studioironwolf

[studioironwolf]

reminder that digital libraries aren’t owned, also why pirating digital content is a necessity

[studioironwolf]

On the anniversary of his birthday.

[studioironwolf]

It's impressive how Neil Gaiman vanished from the internet. Wish Rowling would do the same.

[studioironwolf]

After possibly thousands of requests, here’s a version of the Pans video with CAST IRON pans.

Spoiler: there’s a reason weapons and armour weren’t usually made of cast iron!

Patreon now has bonus pan content!

[studioironwolf]

Some observations on book covers

[studioironwolf]

I've finally figured out an argument that convinces coding tech-bros that AI art is bad.

Got into a discussion today (actually a discussion, we were both very reasonable and calm even through I felt like committing violence) with a tech-bro-coded lady who claimed that people use AI in coding all the time so she didn't see why it mattered if people used AI in art.

Obviously I repressed the surge of violence because that would accomplish nothing. Plus, this lady is very articulate, the type who makes claims and you sit there thinking no that's wrong it must be but she said it so well you're kind of just waffling going but, no, wait-- so I knew I had to get this right if I was gonna come out of this unscathed.

The usual arguments about it being about the soul of it and creation fell flat, in fact she was adamant that anyone who believed that was in fact looking down at coding as an art form as she insisted it is. Which, sure, you can totally express yourself through coding. There's a lot more nuance as to the differences but clearly I was not going to win this one.

The other people I was with (literally 8 people anti-ai against her, but you can't change the mind of someone who doesn't want to listen and she just kept accusing us of devaluing coding as an art) took over for I kid you not 15 minutes while I tried desperately to come up with a clear and articulate way to explain the difference to her. They tried so many reasonable arguments, coding being for a function ("what, art doesn't serve a function?") coding being many discrete building blocks that you put together differently, and the AI simply provides the blocks and you put it together yourself ("isn't that what prompt building is") that it's bad for the environment ("but not if it's used for capitalism, hm?" "Yeah literally that's how capitalism works it doesn't care about the environment" she didn't like that response)

But I finally got it.

And the answer is: It's not about what you do, it's about what you claim to be.

Imagine that someone asks an AI to write a code and, by some miracle, it works perfectly without them having to tweak it---which is great because they couldn't tell you what a single solitary thing in that code means.

Now imagine this person, with their code that they don't know how it works, goes and applies to be a coder somewhere, presenting this AI code as proof that they're qualified.

Should they be hired?

She was horrified, of course. Of course they shouldn't be. They're not qualified. They can't actually code, and even if by some miracle they did have an AI successfully write a flawless code for every issue they came across that wouldn't be their code, you could hire any shmuck on the street to do that, no reason to pay someone like they're creating something.

When actual engineers use AI what they do is get some kind of base, which they then go though and check for problems and then if they find any they fix them, and add on to the base code with their own knowledge instead of just trying different prompt after prompt until they randomly come across one that works.

People who generate code like this don't usually call themselves engineers. They're people who needed a bit of code and didn't have the knowledge to generate it, and so used a resource.

And there you go. There are people who have none of the skills of artists, they don't practice, they don't create for themselves. When they feed the prompt to the AI they then don't just use the resulting image as a reference point for their own personal masterpiece, and if they don't like it they don't have the skills to change it---they simply try another prompt, and do that until they get something they like.

These people are calling themselves artists.

Not only that, these people are bringing the AI generated thing to interviews, and they are getting hired, leaving people who slave over their craft out of the job.

And that is the difference, for the tech bros who think AI art isn't a big deal.

[studioironwolf]

What the flock?! such smart names!

Science should let more cartoonists name things. That how we got the thagomizer and the Rube Goldberg machines. Anyways! SHERLOCK CROWMES!!!!!

Check out my stuff!

