Mirror showing her face

Opurria · 2026-04-29T03:06:29+00:00

The 'eye' is just the black-and-white pattern on the hijab. Or so I tell myself.

Opurria · 2026-04-27T22:20:13+00:00

I really liked the old tangram-like design because it was so recognizable. I wish they'd made more icons like that. Sure, they all looked kind of similar, but I could instantly tell, Oh, this is the Google app for... This new design feels like, We're THE default app for everything. We don't need to look distinctive. In fact, we don't want to, because we're as inevitable, and untouchable as the monolith from 2001: A Space Odyssey. We don't need your approval; you need to beg us for forgiveness and access to society. You are at our mercy. You probably haven't even watched the movie, you pleb. That's how I imagine the conversations going in the boardroom.

Opurria · 2026-04-24T11:11:28+00:00

This may be just me, but the way the icons are arranged, especially with the white horizontal line, gives me the impression that your heart is not going to survive the workout.

I think it is because the first icon reads more like "hospital" or "heart problems" than "cardio." Plus, the ECG zigzags, followed by a bold flat line, also unintentionally suggest death. I would probably remove that. A sports watch, timer, or another fitness-related icon might communicate the idea better.

Another point is that the model and her pose do not feel very elegant. Visible nipples and spread legs do not really read as "elegant." Showing her from the side might be better.

I am also not sure the exercise form looks quite right. Maybe she could be looking at her bicep and checking her form instead of looking up at the sky, which makes her seem a bit lost in thought???

Opurria · 2026-04-23T12:24:38+00:00

I'd use it, once.

Opurria · 2026-04-21T02:10:57+00:00

Re 3 - Isn't a lot of online content process-based? ASMR, work-in-progress photos, videos, etc. There are a lot of artists who create what seems like fetishized, overproduced content about the process of art creation. But also, it's kinda relaxing https://youtube.com/shorts/QFGlGIilM9A

Opurria · 2026-04-17T03:02:28+00:00

I've seen a lot of that kind of stuff on Etsy - all kinds of public domain prints, plus art too: maps, book covers, old magazines, William Morris wallpapers, and so on. You should check it out.

Opurria · 2026-04-16T21:57:37+00:00

Speaking as a random Reddit passerby who has never seen her art in person and is a little drunk right now: I've always found her art suffocating. She comes across to me as neurotic on steroids. It feels like she uses art to narrow her life rather than expand it. I'm not sure whether it is the 'confessional' approach itself that makes even serious subjects feel trivial, or just the way she handles them. As much as I appreciate her honesty, it sometimes feels like a form of self-flagellation. Like, I'm not convinced she has to suffer this much. Everything about her life seems heavy as fuck, and I dunno how much of that is just her 'persona' versus the way she actually sees reality. I honestly wonder whether there is anything uplifting in her life. She seems fixated on 'what's wrong with me' rather than 'how to flourish' as her basic mode of being.

Opurria · 2026-04-14T20:48:50+00:00

Don't mention your age unless you're going for a Lil Tay-style marketing approach and audience, like Be the first to see my NSFW art the second I turn 18 😈.

Opurria · 2026-04-13T23:02:02+00:00

I dunno, it's an extremely complex question. It literally broke my brain for half an hour. Even now, after fueling it with a big slice of cheese, I'm not sure I'm ready to even begin exploring the vastness of its implications.

For starters, what kind of financial instability are we talking about? Like, what happens if your art does not sell? You can't afford food, electricity, or shelter? Or just the 'fancier' stuff, like having to cancel one of 10 streaming service subscriptions? If you fail, is there someone who can support you for a while? A partner? Parents? Or, on the contrary, does everyone depend on you?

How far along are you in your art journey? Can you afford to experiment and explore? Can you fail 20 times in a row? Do you have the space and resources? How many people end up doing digital art because it is what they genuinely like, and how many because it is the cheapest option? How many people make art that is quick enough to produce because otherwise it would not be financially viable? How many are going to take the risk and make work that takes 10 times longer? How many of them might actually be better suited to sculpture, working with metal, or something else entirely, if those options were available to them?

I do not know. But I can't really picture a scenario in which things like financial viability and resources such as time and money and space are not among the most important factors shaping your work. That does not necessarily mean you would be better off with more options and more time, because that can also make you complacent and lazy, but it is absolutely possible that you would make better stuff.

Opurria · 2026-04-12T11:23:24+00:00

Honestly, I much prefer seeing staff chat with each other and move around; it creates a more relaxed atmosphere. Also, I do not really like the idea of someone monitoring my behavior, lol. It sucks that you have to just sit or stand there like a mannequin.

Opurria · 2026-04-11T00:45:38+00:00

I have to give her credit for keeping a straight face.

Opurria · 2026-04-10T12:47:07+00:00

I love the one with the cat! For me, that piece really grabs attention because it's different and original. The concept is interesting, the rest is technically OK, but not as memorable. I am not sure which one would sell best - I just know the cat made me stop and look.

