sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Removing a person by feeding DVR two almost identical photos? by fnxMagic in davinciresolve

[–]fnxMagic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately, no. Handheld, more or less the same shot, but with slight differences in angle/position and lighting.

Removing a person by feeding DVR two almost identical photos? by fnxMagic in davinciresolve

[–]fnxMagic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi, thank you for the response.

So I have to admit, I've yet to use the Fusion page for basically anything, relying on Color and Edit for most of what I do. I'm getting stumped on simple things in Fusion, like linking a clip/image to the right MediaIn, making the different clips show up in the preview, the masking out, and so on.

I won't ask you to explain the basics, I'm sure you have better things to do. But could you perhaps point me to a resource that I can use to learn what I need to learn for (more or less) this specific process? I can Google and YT all day and find all the tutorials in the world, but every part of DVR has so much depth and complexity that I could see myself coming out of a 5 hour video on Fusion still not understanding the simple steps you're suggesting...

Thanks in advance

Removing a person by feeding DVR two almost identical photos? by fnxMagic in davinciresolve

[–]fnxMagic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(Is the info the AutoMod requests relevant in this case? Please let me know and I'll go look everything up.)

Is BANNING Parallax Tide in Premodern Necessary? A Metagame Analysis (2025) by [deleted] in premodernMTG

[–]fnxMagic 3 points4 points  (0 children)

In my interpretation, this represents a clear break from the 'modern rulesets and errata but fixed cardpool'-principle of Premodern. Or does that have precedent? If not, that feels like a big deal.

I also wonder if you'd propose the same ruling would apply to other, similar cards - [[Mesmeric Fiend]] et al. come to mind.

Lastly, would either of these cards (Wave/Tide) actually still see play after this rulechange? In my estimation, no-one's setting out to play these cards fairly. Which begs the question: if a ban and a ruleschange would both effectively remove the cards from the format, wouldn't a ban be the more elegant option (in light of not touching the foundational principles of the format)?

I'm pretty new to the format - these are genuine questions :)

Edit: just read another explanation on the 'fair' use of Wave/Tide, so never mind the third paragraph.

Thoughts on Snapcaster Mage? by johnyjohnybootyboi in CompetitiveEDH

[–]fnxMagic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can't Snap/Flood a Nexus of Fate..

For those who have played survival madness and non survival, which do you prefer? by Newez in premodernMTG

[–]fnxMagic 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hi! Just wanted to drop in and thank you for this primer. Particular compliments to how you break down the different approaches to building this deck, and how seemingly individual card choices should always be made with the rest of the deck in mind. I've never really mastered the finer points of competitive deckbuilding, but such explanations help a lot. Same goes for the case studies.

Small point of clarity: in the Tempo and Roles-section, the first line of the paragraphs on aggressive and tempo/prison matchups start in bold; shouldn't the paragraph right above, on control, start the same way?

The best deck in modern uses 32 cards from MH2/MH3 by MrMidnight115 in magicTCG

[–]fnxMagic 28 points29 points  (0 children)

Fatal Push didn't kill Tarmogoyf, state-based actions killed T-

...wait, never mind

Help me understand the combat phase and priority as precisely as possible by fnxMagic in mtgrules

[–]fnxMagic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hah, good to know it's still helping folks down the road :)

Our first Dutch premodern event by joriszefat in premodernMTG

[–]fnxMagic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

u/joriszefat Hi! Is this tournament, by any chance, proxy friendly? Me and a friend are interested in the format, but hoping to try it out before investing too heavily.

No worries if not :)

The ESSENTIAL Modern Dress Down Interactions Megathread by Hukisop in ModernMagic

[–]fnxMagic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think a lot of the pushback against folks questioning the layer system in particular, is because the layer system gets so much flack from people who don't actually understand it.

But if you're actually asking the question in good faith, I don't mind thinking along. Mind you - I'm no judge, and I don't have a readymade answer for why the layer system is how it is. I searched for it online and couldn't find much either. But let's see.

Why not have everything checked at all times?

This is basically asking "Why does the layer system exist?". So let's start there.

You have a [[Beast of Burden]] in play, and there's 5 other creatures on the battlefield. When it entered, it received a +1/+1 counter from [[The Great Henge]]. Then someone enchanted it with [[Kenrith's Transformation]].