✧Read Namesake✧ ✧Read Crow Time✧ ✧Store✧ ✧Patreon✧

[studioironwolf]

sometimes you need dialogue tags and don't want to use the same four

[studioironwolf]

a writing competition i was going to participate in again this year has announced that they now allow AI generated content to be submitted

their reasoning being that "we couldn't ban it even if we wanted to, every writer already uses it anyway"

"Every writer"?

come on

[studioironwolf]

Horses: Since There Seems To Be A Knowledge Gap

I'm going to go ahead and preface this with: I comment pretty regularly on clips and photos featuring horses and horseback riding, often answering questions or providing explanations for how or why certain things are done. I was a stable hand and barrel racer growing up, and during my 11 year tenure on tumblr, Professional Horse Commentary is a very niche, yet very necessary, subject that needs filling. Here are some of the literary and creative gaps I've noticed in well meaning (and very good!) creators trying to portray horses and riding realistically that... well, most of you don't seem to even be aware of, because you wouldn't know unless you worked with horses directly!

Some Of The Most Common Horse + Riding Mistakes I See:

-Anybody can ride any horse if you hold on tight enough/have ridden once before.

Nope. No, no, no, no, aaaaaaaand, no. Horseback riding has, historically, been treated as a life skill taught from surprisingly young ages. It wasn't unusual in the pre-vehicular eras to start teaching children as young as 4 to begin to ride, because horses don't come with airbags, and every horse is different. For most adults, it can take months or years of regular lessons to learn to ride well in the saddle, and that's just riding; not working or practicing a sport.

Furthermore, horses often reject riders they don't know. Unless a horse has been trained like a teaching horse, which is taught to tolerate riders of all skill and experience levels, it will take extreme issue with having some random person try to climb on their back. Royalty, nobility, and the knighted classes are commonly associated with the "having a favorite special horse" trope, because it's true! Just like you can have a particularly special bond with a pet or service animal that verges on parental, the same can apply with horses. Happy horses love their owners/riders, and will straight-up do their best to murder anyone that tries to ride them without permission.

-Horses are stupid/have no personality.

There isn't a more dangerous assumption to make than assuming a horse is stupid. Every horse has a unique personality, with traits that can be consistent between breeds (again, like cat and dog breeds often have distinct behavior traits associated with them), but those traits manifest differently from animal to animal.

My mother had an Arabian horse, Zipper, that hated being kicked as a signal to gallop. One day, her mom and stepdad had a particularly unpleasant visitor; an older gentleman that insisted on riding Zipper, but refused to listen to my mother's warnings never to kick him. "Kicking" constitutes hitting the horse's side(s) with your heels, whether you have spurs on or not. Most horses only need a gentle squeeze to know what you want them to do.

Anyway, Zipper made eye-contact with my mom, asking for permission. He understood what she meant when she nodded at him. He proceeded to give this asshole of a rider road rash on the side of the paddock fence and sent him to the emergency room. He wouldn't have done it if he didn't have the permission from the rider he respected, and was intelligent enough to ask, "mind if I teach this guy a lesson?" with his eyes, and understand, "Go for it, buddy," from my mom in return.

-Riding bareback is possible to do if you hold onto the horse's mane really tight.

Riding a horse bareback (with no saddle, stirrups, or traditional harness around the horse's head) is unbelievably difficult to learn, particularly have testicles and value keeping them. Even professional riders and equestrians find ourselves relying on tack (the stuff you put on a horse to ride it) to stay stable on our horses, even if we've been riding that particular horse for years and have a very positive, trusting relationship.

Horses sweat like people do. The more they run, the more their hair saturates with sweat and makes staying seated on them slippery. Hell, an overworked horse can sweat so heavily that the saddle slips off its back. It's also essential to brush and bathe a horse before it's ridden in order to keep it healthier, so their hair is often quite slick from either being very clean or very damp. In order to ride like that, you have to develop the ability to synchronize your entire body's rhythm's with the rhythm of the horse's body beneath you, and quite literally move as one. Without stirrups, most people can't do it, and some people can never master bareback riding no matter how many years they spend trying to learn.

-You can be distracted and make casual conversation while a horse is standing untethered in the middle of a barn or field.

