Unpopular TM opinions you have

[Ratman]

It means that you have the tendency to see the world in lines when no lines in fact exist in reality. But this doesn't actually manifest as ruler and pencil geometry.

A cube is a made up object like anything you look at is in fact understood by you as a made up object that your brain approximates based on the light refraction. The thing is though, that while the cube a platonic form, and somebody had to come up with it for the purposes of geometry, it is not a natural form. You will not interpret a chair as a cube, you'll interpret it as a hunched over animal or a bundle of branches. Cubes are not included in the shapes ancestrally encompassed in human unconscious.

Golden rule of course is a meme, something more substantial here would be unconscious understanding of natural human body proportions. Like knowing that eyes are generally in the middle of the head or that your fingers start somewhere around your crotch and the length of a palm goes from the chin to the middle of the forehead. All I'm saying is that for the most part these proportions are not truly symmetric. One side of the musculature is dominant, one eyebrow points slightly another direction, one tit is bigger than the other, you may not have noticed it, but your brain did. That's all there is to it.

[Araya's Dry Cleaner]

Again, sure I guess? I still don't get the point you are trying to make.

I was giving some examples of traits that were demonstrated in studies that have universal appeal, like symmetry, big tits, and big ass. You can look them up in journals.

There's also evidence that precise symmetry or traits freak people out, sure.

If you are trying to prove that people somehow dislike natural symmetry, then you are wrong and should read more textbooks/scientific journals.

[Ratman]

No, actually, let me get further hung up on this one word you used in context I don't really care about.

What you're basically saying is 'most people would agree Quasimodo looks fucked up because of the eye and jaw'. Now, I am a sculptor. This causes certain deformations in aesthetics. When I look at an ass, I calculate its weight and fat ratio and try to figure out whether it's supported by the thigh fat or hanging on the pelvic muscles, which will give it somewhat different motion dynamics within which lie aesthetic values deeper than just your old 'the ass was fat'. At some point during this process of aesthetic deformation, Quasimodo begins to look beautiful, as I come to appreciate the way his weight shifts as he moves to constantly support his hunched back. Should I make a statue of Quasimodo? Maybe, but for the most part this will be appreciated by people with similar sensibilities.

If I went into the opposite direction and made a statue of perfectly symmetrical Roogi Shicky, Dullahan would walk into the atelier and knock it over and say that such a lifeless schizoid construct could only have been conceived by a sick mind twisted by the craving for that which it does not truly understand and cannot accept in its true form. But I'm sure some otaku could also walk in and think it looks neat.

Art academia (and the people who publish those papers) is basically that, a bunch of nepotistic circlejerks between people who share some or most of their deformations in their aesthetic sensibilities. I should know, I'm a part of it. If you try to make commercial art, and try to figure out what the fundamental aestethic values of mankind are, you will quickly find out that these values are dictated by culture, which is to say, fashion trends exist. Right now we just happen to be pretty deep into the schizoid construct territory.

tl;dr symmetry is not a fundamental figural or facial aestehic. A study which demonstrates that 'humans like symmetric faces' probably isn't showing a truly symmetric face because it doesn't exist, it's showing something that looks close enough that the audience and test-maker thinks it is. Rough symmetry is no symmetry at all, one detail deforms the entire thing. You can't even say that the body develops symmetrically, because brain hemispheres and the heart exist. Cavemen were more interested in drawing animals from the side than drawing them from the front.

Big tits, however, are a truly universal value.

[Dullahan]

If I went into the opposite direction and made a statue of perfectly symmetrical Roogi Shicky, Dullahan would walk into the atelier and knock it over and say that such a lifeless schizoid construct could only have been conceived by a sick mind twisted by the craving for that which it does not truly understand and cannot accept in its true form. But I'm sure some otaku could also walk in and think it looks neat.
.

No, I don't think I would say that.

[Walnut Sparks]

Should I make a statue of Quasimodo?

Yes. Yes, you should.

[Byegod]

Creative pursuits should be pursued!

[fumei]

Can we please not derail the thread with this topic again​?

[Comun]

You can’t really derail a thought dump thread without a solid topic. This discussion can and should continue until someone produces a new unpopular opinion to be discussed instead.

[Deathhappens]

does "Nasu is a hack" count

[Rafflesiac]

Depends on what for

[Mattias]

A study which demonstrates that 'humans like symmetric faces' probably isn't showing a truly symmetric face because it doesn't exist, it's showing something that looks close enough that the audience and test-maker thinks it is.

Wouldn't the obvious solution to this be just to take half a face and mirror it?

[Deathhappens]

Depends on what for

What, I have to narrow it down to only one reason?

[Walnut Sparks]

Wouldn't the obvious solution to this be just to take half a face and mirror it?

It's apparently very difficult to get them right, because most of the results I've seen in image searches are downright freakish, even if the starting image was fairly close to symmetrical.

Here, this is one of the better ones, if you ignore the uncorrected hair:

[Byegod]

What, I have to narrow it down to only one reason?

List 5 reasons, Im intersted.

[Ideofago]

I'm just gonna rant that anybody that tries to justify determinism/objectivism/fatalism in any sense with either biology, surveys, or any kind of "empirical" sciences, is someone that annoys me very much.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, this sort of simmetricity should absolutely be used in computer animated, conceptual psycological horror films. So unnerving.

[Mattias]

Aside from the obvious tells like the mole above the lip or on the neck, they don't bad to me.

[madarra]

Did you grow up on many videogame character creators?

Cuz that's what they remind me of, cuz those are also used to create simetrical faces.

[Mattias]

You know thinking back, I've played very few games with custom characters. Skyrim, New Vegas, and the Bioware games, all PS3 gen games, but I was in University when that gen launched. PS2 never really did custom characters, neither did the Genesis or NES. Is this why I like JPRGs so much? I grew up on games that couldn't support Self Inserts aside from re-naming Tidus? Huh.

[Ideofago]

This mention of self insert reminded me of a very overdone tangent in computer RPG narrative, specifically: how to make a self-insert actually interesting and not a blank slate. To make a long post short, we need more computational power and artificial inteligence.

[Deathhappens]

List 5 reasons, Im intersted.

I don't feel like literary analysis today, so I'll settle for "last encore" for now.