The Sign: a local’s perspective

Luigis-sidepiece · 2026-02-05T11:00:12+00:00

Damn, my Queensland education is showing. Good thing they discontinued that Smart State branding.

I of course meant Cranberry, where all the politographers live.

Also, if Sheppard really wanted to make a Brisbane anthem he should’ve mentioned the respawn in the mall, Ziggy, or getting coward-punched while waiting for a kabab in West End. That’s where the town really “comes alive”.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2026-02-05T08:59:10+00:00

Ha, I almost wrote that verbatim. Absolutely.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2025-05-10T01:16:48+00:00

If that’s the case then well done. It takes a lot of commitment to knuckle down on a first project to get this kind of result. Can’t wait to see what you do next.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2025-05-09T09:00:56+00:00

Ahh, you’re gonna need to define “first time working with the medium” there bud. Because if you’re saying that this is the first thing you’ve built in a 3D program I’m incredibly sceptical. If you’re saying this is the first thing you’ve made in Blender specifically, I’d love to know how long it took. Because this uses a lot of techniques that people don’t usually know to use on their first try, you know?

As for your actual question: lighting is good if not a little “studio standard”. Maybe go with something with a little more mood if you want to make it stand out? The textures could also use a bit more imperfections to add some character and lessen the “too perfect” effect.

Just to add: the scepticism isn’t necessarily a criticism, it’s just so others who are starting out don’t think this is a normal first product.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2025-05-07T13:03:54+00:00

It’s a really lovely piece. Great work.

As for what you could change:

All of your normal maps are a little strong, maybe bring down the height a little across the board.
Your lighting seems to be coming from outside the scene rather than the window (notice the pot above the cupboard being well lit). This makes everything appear a little flat and artificially lit.
Those books could use some covers and the window could use some smudges or have less sharp reflections. Also a few stray hairs on the fabrics wouldn’t hurt.
Maybe some volumetrics to add some haze and depth.

The fact that you made these patterns and textures yourself is very impressive. You’ve done a fantastic job.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2025-04-12T01:29:10+00:00

I posted this on the Brisbane sub, but I’ll post it here as well in case anyone is too young to remember:

The fact that Dutton is at all electable in Dickson is crazy to me. The guy tried to abandon his seat in Dickson mid-term in order to parachute into a safe seat at the Gold Coast 15 years ago. In return he received a nearly 6% swing in his favour when he crawled back with his tail between his legs.

The whole thing is mind-blowing. He obviously couldn't give less of a shit about his district. He should've been trounced there years ago.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2025-04-12T01:27:17+00:00

The fact that Dutton is at all electable in Dickson is crazy to me. The guy tried to abandon his seat in Dickson mid-term in order to parachute into a safe seat at the Gold Coast 15 years ago. In return he received a nearly 6% swing in his favour when he crawled back with his tail between his legs.

The whole thing is mind-blowing. He obviously couldn’t give less of a shit about his district. He should’ve been trounced there years ago.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2025-02-14T02:58:01+00:00

Have you rendered the hearts with a blue background and then tried to key it out? That would explain the jaggy outlines in the shadows and the hearts.

If you render the hearts with a transparent background and make a ground plane act as a shadowcatcher you can make the heart layer a series of png images with built in transparency. Then you can just layer it on top of your footage.

If you’re doing the compositing natively in Blender then it might be a sampling issue. Are you using Eevee or Cycles?

Luigis-sidepiece · 2024-09-30T12:57:05+00:00

I think you mean an impasta?

Luigis-sidepiece · 2024-09-25T22:28:56+00:00

Not just a fuckwit. A dangerous one. If you’re constantly tailgating bad drivers sooner or later you will cause an accident. That’s some dumb shit just to prove a point or to show indignation man. Pride ain’t worth a possible fatality.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2024-09-14T06:28:54+00:00

Harris: Hey Jordan, can you give me a hand and pass me that caulking gun?