At every barn I've ever worked at, it's been standard practice with every single horse, regardless of age or temperament, to secure their heads while they're being tacked up or tacked down. The secures for doing this are simple ropes with clips that are designed to attach to the horse's halter (the headwear for a horse that isn't being ridden; they have no bit that goes in the horse's mouth, and no reins for a rider to hold) on metal O rings on either side of the horse's head. This is not distressing to the horse, because we give them plenty of slack to turn their heads and look around comfortably.

The problem with trying to tack up an unrestrained horse while chatting with fellow stable hands or riders is that horses know when you're distracted! And they often try to get away with stuff when they know you're not looking! In a barn, a horse often knows where the food is stored, and will often try to tiptoe off to sneak into the feed room.

Horses that get into the feed room are often at a high risk of dying. While extremely intelligent, they don't have the ability to throw up, and they don't have the ability to tell that their stomach is full and should stop eating. Allowing a horse into a feed/grain room WILL allow it to eat itself to death.

Other common woes stable hands and riders deal with when trying to handle a horse with an unrestrained head is getting bitten! Horses express affection between members of their own herd, and those they consider friends and family, through nibbling and surprisingly rough biting. It's not called "horseplay" for nothing, because during my years working with horses out in the pasture, it wasn't uncommon at all for me to find individuals with bloody bite marks on their withers (that high part on the middle of the back of their shoulders most people instinctively reach for when they try to get up), and on their backsides. I've been love-bitten by horses before, and while flattering, they hurt like hell on fleshy human skin.

So, for the safety of the horse, and everybody else, always make a show of somehow controlling the animal's head when hands-on and on the ground with them.

-Big Horse = War Horse

Startlingly, the opposite is usually the case! Draft and carriage horses, like Percherons and Friesians, were never meant to be used in warfare. Draft horses are usually bred to be extremely even-tempered, hard to spook, and trustworthy around small children and animals. Historically, they're the tractors of the farm if you could afford to upgrade from oxen, and were never built to be fast or agile in a battlefield situation.

More importantly, just because a horse is imposing and huge doesn't make it a good candidate for carrying heavy weights. A real thing that I had to be part of enforcing when I worked at a teaching ranch was a weight limit. Yeah, it felt shitty to tell people they couldn't ride because we didn't have any horses strong enough to carry them due to their weight, but it's a matter of the animal's safety. A big/tall/chonky horse is more likely to be built to pull heavy loads, but not carry them flat on their spines. Horses' muscular power is predominantly in their ability to run and pull things, and too heavy a rider can literally break a horse's spine and force us to euthanize it.

Some of the best war horses out there are from the "hot blood" family. Hot blooded horses are often from dry, hot, arid climates, are very small and slight (such as Arabian horses), and are notoriously fickle and flighty. They're also a lot more likely to paw/bite/kick when spooked, and have even sometimes been historically trained to fight alongside their rider if their rider is dismounted in combat; kicking and rearing to keep other soldiers at a distance.

-Any horse can be ridden if it likes you enough.

Just like it can take a lifetime to learn to ride easily, it can take a lifetime of training for a horse to comfortably take to being ridden or taking part in a job, like pulling a carriage. Much like service animals, horses are typically trained from extremely young ages to be reared into the job that's given to them, and an adult horse with no experience carrying a rider is going to be just as scared as a rider who's never actually ridden a horse.

Just as well, the process of tacking up a horse isn't always the most comfortable experience for the horse. To keep the saddle centered on the horse's back when moving at rough or fast paces, it's essential to tighten the belly strap (cinch) of the saddle as tightly as possible around the horse's belly. For the horse, it's like wearing a tight corset, chafes, and even leaves indents in their skin afterward that they love having rinsed with water and scratched. Some horses will learn to inflate their bellies while you're tightening the cinch so you can't get it as tight as it needs to be, and then exhale when they think you're done tightening it.

