(no subject)

[winneganfake]

Thanks to blakthorne's wonderful photography from the weekend, I'm contemplating a couple of new avatars, and could use some input. Pics behind the cut.



This one to replace , which is several years old anyways.

And then, there's this: I can't decide if I like the quick cobbled-together animation I pulled here, or if I'd want to use one of the two stills instead. Any thoughts?

Comments

[blakthorne.livejournal.com]

if you use the fuckoff one, i'd say sharpen the image some before you put it up... it always bothers me when people have fuzzy avatars. :)

also, fix the colouration on the second icon so they both read the same -- your face is much cooler when it is the focus than when your figers are the focus -- curves are our friend -- or a warming filter, or sommat.

[winneganfake.livejournal.com]

Well, with the first, part of the reason I like it is because my face is just that slight bit out of focus. It's me in a nutshell these days, I suppose.

As for the second, I think I'm scratching the animated idea, and just going with the still of the face-in-focus shot. Cleaner, simpler, and well, I have no idea how to go about doing the cleanup nbecessary to make that animated version truly work.

[grace-batmonkey.livejournal.com]

The new flipoff is way more "you current", and I agree with your photographer about sharpening the image a little, perhaps just by some contrast correction?

The second one...I dunno. It's lacking a certain ineffable *something*, but I don't know what. Words, maybe? A unifying border? Along those lines.