Oct 29, 2014  •  In Scary, Weird

Creepy Halloween Costumes from the Early 1900s

If you do a Google Image Search on “creepy halloween costumes from the early 1900s,” you’ll be in for a special treat.

Not really. Because they really ARE damn scary.

Especially the ones of children. Geez, how can kids be so creepy??!

So don’t look below if you’re sensitive to nightmare-inducing images. You’ve been warned.

creepy_halloween_costumes_1900s_1

creepy_halloween_costumes_1900s_2

creepy_halloween_costumes_1900s_3

Continue reading »

Oct 28, 2014  •  In Entertainment, Funny, Weird

20 Celebrities and Their Historical Doppelgangers

Granted, a couple of them are a stretch. But holy crap a lot of these celebrities look creepily like these historical figures!

(And is it just me, or does Napoleon Bonaparte get a lot more attractive after being compared to Trent Reznor?)

Christian Bale & A Civil War Soldier:
celebrities_historical_twins_christian_bale

Keanu Reeves & Paul Mounet:
celebrities_historical_twins_keanu_reeves

Michael Douglas & George Washington:
celebrities_historical_twins_michael_douglas

Continue reading »

Oct 21, 2014  •  In Geek, Infographics, Information, Relationships, Web

Two Fascinating, Potentially NSFW Charts

I’m not sure exactly why I find these charts — depicting the various subjects and categories that turn people on and how they differ between men and women — so interesting.

Well, duh it’s related to sex so it’s naturally intriguing. But I think for me, the science and research behind human attraction has always been captivating because the driving forces behind what makes one person attractive to another can vary so greatly.

Granted, these charts are not necessarily about attraction. But what turns someone on can’t be too far from their preferences in pornography, no?

Here is a ranking of Pornhub’s most-viewed categories:

men_women_porn_categories

And the most-searched terms:

men_women_porn_searches

Is it just me, or is the fact that “teen” takes the top spot for men in both charts sorta disturbing?

Head on over to the original article for more detailed insights. (Warning: it is hosted on Pornhub’s main site so you may not want to open the link at work or anywhere else where your internet activities are monitored.)

Via Geekologie.

Oct 19, 2014  •  In Entertainment, Geek, Movies

Power Dynamics Via Angles [Silence of the Lambs Edition]

I’m really enjoying the Every Frame a Painting series from Tony Zhou!

Last week, I shared with you his analysis of David Fincher’s brilliant directorial techniques. Today, I bring you a similar video that dissects a famous scene from Silence of the Lambs. This one’s less than 3 minutes long, so take a look if you didn’t watch the David Fincher one.

Once again, I’m blown away by how something seemingly-simple as camera angles can play such a crucial role. It’s almost as if camera angles can act as narrators, or even convey subliminal messages!

Now I’m tempted to rewatch all my favorite movies to examine what I’ve missed…

Via Boing Boing.

Oct 18, 2014  •  In Art/Design, Beauty, Entertainment, Photography

“Photoshop” in the 1930s

Close your eyes. Now, imagine your favorite vintage portrait. Is it of Jean Harlow? Audrey Hepburn? Vivien Leigh? Marilyn Monroe?

No matter who, there’s a very good chance that the famous portrait engrained so deeply in your mind was “photoshopped.” Not in the modern sense, but by using film photography techniques from bygone decades.

1930s_photoshop

When the above before-and-after was posted to Reddit, experts and enthusiasts readily chimed in with stories, explanations, and history lessons. For example, the most upvoted response divulged:

I have worked at a commercial studio since the mid 90’s. We were still doing some of these things then. I remember working in the darkroom and dodging/burning prints, masking…. then spotting them and airbrushing them. You screw up at any one step and you get to start all the fuck over. I don’t miss that one little bit. I started in PS5 and never looked back.

I myself took a year of photography in high school — where we not only learned to manually develop photos but also studied the history of photography as well — but never know that the “dodge” and “burn” tools in Photoshop were inspired by actual dodge and burn techniques in film photography.

“Dodge” means you cast a shadow on the print with a tool (like a paper circle on a stick like the Photoshop Dodge tool icon) or your hand, as the negative is projected onto the photosensitive paper. As you cast a shadow, less light is allowed onto the sensitive paper and therefore it becomes lighter (since it’s a negative, less light projected = lighter result).

“Burn” means you dodge everything except a small area, by making an “O” shape with your hand (like the Photoshop Burn tool icon) or using a piece of paper with a hole in it, to avoid light hitting the paper in all areas except the part you want to burn. This causes that part to receive more light, making it darker, since it’s a negative and works in reverse.

Of course when you’re exposing your negative onto the paper, you’ll do it for many tens of seconds which gives you enough time to expose the whole image for some time, then dodge for some time, and then burn for some time. Of course you can’t see shit and you have no idea what it’s going to look like until you develop your print. At that point it’s too late to change anything so you have to start over many times to get it right.

I dunno about you, but I’d much rather prefer to edit photos using a few clicks!

Via PopSugar