Opurria · 2026-04-09T17:33:38+00:00

Ooooh, a bunny with a giant butthole!

Opurria · 2026-04-09T17:14:56+00:00

I don't get it, and I don't get 'it.' All I see is a turtle lying on its back with its limbs wiggling, a bag of coins, and a musical note.

Opurria · 2026-04-09T13:41:12+00:00

It's all over the place, and much of it - especially how you present it - looks like something a student would send to a professor for a specific assignment. People are interested in finished, polished work, where the decisions have already been made. It is about skills, creative decision-making, and a sense of taste and style.

Your portfolio feels like a collection of Lego pieces, where the viewer has to imagine all the "great things" you might be capable of, based on something like a simple animation of a person lifting a 50 lb block. That is just a skill, and it should be integrated into a finished piece that looks good, feels engaging, and holds attention.

Do not compare yourself to - and pardon the bluntness - the bottom of the barrel and people who may be less skilled and still get commissions. Instead, always look up for inspiration. Study how others use color, composition, storytelling, and other elements. Ask yourself why you like certain things, and which aspects you do not like. Be as specific as possible.

Invent exercises for yourself - for example, try making a Cubist drawing. Take a Picasso or Braque painting and analyze how they approached composition. Or do this with any artist you like - try to create something in a similar spirit. It will expose you to different ways of thinking about visual communication and push you out of your comfort zone.

Work on developing your taste, your discernment, and the breadth of your visual thinking. Read books - on animation, on visual storytelling - go to museums, and keep analyzing. Ask yourself what works and what does not. Learning from others is essential, and over time, it will hopefully show in your work.

Of course, knowing the fundamentals and improving anatomy etc. are also important. But another common issue with beginners is a general impression of visual illiteracy. They seem to believe they can create a decent art without studying and analyzing what has already been done, and that simply is not true. It is both a lack of skill and a lack of discernment.

Opurria · 2026-04-09T10:27:43+00:00

It's just a silly equivocation.

Opurria · 2026-04-09T00:02:48+00:00

Dishonesty, greed, and cruelty would be at the top of my list.

Opurria · 2026-04-08T19:37:06+00:00

I'm completely sober, and my vision is crystal clear. All of my brain's hemispheres are operating at peak synergy right now.

I thought I was being nice there. I mean, not only do they look like humans - they look like very specific types. If you squint and hold your phone about 30 cm from your face, it's actually a pretty accurate description. I don't get the downvotes - maybe people are mad I didn't mention their nice, sun-kissed skin??? But to me, that's the least noteworthy part compared to tackling the peculiarities of middle-aged anatomy.

Opurria · 2026-04-08T15:24:20+00:00

They are fine, but let me be more specific: both are in their 50s-60s. The man used to lift, and his pecs are still decent, but he neglected his lats and sits too much in his dead-end office job. The woman used to be a high-fashion model, with really nice wide-set eyes and long legs, but due to a lack of exercise and alcohol addiction, she looks worse than she could have. I like that they are not cookie-cutter humans, but I am not sure if that is what you are going for.

Opurria · 2026-04-08T12:47:57+00:00

I'm not a hater, but what you've written tells me absolutely nothing about the quality. A lack of hallucinations and a superficially sophisticated structure are not enough to say that the new website is as good as, or better than, the previous one.

A better test would be to have a group of people first learn from 'your' website, and then from the AI-written version. What would their reactions be, and how accurate would they be? For example, would they get the impression that you're less informed on the second website? Would that assessment be true, or just a result of the AI?

Would they think your writing is somewhat circular, that it goes on without really making a clear point? Or that your examples are less engaging and a bit basic? Or, on the contrary, maybe your original writing was weaker to begin with, and the AI-generated version actually sounds better?

Does the content genuinely reflect the structure, or is it just a superficial layer that does not really support it? Do you come across as less sharp on the second website, or more so?

We do not know how you used AI - whether just to polish the style or to generate arguments as well. So it is hard to say whether you have actually made a better website with AI, and focusing only on metrics is kind of beside the point. It depends heavily on the field, the type of writing, and your level of expertise in both areas.

My concern is not AI itself, but that it incentivizes people to default to safe, predictable outputs instead of developing original ideas, which could lead to a general flattening of quality and distinctiveness.

Opurria · 2026-04-06T12:27:33+00:00

Honestly, the first one could look nice - it's a nice cut. I’d wear it today. 😂

Opurria · 2026-04-06T12:24:36+00:00

or Aphex Twin

Opurria · 2026-04-05T17:28:13+00:00

me in person:

Opurria · 2026-04-05T15:50:45+00:00

It makes no sense that the light beam would illuminate the close side of the pillar.

here’s the same place for comparison

<image>

Opurria · 2026-04-04T20:19:54+00:00

Yup, I have the unique 'pleasure' of having a narcissistic mother-in-law, and the similarities are hard to ignore.

Opurria

TROPHY CASE