11357596
>to add a gratuitous amount of smegma
To add a lot and make ot look realistic, you'd have to wither shrink the glans or expand the foreskin so it looks as if the smegma is packed beneath the foreskin making it raised. The easier option, if you want to add a lot of smegma, would be just to use a retracted foreskin

>I just feel i have to learn a style that can do strokes of smegma to do dark skin justice
I think just colouring like Zyldark (yellows) or Milk Flaker(golds and browns) uses would work

>>11359125
>i also learned that scaling down an image and scaling it up (in gimp) loses information
I think that's only a feature in Photoshop, but it's odd since it is a fairly easy feature to implement. I wonder if it's copyrighted, so other programs can't do it since I've never seen any other let you keep the image based on the original until you rasterise it.

Didn't realise there was a thread like this, I've been using AI (and paint.net, really should invest in clip studio) to make sequences and faux-doujins for a while now. Should I post the full things or just a few pages with a link to the rest? Would stitching them together and making a huge jpg be preferable? I've got several that are about 15 pages each, seems a bit much to post all that.

>>11342290
Reference controlnet at a low weight, 0.1 to 0.2, I've found helps a lot. Specifically reference only, not adain/attn, and always have 'my prompt is more important' on. When trying to get a consistent "original character" I'll generate a bunch of different angles and practically make a character sheet to then use in reference. It's never perfect, you're gonna need to edit various things, but that happens even with established characters. Pic related shows different angles of the same character with a mostly consistent face and outfit which I found reference helped with (the panelling is a bit embarrassing to look back at, though).

In your case however where only the head is kept the same I'd highly recommend using img2img inpainting, which you generally want to be using on faces and hands anyway.

>>11354707
that cap is a bit confusing to read, I'm assuming the normal text is user and the small/faded out text is ginger futa, I'm assuming this based on the left/top part. but then the bottom/right part is from ginger futa's perspective? maybe different colors for which person is speaking would be nice?
cap itself is good and hot but I just don't follow

>>11361028
oh wait I get it, both are her but she is one of those yantsundeer archetypes (I don't get this fetish). I read the other captions after that one and I thought it was also a futadom kind of caption but that's not the case at all
nevermind

Decided to go with posting stitched jpegs, still need to split them to get under 4MB. Full size uncompressed and textless versions are on pixiv, search user 'boundfat'.

Premise for this one was requested as "Jealous mojoka lesbian spikes her model friend’s tea with a love potion. Making her friend transform into someone like her and fall in love. Story themes: sexual orientation change, feet/sweat/smell fetishes, weight gain, pubic/armpit hair growth, strong odor."

1/2

>>11361052
2/2

Premise for this was requested as "gradual partial swapping between 'perfect' woman and someone low-status to steal her beauty and life". Discussed script with them and decided on marin and a fat otaku guy swapping physical/mental traits until totally swapping lives, but not with full identity death. Like the one above has smell fetish and weight gain.

1/2

>>11361062
2/2

Someone else already took the time to stitch this one and put it on hypnohub so I'm splitting theirs to fit 10k res limit. Was made before the others, didn't know what I was doing, no panelling and speech bubbles suck.

Elf turns into a stinky NEET and eventually a gross goblin. She gets kinda ugly, so warning there. Feet more prominent fetish here too.

1/3

>>11361078
2/3

>>11361079
Short follow-up made much later, "counter-spell" was most requested epilogue.

3/3

edit #24. original by foreskin anon in >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11283656/#11288018
https://rentry.co/Foreskin_Anon
>Foreskin Futas and Dickgirls > Pekomama (Hololive).jpg
lossless version:
https://files.catbox.moe/m1hakm.png
>>11360875
>To add a lot and make ot look realistic, you'd have to wither shrink the glans or expand the foreskin so it looks as if the smegma is packed beneath the foreskin making it raised.
i don't really care for making it realistic; i was just trying to emulate how it was done in the first gen i captioned >>11341244, where huge clumps of it spill outside the foreskin. there not being enough space beneath the foreskin to afford so much smegma doesn't matter to me. but i do like foreskins that are bloated from a buildup of smegma. but i don't think i can ever hope to draw that, not do i necessarily want to, since i feel it'd make a niche fetish even more so
>The easier option, if you want to add a lot of smegma, would be just to use a retracted foreskin
i enjoy retracted foreskins on men, but not on women. for girls if they don't have at least partially-retracted foreskin, it's a downside, to me. so to me, which it is depends on gender
>I think just colouring like Zyldark (yellows) or Milk Flaker(golds and browns) uses would work
oh, maybe making the smegma darker would in fact be what i felt was missing from that edit. thank you!!!
>>11361008
holy production value batman!!!! the brutal mogging has commenced!!!!

to be fair, i don't do long-form content; only one-off stuff. and i have observed stuff people do, like onomatopoeia (sound effects), tilted text (or even text with depth of field and perspective), colored text, different fonts in the same edit... but i can't say i can glean the rhyme or reason for it (besides sound effects), so i don't think i can add any such things to my own edits. but i see you!!! and it's insane!!! even beyond text, you employ so much skill, personality, and passion in everything!!! just wow!!!

>>11361028
>>11361034
depending on the edit i might well use the smaller (and sometimes translucent to convey inner monologue) text for speech coming from another person, but there i felt the "girlfriend" comment removed plausible deniability for it being anyone but the girl in the image talking, since in the text above (the part she says out loud) she tells the viewer they're never gonna get a girlfriend unless blah blah blah, so the "girlfriend" being referenced is the viewer's conceivable prospective girlfriend. so it wouldn't then make sense for the translucent text beneath it to be the viewer responding "i'm the only girl you'll ever need", since that only makes sense as inner monologue from the girl in the pic, from being threatened by the concept of the viewer getting a girlfriend who isn't herself. in this case, even if i wanted to affirm beyond any doubt that the caption is all the same girl speaking, i would have no option beyond speech bubbles pointing to who's speaking, which so far i'm not trying to do

>>11361288
Thanks man, truly, despite using AI I try hard not be lazy. Text effects are something I've avoided simply cause paint.net is no good for it, but I appreciate when people use them right. Entire screen of bulging rotating colored bubble text with DOF is something I've seen on captions before and it looks kinda bad, but for emphasis it can do a lot. Different fonts and sizes do a good amount on their own, different characters having their own font helps. If using directed speech bubbles you can get away with multiple for one character to use for emphasis but hopefully sparingly. I try to keep to the usual doujin typesetting fonts, most often wild words or lafeyette comic pro, though plenty others are good too. Can share a comparison list of ones I've used if you'd like.

>>11361288
if you take requests, I'd like an edit on an image with pekomama and pekora, preferably both futas if you can find one like that

>>11361763
If he was actually like a koala he'd not be able to identify a BBC without it being attached to a black man, like how a koala cannot identify eucalyptus leaves off of the tree.
They are very dumb due to having smooth brains

>>11354872
Bump. Any more of the aqua artist? A set maybe?

edit #25. original by 0.4 in >>>/d/ddg:
https://rentry.org/0point4_anons_AI_rentry
>314. Random gens part 27 > ComfyUI_45927_.png
i've been doing paragraph shenanigans (extending them far past ideal lengths then manually stopping each line short, mainly to minimize overlapping naughty bits) for a while now, starting from edit #6, albeit back then in an early form, where that was the first time i tried aligning the paragraph to the right, and i merely shortened the text box size until it produced a paragraph format that coincidentally didn't overlap much. but pic related was definitely the most curated each paragraph has been. 3/5 of them (2nd, 3rd, and 5th) were just a disaster without doing something about them. the 2nd was the hardest to do, between not extending it too far past the centre of the image, and not overlapping with her face, or breasts. it also aligning to the right made me realize that i have to reverse which line has the space, in that i had to end lines without a space, else they wouldn't be aligned with the lines that the text field automatically split into the next line
>>11361570
>Entire screen of bulging rotating colored bubble text with DOF is something I've seen on captions before and it looks kinda bad, but for emphasis it can do a lot.
i know exactly what you mean, haha. as an inexperienced editor who does nothing beyond putting text on an image with a "stroke" (outline) to them to make them readable, i can't confidently say what is good, bad, or meaningful formatting. but i always hope for there to be purpose behind expression, which, in creating content, to some extent there always will be, but if you can't say /why/ you did something, i think it is kind of weak expression. so i'm glad you validated that that some people very much just do anything, haha

and, thank you very much for the use cases!!! i struggle to use all-caps fonts due to density, but this thread is in dire need of font options, so for the culture, please do share that!!!

>>11361621
yeah i take requests, haha. i just added some notes in my rentry of when an edit was a request, but these ones were requests:
>>11357700 >>11357800
>>11359129 >>11360310
>>11360612 >>11360818
unfortunately, though, i only edit ai art (just an arbitrary constraint of mine, from my feeling genners are more approachable and stuff), and while i'm sure there've been some pekomama and pekora gens on >>>/vt/vtai if nothing else, them being dickgirls, let alone having uncut dicks (which i prefer, but isn't necessary) is something i feel i can safely bet has NEVER happened before. so realistically if i could even find a single gen of the pairing they'd be cis girls, which i've captioned cis girls before (especially if they have inverted nipples), which i feel limits opportunity for casual/taboo dialogue by a lot, so i might not be able to do much, anyway. and i might not even like the art style in the gen in the first place, either. but i wouldn't be against captioning something like that at all, if it were possible. but i'm not even going to try looking for such a gen myself, sorry. maybe if i browsed >>>/vt/vtai i'd already have one or maybe even several, but i can't imagine browsing a thread of 99% catbox links (slowly waiting for each image to load uncompressed one at a time due to no thumbnails) just hoping for a random gen of the pairing, sorry

>>11361776
that artist is called nezumi:
https://e621.net/artists/47369
>A female Japanese artist who has made many contributions to both the furry and anime communities since 2006. Known for drawing high quality, highly detailed subjects ranging from humans to beasts and mecha.
0.4 has used the style a few times in his pixeldrains (51, 308, 310, 312, and maybe more, but i didn't download them):
https://rentry.org/0point4_anons_AI_rentry

and here are some strays using it i managed to find:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11327497/#11328619
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11327497/#11328620
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11327497/#11328709
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11327497/#11331098
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11327497/#11331414
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11327497/#11331423

>>11361925
Here buddy, font comparisons. No italics/bold cause I'm lazy, but tried to describe use cases.

>>11361958
thank you!!!! i can't imagine personally caring for the distinctions between most of those capital letters-only fonts at the top, but it's amazing you have them at your disposal, when to me they just kinda blend together, haha

but what is "Are ya making clown porn?"? i think of all those fonts, that is the one that is closest to something i'd use by default, personally. i wish it had rounder lowercase letters, so i might prefer my current font (pally bold) still. but do you use that text for it to say that using it undermines the immersion of the work, so using it would be like saying the work is a joke? i know people feel that way about comic sans, but i thought i knew what comic sans looked like (i purposely didn't check what it looks like just now, so my opinion on that font i'm asking about stays uninfluenced). i never learned what people hated about comic sans, but maybe if i saw it, i'd intuitively realize what was wrong with it

>>11361961
>but what is "Are ya making clown porn?"?
oh haha, yep that's comic sans. thought it'd be more obvious, maybe it needed to be bold to really look like comic sans. As someone that actually has made clown porn, that is the only time to ever use it.

If capitals matters enough to you then LAFFAYETTE comic pro (I always spell it wrong, did so in the image) is a good choice. It's a little thin on some letters so without a speech bubble you're gonna want a drop shadow or border. If space is the issue then keep in mind the base font matters more for that than whether or not you're using capitals, all of those were in 18 point. Acme and felt are particularly compact without looking messy, but I still think if you're depicting speech you're usually better off with the top 4.

>>11361961
>>11361967
To add to this people dislike comic sans mostly due to association, same for papyrus/chiller, but designers hate it due to its poor kerning, line weights and being neither straight enough to look professional nor angled enough to look like handwriting. It looks awful as a block of text mainly due to the sizing and kerning. Augie also looks like trash, but it's more easily read trash.

Anyway for variety other than fonts, here's a layout test for a page of the next comic I'm working on. I can actually call it a comic this time as I'll be using gutters and a 2:3 vertical page. Want to include some out-of-border pop, though it's actually harder to do that with AI art as I generated it with a background first. Subject is an MHA parody, futa in red is an original character based on bosozoku, MHA designs are pretty boring to me so making up my own bad guy was fun. Came up with a pun name, "stick shift" and their special move is the "suicide clutch". No one reading it to beat off will get it, but that's fine by me.

