2 ms·
The first render, where the stroke width is thin at the top, and fat at the bottom... it's still bad objectively, but it almost looks like it is heading in the
by NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
The first render, where the stroke width is thin at the top, and fat at the bottom... it's still bad objectively, but it almost looks like it is heading in the direction of something that could be called interesting/creative. If the author continues, it might have something really cool in a few iterations (mixed in with more than a few that make the eyes bleed, I'm sure). Wouldn't be shocked if he eventually shakes a few insights down from the clever tree.
- bovermyer 3y agoWhich render? Also, nitpick - "she," not he.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago6 or 8 were arranged in a grid. Top left. Wow, -3. You guys are a hard crowd.
- bruce343434 3y agoPerhaps you are being downvoted because you're leaving negative yet unconstructive feedback. Apparently what author created is not creative and objectively bad? Please reflect on what you feel when you receive unsubstantiated negative feedback of your own (the downvotes).
- NoMoreNicksLeft 3y agoNothing negative about it. They're objectively bad. If I was insulting artistic talents, if he had done them himself, then I could see hurt feelings. These were done by algorithm. The author didn't create them. He wrote code that did so. As I already said, if he continues, some insight might shake out. You're all poorer for seeing negativity where none exists. You don't even realize you're doing it, do you?
- oneeyedpigeon 3y ago> Wouldn't be shocked if he eventually shakes a few insights down from the clever tree. Come on, there's no way to read that other than condescending. You clearly don't think much of the author. And, as you've been told, she's a "she".
- NoMoreNicksLeft 3y agoI would think that says more about reading ability, than anything else.