this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2025
53 points (90.8% liked)

Showerthoughts

30472 readers
897 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted, clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts: 1

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
    • If you feel strongly that you want politics back, please volunteer as a mod.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
vatlark
forkball
Thekingoflorda
53
A very low-resolution image is probably way harder for a painter to convincingly replicate than a pristine HD image of the same scene (self.showerthoughts)
submitted 2 weeks ago by 58008 to c/showerthoughts
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In computational terms, a low resolution version of an image is almost by definition 'simpler', with fewer colours and details intact, but it seems like it would be much harder to do a convincing 1:1 replication of it in a painting compared to recreating a 'clean' HD version.

Or am I way off the mark? ๐Ÿ˜† I'm not a painter, obviously. Seems like getting all of those weird JPEG artefacts right would be something of a novel skill for a traditional painter (or even a digital painter, for that matter).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I mean... pixel art. For sure it is hard in a completely different way than photorealism. Less to work with (for good and bad), and a new set of rules (for pixel placement). I'm sure there's multiple valid techniques (digital first, rough planning, individual pixel canvases/swatches or some other collage etc... not to mention cross-stitching or various building toys if you count that).

I don't see the appeal in re-creating artifacts, but I'm sure there are people who can make a convincing approximation (particularly if they know any of the technical reasoning for JPEGs).