>>11361967
i guess i was just being kinda schizo about capital letter-only fonts. i just remembered switching from "wild words" to "pally bold" and seeing that it was denser, so i somehow thought that it was no contest. pic related is "Pally Bold"/ "Laffayette Comic Pro Regular" "CC Wild Words Roman", respectively. i think what's happening between "Laffayette" and "wild words" is that "wild words" is denser vertically, and "Laffayette" is denser horizontally, because "Laffayette" is 9 lines, and "wild words" is 10, but they're about the same height. but the difference in density between them and "pally bold" isn't as drastic as i thought it'd be, especially considering the "pally bold" paragraph is cheating, since i manually fucked with the proportions of the text box until it produced an outcome that i thought was ideal; for "Laffayette" and "wild words" i literally just duplicated the text layer and changed the font to either of them, without min-maxing for aesthetic or density in either height or width at all

but, wow. yeah, i didn't recognize comic sans there, lmao. maybe you're right in that it's usually bolder. again, i was just drawn to the lowercase letters approaching being circular, even if in comic sans it's not really trying to get there, so it's not ideal to me. when i was using "wild words" over "pally bold" (my edits still only use a single font for everything), i tried "stroke" (outline) text, to make the text legible, but didn't like how it looked, over "drop shadow". but when i switched to "pally bold" i switched entirely to "stroke". i think "wild words" would've looked good in my captions if on top of the "stroke", i did another "stroke" layer beneath it, but extremely big and blurred, as a shadow, as pseudo "drop shadow", or maybe even literal "drop shadow", since the "stroke" would be making the top left of the letters legible anyway. but i didn't want to make the background image any harder to read by using blurred "drop shadow"

>>11361985
sorry; i didn't realize how bad this looked without the dark alpha background in gimp (my image viewer uses pink for transparency, so i thought it looked okay), so here's an export with a black background
>>11361975
>To add to this people dislike comic sans mostly due to association, same for papyrus/chiller, but designers hate it due to its poor kerning, line weights and being neither straight enough to look professional nor angled enough to look like handwriting. It looks awful as a block of text mainly due to the sizing and kerning.
oh, wow; now that you mention it, the kerning is really bad, haha. "pally bold" also struggled sometimes, because i can see the letters overlapping with each other if they're just the wrong pair put next to each other, but i chose it specifically because its density was high, so i overlook that and the capital "A" being asymmetrical, which triggers my OCD so much (though, i've learned to overlook it and stop thinking about it, especially because i have no confidence i can find a font with round lowercase letters i'd use instead). but comic sans' kerning just being low density is not great for me
>Came up with a pun name, "stick shift" and their special move is the "suicide clutch". No one reading it to beat off will get it, but that's fine by me.
i can't say i get the reference, but is that also a double entendre referencing the extremely late (basically end of the manga) MHA spoilers?

>>11361985
Pally isn't bad, it's nice and thick which is good if you aren't using a bubble, but it does have a kind of... "nintendo game" feel to it that might clash with the subject matter. Also a little trick I use, which is stupid but it works: copy the text onto a layer underneath, invert colors or use -100 brightness to make it black, then use either a "glow" effect or gaussian blur to give it an all-around shadow. Can increase the radius of the glow/blur when applying it. If it looks too weak, copy that layer over itself until you get the density you want, then combine. It won't be as clean as an actual outline, bubble or border but is good for "lesser" text like onomatopoeia or muttered speech, you see small out-of-bubble text like that very often in manga.

>>11361989
hehe, it's referencing a really outdated motorcycle design that used a handbrake, but more directly "stick" is referring to them having a penis. "shift" is cause, for the sake of the story, he has a quirk that lets them change their own and others sex characteristics - he was a guy originally. The requester specifically asked for TSF via "female puberty" and I really liked the idea of deku thinking he has a quirk when in reality he's just experiencing female puberty. By the end he will be a full grown woman with big fat slappers, but I still need to generate all the rest of the panels and then the hard part that takes way longer, editing it all into a comic and inputting the script I wrote out.

Another original character, pro hero "leimotif". Plan to edit this one to have out-of-border pop too, placed on right side so fist will be overlapping panels on the left. He only shows up for this one panel. I'll just copy and paste the profile I wrote out for him: Intentionally generic hero using a bunch of design elements MHA character designs tend to repeat. Name is close to leitmotif but is instead pronounced "lay motif", which sounds like "lame motif". His quirk is... I dunno, something lame. He sucks.

>>11362002
i can't say i chose "pally bold" from a super educated place, of at all choosing it from very many options, and being conscious of their pros and cons (even if only from my personal taste of wanting dense text with round lowercase letters). So maybe even only in regards to my personal preference, there are better options i don't know of yet. but if it's the roundness of the letters you're picking up on, to me that just makes it cute. maybe it's actually too bold, and looking at it side by side with "Laffayette" and "wild words", the vertical spacing is atrocious, and completely undermines my choosing it for its supposedly high density. but i literally don't know any better, so... also, "pally" came with bold/medium/regular versions, respectively. pic related. i think "regular" loses the cuteness i saw in "pally bold" in the first place (the "bold" version was the only one that was displayed on the site before downloading, so i didn't even expect to get "medium" or "regular", let alone knew what they looked like), but "medium" is pretty cute to me, too. but i just didn't entertain either because to me i already chose "pally" thinking it only came as "pally bold", so i didn't bother putting any more effort into choosing a font when i thought i'd already just completed the process of doing so

and, thank you for tip for adding shadow. i don't know what could be "stupid" about that method, though, but i also am an inexperienced editor who's never tried blurring anything before, haha. but i'm probably not going to try that, since i don't want to obscure the image below. but it's better to have the tool at my disposal than not. thank you
>>11362016
wow!!! i literally cannot even imagine anything i produce having such depth and creativity to it, lmaooo. even both character names are insane, but "leimotif" is, again, something i could never even dream of producing, lmao. dude, you're really on another level!!! i'm not even just gassing you up!!!

>>11362016
i ran out of space, but i also meant to say that "slappers" is hilarious, lmao. i assume that was just another name for ass. lmao. and, if you aren't aware of the (again, extremely late into the manga) MHA spoilers that reference "stick shift"... well, just dropping the spoiler right here would be inconsiderate, so i won't. but that adds just another depth to the double entendre, so that's a happy coincidence, haha

>>11362019
Thanks again man, it's fun to do this kind of stuff. As for the fonts, I think the rightmost looks best and honestly very good, it's only when bolded it makes me think of something like animal crossing. If you have an outline or shadow you don't need a particularly thick font, and unbolded it's already plenty thick on every letter. The kerning is taking up space horizontally, though it is a nice font. Honestly you don't need a particular large font size for something to be readable, just use one that would be particularly readable at any size. Wild words is the king for that.

Put together a quick tutorial of how to do the shadow, it won't affect the image at all as it's simply a layer under your text but still above the image. Used an old image I had laying around that had enough contrast to show off how useful it is to do this.

>>11362021
I actually didn't watch/read it all the way cause I found it kind of boring around the sports festival, so if there's an unintentional pun that's great. And slappers referred to big fat swinging tits, requester wanted that to be a focus. Deku'll be wearing the UA cheerleader outfit to show them off once he/she is all grown up.

>>11362048
wow, i see what you mean. even your tutorials express personality!!! and, it does help, because i guess i was just afraid of the precedent of blur/glow obfuscating an image, but if it's so small that it's basically just subtle "stroke" (outline) text, then it might well be better than just using a bigger "stroke". there's no harm in trying. i'll try it next edit, possibly reducing the "stroke", from it not needing it as much. or maybe i'll try your example, and just use the blur/glow instead of "stroke". but i definitely think switching from white to black text is kind of cheating, because that's already the best contrast possible against her skin, so i feel it diminishes your intending to demonstrate the contrast a white blur/grow "stroke" would provide
>As for the fonts, I think the rightmost looks best and honestly very good, it's only when bolded it makes me think of something like animal crossing.
well, i did choose it becauee i felt it was cute, haha. but, it is useful feedback. i should be conscious of the fact that as much as i personally don't consider cuteness sacred, for others it breaks immersion of their smut conflates cuteness with provoking lust. but if you're saying the kerning on the font is bad, i chose it specifically because i thought it was good about that, unless you mean vertically, in which case, yeah, it's so fucking awful; i literally wasn't even conscious of that until now. this convo. what the fuck. but i didn't know if vertical spacing was also called "kerning"

about the MHA "gear shift" spoilers, i tried to find a youtube video that referenced it without it saying it in the title, but that's impossible, lmao. just search "my hero academia gear shift" on youtube to see various clips about the spoiler. the manga beats around the bush about it for so long that it's actually a huge reveal

>>11362060
another for you. not familiar with "stroke" but then I'm just not familiar with many image editors in general. And yeah the font, personally I think pally looks good but it is taking up more space horizontally than others could ONLY IF being compact is an issue, is what I meant. Like you said it's particularly bad for vertical kerning but that can be adjusted in your editor's settings, not sure exactly where you'd find that setting on what you use though.

As for the cute/smut association, it's not a real problem people have read insanely smutty stuff with DejaVu but then beautiful thought provoking prose in the same font. I usually try to match a font to a character's manner of speech, so finding one perfect font has never been a priority for me. But then I stick text in bubbles so it's not nearly as hard to display things cleanly.

>just search "my hero academia gear shift"
Thanks for that, I'm really glad to have something unintentional happen there. I think that's pretty common artistically, a lot of things I thought were perfectly crafted homages or wonderful wordplay turned out to be mere coincidence. The subconscious at play I guess.

>>11362075
sorry, but i don't get what you mean by pally has bad horizontal kerning, in that you're saying it occupies a lot of space horizontally. i literally chose it because i thought it was dense horizontally. the site preview did not show it vertically, so i didn't see that the vertical kerning was so bad until i installed it. maybe gimp (the editing program i use) has options to change it, so i might look into that, thank you.

and, i linked a video at some point in the thread >>11351694 of me showing off "drop shadow" and "stroke" in the program "inkscape". "stroke" appears to just be the standardized name for "outline" text (and is what inkscape refers to it as), but of course the layman wouldn't recognize such, which is why i always say "outline" in parenthesis when i refer to "stroke" text

also, i don't mean to be nitpicky so many times in a row (sorry), but i definitely think that switching to such thin font doesn't provide the blur/glow the same opportunity as in your tutorial earlier. by nature the glow is strongest at the centre, and dissipates outward, so with such a thin font, proportionally the blur/glow can be (and probably is) pretty much as thick as the text itself. i was trying to say that in the tutorial, the blur/glow doesn't have much opportunity to demonstrate contrast, because the dark text color already provides sufficient contrast. were the thick text in the tutorial white instead, it would have to depend entirely on the blur/glow to provide contrast to make the text legible, so to see how much you needed to add to make it legible would've made for a better example, i felt. but, again, with such thin next you now switched to, you are afforded much more opportunity to make the blur/glow bigger without it being considered as having to be too big to provide sufficient contrast, such that people would be inclined to give up on it to instead just do the same thing but without blur instead, which is a more conventional "stroke"

>>11362075
i ran out of space in my last post, but i meant to apologize for if my reply seemed rambly, or anything. sorry. i kinda gave up on whether anything i was saying made sense, so it was kind of a stream of consciousness just saying whatever came to mind. sorry. but thank you for providing examples. i'm sorry to pressure you into constantly doing more, when showing it in the first place- especially with such a high production value tutorial- is beyond what anyone else would- or could- ever do. sorry

Feel like I should add an image so here's another sequence, didn't post it earlier cause it's textless, but it does still tell a story. Lucoa and Shouta swap heads, are unable to use magic to swap back, start getting used to and growing into their new bodies, which eventually affects their swapped heads physically and mentally.

>>11362095
>>11362099
It's okay bud, it's fun to see discussion on here even if it gets longwinded. I'm really bad for it myself. I only brought up the horizontal kerning thing on pally because I thought you said being compact horizontally mattered, so wanted to mention others like Felt are even more compact. That's all I meant by it. You're free to use whatever font you want and pally is nice. It's not like you're doing shit with chiller or a cursive font, if you were I would actually be yelling at you lol. Plenty of times I've seen a caption without a transcript that I plain cannot read due to poor font choice, lack of outline/shadow/bubble, colors that blend or way too many effects. You aren't doing any of those and aren't writing an ESL mess, so you're doing very, very well for captions.

And yeah with a thin font it doesn't look good, I just wanted to show that even with a thin font in white that would otherwise be completely unreadable it's made possible to read. Second to last image in the initial image showed the white text wild words with 3 layers of black shadow and I thought that was a good enough example, but threw in the black on white at the end as an extra. It also doesn't need to be layer upon layer, you can get the same effect by increasing contrast, lowering brightness, applying filters etc. Layer by layer is just easier to tell how much is too much, and you can lower opacity on the most recent if you need an in-between value.

