Subject: What need was there to replace them in the first place? (nm)
Author:
Posted on: 2010-10-27 02:30:00 UTC
-
Special Operations Division Flash patch vote by
on 2010-10-25 04:20:00 UTC
Reply
Welcome to the Special Operations Division Flash patch voting area. In this vote you have three options.
Option one.
Option two.
Option three.
Option four.
Something better.(please comment on what you would think is better)
thank you for you time, have a good day. -
second by
on 2010-10-31 21:52:00 UTC
Reply
The second is definitely better. The last one looks too close to other departments, and the first is a little too complicated. They all look amazing, though. ...oops, I haven't introduced myself yet...
-
Re: Special Operations Division Flash patch vote by
on 2010-10-28 13:03:00 UTC
Reply
Out of these three, I'd have to go with the first one.
-
Ooh, that first one's nice! by
on 2010-10-26 04:30:00 UTC
Reply
I agree with Nesh on the 3rd one, it's extremely similar to one or two other divisions patches and that could cause some confusion.
The first and the second one are both nice, but I find myself pulled toward the more bold, angular strokes of the first one. So, my vote goes towards #1! -
Are those ampersands? by
on 2010-10-25 17:29:00 UTC
Reply
I'm gonna say definitely not #3, since it looks too much like the DF's patch. As for the others, could you say a few words about why/how you came up with that particular idea?
~Neshomeh -
I like the second ampersand. (nm) by
on 2010-10-27 04:45:00 UTC
Reply
-
I suggested the ampersand. by
on 2010-10-25 17:48:00 UTC
Reply
I picked an ampersand because the SOD was described as taking on a lot of mission that were the 'miscellaneous of the miscellaney' and it seemed appropriate. Admittedly, I pictured more of the conventional modern ampersand rather than something overly stylized, but I wasn't that specific in my suggestion.
-
What about... by
on 2010-10-27 07:09:00 UTC
Reply
... something that plays on the acronym SOD, kinda like the Bad Role-play Department's patch plays on BRD? Maybe a bit of turf with brown dirt on the bottom and green grass on top?
~Neshomeh -
I do not like any of your options. (nm) by
on 2010-10-25 16:01:00 UTC
Reply
-
Got any better ideas? (nm) by
on 2010-10-25 16:44:00 UTC
Reply
-
I prefer the ones that were already there. by
on 2010-10-25 17:53:00 UTC
Reply
As compared to the ones you are replacing them with.
-
Re: I prefer the ones that were already there. by
on 2010-10-25 18:22:00 UTC
Reply
The Special Operations Division does not have a flash patch. I figured that if I started a vote, with the possibility to new ideas, I would get more suggestions and be able to make a better patch.
-
What I mean is this: by
on 2010-10-25 18:28:00 UTC
Reply
I don't like the aesthetic qualities of the style of these new flashpatches or the ones that replacing older ones on the wiki in any way.
Simple as that. -
how can I fix it? by
on 2010-10-25 18:34:00 UTC
Reply
What do you not like about them, and how can I change them for the better?
-
Not change them. At all. (nm) by
on 2010-10-28 02:21:00 UTC
Reply
-
What need was there to replace them in the first place? (nm) by
on 2010-10-27 02:30:00 UTC
Reply
-
Different reasons. by
on 2010-10-27 04:45:00 UTC
Reply
First of all, some departments had no flash patch images; that was why I started making images. Silverwind I think has been putting the "cloth" texture on them so that they all have a consistent style.
We had everything from realistic-looking stuff to hastily done clip art...
Perhaps more of an "iron-on patch" texture would look better? Silverwind--how long does it take you to change the texture? Maybe a range of possible effects to pick from, if we want a consistent "look" for our flash patch images. -
In defense of the clipart... by
on 2010-10-27 06:58:00 UTC
Reply
If I'd tried to do anything more complex, I never would've gotten as many done as I did, and even more departments would be sans flash patch. Also, some of them are actually heavily modified and took quite a bit of time. {; P
That said, while I was initially resistant to the idea of replacing everything on the purely selfish grounds of not wanting to see all the ones I made blithely replaced, the argument of consistency is a good one. A more or less consistent style on the wiki is something I am for, and I always was behind the effort to confirm flash patches for at least the best-known departments, so I say go ahead.
However, I do have one question. Have you remembered to place all your images in the appropriate category?
~Neshomeh -
Looks like she's often using your images as base images. (nm) by
on 2010-10-28 16:06:00 UTC
Reply
-
The correct pronoun is "He" (nm) by
on 2010-10-28 19:43:00 UTC
Reply
-
Sorry! Your name doesn't tell me & 2/3rds of us are girls... (nm by
on 2010-10-29 19:40:00 UTC
Reply
-
It's alright by
on 2010-10-30 06:34:00 UTC
Reply
I should have some examples done by Sunday.
-
0.25 to 1.5 hours by
on 2010-10-27 06:26:00 UTC
Reply
It depends on the complexity of the patch. Most will take no more than a half hour to remap. Lucky I am a pack-rat when it comes to project files and have most if not all base pictures, layers, and colors I used to make the patches in there respective file. My only requirement is that I need a 500X500 pixel example of the preferred texture, in medium gray if possible.
-
Hmm... by
on 2010-10-27 19:07:00 UTC
Reply
Maybe you could post example textures. I do like consistency, but remember these flash patches do have to contain a SEP field, which can be miniaturized but possibly not so much as to be simply printed on clothing... Don't take down any of the stuff you already did; but let's look at other options before we do more.
-
I like option 2 (nm) by
on 2010-10-25 15:28:00 UTC
Reply