People who draw out of thin air usually have these trained references in mind, so when they draw a pose they're not so much simply copying from their imagination, but from facts and past experience, about knowing about anatomy, light, and proportion. You draw as you go and see what's on the page, and you can build out a world that didn't exist, but not so much from mind's eye, but somewhere in-between the page and prior experience.

None of the above training or sketching would be needed by someone with a photographic memory or an imagination that can hold that level of mass detail (they'd only need to know practical techniques their medium depends on). There have been people like that such as Austin Osman Spare, but in the main the vast development in art has to do with learning about anatomy, proportion, light, color, and technique as taught by all the great masters.

Cartoons are a good example how a style comes not so much from the imagination, but how one very naively and simply draws characters and then builds off that natural style into something refined. This comes from playing on the page, not imagining what one wants. If you copy other people's cartoons you can also learn different lessons, and that has to do with training the eye and technique.

https://www.vox.com/culture/22840526/colors-movies-tv-gray-d...

There's another article I can't find on it.

It's got nothing to do with netflix. Digital is not to blame either, but it's certainly a catalyst.

It mostly has to do with insecurity surrounding digital and the bizarre idea that saturation is trying to 'emulate' film, (when color timing films was always just been about trying to emulate reality).

You can correct most of this problem with a decent media player. Just play a film in VLC and touch up the saturation and possibly the contrast in the effects settings.

It really doesn't take much adjustment to makes a film that once had a depressing palette suddenly half decent. I can't tolerate watching films through sunglasses so do this pretty often.

It really is a fashion. I've seen an advert for grading software that had a famous photographer casually showing the viewer how he ruins his pictures with this process of desaturation. I've no why people think this looks good, but it is deliberate.

I asked the cinematography reddit once why people do this and got a lot of incoherent responses about how saturation is just trying to emulate film and that it's just how 'new' things should look. Apparently many new filmmakers experience of reality has been through tea-shades on an overcast day. It beggars belief.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33074310

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

1. Having failed to recognize that mutual aid is an objective truth of evolutionary successful behavior in social animals and is absolutely rational behavior and that so-called self-interested behavior (at the expense of other people) is in fact not really self-interested because we live in groups, and is irrational behavior in social animals...

2. ... that therefore 'social justice' is relativistic and arbitrary, when in social animals, it most certainly is anything but.

I was first put on lamotrogine and it's mental side effects were far more debilitating than lithium's physical side effects. Lamotrogine destroyed my working memory to the point I'd consistently leave food on the stove and just forget about it. Lithium also works better for me. It is also dirt cheap compared to alternatives which don't work as well for many people.

Other forms of Lithium also have potential for future treatments, with Lithium Orotate being considered for trials recently (few side effects, safer, crosses blood brain barrier more effectively, but was mischaracterized in the 70s and largely ignored until now).

Open ISA is huge. It may not mean open hardware on its own, but it sure as hell opens the door to open hardware in the future. I think there is a chinese CPU in development that is claiming to aim to be the linux of CPUs. Can't remember the name but they were at one of the risc-v conferences recently.

But actually I'm thankful I didn't go through the diagnosis-mill back then, because later in life I sought answers from a GP and was simply diagnosed with depression, had SSRI's thrown at me and developed a mild psychotic episode (full blown manic episode in which I thought I could make a free energy device knowing nothing about electronics), which of course I didn't see a doctor about, because you can't actually tell when you're having a psychotic episode, especially if you go all the way to black-out word salad mode.

Many years later finally properly diagnosed with Bipolar 2 (explains full mania on SSRIs as opposed to hypo mania/mixed episode I normally get). Glad I didn't have to go through that shit when I was younger. GPs are so arrogant you have to literally stop them in their tracks and say NO, I WANT TO SEE A PSYCHIATRIST PLEASE (and silently to yourself 'AND I SURE AS HELL DON'T WANT any more of your free anti-depressant sample packs you bleepety bleep').

If I had so many problems figuring out what was relevant to tell someone to help them diagnose me, what is normal and what is not, when I was in my 20s, I really doubt a child would do any better without really extreme and obvious psychotic episodes, etc, that aren't simply delusional.

You may have a point in some way (not specifically narrative alone, though): It is true that certain anesthetics don't even render us unconscious, but just make us forget what we were perceiving while having our CNS motor functions paralyzed... and maybe deep sleep is similar--while paralyzed maybe we forget our senses moment by moment. But ego death from psychedelics is not the same thing: it doesn't completely erase your ability to recall impressions and images.

Either way none of this explains how qualia can arise other than it helps to remember things for us to have a sense of chronology/persistence of experience, and so I doubt a machine that can come up with a narrative of what it is sensing would magically have qualia (we would have no way of knowing, even if it claimed it did--all we could know is that WE are consciously observing an apparently conscious thing).

I sometimes think that persistence of experience is an illusion maintained by memory. That every time we lose consciousness then regain it, "it" is simply a new instance that is a clone of the old instance with the illusion it is the same person due to memories and being in the same body. Like "the prestige" the man drowns each night and experiences death, but the clone has the illusion that it has been alive up until the point it was created. In this case I see consciousness and qualia as a temporary instance/shape of neurons activating in unison that is suddenly conscious, but can lose residency, and when it re-forms has the illusion "it" is the same thing and maintains an identity.

Considering it takes many depths of artificial neurons to simulate a single human neuron, and the speed at which learning can regress is so slow now, I think we are a very very long way from having such an instance of consciousness appear in an active neural network. Such a network would need to be so analog that it would be effectively the same thing as actual grey matter, and you may as well just have a baby. At least with a baby you would have a true sense of the responsibility you have in creating such an instance (or persistent series of instances that creates an identity).

What do you think capitalism is exactly? What's your definition that fits the context of that statement?