>>11362137
oh woops, image didn't take

>>11361288
>i enjoy retracted foreskins on men, but not on women
Weird, but okay
>oh, maybe making the smegma darker would in fact be what i felt was missing from that edit
Darker, or maybe a different hue or saturation. This gets into what's known as colour theory, in particular the concept of colour matching and colour context. Different colours of smegma will match different colour skin tones better, and the skin tone itself will change the perception of a colour (this mostly comes up when there's coloured light sources)
I use the same base colours for the edits I do, but I'll often add a hue/saturation/lightness filter on top to mess with the colours a bit to match the skin tone. Here's an example sampling from Zyldark's colours. I started with thr same base colour and used a filter to change it to match the skin tone a little better.
(I don't know if you can do this with Gimp, I think i heard something about them adding these sorts if filters not too long ago)

edit #26. original by @mindovertease on twitter:
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=13005558
https://x.com/mindovertease/status/1904924035927937471

lossless version:
https://files.catbox.moe/d1b9kw.png
>>11362137
>I only brought up the horizontal kerning thing on pally because I thought you said being compact horizontally mattered, so wanted to mention others like Felt are even more compact.
oh, i see what you mean. i might've seen fonts on the font site i chose mine from (https://fontpair.co/fonts) that were denser than "pally bold", but i prioritized the roundness of lowercase letters over density, so even though "felt" is far denser, the letters being squished horizontally to accomplish such isn't the aesthetic i was looking for. but you are right that only density being the criterion, "felt" is far denser than "pally bold"
>Second to last image in the initial image showed the white text wild words with 3 layers of black shadow and I thought that was a good enough example, but threw in the black on white at the end as an extra.
oh NO!!!!! i'm really sorry; i literally didn't notice that text at all!!!!! sorry!!!! all my prior comments about the demonstration were from believing you just went from the top panel to the last one. sorry!!!! i think i did notice the black text in the second panel, but i think the blur/glow alone is literally just not sufficient contrast for me personally, considering i did not notice the text at all... i'm sorry. but maybe were i looking for the text it'd actually be sufficient. sorry again. sorry my previous criticism is literally forfeit, since you demonstrated it throughout. sorry again
>>11362455
>>i enjoy retracted foreskins on men, but not on women
>Weird, but okay
well it is weird, but i made a caption to conveniently explain my reasoning for it once >>11358012, if it helps

but, wow. i did see how deep the rabbit hole went for lighting, but learning color theory helping isn't something i thought of. thank you!!!

smegma warning. original from >>>/trash/slop:
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/72480009/#72483648
>https://files.catbox.moe/nsxk44.png
edit #27

i actually forgot to try the gaussian blur/glow (in gimp i only saw gaussian blur) "stroke" (outline) anon literally made a tutorial just to illustrate to me when making my last edit, which is a shame, because i know since the image used bright colors that it would've helped a lot. but i did dick around with it for this one since the missed opportunity was stuck in my head, and i do think it elevates it!!!

a key thing i learned was that in gimp (my editing program of choice), duplicating the text layer to dedicate it to the gaussian blur "stroke" is NOT serviceable, because gimp prevents the blur from expanding beyond the borders of the text layer, and instead just cuts it off, which is horrible. instead i had to do it as i do "stroke" without gaussian blur, which is to say how >>11340131 taught me, but modified. so i did "alpha to selection" on the text layer as usual, but rather than going to "select" > "grow", growing it by an arbitrary amount, then creating a new layer below the text to paint bucket fill with black (which is how anon taught me how to do "stroke"), you skip the "grow" step, and i prefer putting the new layer to paint bucket fill on top of the text until you fill it, since now that the selection you're filling is the same size as the text, this is the only way to tell you filled it properly until you get to fucking with the gaussian blur

another thing is that where the "select" > "grow" popup remembers your last-used value, and even creating new layers remembers your last-used layer name (which helps for creating tons of stroke layers named after their "grow" size), the gaussian blur popup does NOT remember your setting. so you have to take note of it externally, to remember how to standardize it for the edit

>>11363459
i ran out of space, but another quirk about gimp i learned is that undoing and redoing layers does NOT redo their "fx" (effects, i presume) modification, so when i undid duplicating the gaussian blur layers (which being told to duplicate them to increase their intensity to taste was a HUGE protip, since i never would've thought of that myself, and just one layer alone was barely noticeable at the size i wanted it) trying to see the difference adding it makes- since i didn't think that it'd be distinct from just making the layer invisible-, i literally only noticed after exporting that redoing the layers didn't redo their effects. i must've just thought that even though i couldn't notice the effect getting stronger, that one layer was just not enough, so redoing it must've made it look the way i wanted. but, nope; it was just culled

also, you can tell in the edit, but i very much still kept my normal "stroke" layer, and merely added the gaussian blur "stroke" layers as a little extra. i also made sure to put the normal "stroke" layer above the gaussian blur "stroke" layers, because even though i couldn't notice a difference (and objectively i suppose there can't be a difference, because the gaussian blur "stroke" layer being black means it cannot saturate the black of the normal "stroke" layer any more), making it a habit to do so would scale for if ever the normal "stroke" layer is a different color, unless i literally wanted the normal "stroke" layer to be saturated by the gaussian blur "stroke" layer. i doubt i'll ever try anything too experimental with formatting, since i don't really feel inspired to try anything fancy i see other captions do, let alone to try to make an idea i come up with independently become a reality, since i don't feel i could ever have such ideas. but still

for proportions, my normal "stroke" layer (in this edit) is 3 pixels, and my three (3) gaussian blur "stroke" layers have a gaussian blur value (presumably pixels?) of 7.5

original by blurry eyes in >>>/d/ddg:
>>11363650
edit #28. request #4 >>11363479
>Lately do you could able to caption image with thick cum? This may or may not be request as i just wondering if you would like to do it.
>>11363461
i forgot to mention that gaussian blur doesn't appear to do anything to the layer unless you dismiss the "alpha to selection" you probably still have active after creating the layer you're trying to blur

edit #29. original by @FUTAALOVERX on twitter:
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=11371612
https://x.com/FUTAALOVERX/status/1841796754863489316

i realized in making my last caption that it's worth making a preset for the gaussian blur size i want for its respective "stroke" (outline) layer pixel size, because since we're dealing with such small numbers (3 pixel size normal "stroke" layers demand a 7.5 value gaussian blur to be to my tastes), virtually every caption i make will be using the same few normal "stroke" pixel sizes, which demands the same gaussian blur value every time. so just pulling up the preset eliminates opportunity for human error mistyping it, and makes me not have to remember what to type, or anything, so it's okay i guess that gimp doesn't just remember the last value set gaussian blur to

pee warning. original from >>>/trash/slop:
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/74503757/#74504875

edit #30

the gen had a mangled watermark bottom right, so i had to use the "healing" and "clone" tools in gimp to remove it, which i did so before plugging it into waifu2x, because i found the res a bit too narrow otherwise. trying to figure out those tools was super stressful for me, and i still am not sure i understand them after skimming the gimp docs about how they work, but i kinda managed an okay result, so i just moved on. the gen is also kind of slop-like, but it still inspired me, so i went for it anyway

original by blurry eyes in >>>/d/ddg:
>>11364012
edit #31. request #5 >>11363885
>>cumlogs
>This "thick cum" one, it just i wasn't well-known with that term yet.

pee/straight shota warning. original from >>>/trash/slop:
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/74374875/#74376219

edit #32

her left hand kinda has a sixth finger going on, but i don't know how to do anything about that, so i'm coping by just pretending it has plausible deniability for just being the groove in-between the fingers...

>>11343917
>>11343813
NTA
anything done on a phone app is spying on your imagination to make a profit that will not be shared with you.

It is not much different with PCs, but if you look at image programs that do not do marketing of any sort, such as open source, then you only need to watch out for when the developers sell out to some overseas group and it becomes spyware, like happened with Audacity after version 2.4.2 when muse group "bought" the project.

https://www.ac3filter.net/what-version-of-audacity-has-spyware/

The article is probably bot-zlop but it has some of the facts I remember from 2021 and when it was on slashdot.org

>>11364433
That doesn't bother me, and it can't be that profitable since they've recently increased the frequency of ads. The thing with non-creative people using these apps to "spy on your imagination" is they are doom to eventually fail as they don't understand what people actually need. That's why I'm making my own python program to eventually use instead, because there's several features I wish were different to make it more streamlined to how I want to do things. It'll obviously solve any data collection, although probably my Android phone would still be doing that to a degree. So long as their data harvesting doesn't interfere with my working, I don't care that they do it. As someone who completely ignores ads they gain nothing from knowing my browsing patterns, and as someone capable and willing to my own apps they'll gain nothing from locking features behind a premium account. I've tried doing those survey sites at one point, but because I have no addictions or spending habits beyond necessities I couldn't get paid for anything. So my data is no doubt worthless.

edit #33. original from >>>/trash/slop:
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/71686804/#71693093

i stopped embedding the "drop shadow" versions of my old captions i retroactively turned to "stroke" (outline) versions in my rentry, because the "stroke" versions are just more legible and conventionally appealing, and instead linked them underneath each caption, under the source:
https://rentry.co/ambihurts

i also think i will go back and add gaussian blur to my "pally bold" font captions (probably won't bother with the "wild word" font of my earliest captions, since i'm not sure it'd look good, but i can try it anyway, so i might take it back and do them too without saying so) and replace the versions in my catbox with them, linking the non-gaussian blur versions below each caption in my rentry just the same (obviously haven't done these retroactive edits yet, but just to link my catbox album again, for convenience:
https://catbox.moe/c/7vd589

my logic for embedding the "drop shadow" versions of the captions originally was that rentry has a width limit, so if your screen is at least that wide, you can view the "stroke" and "drop shadow" versions of the captions side-by-side, to compare them, which isn't normally possible unless you open them both in their own image viewer instance, scale them down to fit on your screen, and compare them that way, which no one would ever bother doing. but i did know from the start that if your screen isn't wide enough, the captions stack on top of each other, which is useless. it's just not worth the increased bandwidth cost and annoyance of browsing for most users just for an "oh, i see the difference" moment some people will have then move-on from

Help me, /d/egenerates.
I was raised by god-fearing teachers, started writing supper early, way before I knew what is socially acceptable. My kid writing had a mix of humans and furries "Who Framed Roger Rabbit"-style with heavily sexualized ladies, which was kinda weird for a preschooler. I was given a bunch of "birds and bees" talks, got my hands on my older brothers porn magazines, carried my writing notebooks everywhere with me, like going to the beach with family and drafting some lewd stuff involving strangers I've seen there. Was allowed into girls section of public baths for a while due to early age, staring at tits and bushes. Considered becoming a pornstar way before I knew how reproduction works exactly.

Until one day my brothers friends came over for a beer, stumbled across my writings and decided to give it a chuckling read aloud. Although my family stood by me and put a stop to it quickly, this was so embarassing that it fucked me up bad, because I was always trying to look cool to the elders.
I practically stopped writing ever since, I'm super jealous of writers like Burroughs and Miller who put /d/-tier porn in their books, sometimes involving real people under real names, but the thought of even describing a sex scene and putting my name on it makes me want to blow my brains out.
My family despises sexuality, my friends have the most basic-ass porn tastes and would only talk about it when blackout drunk, my wife is generally supportive with whatever I do, but still insecure when it comes to the idea of bimbos in permanent heat that fulfil your every desire. Then there are my childhood fantasies of being absolutely molested by a venus, fucking in public, stretching lady holes with objects and monstergirls.

What the fuck do I do, I'm a grown-ass man of 30, but I'm so afraid of being judged that I will die before releasing anything like Ichi the Killer or Euphoria. Fucking puritans keep trying to get porn authors in jail and banning sites

>>11364614
honestly, independent of the coincidental subject matter, i can't help you with getting over the trauma of being exploited when you allowed yourself to be vulnerable, because even after years of mulling-over my grief, i still struggle with allowing myself to be emotionally vulnerable to people. i honestly think i have no coping mechanisms, because if i make myself vulnerable to people and i receive negative feedback, to me i either have to respond dismantling why their feedback is irrational, or i sit on it, but i consider such as hurting me, so i wish i'd never seen the negative feedback at all

but, the coincidental subject matter is such that it appears to me that your inhibition lies in merely going through the motion of allowing yourself to be vulnerable, and not the precedent of emotional vulnerability. it is a meaningful distinction, in that from what i understand, provided you had someone in whom you had faith wouldn't emotionally abuse you for your writing- which you have no coping mechanisms for-, it is that you cannot bring yourself to share your writing with them. it is distinct from having no problem with sharing your writing with anyone, but your being too emotionally blunted to allow yourself to find such fulfilling anymore, because being emotionally-invested in the feedback of others would open yourself up to abuse

so, to me, the solution appears to be any discipline/procrastination method that would get you to take baby steps towards your goal, since you just need to become familiar again with the practice of sharing your writing with others, so it doesn't seem like an insurmountable barrier to cross. here's a kind of embarrassingly-titled video on such i watched on 2x speed a few weeks ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1uScqo3KQk

it's about "FAST":
F - feel the emotion
A - accept the emotion
S - shrink the action
T - tie it to your identity

basically just snowballing patronizingly-small steps into huge feats you can be proud of

>>11364614
You could start out trying to write deliberately bad stories, just to hone your ability to write. A book I enjoyed when I was first learning to write, and sucked terribly at it, was '100 Ways to Write badly Well'. If you're able to understand why something is bad, then it'll help when trying to understand why something is good.
Of course it could be a barrier to actually trying to write something good, but since you're already struggling with that it may not make it ant worse. Since you'll be conscious of why its bad, when someone calls out the things that are bad they'll be in agreement with you. So it won't feel as bad. That may immunise you when someone is criticising something you think is good. Obviously it would be on an alt account.