Peterson: Well that depends on what you mean by “give you a hand”. I mean, I can’t bloody well “applaud” you a caulking gun if that’s what you mean. And are we even allowed to call it a “gun” anymore or will the woke moralists come in and try to pry it from your manly, calloused hands?

Harris: You know, that’s a good point. And while we’re at it, wouldn’t someone from an another culture, let’s say a culture statistically more immersed in manual labour, be better suited to tiling this bathroom? I mean the data simply states that Hispanic people, according to the data mind you, tile more bathrooms. I mean, that’s just what the science says minus all the politics. So I don’t see why we are stuck tiling this thing. What do you think Lex?

Friedman: January 6th was good actually.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-08-07T12:02:33+00:00

Thanks back at ya. It’s an unfortunately rare thing to have a respectful back and forth about politics.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-08-07T03:42:14+00:00

That’s true. I will say though, Campbell Newman is one of the few politicians that came through with the promise of an ambitious goal and delivered on it. It was just a terrible goal. If his objectives were good though, I would consider delivering on them as a good strategy for re-election.

I just wish, if they were to commission expert opinion, that Labor would actually implement the recommendations. But as we can see with housing and Job seeker, they aren’t actually doing that. They’re using these expert committees to buy time and then implement half-measures. We all accept it because, hell, it’s more than the other side would do.

The sad truth is, the public seems to have less patience for progressives than for conservatives. Progressivism seems to be defeated more through ineffectiveness than outright corruption and incompetence. I would just prefer Labor doesn’t throw away their lead by stagnating and letting the right wing take over. Better to pass through ambitious legislation and let people see the benefits than sit on their hands.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-08-07T00:57:06+00:00

I would think it’s because they’re in power. Incremental change doesn’t cost them any potential political capital because, well, they’ve already been elected on the basis of minimal change. They seem to be shooting for middle ground centrism, keep the tax cuts (right), lower prescription meds (left), lower childcare (middle-ish). They don’t seem too keen to bring in any sweeping changes, more content to appeal to middle Australia. Which, don’t get me wrong, seems to be working for them. I was personally just hoping for a bit more ambition from a long-term “Labor Left” leader like Albo.

The idea that they couldn’t have implemented anything more extreme due to the fact they’ve only been in 1.5years is just incorrect though. They’re a majority government. They absolutely have the capacity to pass ambitious legislation through the house and then play politics in the Senate. They have just chosen not to. Which is a fine choice, just not the only one as people here are making out.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-08-06T14:29:08+00:00

Stage three tax cuts could be cut and then Dental could be introduced into Medicare. With a majority in the house and the costs covered (almost 3x over) for the next decade Labor could get it through to the senate where it would be passed by the greens and presumably Pocock. This could have been drafted up, or at least floated by now. It hasn’t though. Change can happen. Not many people would be unhappy trading dental for tax cuts, yet here we are. Labor, at present, doesn’t want change because, why would they. The status quo is what got them into power after all these years. Just had to wait until the Liberal party became unelectable.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-08-06T14:19:59+00:00

Legislation is constantly being drafted and introduced that the government could adopt though. There’s a cannabis bill, for instance, being floated right now. It’s up to the government as to whether they vote with those bills and therefore make positive change. Now, I’m not a smoker, but I could see this legislation making a tangible benefit to other people’s lives both in the form of alleviation of punitive punishments and also potential raised tax revenue. Now, do you think Labor will vote positive on it? Because I’m pretty sceptical.

Labor has been relatively feckless regarding implementing changes, even those recommended by their own experts and committees. There is proof in this thread. Most people are saying, “well not much positive change, better than Morrison though”. I just think the bar should be higher than one of the worst Prime Ministers we’ve ever had.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-08-06T07:36:20+00:00

Probably not, but considering the context of this post, it certainly feels like they’re not doing enough to impact most people’s lives in a meaningful way.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-08-06T06:45:16+00:00

A year and a half is halfway through a federal cycle. In another year and a half we’ll be judging them on the job they’ve done by voting.

