Anonymous
8/24/2025, 2:20:48 PM
No.11362554
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!!!
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!!!