And if you were worried about people you know stumbling on it, you could hide the files by saving them with a cipher where it'll just look like a a random data file.

i was worried about whether the gaussian blur proportions i was using (3 pixel normal "stroke" [outline] layer + 7.5 gaussian blur value [i presume pixels?] stroke layer [duplicated twice, for three [3] gaussian blur layers in total]) would scale for any size, so i used an uber huge font size to compare

left is 50 font size, 3 pixel "normal" stroke layer, 7.5 value gaussian blur "stroke" layer (x3, for 3 gaussian blur layers total)
right is 250 font size, 15 pixel "normal" stroke layer, 37.5 value gaussian blur "stroke" layer (x3, for 3 gaussian blur layers total)

i think they're literally the same, so it scales proportionally. i get this probably would be a stupid test if i knew what gaussian blur was, but still. i was worried i might find one day that because i haven't been doing some calculation to determine how offset the opacity of the blue becomes at different scales that this wouldn't be standardized by just scaling everything up proportionally

also, i thought about saying the following so many times, but i bit my tongue on it every time. but the gaussian blur popup window is the first time i encountered a menu in gimp (this is all in gimp btw) where when selecting a preset, it defaults to expecting you to hold click, hover over the preset you want in the dropdown, then release click to select what you wanted. i thought i was going schizo for a while seeing the dropdown flicker, but i eventually figured it out, but i thought i'd sound stupid if i said this out loud. but i've come to prefer holding click to select my gaussian blur preset, rather than making it flicker, then it probably switching to normal click-to-select-without-holding-click behavior. so i figured saying this is better than not

>>11364683
just googled that word and learned it's a racial slur. my fault. the font was just so big that the way it squished and cut itself off made it just end up in that word somehow. my first choice was "woo", but i thought a lowercase letter than went below the rest (like "g" or "j) would make for a better text, since i couldn't fit the whole sentence in without making the canvas way larger. so i just replaced the last letter with a "g"

>>11364620
Not sure I completely understand, but I think I do. My initial experience in school was not stepping on any toes, avoiding confrontation and trying to be everybody's friend. Turned out it mostly works, but there are people that just hate you for what you are, not what you do, they can't help it. I treat creative success not as converting this kind of people, but reaching the ones that would already get along with you if they knew you. However talking about fetish shit, this amount is a small one and you can't reach your crowd without getting in front of all the ones that'd get upset, offended and try to fuck with you for it. I have a persistent anxiety that I get attention and people decide to Salman Rushdie my ass. I could self-censor all the lewd stuff out and reach a bigger audience, but I feel I'd be cheating myself and writer's income is peanuts anyway. Maybe I'm just not badass/blackpilled enough for this line of work.

I guess I'll try the military psychologist anime guy's method anyway

>>11364636
That sounds quite cool, couldn't find a website to steal the book from, but I found his old blog with snippets. I found that offending people is way easier and more effective than getting them to like you

>>11364614
You do realise plenty of authors in any medium work under pseudonym, right? Not everyone on earth is able to dig through your unpublished work and make fun of you for it like your brother did. Simply come up with a separate moniker to anything attached to you and start releasing things under it, never been easier to do this.

>>11364712
i mean, it sucks. i don't really know how i can help. when i was new to making captions (i mean, i'm still new, but i've made 33 captions by now over the course of just over a month), i literally required validation, or else i wouldn't continue. i mentioned how i felt when i posted my first caption to a server earlier, after seeing them softly make fun of me >>11343758
>thank you, anon!!!! you actually inspired me to make my second (and maybe last ever) caption, haha. i shared that caption in three places and only got one (1) positive (You). i shared it in a slop discord and four different people just kind of hivemind reacted that the caption was pure yapping. i know irony and dogpiling is just standard discord behavior, but it still bummed me out.
i was just disproportionately making myself vulnerable by sharing my creativity for basically the first time ever, so even though it could've been far worse, it basically broke my heart. but i've come a long way, and after gaining momentum, i became unstoppable. i rarely get acknowledgement at all, let alone positive feedback, but at this point i do it for legacy, and for myself, so i think it's okay. i think you can do it too if you, since for me it was just getting over the initial expectant and fearful vulnerability of trying something new. but maybe your baggage is more complicated than that, so i don't mean to be reductive

>>11364729
That does sound quite vulnerable, I appreciate you sharing. I guess it was a relatively safe space among fetish crowd and under a pseudonym, but still. Did you do anything else before, like drawing or writing? Being addicted to validation kinda sucks, because it won't always line up with your personal tastes.

>>11364725
You see, I'm from Russia, where they passed a law some time ago, requiring authors, channels and bloggers having any noticeable audience registering under full legal name, authentication not bound to your ID through a phone number becomes rarer and rarer, while making and distributing pornographic materials was de jure illegal for as long as I remember. Don't want it to get political, just something that can realistically happen in the future in other places like UK, Poland or w/e. The regular citizens don't give a damn and I'm probably not moving to post my fanfic. At least it's not Sharia law yet

I would even be fine breaking the law on the down low, like I was doing weed for while, if there wasn't so many schizos seething over porn and doing the "civic duty" snitching. Writing is already kinda hard, but when you are thinking that you are digging yourself into a hole with every word its even harder

>>11364767
>Did you do anything else before, like drawing or writing? Being addicted to validation kinda sucks, because it won't always line up with your personal tastes.
i used to have a google+ account back when google was forcing that down everyone's throats, and i ended up on it somehow and interacting with people. only furries, cause i was just a furry at the time. tons of them were roleplay accounts, and i was super socially awkward and panicked about the prospect of roleplaying, but so as to not shame them for just initiating roleplay i always played along, and i quickly found that the lowest common denominator was much, much, /much/ less verbose than i was, not to toot my own horn, since i've ever even read a book i wasn't forced to before, nor ever read fics before, or anything. so i basically was just used for prose, and i found it fulfilling, except when it wasn't, cause the person was some sort of abusive, but i learned to deal with that eventually

besides that, a few short years ago i entered a taboo community and wrote some extremely harsh stuff encouraging people to get worse. it saw success, since i'd already established a name for myself in the taboo i was in. but it didn't come without antis. but i had way thicker skin by that point, since the taboo i was dealing with was super harsh

also, i read your reply to the other anon, and, wow, i'm sorry. i definitely can't relate, nor do i think most people can, unless they've literally made a career out of their creativity. i don't think most people here will ever have to confront a conceivable reality where anything they do online must be tied to their real name unless they choose it to be, in which case it'd be far removed from anything they could be posting on /d/. i feel that is a completely different topic than just gaining the courage to share your lewd vision anonymously. i'm sorry

>>11364685
Wogs aren't brown enough for anyone to care about racism towards them these days

>>11364585
>i also think i will go back and add gaussian blur to my "pally bold" font captions
i did actually go back and bother doing this, so you can get the definitive versions of those here:
https://rentry.co/ambihurts
https://catbox.moe/c/7vd589

and, yeah, i didn't bother doing so for the "wild words" font captions my first captions used, but maybe i will eventually. retroactively doing this was so tedious btw... to any to-be caption-makers reading this, please try adding flair to your captions the first time around to see if you prefer it...

i also corrected mistakes that i took note of after posting:
>edit #19 - horse girl (pee warning)
-fixed centring on translucent paragraph (it's arbitrary in the end, since i don't always measure it, but i literally did measure this one, but i fucked with it back and forth so much that i got confused and got lost in the sauce when just plugging in numbers to move this paragraph rather than eyeballing it anymore)
-fixed spelling mistake in 3rd quote on the right ("T-there's" > "Th-there's")
-capitalized the first word after the ellipsis in the 3rd quote on the right for formatting standardization
>edit #20 - bridget
-fixed the last line in the 2nd paragraph starting with a space (was hard for me to spot before adding the "stroke" [outline] text, and also i think this was my first time manually shortening paragraphs to avoid overlap. i now toggle the image layer multiple times when editing, and copy paste all the text into a 4chan "quick reply" window in my browser for autocorrect, so this should never happen again)
>edit #21 - super sonico pregnancy
-manually ended the 4th line in the 3rd paragraph a word earlier to better avoid overlapping text with the pregnant belly (i thought since it was literally one [1] pixel away from touching that it was okay, but when you zoom out you can't tell that it's not touching, and making this change creates a better contour of the text following the outline of the belly anyway)

>>11364827
>the 4th line in the 3rd paragraph
i meant the 4th last line

Mommy says no more teeth

edit #34. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11306933/#11307621

https://files.catbox.moe/vnyhae.png

edit #35. original by @oatmealdood on twitter:
https://x.com/oatmealdood/status/1904410888523710822

mirror:
https://files.catbox.moe/c0fymj.jpg

Figured I've taken enough post space without posting an actual caption, so here's my shot at it. Don't know shit about typography, sorry

Tinker Bell now has a mom called Titania Bell whos a shota fiend

>>11365356
i think the drop shadow not being a standardized size/offset/opacity proportional to font size is the main thing that breaks immersion, and i think the text hearts are also not great, since you can search "heart emoticon" online, find one you like, then copy paste it into your editing program, and change the color to anything you'd like it to be, since unless it's an emoji, it should be able to be colored like any other font. or you can outright just edit in heart images or anything else like some editors do, but i've never tried anything like that myself. i think there're probably grammatical errors or at least unconventionally-formatted things in there, but as a fellow verbose caption-maker, i appreciate going for broke!!!

>>11365364
I'll update the hearts if anybody points out any grammar mistakes. There's probably a way of standardizing shadow offset, I just copied text blocks in Inkscape, recolored and moved them manually. I wasn't sure about the text block placement at all

I don't get non-verbose approach so far, you need to have a really good oneliner or a short dialogue instead of a story. I've actually spent half the time researching what is allowed on /d/, /h/, /b/, /aco/ etc

smegma warning. original from >>>/d/ddg:
>>11365103

edit #36

in this edit i started schizoing-out about whether duplicating the gaussian blur layers too quickly was making them bolder somehow, but i assume i just blanked and did something wrong myself... i still am now paranoid, and will only dupe the layers after seeing the effect of the previous dupe visibly happen, though...
>>11365405
inkscape automates that for you, though. see >>11351694
>https://files.catbox.moe/geumji.mp4
also, anon shared a standardized font list here, if you haven't seen it to know what some options are >>11361958
and i agree that verbosity is the only way to play, really, haha. but people who don't get it just call it yapping. it stings a bit, but you can just discard them for not being part of your audience, anyway, so it is what it is. i once had someone even say that the "image" was nice, but that they wish the caption was shorter, so it obscured less of it. i thought they were praising the caption, but merely thought that it was either overstaying its welcome, or was superfluous. nope; they clarified that the caption "was okay too", but it's just covering the image period, therefore it should be shorter. i was in shock. i just didn't respond

about grammatical errors, i manually transcribed it, and proposed some corrections here:
https://rentry.co/diq7v75x

>>11365458
Man, why is everybody on this board thinking of semen and colons... On a serious note I tried to use commas instead of periods to make it sound more urgent, like she was talking fast to not give him time to think and back out. That one at the end was a genuine slip, thanks, was changing the sentence back and forth. There is a shitton of commas in Russian that English speakers omit, so I mostly gamble.

Found the heart emote, trying to replace shadow with border, haven't looked at the fonts yet.