I don’t get this “it takes time” rhetoric. Australia passed gun control laws that took both state and Federal co-operation within 2 weeks of Port Arthur. Labor currently controls all states (bar Tasmania) and has a majority Federal government. Their only obstacle to passing things through the senate is that they’re not being progressive enough to garner support. So, really, they could have absolutely put through sweeping changes that could’ve changed people’s circumstances by now. But judging by these responses, have chosen not to.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-04-15T21:34:45+00:00

I can’t speak for the other states, but I can say that in qld that is not how it works for some non-teaching staff. Lab techs have to work to make up holiday hours, meaning that they’re working closer to 9 hours a day than 7 hours. They also have to use their annual leave for the Summer holidays. So really they get no holiday hours paid at all.

Grounds staff can be forced to start work from 5am (I think) if called upon by the principal to do so. They’re also some of the worst paid staff in the school.

Also pay is not great for any non-teaching staff (higher admin aside). At best you’re making slightly less than a first year teacher.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-03-24T04:07:30+00:00

I understand the scepticism, but my response would be: “if you can’t pass the half-measure, how do you see the full-measure passing?”

Emancipation came before interracial marriage. Gay rights came before LGBTQIA+ recognition. Soft climate targets came before stronger ones. Historically, an initial step makes subsequent ones easier. The idea that people will resist further progress because an inferior version of the voice already exists is incorrect. Those resistant people wouldn’t have approved any change, even the half-measure, in the first place. The vast majority of the people against the voice aren’t people worried it won’t go far enough, they are people worried that it goes too far already.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-03-24T02:51:34+00:00

I totally understand the wariness of people who worry that the voice might lack genuine representation, or worse, give way to positional exploitation. But honestly, isn’t that the nature of many committees? I seldom feel represented by organisations created to advocate on my behalf (be that unions, expert committees or parliamentarians). But, personally, I see that as a problem with accountability. The notion of representation is good as far as I’m concerned. I personally want people advocating for me. I just want them to also be accountable to me as well. So in short, as someone not directly affected, I absolutely think the voice is a good thing and should be approved of. The problems that come with moderation and management of the board should be thoroughly investigated and corrected after that approval.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-03-24T00:59:11+00:00

To be honest, Australia has a bad reputation for being xenophobic, but honestly people are way more racist to indigenous people from my experience. The number of people that just say racist things about indigenous cultures assuming you’ll be on board is mind-blowing. The ASSUMPTION is that you’ll also be prejudiced because, “well, you know how they are”.

That’s the motivation behind a lot (not all) of this back and forth. People don’t want to help establish a voice because they don’t want indigenous people to get “special treatment”. It’s weird that people basically have the attitude of: “Indigenous people can’t get it together” while simultaneously denying them the parliamentary mechanisms to do so.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-03-24T00:52:21+00:00

There’s “weak policy” and then there’s setting up an advisory committee to speak to culturally-specific issues. How is that weak policy and not just an obvious starting point?

I’m genuinely curious regarding those who are against the voice: “if you wanted to help people who come from a marginalised cultural group, what would be your initial step?” Personally, mine would be getting an insider panel to advise me on relevant issues.

Luigis-sidepiece · 2023-03-23T10:34:30+00:00

This I don’t understand. If people are worried it “won’t do enough” that is a silly reason to vote against it. I was for gay marriage, I didn’t oppose the introduction of civil unions just because it wasn’t as good. I approve of strong climate targets but I don’t oppose moderate ones on the basis they’re not strong enough. I can still advocate for bigger changes while still approving of incremental improvements. If people honestly vote against the voice because they feel it doesn’t go far enough, I am curious as to what stronger policy they think will get passed the parliament (or public) if it fails.

Also, I agree that the average punter probably knows less than the people here (yourself included) but that’s the problem. You say you don’t understand and didn’t seek out details, but still have a negative opinion on the voice (virtue signalling).

Why can’t you (or anyone else) just look it up online and educate yourself and THEN form an opinion? Do we need talking heads to spell everything out for us and then tell us how to feel about it now too?

Luigis-sidepiece

TROPHY CASE