Shirt.Woot

cdrewlow wrote:Augmentation is good, but I would use "arm" instead of "arms."

Thanks! Changed!:D

wirdou wrote:I really like Kevlar (great colors!) and Apelad's is just hilarious. Here's what I've got... Any suggestions? I'm not sure about the word "augmentation"...Is that used?

Ducktor Moreau?

j5 wrote:Ducktor Moreau?

Ugly Duckling!

j5 wrote:Ducktor Moreau?

I see what you did there.... XD

rasabi wrote:The Art of War:



Still a ways to go. Shadows? No Shadows? I liked the purple semi-circle until I realized it is physically questionable sooo might go with the bottom for that. Other thoughts welcome :P

I love this! One question though, if he hasnt brought his sword down on the other samurai then how is there a brush stroke there? Maybe have his hands at 12 o clock like hes in the middle of the swing and have the brush stroke behind that.

Whoops - Fishbiscuit corrected me; I'd missed the addendum to the Derby rules made in the comments!

Okay, I'm calling major shenanigans on two poorly designed, largely unreadable shirts from the same artist shooting up the voting ranks two derbies in a row.


Seriously. It's a little ridiculous.

neuropsychosocial wrote:YOU GUYS! "You must title your design with the book you're referencing." Four of the first nine shirts submitted haven't followed this Derby rule. (I haven't made it past the first nine yet.) I don't know if the Rejectionator is going to Rejectionate for this... but if you haven't submitted yet, for goodness's sake, don't risk it. And don't put Travis in the position of having to decide whether to Rejectionate!

Click

lotsofgoats wrote:Okay, I'm calling major shenanigans on two poorly designed, largely unreadable shirts from the same artist shooting up the voting ranks two derbies in a row.


Seriously. It's a little ridiculous.

You would not be the first.

lotsofgoats wrote:Okay, I'm calling major shenanigans on two poorly designed, largely unreadable shirts from the same artist shooting up the voting ranks two derbies in a row.


Seriously. It's a little ridiculous.

Care to expound on the shenanigans?

tjschaeffer wrote:Click

Yup, I was wrong! I posted an apology over here for being confused about the clarification to the rules, and I think I've edited my posts so that I don't spread my confusion to others!

neuropsychosocial wrote:Yup, I was wrong! I posted an apology over here for being confused about the clarification to the rules, and I think I've edited my posts so that I don't spread my confusion to others!

Boo!! Spread the confusion!!!!

j5 wrote:You would not be the first.

Yea, I saw your comment over there and figured we're on the same page.

So it's not just me being crazy, right? Because I really have no explanation for how those two-in-a-row are getting votes unless there's a big group that's a fan of impossible-to-read shirts that have contrast issues.

lotsofgoats wrote:Okay, I'm calling major shenanigans on two poorly designed, largely unreadable shirts from the same artist shooting up the voting ranks two derbies in a row.


Seriously. It's a little ridiculous.

You're being generous. It's more like the last 15-20 derbies in a row.

hey, i was wondering if i could get any critiques and if anyone would want to see this on a shirt

Aha, well I've only been around these parts since Mad Science so kindly forgive my small sample size.


I think it's awesome that artists will genuinely seek and take advice from shmoes like me who have good vision and stupid hands, but if this all has the potential to devolve into a popularity contest then I don't see the point in sticking around. This makes me sad.

lotsofgoats wrote:Aha, well I've only been around these parts since Mad Science so kindly forgive my small sample size.


I think it's awesome that artists will genuinely seek and take advice from shmoes like me who have good vision and stupid hands, but if this all has the potential to devolve into a popularity contest then I don't see the point in sticking around. This makes me sad.

Shenanigans have been a part of the derby since it started, you're just seeing the latest incarnation. Since the new derby rules were implemented "popularity" alone is not a determinant.

fuzzzydunlop wrote:You're being generous. It's more like the last 15-20 derbies in a row.

It physically pains me to see it happen week after week. Although if I see a design I like, I'll say so. Notable for the rarity.

Question for everyone. I know that the top voted design is sold on Friday's, and editors pick the next two (Sat and Sun designs), but I always thought the editors had to pick from the top 9?? Today's design, which received 90+ votes was selected. I'm assuming I was incorrect and the editors can pick ANY designs they want, right? Does it happen often that said design is out of the top 9?

This derby has brought out more interesting designs and attractive shirts than any in a long time. There are quite a few shirts I would like to have.

thehookshot wrote:Question for everyone. I know that the top voted design is sold on Friday's, and editors pick the next two (Sat and Sun designs), but I always thought the editors had to pick from the top 9?? Today's design, which received 90+ votes was selected. I'm assuming I was incorrect and the editors can pick ANY designs they want, right? Does it happen often that said design is out of the top 9?

Yep. 3rd place is a guest editor who can pick absolutely anything. It's a different guest each week, so it depends on their whim, but they usually pick from the fog.

orabbit wrote:Yep. 3rd place is a guest editor who can pick absolutely anything. It's a different guest each week, so it depends on their whim, but they usually pick from the fog.

Going one step further, both Woot's (2nd place) and the guest editor (3rd place) can choose any design, with some caveats.

- You can't pick your own design.
- For the chosen design, the artist did submit the files.
- The design is printable.

The fogged vote counts are not visible for the G.E., so the true ranking does remain unknown until it's up on Sunday. If it happens to be 3rd place in votes, it's by sheer coincidence.

I will say that when I was a G.E., a consideration I factored was how acceptable it could be to the greater Woot community. I'm sure such is considered by Woot's editors too, but there's no formula here that would predict how well a shirt would or would not sell. Well, okay, there might be one - if Friday's number was any indication, designs in the style of Woot's #1 artist is a way to sell more shirts ...

(Now awaiting someone's followup rant regarding quality vs. quantity ... )

Narfcake wrote:if Friday's number was any indication, designs in the style of Woot's #1 artist is a way to sell more shirts ...

I agree: artists whose work looks like tjost's often sell well at woot.

(Now awaiting someone's followup rant regarding quality vs. quantity ... )

I can rant for hours about poorly operationalized variables or failure to define key terms or confusing mediating and moderating factors or independent and dependent variables...

I just submitted my first entry. I hope you like it!

Does Terry Prachett and Neil Gaiman's Good Omens count as classic lit? Any designers feel like doing? Pretty please! My design skills pale in comparison to what y'all do!

ruthjhodsoll wrote:Does Terry Prachett and Neil Gaiman's Good Omens count as classic lit? Any designers feel like doing? Pretty please! My design skills pale in comparison to what y'all do!

The Derby rules specify that the book was published before 1920.

General note for derby entrants: if you need to explain your design, then it's a bad design. You may have drawn it up beautifully, but that's entirely irrelevant.


Note that insisting that an exceedingly obscure reference is actually not exceedingly obscure may contribute to a poor design choice.

Jabberwocky fell out of the cloud

Hmm what are the chances it might make it into the top three now? I really wanted that one.

jezzarisky wrote:Jabberwocky fell out of the cloud

Hmm what are the chances it might make it into the top three now? I really wanted that one.

EC/GEC is the only hope for it.