Thank you to whoever posted the fonts

edit #37. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11248864/#11252086

>>11365458
An update, taking your feedback into account.
I must say, you calling rape what it is is hot, I really like the cadence of the word. Yet if somebody wanted to have a problem with what you make, that would be the #2 best reason (#1 is always underage girls). My instinct is to instantly look for a euphemism, but kudos for your bravery.
Girls like to be restrained, slapped, hair pulled, but pretend they never had rape fantasies, it's so cringe

Most complex smegma I've drawn to date.
Unfortunately, I don't have a good video of the process because I initially made it zoomed out. I had intended just to do AngelAuxes' style with a little variation, but as I went I started adding dots all around like a sort of LewdCromulo style, then decided to connect those dots to make stranda like how PrevYourBrain does it. After that, the AngelAuxes style didn't really fit so Unchanged it a bit to make it more suited to these addition details

>>11365837
wow!! crazy lewd dialogue, anon!!! though, personally i prefer rape over loli, haha. i tend to prefer emotional taboos (rape, pain, abuse) over more physical ones like loli, wearing inappropriate dresses in public, etc.

also, i am too lazy to do it now, but i reread my proposed correction rentry, and i think i'd like to amend/ take back one thing i said, but i'm too lazy to edit it right now, so i'll just tell you it right here: i was wrong about the "future tense" thing i said about paragraph five (5):
>"you" should be "you'd"/"you would", since the "you'll" just before establishes the sentence as being future tense, so doing this will make it match the tense
you didn't make the change anyway- so that's a relief-, but this made me realize that i should've prefaced the whole thing with a disclaimer saying that as in all art, correctness is merely a suggestion, not a rule, so limiting opportunity for creative expression for the sake of correctness doesn't always do the art justice. but in this case, anyway, i was simply wrong about the use cases, in my outright saying that there was only one (1) correct option, and yours was a mistake, sorry. for example, consider the following sentences:
>you should go to the festival; you'll see something [you'd] like
>you should go to the festival; you'll see something [you] like
while it's true that past the semicolon the former has standardized tenses and the latter doesn't (which i thought made the latter incorrect), the one with differing tenses isn't incorrect; looking at the context, it only suggests that it's referring to the "you" in the present, and not the prospective (future tense) "you". it is a meaningful distinction, in that making it future tense (my original proposed only correct option... sorry), you divorce the person from the present, which culls sympathy. keeping it present tense like you did just affirms you're referring to them right now, and not the idea that their taste will change down the road

>>11365837
i ran out of space, but two other things is that in my original proposed corrections, i either didn't notice or forgot to say that "some time" in the third (3rd) paragraph should be one word ("sometime"). and in this second draft of your caption, you forgot to replace the heart in the sixth (6th) paragraph with the "unicode" one (looking it up myself, that seems to be the term for them), so they aren't standardized. but otherwise it's just good stuff!!! good job!!! but sorry if i shamed you out of using "bald" in sexual contexts... sorry. "shaved" is a good word for it, though!!! it literally never occurred to me!!!
>>11365894
bro, WTF!!! i literally have been dreading even trying to draw smegma for nearly two (2) WEEKS now (13 days), just because even my meagre attempt to do the least stressed me out so much, and i procrastinated about it for days and days. but you're out here doing insane rendering that depicts literal dripping smegma with mass and shading and layers upon layers, and you even had to put some of it beneath precum!!!! i'm literally not gassing you up at all when i say you're insane... i pretty much just gave up on trying anymore, cause i found it so stressful to only even mange so little. though, i did see these smegma edits of borvar drawings (the first has a version with flies encircling it, but i have no interest in drawing that, so it's not useful as a reference for me, but it's the fourth [4th] image in the siblings list at the top if you want to see it):
https://booru.borvar.art/posts/3061
https://booru.borvar.art/posts/3424

only the first has an editor as an artist tag, but they look like the same style, so i assume the second just didn't credit them. but, to me this looks just as easy to draw as the same one mamimi smegma drawing i've referenced a lot, except this shows mass better, because it uses layers of different colors. so i've thought about trying, but keep procrastinating... but i respect your ambition so much, anon

>>11365906
To be fair, worked on it over 3 days because I couldn't get it to feel right
I made another quick one, because I wanted to show how I did the mass of smegma. Although in the other one, I started out just drawing the fill colour, this time ai decided to start with the blobs. I found it's easiest when you start from the centre where the blobs will be mostly round. As they move towards the top, they (should) get a little flatter and at thr bottom a little droopier. Defining all the shapes first I found works best. Then you can going through and thickening the lines where there is more shadow, and thin/remove the lines where there is less.
I also found that hiding background helps for getting the overall shape right. When you can see the shape of the dick without the dick, you know you did it right.

I posted the full image here >>11365927

>>11365906
I thought I did change it, though. It's becoming a bit of a mess of edits, so let it be a happy accident, like the one heart emoji I forgot to replace. As in "bald", its kinky when trashy characters make derogatory remarks about themselves, but that's why I put it up for feedback. Who knows, maybe there are a lot of balding people who'll get upset by it? Not on this board though, it's the self-acceptance central. Love the topic of pubic hair - if she lets'em be natural it's like you are both wild animals, if she shaves often it's like she knows she might need to show it off any day of the week.

I put loli and shota apart though. Shota is often an underdog story I have personal emotional connection to. Like if your classmates found out you're banging a teacher or at least an older girl you'd be the coolest kid for the next 5 years, while if you are a girl, they'd put you into therapy and the guy behind bars or 6 feet under. There is enough stories where a lady tries to cause distress to an innocent boy by showing herself off and fondling his genitals, but to the me is the kind of distress that causes growth and independence. At least once that short fling is over. And if an underage girl gets coaxed into sex, it leads to whore makeup, brash cynical attitude and trying to sell herself up the social ladder, once the initial shock is over. So, I love the teenage/milf sextoy degenerate, once the got over the men-hating phase, innocence does nothing for me. It's almost religious, because we all exist thanks to sex and any pleasure is by design divine.
I'm also not amused by kids trying to figure out whats what on their own, there must be at least one person who knows what they are doing.

Smegma smell is a bit much for me, but I'd be happy to give my girl a warm shower or get blasted in the face with squirt. And don't get me started on horse dicks

edit #38. original by foreskin anon in >>>/d/ddg:
https://rentry.co/Foreskin_Anon
>Single Characters > Enterprise (Azur Lane) > _enterprise azur lane_00009_.png

mirror:
https://files.catbox.moe/x85fqy.png
>>11365933
>I found it's easiest when you start from the centre where the blobs will be mostly round. As they move towards the top, they (should) get a little flatter and at thr bottom a little droopier.
i don't know what you meant by "this time ai decided to start with the blobs", but, wow!!! that makes perfect sense, but i've never thought of that before!!! i mean, obviously i knew that should be the case, but when i was actually trying to edit in smegma, i thought since i wanted there to be so much of it anyway that since the foreskin wouldn't be obscuring it from any angle that i didn't have to worry about that much. but especially in the first smegma edit i did, where you couldn't see the entire outline of the foreskin, that should've demanded heeding perspective more. i'm still dragging my feet about trying to draw smegma, but i appreciate your sharing your legacy and thought process with me anyway, even though as far as inspiring me goes, for now it's still wasted... sorry
>>11365950
i'm ngl, i honestly don't think about the social connotations or ramifications of porn very much, haha. to me i just pluck subject matter and drop them into a world where being casual about sexuality is normalized, so no matter what the topic is, i kind of just float on the casualness of it, and it writes itself, for me, anyway. so if it were me, any loli/shota would just be a vehicle for more casual content were the scenario to go for long enough, rather than be grounded in reality, where people need to actually heed and conform to social standards, and have normal expectations of modesty for themselves and others

but yeah, smegma is just my fav, along with pee, haha. but since i only edit ai-generated art, it's not very possible to find gens with either, especially done well

edit #39. original by blurry eyes in >>>/d/ddg:
>>11365970
picrel had some bri'ish teef going on, so i used my extremely pro (nonexistent) drawing skills to change ones of (>9) pixels to black in her mouth to erase a tooth, so it looks like you're only seeing one of her top teeth, rather than two with a gap between them. i think it helps a lot, but it's such a small edit (literally, in scale) that i'm not sure anyone would notice had i not said anything. but here's the captionless version with only that edit anyway:
https://files.catbox.moe/voa76r.png

>>11366174
>ones of (>9)
i meant less than ("<")

>>11365986
>i don't know what you meant by "this time ai decided to start with the blobs",
I mean I started with drawing the circles. In the prior one I had just drawn the sillohette, then the circles on top, then darkened and erased. It's a bit easier if you start with the circles to make sure you can fit all the shapes in and they look good together. If you're trying to fill an area you already defined, you become a bit limited and my end up having to change the sillohette more

>>11366174
please do more cum log captions.
sometimes I wonder how it would feel to push one of these out

original by blurry eyes in >>>/d/ddg:
>>11366594
edit #40. request #6 >>11366533
>please do more cum log captions.

it took me making this caption to realize it, but i think what i felt was off about my last caption >>11366174 was that the "stroke" (outline) and proportional gaussian blur "stroke" layers were too bold. the reference i use for the font/"stroke" sizes are 1536 image width = 50 font + 3 "stroke". in this case, that meant ~41 font + 2.4375 "stroke". ever since my "drug trip" caption >>11357596, i've been rounding up 2 "stroke" to 3. but now that i have the gaussian blur "stroke" layers for added contrast, i think i shouldn't anymore

>>11366533
i simply don't have any material to do any more cum log captions for, though. that last one was actually my second one; the first is >>11364053 if you haven't seen it. the genner who's doing these in /ddg/ downloaded a lora specifically to do them, so more gens of them must exist out there somewhere, but i don't know how to find them. before the /ddg/ genner made these, the only ones i'd seen were some low-quality ones on an imageboard that's wordfiltered here, which i posted screenshots of the thumbnails of here >>11363751
>https://files.catbox.moe/vm9yve.png
since then, i also found a genner who did it a few times. here's an example:
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=12169680
https://x.com/FUTAALOVERX/status/1874798223417827439

the art style is appealing, but the cocks are a bit hyper for my tastes, and there is little opportunity for casual dialogue when it's a naked girl in public, or bottomless schoolgirl (i really hate bottomless, since it's just the opposite of casual). and they're all touching their dicks- which the one i linked is okay about, since she doesn't have much of a handle on it, but still-, which makes it way less casual, too. there's just not much i can do with these gens, even if i wanted. so as far as i can tell, this is the last of the subject matter i can do for now

>>11366820
i ran out of space, but about my editing logic, i've always struggled with square images, since once i started calculating font size using width (or otherwise the narrowest side of the image), i quickly realized that if an image is square, the font size is actually much bigger proportionally than i expect it to be, so i have little real estate to put a caption. so far i've been dealing with it in non-standardized ways, or just tanking it if i could, but i think i've settled on standardizing it by converting the image to 13:19 ratio, which i know nothing about drawing/photography or maybe just aesthetic aspect ratios, but 1248x1824 seems to be a fairly common res for gens, which is 13:19. i'm kinda retarded, though, so i couldn't figure out how to convert square image resolutions to 13:19 using any online calculator, so i watched a youtube video on how to calculate it manually:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZoTDpK5fLo

i only needed to watch the first minute of it to get it. so finally standardizing font sizes for square images is nice
>>11366517
ooh, sorry; i thought "ai" wasn't a misspelling of "i", so you were saying you were using ai in the drawing process somehow. i understand, now, sorry about that

>>11366820
lmfao so funnily enough this is the one i asked of you in the other thread,

>>11367006(me)
or I guess it'd be more accurate to say "asked of another guy"

edit #41. original from >>>/d/ddg:
>>11366910
i realized since my last post that there was no reason for me not to just convert the aspect ratio of all gens i edit to 13:19 to scale my font size to such, since it's standardize it absolutely, and increase the density in most cases (barring extremely narrow gens). so to say it again for convenience, to do so i start with my original proportions of:
>1536 image width = 50 font + 3 "stroke" (outline)
then, for this specific image, for example, i convert the aspect ratio to 13:19, which with the original being 1536x1824 (16:19), becomes 1365x1995 res. i then divide the width by each other (1536/1365), then either divide the font/"stroke" size by the difference to scale them down proportionally if the res is smaller (such as in this case), or multiple the font/"stroke" by such to scale them up proportionally. in this case it ended up being ~44.4 (rounded down to 40) font size, and ~2.66 (rounded up to 3) "stroke" size. it's just another step to added to the process of making a caption, but finally standardizing font/"stroke" size makes it worth it

>>11367095
forgot to add that my gaussian blur "stroke" (outline) layers (3 total) have a value of 7.5 when the normal "stroke" layer is 3 pixels. also my gaussian blur "stroke" layers do not have any "grow" size added to them. i explained such here >>11363459
>so i did "alpha to selection" on the text layer as usual, but rather than going to "select" > "grow", growing it by an arbitrary amount, then creating a new layer below the text to paint bucket fill with black (which is how anon taught me how to do "stroke"), you skip the "grow" step

