>>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
4chan Search
2 results for "d4b3cba554d32c7af7579a5f14e25e6c"
>>11346178
0.4, we've been through a lot, but i have a lot to say to that. first of all, idk how you can think that calling my caption "walls of text" is less harsh than saying you can't read it because of poor contrast. imo calling something "walls of text" has connotations of "bad, therefore wrong", but saying it has poor contrast is just a practical issue that can be reconciled without discouraging my creativity
secondly, all my captions deal in taboo at best, and conventionally gross content at worst, so i barely expect anyone to even acknowledge them, let alone provide feedback on them in any way, let alone provide positive feedback. but feedback on contrast lands you in the second category, which is hard to come by, so it's extra useful for you to provide such feedback if you can
thirdly, it was only my third caption, so i'm an inexperienced caption maker. so it's really important for me to receive constructive criticism in these early stages, lest i continue on with an unfortunate foundation for who knows how long, if i'd ever learn how to improve
so i'm glad i got that out of you eventually, but, yeah
0.4, we've been through a lot, but i have a lot to say to that. first of all, idk how you can think that calling my caption "walls of text" is less harsh than saying you can't read it because of poor contrast. imo calling something "walls of text" has connotations of "bad, therefore wrong", but saying it has poor contrast is just a practical issue that can be reconciled without discouraging my creativity
secondly, all my captions deal in taboo at best, and conventionally gross content at worst, so i barely expect anyone to even acknowledge them, let alone provide feedback on them in any way, let alone provide positive feedback. but feedback on contrast lands you in the second category, which is hard to come by, so it's extra useful for you to provide such feedback if you can
thirdly, it was only my third caption, so i'm an inexperienced caption maker. so it's really important for me to receive constructive criticism in these early stages, lest i continue on with an unfortunate foundation for who knows how long, if i'd ever learn how to improve
so i'm glad i got that out of you eventually, but, yeah