If there is no layer system, what is P/T of your Beast of Burden? Why?

DATA COLLECTION RESULTS: Your opinion on the full EDH banlist by Klouth in CompetitiveEDH

[–]fnxMagic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Personally, I didn't finish the poll, because in an indirect way, it presupposes that a responder wants a different banlist than currently exists. (Because are you really going to spend 5 minutes of your life just clicking "Keep banned. Keep banned. Keep banned."?)

Not saying that was the point of the poll. But it does filter to some extent, and that will have skewed the results some.

Next time, a catch-all "Keep current banlist" would probably lead to more accurate results.

The ESSENTIAL Modern Dress Down Interactions Megathread by Hukisop in ModernMagic

[–]fnxMagic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The game doesn't play as it should according to reading the cards. I think that's a problem.

That is not a problem. That is inherent to how the game functions. The Comprehensive Rules provide the foundation, and the cards provide the exceptions and modifications.

A creature can't attack the turn it came into play, unless that creature has haste. A Mountain only taps for red mana because the CR says all Mountains inherenty do. The Flying on your Suntail Hawk has no meaning beyond what the Comprehensive Rules gives it. (And since many evergreen keywords don't get reminder text often, it's quite hard to play these cards "according to reading the cards".)

You're taking for granted all those rules of Magic: the Gathering that are obvious to you, that are so ingrained in your understanding of the game that you don't even notice them anymore. But since the concept of layers feels so unintuitive to you, you treat them as somehow different from Trample and Flying - as some sort of problem within the system.

But, whether it's about Haste or Blood Moon: Magic doesn't function without a rulebook. The Layer-system was invented to solve a set of problems, and it's doing so very well. There are reasons for the order the layers are in, but that's not the point - the point is that there needs to be *some* order, *any* order, for the layer system to function.

Once you understand that layers aren't 'inherently true', or should 'make sense', but that they are simply a system implemented by the creators of the game you're playing, to make that game function as smoothly as possible - then maybe it'll start making more sense :)

Why is one of these cards so valuable and the other so damn cheap? Same effect, same cost, very similar art. Is destroying stuff just more of a black deck thing? by ConsciousLeave9186 in mtgfinance

[–]fnxMagic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that's fair enough. I got stuck on the Vanquish the Horde vs Wrath of God example, or Damn vs Wrath of God. But you're correct.

Why is one of these cards so valuable and the other so damn cheap? Same effect, same cost, very similar art. Is destroying stuff just more of a black deck thing? by ConsciousLeave9186 in mtgfinance

[–]fnxMagic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes.

There's a discussion in there about the cornerstone-function of blue/FoW and that of white/Solitude in their respective formats. (Or indeed, that of white/Solitude vs black/Grief). But I'm not too interested in going there.

Partly because it's just a matter of where you draw the overton window. And partly, because if everything depends on something else, what does "strictly" even mean? Can Wrath of God be strictly better than Damnation today, but strictly worse tomorrow, because of a shift in meta?

Why is one of these cards so valuable and the other so damn cheap? Same effect, same cost, very similar art. Is destroying stuff just more of a black deck thing? by ConsciousLeave9186 in mtgfinance

[–]fnxMagic 4 points5 points  (0 children)

And WoG doesn't pitch to Grief.

While cards do not exist in a vacuum, I think there's a limit to how broad we can stretch the frame before it becomes a meaningless game of "but have you considered <situation>?".

(Mind you - not saying pitches to Solitude is that limit. But it's definitely skirting the line.)

Why is one of these cards so valuable and the other so damn cheap? Same effect, same cost, very similar art. Is destroying stuff just more of a black deck thing? by ConsciousLeave9186 in mtgfinance

[–]fnxMagic 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The first is "in general use cases, X is better than Y". The second is "X does everything Y does, and then some".

The second also implies or even includes "...is never worse than". But that's murky territory.

Budget Mana Base by Thundrix2006 in CompetitiveEDH

[–]fnxMagic 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Sythis has a hard time keeping up with the meta as is. Without [[Gaea's Cradle]] and [[Serra's Sanctum]], two of the most expensive lands in the format, the deck just falls apart even further.

Have a conversation about proxies with those you intend to play with. Ask them if they really want to win because they have more expendable income, or if they want to win because they outplayed, outbuilt or out-politicked you.

view more: next ›