>>11367095
actually i will only do this calculation to increase text density; if the image is narrower (which would result in converting it to 13:19 res decreasing text density), i'll just scale the text down using the actual width of the image

pee warning. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11306933/#11309894

edit #42

>>11367214
i've got another place she can put that for me to keep warm

>>11367214
somehow only noticed the 2nd paragraph having a space before the last ellipsis after posting. fixed version:
https://files.catbox.moe/btv6l0.png

toddlercon warning. original from >>>/trash/slop:
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/72817517/#72819684

edit #43

period blood (menstruation) warning. original from >>>/trash/wvp:
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/72683455/#72696026

edit #44

ryona warning. original from >>>/vt/vtai:
https://warosu.org/vt/thread/92082600#p92120062

edit #45

cunny warning. original from >>>/trash/slop:
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/74030388/#74033587
>https://files.catbox.moe/jd0wcz.png
edit #46

>>11367783
i realized i accidentally forgot to check whether the manually shortened paragraphs started/ended with a space (depending on left/right alignment respectively), and this edit had the last two ending in a space (which i guess i just typed out manually without realizing, independent of aligning them). fixed version here:
https://files.catbox.moe/14qnlc.png

i've noticed enough mistakes after posting that i will make a checklist of things to check before doing the "stroke" (outline) layers, which is when amending mistakes would become annoying. off the top of my head (and based off the previous mistakes i've noticed since posting, it should include:
-copy all text into notepad++ (separating each text box by the enter key [double-spacing manually shortened paragraphs for legibility]), then paste into the 4chan "quick reply" window in your browser for autocorrect
-confirm that punctuation signifying the end of a sentence is followed by a space (unless it's the end of the paragraph)
-confirm that punctuation is not preceded by a space (unless they're sound effects, opening parentheses, or closing hyphens)
-confirm that the first letter of every sentence is capitalized (barring special circumstance such as an ellipsis demanding being followed by a lowercase letter to signify being the same sentence)
-confirm apostrophes are where they should be (making sure not to conflate "it's" and "its", "who's" and "whose", etc.)
-counts periods in ellipses to confirm they all have three (regardless of whether they're followed by exclamation marks or question marks)
-check that stutters start with a logical sound (e.g. "th-there" rather than "t-there")
-check that manually shortened paragraphs do not start/end with a space (depending on left/right alignment respectively)
-don't be lazy when manually shortening paragraphs; if it doesn't look right, undo as far back as you have to, then shorten a word (or far more) early or late, hoping for a butterfly effect that looks good

>>11367834
i ran out of space anyway, but a few more things to add:
-don't be lazy about changing the color of the text for legibility when proofreading, knowing you'd have to change it later (this only affects me because i use gimp rather than inkscape, so i don't have"stroke" [outline] for legibility until i tediously add it manually)
-frequently make the image layer invisible (and turn any active guides/selections invisible) for fresh eyes on the edit itself, to see if anything pops-out as being glaringly wrong

>>11367834
another:
-confirm that commas are followed by a space (and closing parentheses are too, unless followed by punctuation)

>>11367844
i guess i should also add:
-confirm that opening parentheses are preceded by a space

>>11367834
>-check that manually shortened paragraphs do not start/end with a space (depending on left/right alignment respectively)
i've started dicking around on another caption idea, and i'm noticing that what happens is when typing a first draft for a paragraph, i end it in a space by default, since i consider it a victimless crime. but obviously for caption-making it isn't if i'm aligning the paragraph to the right, since that would make the last line unaligned by that space. so i added an exclamation mark ("[!]") after the word "right" in this checklist note thing, since it seems easiest for me to absentmindedly fuck it up

>>11367834
>-confirm that punctuation is not preceded by a space (unless they're sound effects, opening parentheses, or closing hyphens)
sorry, i was wrong about this. closing hyphens are not an exception. for example:
>last night i went to the bar- a gay bar, mind you-, and it was gay
neither the opening nor closing hyphen are preceded by a space. i didn't think it right in my head writing of this

>>11367834
another i could add:
-confirm that "I"s (including contractions like "I'd", "I'm", etc.) are capitalized

>>11367834
another:
-make sure the text box doesn't cut off the text (can happen even horizontally in gimp, albeit rarely. sometimes can't be helped with certain fonts when aligning the text to the right)

smegma warning. original from >>>/jp/2huai:
https://warosu.org/jp/thread/49599942#p49673819

edit #47

my first time doing a skin tone edit. i really dreaded trying, and procrastinated about it for a lot, but i watched several video tutorials about it, and got so inspired by how easy it looked. in the end, it took me five (5) attempts to get one i was satisfied with. desu, looking back at them, all attempts but my first were okay-ish (i exported them as .pngs for easy reference), but my first was way saturated, which made me realize that saturation increases the noise (jpeg artifacts) by a lot. one of the generic youtube tutorials i watched on the tool itself (in gimp btw; the video tutorials i watched on editing skin color specifically were all photoshop, but i'm using gimp), the guy did mention holding back because of noise, but i didn't expect it to be so bad. i assume i wasn't doing anything wrong, but just a huge spectrum of skin colors were off-limits due to the noise being super noticeable. i ended up making the skin tone lighter than i would've liked just due to noise concerns

... well, i said all that, but then comparing them, i still prefer the darker skin tone anyway. the contrast is just a lot better. mind you, i think it is poor contrast against my caption, since the fucking shadow silhouette of a character you haven't unlocked yet at the bottom of the screen is grabbing all the attention. but still. also, a while ago i said this >>11363461
>another quirk about gimp i learned is that undoing and redoing layers does NOT redo their "fx" (effects, i presume) modification
this just isn't true i guess??? so i guess i'm just schizo. i ended up fucking with the last two paragraphs so much, then after all that realized that i preferred how they were like an hour prior anyway, when comparing my export for reference against it. so i undid literally like an hour of fucking with it, and even undid deleting the "gaussian blur" layers, and it just werked

>>11368414
well, about the undo/redo fx (effects) thing, i just somehow found the energy to test it, and both are right, actually: you can undo/redo deletions just fine, but redoing a duplicated layer does NOT restore its fx (effects) modification. so i wasn't just schizo the first time. scary stuff

>>11368414
i only remembered to export this captionless after catbox came back online and i expected to see the captionless version next to the captioned version in my rentry. captionless version:
https://files.catbox.moe/gwbkre.png

straight shota warning. original by DualShock in >>>/b/degen:
https://thebarchive.com/b/thread/928789504/#928792556

edit #48

edit #49. original by blurry eyes in >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11365586/#11367946

>>11369038
sorry, forgot the post was still active, so i didn't need to use an archive link
>>11367946

>>11369038
i missed a dropped "s". fixed version here:
https://files.catbox.moe/0zzer9.png

i got mindlessly dependent on my editing checklist, and didn't proofread beyond copy-pasting the text into notepad++ then pasting it into a 4chan quick reply window in my browser for autocorrect
>>11367834
also adding:
-check for grammatical errors spellcheck wouldn't pick-up on (accidentally using the singular version of a word rather than the plural version [such as "apple" instead of "apples"] saying "is" instead of "it", etc.)

i tried to do my second skin tone edit, but it looks really bad, and i don't think i have the experience to necessarily know how to make it look immersive, so i think i'm gonna give up and just ask the genner to gen a version with it for me since they're a /ddg/ genner so they're easy to contact, and they'll probably indulge me

i also learned several things about gimp.

1: saving the project file mid-"free select" tool closes your selection prematurely; it does NOT save you progress mid-selection,. you CAN SAVE THIS BEFORE YOU SWITCH OFF THE TOOL (closing the program or the project tab counts as switching off the tool) if you used "anchor" points to make the selection (rather than freehand drawing it), but i didn't know this, so i was at the mercy of what the straight line it did from the start anchor to the end anchor would end up being. it didn't cut off that much, so i managed to salvage most of it, but i specifically tried to save the project file mid-selection hoping to not lose any progress, so this was the exact opposite of what i wanted, and was super stressful for me

2. opening a project file with a selection active automatically saves it to a locked channel and opens the project file with unsaved changes

3. choosing "crop to selection" retroactively crops ALL your channels to that new canvas size, and undoing it does NOT reverse it. pic related

this fucking program (gimp) is full of unintuitive death traps everywhere... but i'm learning them the hard way, i guess... so at least i'm learning them...

>>11369546
i thought about it btw, and i think my mistake might be that painstakingly making sure not to select the cum might never look good. the way i do skin tone edits (and the way every tutorial i watched on them specifically did them) is you select the skin, then you change the color curves/levels/hue-saturation/saturation until it's the way you want it. so selecting cum and sweat should be okay, because as you can see in my attempt i gave up on, the glare on the skin got toned-down to match the skin i darkened. so had i just selected everything it'd probably look more immersive for it, and have required less effort to boot. again, i gave up on trying to do this skin tone edit this time, but next time i'll try this

edit #50. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11310109/#11311904

50 edits is a huge milestone, i think!!! i've been slowing-down as gens that immediately inspire me (or ideas i have for them sooner than i see an appropriate gen) have been mostly spent, but i still have some juice left in me, i think. it's just a matter of now having the means to express myself, so i can do so when the opportunity arises, rather than just moving on without having done so. so i'll simply have more edits in my legacy as time goes on

virtually all of my "edits" have just been captions, and i only even tried to draw smegma twice (2 times), despite the fact that pee and smegma are my number one favorite thing, and what would endlessly inspire me were i able to draw smegma, or even draw pee. i know that male genitalia (all i care for) makes pee corkscrew, but i can't imagine drawing it, even so, so i haven't even looked at references for it, really. but even smegma, i am just so stressed trying- despite having seen references that inspire me to try, since they seem very doable when you narrow the scope of what you're looking at, and just view it as extrapolating from that-, so i don't know if i have it in me to learn how to draw smegma, to be able to confidently draw it whenever i'd like, without it stressing me... it's a bit embarrassing calling my captions "edits" when they're basically just horny text posts (that i admittedly do spend a while typesetting, which i've learned a lot about since starting, but i've hardly put into words since i am VERY OCD about it, literally measuring things pixel-perfectly, employing patterns and parallel lines, learning how to standardize things and what looks better NOT standardizing...), but i can't really go back to calling them just "captions" anymore after i've tried drawing smegma... i guess i still could have, but i wanted to give myself some credit, even though having all but given-up on it, i'm embarrassed by such now...

>>11369546
i think the genner i tried to bum a dark-skinned version off this gen of theirs off of grew tired of doing minor changes to the gen at my whimsy, which i felt super bad about throughout, but even after all i put them through i didn't realize that the expression was the most important part, which i didn't do justice the first time i noticed they changed it, when i described it as "cool and composed". i would later change it to "borderline innocent apathy" after they indulged literally every other nitpicking change i could come up with and only then noticed that the expression was off (in it being stern instead), but by then it appears it was too late. i just feel that the expression in the original provides much more opportunity for motivational complexity, while also making it more casual from the apathy, and more taboo from the innocent look

so like a cunt who wasted the genner's time, i went back to try to make a skin tone edit on the original work again. my idea i mentioned i'd try next time was no good, and this is the end result of that. i guess glare on skin scaling proportional to the skin tone only makes sense, but cum doesn't, because it reflects light much better than skin, and in this case maybe completely independently of the skin, since it's so thick. so the solution must be to just refine my first attempt, so for now i assume my painstakingly trying to avoid selecting the cum wasn't wasted. i will try it later when i can be arsed. i only have so much motivation in me to try learning new things, or developing skills...

edit #51. original by 0.4 in >>>/d/ddg:
>>11369688

1/12

>>11370318
2/12

>>11370319
3/12

>>11370320
4/12

>>11370322
5/12

>>11370322
5/12 with image

>>11370324
6/12

>>11370325
7/12

>>11370326
8/12

>>11370327
9/12

>>11370329
10/12

>>11370330
11/12

>>11370332
12/12

edit #52. original from >>>/vt/vtai:
https://archive.palanq.win/vt/thread/91980578/#91999025

>>11370318
desu i'm kind of a hypocrite saying this, cause if i were to somehow ever do long-form content idk if i'd do the following, but i think since each page has a border, you could afford to put a page number on each page, without concern for it breaking immersion. otherwise there's a lot of stuff i can't comment on since i don't add any bells or whistles to any captions i do, and i can't comment on panelling, sound effects, using different fonts; anything. but i think the vertical spacing in the fonts you use might be super bad. mind you, the one (1) font i use is not much better, and i didn't change it at all. but still. an anon posted an image with some standardized fonts they recommended >>11361958, if it'd help. maybe depending on the program you use to edit you can change the vertical spacing regardless, but still

also, the first page featuring a hand gesture when she has six fingers (and even her thumb looks kinda bad) is super noticeable, considering it is the centrepiece of the page

>>11370346
>>11370346
you can fully shut the fuck up. you don't even use your own gens and the only information ill take is the hand one. it takes time to actually edit panels and make a decent storyline. the font doesn't really matter because everyone has their own style and so do you. i honestly think you are Impenitent pleb nobody asked for. i posted because i was proud of a doujin i made and gave to you for free. suck my clit

>>11361081
do you have a pateron or a site where you post so i can support and follow you?

