Log in

No account? Create an account
31 July 2008 @ 11:19 pm
i'll play  
a) Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us I sort of made this for iconplay, but not really. I originally just wanted to make something to fuel my sudden Natalie Dormer obsession, but then the crazy colours and overall design of it reminded me of iconplay for some reason. And no, it didn't remind me of the current 'design a new header' challenge, it actually reminded me of the commuity itself. Weird...

b) Some guy possibly scammed some money from me today at work. I'm ashamed because that wasn't the first time that has happened :(

c) I'm now up to the 5th (or 6th?) episode of Tudors. I'm liking it a lot more than I did at the beginning. There have been a few more funny bits, a few memorable bits, a few clever bits and the beginning titles still rock my socks. Overall... yay :D
Current Mood: distressed
Steph: supernatural; dean greyscaleharbourlight on August 1st, 2008 01:43 am (UTC)
I really love the graphic. I think the coloring and texturing is amazing! From the thumbnail it just looked like a crazy blob so I wasn't expecting much and then I opening it and BAM! Wow! :D

That font works really well on there too!

Some scammed money off you? How?
Joshblueymcphluey on August 1st, 2008 02:06 am (UTC)
Yay!! Thankyou! :DD

There a few grainy bits I now wish I'd cleaned up before posting. And thankyou, I'm still trying to make that font a thing :P and I will, just you wait and see.

Well... they gave me a hundred dollars to pay for an iced coffee (so straight of the bat, that's scamming 101) they snatched the change off of me as I tried to give it to them (102) realised that in the end they had the $3 need to pay for it, and told me to give them their hundred back (103) and then I suspect they didn't give me all of the change I gave them (104). Overall, it's pretty textbook scamming, and I can't believe I didn't do anything about it. :(

See, what I SHOULD have done was take their number, and then when we counted the till and compared it with what the register says we should have and it comes up saying that we're $50 up, then we call them up and give the money to them that we wrongfully took. But, if it turns out they were scamming us afterall, then we'd get to keep our money.

Even then, I still don't know if that's what actually happened. I wasn't around when they counted the till last night, but I'll find out in an hour. I haven't got high hopes, to be honest.
Stephharbourlight on August 1st, 2008 03:26 am (UTC)
Ok. Seriously, none of that makes any sense to me :P

How is them giving you $100 automatically scamming $101??
Joshblueymcphluey on August 1st, 2008 07:17 am (UTC)
hehe, Scamming 101. You know, like Biology 101 or Psychology 101 :P I was joking around.

When somebody gives you a $100 note to buy something cheap, that's textbook scamming because if you "mess up" the change then they get a bigger amount in the end. Get it?

It's like, if you gave me $5 and bought something that was $1 and I gave you $4 change. But say you thought I'd only given you $2, then I'd give have to you $2 to make up for the money I "didn't give you". But if you were buying something with a hundred dollar note that was $1, and I supposedly messed up the change, you could end up with $50 extra. Which, by the way, is exactly what happened yeserday. I checked :(

Make sense now? I want it to make sense so you can feel my pain.
Steph: buffy; quote danger for breakfastharbourlight on August 1st, 2008 07:21 am (UTC)
Ah ok I get it now. You confused me with the 101 stuff cos I thought you meant money :P

And don't you remember when you have already given them $50? :P
Josh: supernaturalblueymcphluey on August 1st, 2008 08:18 am (UTC)
did you do customer service at your old job?

Anyway, eventually you find that the day flies past in a daze. You'll give incorrect change, you'll ask the same question twice and you'll forget whether you gave them the %50 or not. So when they say you haven't given them the money, you start to doubt your memories. And so with me doubting both my memories and them, I was thrown for a sec.

Because, see, the thing is... I actually thought I'd given it to them, but they insisted that I hadn't (obviously). I asked the other guy who was on the same shift as me, what he thought I should do. Apparently he didn't understand what I meant or he didn't know what exactly we should do in that situation (I think a combination of both), because he just told me to give them the money. And so I did.

Doyy, why didn't I just listen to my instincts?
nargynargynargynargy on August 1st, 2008 05:46 pm (UTC)
Wow, cool play with colour! What layer modes (if any) did you use? I'm either guessing inverse or difference? I've tried so hard to get something to work like this, psychadelic you know? It just doesn't come out right. Great job :)
Joshblueymcphluey on August 2nd, 2008 02:11 pm (UTC)
Well, I used about a million layers, but yeah, difference is the main effect. I could upload the .psd for you if you want.
nargynargynargynargy on August 3rd, 2008 01:53 pm (UTC)
Thing is, I don't have photoshop! I cant get to grips with it, so a psd file wont work. Thanks for the offer though, that was really generous of you :D

I kinda got inspired to work with difference again - but guess what? not working lol. I figured there would be millions of layers, but its just, my brian just keeps softening everything up instead of leaving it eccentric and wild. Maybe its just my style you kno? Ima keep at it.
Joshblueymcphluey on August 3rd, 2008 02:24 pm (UTC)
I think the trick is to be able to see where the exclusion layers make it look awesome and where they look make it look terrible, and similarly when to mask and when not to. For example, if I left the exclusive layers unmasked you wouldn't be able to make out her face in the center, but if I had masked more it wouldn't be nearly as dramatic, yeah?

Can I see what you made?

Oh, and if it helps, I had the original layer duplicated and set on exclusion, but offset and then duplicated and rotated etc, rather than using a colour layer or texture on exclusion.
nargynargynargynargy on August 5th, 2008 06:51 pm (UTC)
It was so crap I binned it. To be honest, I would have been embarassed showing it anyone :(. I have been using masking, its just I feel like it doesn't come together seamlessly u know?

>i>Oh, and if it helps, I had the original layer duplicated and set on exclusion, but offset and then duplicated and rotated etc, rather than using a colour layer or texture on exclusion.</i>
I figured as much. I think my problem is not with technique but getting the composition right if you get my drift? Anyways, thanks for helping!