We need to talk about the worst thing about making AUs....
The fact that then when you inevitably think about crossovers you don't want the crossover with the canon you want it with your specific AU. Your brain worms, your circus, but THEN WHAT?
Oh, yeah, to understand this crossover you need to go read this entirely different fic/series? Girl help 😭 you can't do that
260 notes
·
View notes
You know something? Out of all the ideas that the Danny Phantom fandom has mined the everloving shit out of, I feel that Blood Blossoms have not been mined as a concept NEARLY enough!
Because just like... A flower that hurts ghosts...? That's actually a pretty honest to Arceus interesting idea! Can different species of Blood Blossoms do the same thing? Are there different flowers in the genus that can effect ghosts differently...? Are there other herbal or traditional folk medicine type stuff that can also effect ghosts...? Like, in the human world, Danny Phantom ghosts are pretty OP. But there being stuff that just grows and lives naturally on Earth being able to repel or harm ghosts? That's actually just neat! I wanna see that stuff used more and to know how ghosts would have been fought against in ye olde times before all of this fancy technology came along!
200 notes
·
View notes
One day I will write an entire piece on why Ranni's questline is a perfect example of a subtle, gothic, and chivalric romance story but one that still manages to be so blatantly in your face about both the Tarnished and Ranni's feelings for one another that you can't miss it. And yet, people still insist that it's platonic because Ranni isn't jumping into the Tarnished's arms and proclaiming her undying affection for them (even though she does say she loves them in her own quiet way with the fucking key but I digress) and it makes me fear that reading literacy is at an all-time low worldwide.
396 notes
·
View notes
i know i use radfem as a shorthand for the gyns on here who Believe those Beliefs but i think radical feminism is something one does, not an identity, and i think part of our collective problem is that we're all still submerged in the deep fryer that is identity politics
400 notes
·
View notes
Just me back on my rvb bullshit in the form of some rare pair cuddles.
I drew Simmons being clingy last time, so now it was wash's turn. and i was actually brave enough to start posting the fic for these two as well, so have that link too.
61 notes
·
View notes
want to give my two cents on the AI usage in the maestro trailer--
i think seventeen doing a whole concept that is anti-AI is very cool, especially as creatives themselves i think it's good that they're speaking up against it and i hope it gets more ppl talking about the issue. i also understand on a surface level the artistic choice (whether it was made by the members, the mv director, or whoever else), to directly use AI in contrast to real, human-made visuals and music in order to criticize it. i also appreciate that they clearly stated the intention of the use of AI at the beginning of the video
however, although i understand it to an extent, i do not agree with the choice to use AI to critique AI. one of the main ethical concerns with generative AI is that it is trained on other artists' work without their knowledge, consent, or compensation. and even when AI generated images are being used to critique AI, it still does not negate this particular ethical concern
the use of AI to critique also does not negate the fact that this is work that could have been done by an actual artist. i have seen some people argue that it's okay in this context because it's a critique specifically about AI, and it is content that never would have been done by a real artist anyway because it doesn't make sense for the story they're trying to tell. but i disagree. i think you can still tell the exact same story without using AI
and in fact, i would argue that it would make the anti-AI message stronger if they HAD paid an artist to draw/animate the scenes that are supposed to represent AI generated images. wouldn't it just be proof that humans can create images that are just as bad and nonsensical and soulless as AI, but that AI can't replicate the creativity and beauty and basic fucking anatomy that's in human-made art?
it feels very obvious this was not just a way to cut corners and costs like a lot of scummy people are using AI for. ultimately it was a very intentional creative decision, i just personally think it was a very poor one. and even if some ethical considerations were taken into account before this decision, i certainly don't think all of them were. at the very least i feel like the decision undermines the message they want to convey
i would also like to recognize that i myself am not an artist, and i have seen some artists that are totally on board with the use of AI in this specific context, so clearly this is not a topic that is cut and dry. but generative AI is still new, and i think it's important to keep having these conversations
47 notes
·
View notes