>>11370346
marrying this girl immediately, I am NOT passing up a slut with a bush who secretly wants me to ravage her ass instead of her pussy
>>11370448
its pretty hard to read your comic honestly. the typesetting is rough

>>11370465
in what way do you mean? as in what she is saying or the narration? i only edit on canva since i can long scroll on it.

>>11370471
I guess if you're just scrolling vertically like a webtoon then it wouldn't be much of a problem, but the vertical spacing makes it rough to follow.
The sound effects and onomatopoeia are fine.
Also, there's a technique they use in translating manga where they try to limit lines to only one or two words, and break sentences up in certain ways.
For example, here in the first panel>>11370327
They'd break it up like
>Need to
>go to the gym
>,or take some
>maca root!
>You can't
>keep tapping out
>like this
>,dickweed.

You've got it mostly correct, its just finding the most natural line breaks that make it easy to read while lowering your eyes rather than going left to right. It also might be better to use a thicker font and add just a little dropshadow if you're not gonna use speech bubbles.

>>11370473
heard and understood. i like the webtoon format so i guess ill post it like that in the future. i don't like speech bubbles because it blocks the scene too much. i also understand the lines as well, ill send this commission i'm working on when i'm done with the edits u suggested.

>>11370476
gotcha, good luck!

>>11370448
>you can fully shut the fuck up. you don't even use your own gens
never said i did, and that has nothing to do with my feedback (which wasn't hostile nor mean)
>it takes time to actually edit panels and make a decent storyline
never said it didn't, nor did i comment on such
>the font doesn't really matter because everyone has their own style and so do you.
saying the font has a lot of space between it wasn't an attack against you; i was merely pointing out that you have options for otherwise
>i honestly think you are Impenitent pleb nobody asked for.
what does this even mean. the word "impertinent" means "irrelevant", and "pleb" means someone of lower-class. do you want me to apologize for saying *looks at notes*... that adding page numbers is an option, that your font has a lot of vertical space between them, and for linking you a resource with standardized font options?
>i posted because i was proud of a doujin i made and gave to you for free. suck my clit
i don't understand why you are so hostile. sorry that happened to you, i guess

>>11370465
>marrying this girl immediately, I am NOT passing up a slut with a bush who secretly wants me to ravage her ass instead of her pussy
i'm glad you like it, anon

smegma warning. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11288567/#11292609

edit #53

pee/smegma warning. original by 0.4 in >>>/d/ddg:
>>11371271

edit #54

for this one i found that my 60% smaller font size to indicate quieter/unsaid speech was too small, so i literally opened the original in gimp and increased/decreased the font size of letters i put next to it to figure out the sizes and their difference, which was 17/14, which is ~82.4% difference, so with the font sized i used being 49, i just rounded it to 80%, which rounded the smaller font to 39 (plugging the exact percentage difference of the original into a calculator would've resulted in me rounding to 39, though). also i hate to be a gatekeeping cunt, so since i said the reference out loud, i'll just link it without anyone asking (it's ironic and kinda gross btw)
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/thirsty-little-flower

and while i'm at it, here's the reference i added to an earlier caption of mine, too:
>>11368560
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/dude-let-me-in-im-a-fairy

another thing is that in the past when i wanted to fuck with the placing of paragraphs after adding my normal "stroke" (outline) layer (and my gaussian blur "stroke" layers once i started doing them), i would literally either delete or turn the "stroke" layers invisible, move the paragraph, then tediously re-apply the "stroke" layers, which i would do potentially for literally even only moves of a single pixel. but during this caption it somehow occurred to me that since i watched a tutorial that taught me to use "groups" in gimp at some point, that i could add the text layer and its "stroke" layers to a group, then move the group. it just werks. it helps a lot

>>11371529
>which rounded the smaller font to 39 (plugging the exact percentage difference of the original into a calculator would've resulted in me rounding to 39, though)
second "39" was meant to be 40

edit #55. original from >>>/d/ddg:
>>11371707

edit #56. original from >>>/trash/wvp:
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/72683455/#72712073

i think the vertical spacing in my font ("pally bold") is finally starting to bother me, so i'm going to try reducing it from now on, hopefully in just a single change and kept standardized following

>>11372490
unfortunately gimp doesn't seem to scale line spacing proportionally for font sizes, so i can't just set a line spacing offset and forget about it. i found the most problematic letters in my font ("pally bold") to be the lowercase letters "qbfjlg"), so for every caption from now on when i calculate (or maybe one day arbitrarily choose) the font size for any given image, i will have to paste those lowercase letters into a text box twice, separating them by a line, then manually count the pixels to make sure they're separated by the arbitrary spacing i want them to be (in this case one pixel from the lowest point of the lowest lowercase letter and the highest point of the highest lowercase letter)

I did this like three days ago.
I'm fairly proud of it, even if I know it could be a little better. Unfortunately, four hours was already enough time, and I never dove back in.

>>11372537
Look like a game sprite if you were to be a game developer...

>>11372539
Funnily enough, I did sprite work for Salvor Deep, but this one was much easier.
Salvor Deep was all black and white and super big as an artistic choice from the dev. It looked groovy, but was a bit of a pain to animate.
Something small like this was a relative cakewalk, even if it was three times the length.

edit #57. original from >>>/trash/slop:
https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/72440414/#72441453

>>11372537
bruh... wtf is this ORIGINAL CONTENT shit??? requiring SKILL, AMBITION, and DISCIPLINE to DRAW??? and not only that, but ANIMATE???? the brutal mogging just never stops

dark skin + light hair is super based btw. i guess her hair is grey, so it's not really "light", but still. and look at those hips!!!

Any Cock Vore related stuff?

>>11372608
D'aww shucks~.... Thanks.

It's supposed to be Funou from Futanari no Elf. Someone else drew an original single sprite, and I clicked it, thinking it was animated.
It wasn't... That just wouldn't do.
So, I converted it, touched it up and cleaned the colors, and then let my autism take the reins. 244 frames later, it was 9pm and I had college in the morning so I had to stop.

>>11372878
what the fuck, man. so casually and spontaneously doing something so high production value is, again, the brutal mogging i did not expect from this thread that until now the art has only been in the form of edits. but i'm glad it was college and not preschool. i guess youtube (and tiktok if i browsed it) would deliver on mogging me harder if i sought it out

>>11372935
Well, not to mog more, but I think it's actually done now.
Don't demean yourself or sell yourself short! I'm still learning, and you can do the same. If there's something you want to do, and I mean really want to, go for it. No one can judge someone for trying their hardest and doing something a little crazy.

>>11372968
>Well, not to mog more, but I think it's actually done now.
well, at least you're kind about it, but, yeah, i definitely DON'T have the discipline and all that to learn how to draw, or anything, lmao. i literally have a drawing tablet i don't deserve, and i did try to draw once like a year and a half ago, but i just can't; i even put in an hour a day for probably a few weeks (hopping between different things to do, but eventually settling on sketching "gesures"), but i just felt so stressed and hopeless and my heart wasn't in it anyway, so i dropped it, just as i'd never tried prior in my life. i respect being able to draw from scratch, though. to me it's so fucked-up. i just can't imagine getting that far. and, again, even learning to animate!!! i definitely feel a thread like this doesn't expect you to DRAW the ENTIRE artwork, and even drawings limited-scope edits is so stressful for me that i only tried it twice a month ago and never again. so thanks for the inspiring words all the same, but, in me, your faith is missplaced, lmao. i haven't learned to draw for a reason, and the reason is for a systematic lack of trying, from not having the ambition to see it through

>>11372973
Russian guy here, here's a less cursed one-pager from my porn notebook, at least you can figure out what's happening. I think. I guess it deserves to exist in this thread in an uncleaned photo format, spring and all. Done it a while ago, the goal being not having to use text, there are much less fortunate attempts

Having a bit of trouble picking images that don't already have text lately, looking for something dungeon themed. Liking your latest stuff, esp the hairy upskirt one

>>11372981
o, all i do are captions!!! and mostly conventionally disgusting stuff!!! the ones i do that AREN'T disgusting are VERY few and far between, but they're still probably taboo!!! HUGE content warning for reading even a single word of the shit i caption!!!! but i'm glad you found at least some appeal to any of them, haha

but bruh... i feel so bad that you're posting ORIGINAL ART in the thread where i've just been filling it with captions!!! i can't even bring myself to TRY drawing, let alone stick with it enough to produce something i can be proud of!!! truth be told, i don't even know why you're hanging around with us, lmao. even among captions, i don't add any flair to them like >>11361008 does, and even limited-scope edits (involving subject matter i'll spare jumpscaring you with here), there's an anon here who does them so immersively that it's inarguably just honed drawing skill. then there's me, lmao. one font with an outline (and eventually also blurred outline) for legibility

(here's a more confusing one, deer hunting season)

>>11372986
I mean, if you do captions, it's not beyond reason that you can push out a post-length flash-fiction with a plot all your own. If you need to clear some quality bar, it would always be better to lean on the things you know how to do already, otherwise just have fun with it.

My biggest obstacle was always "why do it", because 90% of people only care about the top 5% of stuff, which you won't realistically get into until late in your career. It's pretty easy to get to the level I'm at, fun even, but it's little more than a parlor trick. AI has me mogged most days of the week, especially with it figuring out Melkor Mancin, Kunaboto and Incase styles to the point I can't always tell its AI and every r34 submission is now at least a 7/10 mathematically correct venus I could plap for days.

In my search for a worthwile project I attempted gamedev multiple times, inevitably dropping it because it's such a huge time sink and I'm like a different person every few months, rotating between hobbies. It's common advice to make games as small as possible and share them as soon as possible to get enagement, but I just couldn't get excited by anything small, while also unwilling to join a team.

Getting into short stories instead of novels only was the first step for me, after I came across an annual horror story complation published in Russia that had stuff like gang rape, cannibalism and folk festivals of banging wild undead. Still yet to finish one of my own though. I feel like caption stuff can be the gamechanger for me, because it's inherently trashy and looked down upon even by other gooners, yet satisfying because you are your own target audience

If you wanna have fun drawing, start copying people's shit and never say sorry

>>11372522
>then manually count the pixels to make sure they're separated by the arbitrary spacing i want them to be (in this case one pixel from the lowest point of the lowest lowercase letter and the highest point of the highest lowercase letter)
i had half a mind since this post to actually standardize this proportionally by calculating how a one pixel difference would scale for higher font sizes, but i tested it at some 400+ font size (even adding my "stroke" layers to it), and i don't think it looked bad, or anything (where i purposely arranged the letters such that they'd touch without the one-pixel difference), so i think i'll just keep a one pixel difference for every font size, since it's technically higher density, anyway. also, i accidentally zoomed-into the lowercase "j" of my font ("pally bold") and found that it actually technically reaches one (1) pixel lower than the other lowercase letters, even if in an imperceptible way unless you're using absurd font sizes. so the only letters i need to measure spacing are "f" as the highest and "j" as the lowest lowercase letter. but it's weird, since at font size 41 i thought i was being schizo in thinking "f" reached higher than the other lowercase letters, but then at 50 font size it did again. of course, at bigger font sizes these slight distinctions become increasingly blatant to see, so it's still correct to only use these letters for reference. i'd post an image of me looking at this in gimp again, but after realizing that the "j" reached lower than the others (which ends-up reaching waay lower than them at that 400+ font size), i didn't want to post that failed reference for what a one pixel gap looks like, and was too lazy to remake it properly

actually, after making three max-character text posts i have yet to submit, i felt the least i could do is open gimp and remake the one pixel line spacing comparison properly, so only 2/3 of my max-character posts are text posts. 500 vs. 50 font size

>>11373018
i mean, the fact that you dip your toes into so much speaks to me about the difference between you and i, haha. not that being a potential "jack of all trades, master of none" demonstrates ambition, but still, i can't even imagine committing to a single thing for the sake of creative expression, yet you've dabbled in so many, haha. plus, even if you diminish your art skill, it's crazy to me to be able to get that far at all, haha

about ai, i mean, even ignoring my lacking the ambition to ever learn how to draw, ever, even if i somehow /did/ have the ambition to draw, i personally wouldn't feel demotivated by ai, because... well, i'm thinking about it, but i don't know if i am conscious of the reason why, sorry. but i guess i would envy the time investment and discipline difference between the two skillsets, in ai requiring far less. i guess i just feel, if i had the ambition to draw, drawing in itself would be the reward. for me, making captions comes easy to me (at least in the format i'm making them; i've seen some people just basically write short stories as a caption (likely just beside the image, rather than typesetted over it like i do), so i don't really feel like making the caption is its own reward; i would like appreciation for it, haha. so, if i were alone in the universe, i wouldn't bother making captions, right. but i could see myself learning to draw, provides i could find the inspiration to do so. of course (or, maybe it doesn't go without saying, but personally) were i an artist, i would post my art online in every circumstance somewhere- provided i got to the point where i were proud enough of it-, save for art studies or works-in-progress or just putting hours in to hone my skill, etc.. but like, me just drawing something gratuitous and self-indulgent? i'd post it, always, and i'd like appreciation for it, haha

>>11373018
>>11373238
i ran out of space, but i meant to add, i guess by my own logic, ai competing for my prospective audience with a much lower barrier for entry- or potentially even replicating my art style outright- would result in my getting less appreciation for my art. but, to me, art is something i feel i can make for the sake of leaving a legacy, as in it's something i could truly do for the sake of itself. so any conceivable praise and appreciation for it would strictly be secondary. of course, maybe the dynamic could change if i were say fulfilling someone's request, in which case it not being my own legacy left primarily for myself would make me think about ai devaluing my art more. but all of this is just a thought exercise for me, anyway, since i don't have the ambition to learn how to draw, so i never would
>I feel like caption stuff can be the gamechanger for me, because it's inherently trashy and looked down upon even by other gooners, yet satisfying because you are your own target audience
in a way it's true, but as i said before, i really do hope for appreciation for my captions, haha. even though most of it is left field, gratuitous stuff, and my passion is a specific subject matter that is conventionally gross. to me, finding the words to say something in a novel and immersive way across several paragraphs (again, at least with the way i do captions) is a super conscious effort, and were i just gooning alone, i wouldn't need all that; i'd only think of the subject matter wordlessly, seeing it in my mind. to me, writing is a mere vehicle to reach others, so as such i wish it'd be appreciated by others, haha. again, with drawing, i don't see it this way; i feel if i could draw, provided i could make something i'd be proud of, i feel it'd stand on its own. for me at least, writing is inherently a compromised form of creative expression, where the purity of my creativity is translated into a digestible format, losing something in the process

(a nuanced commentary on the post-9/11 society)

>>11373239
>were i just gooning alone, i wouldn't need all that; i'd only think of the subject matter wordlessly, seeing it in my mind. to me, writing is a mere vehicle to reach others, so as such i wish it'd be appreciated by others
>writing is inherently a compromised form of creative expression, where the purity of my creativity is translated into a digestible format, losing something in the process
Doesn't sound any different from any other art form to me, except you have hands-on experience with this one. If you know about writing, there are people who wear tweed jackets and black turtlenecks and introduce themselves as writers yet never write anything; there are people who've finished multiple books, but hesitate to call themselves writers because none of their books were accepted for paper printing by a publisher; there are even people who crank out books every few months on schedule that then get sold under a famous author's name and never think twice about it.

I don't think that legacy works in a way that somebody would randomly read your stuff after your death while carrying it to the incinerator and fall in love with it. You need to make a lot of effort reaching out and staying consistent so that people think of you whenever they have that specific craving you can satiate. Huge amount of work underwater, so that the stuff peaking out gets noticed. The bigger footprint you leave, the more chances it will still be talked about when it's old news.
That said, I'm not really concerned with what happens after I'm dead. To spend years working hard and not getting any tangible benefits you need to truly be mental. I'd wager, the pay isn't good even if you DO get published, you can't outpace McDonalds, so it's more of a vanity thing. Everybody knows what Naruto is, but the guy had to spend about as much time as I were alive chained to the desk, no vacations, no honeymoon, just drawing pages.

>>11373305
sorry, i think you completely misunderstood what i was trying to say. there're two topics you responded to:
>my finding my writing to be a translated version of my creativity, which i as such wish for appreciation for, since i do it exclusively for others
>my saying i could view drawing as something i do for the sake of leaving a "legacy"
and i don't think you understood and responded to either of my points, sorry. on the first topic, the first two of your examples (identifying as a writer and not writing anything, and having written multiple books but not identifying as a writer) seem like a complete non sequitur to anything i said. or, maybe it /is/ in response to something i said, but not what you greentexted. but even responding to it for its own merits anyway, i'm assuming i said i'm not a writer, despite making captions. i've definitely said that on another board, so maybe i said it here. but i don't really follow where you were going with that, sorry. and your third example (being a ghostwriter and never thinking about it again), i guess that /is/ a relevant response to what i said... so, sorry for saying that entire response was a non sequitur, sorry. i guess i felt it got obfuscated by your first two examples. but i don't have much to say about it anyway. i guess people like than and i are just built different. if writing came easier to me, maybe i could see myself as just going through the motions of writing not for appreciation, but just to do it so others don't have to. but i don't know what more to say about that, sorry

>>11373305
>>11373743
about the second response, i think you maybe just saw me use the word "legacy", then took it and ran with it, sorry. i definitely didn't mean the word "legacy" in the conventional way, of something passed-down. the two times i used the word, i buffered it by saying:
>art is something i feel i can make for the sake of leaving a legacy, as in it's something i could truly do for the sake of itself
>my own legacy left primarily for myself
as if to mean in a vacuum, having made it is its own reward, independent of what follows. i guess i also silently had expectations of it being preserved at least for my lifetime, in that i would feel cheated if were i an artist, something i drew would be destroyed, and lost. but that is only because i wished to be able to look at it myself. i guess maybe a misunderstanding was my saying i wanted my writing to be "appreciated". what i really meant was for me to receive feedback people liked it, sorry. so "praise" would've removed any ambiguity. people simply reading my captions isn't very validating to me; i want to know that they liked it. i don't care about how my captions will be met after i die, even if they liked them, and i definitely wouldn't care if people simply read them, with no feedback at all that they even liked them

>>11367834
another one i added:
-ctrl + F " " (double space) after pasting all text into notepad++ (or your browser for autocorrect), and turn any to single-space

>>11342327
Dude please. You gotta make more of the Slime Dick Girl on Male. Continue it. That pink one on the bottom left is so hot. The idea of being submerged with your asshole exposed like that is slut fantasy 10/10. What's your tag?
It be even fucking hotter if you see the Slime cum, invade his prostate, forever giving him orgasms.

edit #58. original by goonedp3rv on rule34:
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=12137158

the typesetting on this took a bit, since with the increased text density from reducing the line spacing to literally only a pixel difference at the tightest, i went for broke and managed to not cover-up her skin at all, but that was just tedium and tried and error, and i'm OCD enough to manage it if i put the time into it at this point; the real thing with making this caption was that i found that it was way, way, waaaaay too vanilla to inspire me as i wanted. there wasn't enough real estate for me to shoehorn smegma into it as i usually would while also doing justice to the off-shoulder top opportunity (literally the entire point of the caption), and even though off-shoulder tops are one of my favorite fetishes ever, i didn't realize it is just waaaay too vanilla on its own for me to feel super inspired with it. i guess it might be between that and her expression being more noticing/subtle than consciously flirting, so i couldn't do anything too blatant, either. to me this was just super vanilla. i'm going to be wary of delving-into vanilla captions in the future, cause this caption wasn't even verbose nor creative; it's literally just vanilla, but as such, i felt it was the most creatively exhausting of any i've ever made

>>11373887
only just noticed i said "top" rather than "dress" in the 2nd last paragraph. fixed version here:
https://files.catbox.moe/0buo3p.png

>>11367834
only remembered midway into making a caption to manually and contextually reduce the line spacing of my font ("pally bold"), so i added a note in my proofreading checklist to do so, even though i only really open it after i've finished making a caption, so it'd be a bit late to only read it there. but better late than never

pee warning. original from >>>/d/ddg:
>>11374035

edit #59

pee/smegma warning. original by @AiMilkers on twitter:
https://x.com/AiMilkers/status/1960155951954047386
https://rule34.xxx/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=14718418

edit #60

i'm just coping by pretending the left hand's index finger is hidden. i didn't even know four-finger hands were possible before this

>>11364585
>i also think i will go back and add gaussian blur to my "pally bold" font captions (probably won't bother with the "wild word" font of my earliest captions
>>11364827
>and, yeah, i didn't bother doing so for the "wild words" font captions my first captions used
i just went back and did it, but my fear was definitely correct: since "wild words" is a much narrower font than "pally bold", its line spacing is much denser, and it's caps-only (so visually the kerning appears denser, even though it isn't), using the same gaussian blur "stroke" layer proportions as i do "pally bold" (2.5x the size of the normal "stroke" layer, and three [3] layers of the "gaussian blur" "stroke" layers total total) makes it appear extremely heavy-handed; it is just way too dark, and not big enough for how dark it is. i thought i didn't care- since i wasn't that emotionally-invested in my earliest captions which used the "wild words" font anymore, since i found the font didn't reflect my tastes as well as "pally bold" does-, but i can't in clean conscience consider these the definitive versions of my captions, so even after tediously retroactively adding the "gaussian blur" stroke layers to them, i think i wasted my time, and should either do it properly or not at all. but i don't know if i will ever be arsed to trial-and-error proportions that work for this font i don't care that much about, so i might never do so. though i said similar the first time, and i just bothered trying to do it since the thread was nearing autosage and i felt it was time enough to bother, but having to do more makes it not so exciting of a prospect to do anymore

>>11374858
i ended-up just reducing it to two (2) gaussian blur "stroke" (outline) layers rather than just copying the three (3) of the "pally bold" font. updated my catbox album and rentry with versions of my first nine (9) captions (which use the "wild words" font) here:
https://catbox.moe/c/7vd589
https://rentry.co/ambihurts

i didn't trial-and-error the size of the stroke layer; i just left it with the same proportions as i use for "pally bold" (2.5x the "grow" size of the normal "stroke" layer). i don't know if it'd be worth doing so, anyway, because the problem is that since the line spacing is so dense and the kerning is as well (as far as all-caps fonts go), there is disproportionately more overlap for the blur between the letters than a lowercase font like "pally bold", so the metric for "too bold" is really gauged between the letters, as opposed to "pally bold", where you are more just discerning how bold each individual letter is in a vacuum. so i think the main thing was just that three (3) gaussian blur "stroke" layers was too much, so two (2) was the only option. being OCD about the blur size is secondary, so with my being unable to be arsed to do it, it is good enough just copying the ratio i use for "pally bold"

pee warning. original from >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11270977/#11279214

edit #61
>>11374927
>updated my catbox album and rentry with versions of my first nine (9) captions (which use the "wild words" font) here:
>versions
with [definitive]* versions

>>11362048
Such a cute tutorial, big fan.

>>11361052
>>11361053
This is really good! Honestly, if you went for a less "AI" style, you could probably pass it off as a real comic! It's charmingly written and made me smile >:] I can tell you put a lot of work in!

edit #62. original by blurry eyes in >>>/d/ddg:
https://desuarchive.org/d/thread/11306933/#11307323
https://mega.nz/folder/CCgHgSJL#h5FRO0k-UqJT7w93R-qsUg
>Blurry Eyes - Mega > Monster > 00064-2100011679.png

>>11375725
bruh, i literally have an editing checklist to check for sentences beginning with capital letters... how did i miss one in the last paragraph... i must've just gotten complacent because it was the literal last paragraph...

>>11375734
no, part of it was definitely that i got caught-up on the phrasing "were destined to be", and questioned whether it should be present tense ("are destined to be") instead. but wtf man. pretty fucked-up. didn't even know this could happen. gonna add a note to double-check paragraphs before moving on, i guess

>>11375725
the second sentence in the last paragraph doesn't start with a space when it should. fixed version:
https://files.catbox.moe/lp9f10.png

>>11375740
>space
capital letter* (freudian slip i guess, cause spaces being where they shouldn't are usually the mistake i make)

>>11375737
another reason i might've missed it was because i knew the paragraph ended on one-word sentences for emphasis, so i put disproportionate attention on checking that. i might amend some of my notes to depend on ctrl + F more to highlight things, to eliminate possibility for human error just glossing-over stuff like i somehow managed here

>>11367834
i reformatted a lot of stuff in my proofreading checklist after managing to miss a mistake i literally checked for, as per my checklist. i mostly incorporated relying on notepad++'s "mark all" functionality to highlight where to look. i added it to my rentry:
https://rentry.co/ambihurts#editing-checklist

>>11373886
The original artist is dittochad
I don't make anything myself yet, just captions, edits, and writing