When you're working with a horse wearing a bridle, especially one with a bit, it can be a shocking sensory experience to a horse that's never used a bit before. While they lack a set of teeth naturally, so the bit doesn't actually hurt them, imagine having a metal rod shoved in your mouth horizontally! Unless you understand why it's important for the person you care about not dying, you'd be pretty pissed about having to keep it in there!

-Horseback riding isn't exercise.

If you're not using every muscle in your body to ride with, you're not doing it right.

Riding requires every ounce of muscle control you have in your entire body - although this doesn't mean it wasn't realistic for people with fat bodies to stay their weight while also being avid riders; it doesn't mean the muscles aren't there. To stay on the horse, you need to learn how it feels when it moves at different gaits (walk, trot, canter, gallop), how to instruct it to switch leads (dominant legs; essential for precise turning and ease of communication between you and the horse), and not falling off. While good riders look like they're barely moving at all, that's only because they're good riders. They know how to move so seamlessly with the horse, feeling their movements like their own, that they can compensate with their legs and waists to not bounce out of the saddle altogether or slide off to one side. I guarantee if you ride a horse longer than 30 minutes for the first time, your legs alone will barely work and feel like rubber.

-Horses aren't affectionate.

Horses are extraordinarily affectionate toward the right people. As prey animals, they're usually wary of people they don't know, or have only recently met. They also - again, like service animals - have a "work mode" and a "casual mode" depending upon what they're doing at the time. Horses will give kisses like puppies, wiggle their upper lips on your hair/arms to groom you, lean into neck-hugs, and even cuddle in their pasture or stall if it's time to nap and you join them by leaning against their sides. If they see you coming up from afar and are excited to see you, they'll whinny and squeal while galloping to meet you at the gate. They'll deliberately swat you with their tails to tease you, and will often follow you around the pasture if they're allowed to regardless of what you're up to.

-Riding crops are cruel.

Only cruel people use riding crops to hurt their horses. Spurs? I personally object to, because any horse that knows you well doesn't need something sharp jabbing them in the side for emphasis when you're trying to tell them where you want them to go. Crops? Are genuinely harmless tools used for signalling a horse.

I mean, think about it. Why would crops be inherently cruel instruments if you need to trust a horse not to be afraid of you and throw you off when you're riding it?

Crops are best used just to lightly tap on the left or right flank of the horse, and aren't universally used with all forms of riding. You'll mainly see crops used with English riding, and they're just tools for communicating with the horse without needing to speak.

-There's only one way to ride a horse.

Not. At. All. At most teaching ranches, you'll get two options: Western, or English, because they tend to be the most popular for shows and also the most common to find equipment for. English riding uses a thinner, smaller saddle, narrower stirrups, and much thinner bridles. I, personally, didn't like English style riding because I never felt very stable in such a thin saddle with such small stirrups, and didn't start learning until my mid teens. English style riding tends to focus more on your posture and deportment in the saddle, and your ability to show off your stability and apparent immovability on the horse. It was generally just a bit too stiff and formal for me.

Western style riding utilizes heavier bridles, bigger saddles (with the iconic horn on the front), and broader stirrups. Like its name may suggest, Western riding is more about figuring out how to be steady in the saddle while going fast and being mobile with your upper body. Western style riding is generally the style preferred for working-type shows, such as horseback archery, gunning, barrel racing, and even rodeo riding.

-Wealthy horse owners have no relationship with their horses.

This is loosely untrue, but I've seen cases where it is. Basically, horses need to feel like they're working for someone that matters to them in order to behave well with a rider and not get impatient or bored. While it's common for people to board horses at off-property ranches (boarding ranches) for cost and space purposes, it's been historically the truth that having help is usually necessary with horses at some point. What matters is who spends the most time with the animal treating it like a living being, rather than a mode of transport or a tool. There's no harm in stable hands handling the daily upkeep; hay bales and water buckets are heavy, and we're there to profit off the labor you don't want or have the time to do. You get up early to go to work; we get up early to look after your horses. Good owners/boarders visit often and spend as much of their spare time as they can with spending quality work and playtime with their horses. Otherwise, the horses look to the stable hands for emotional support and care.

So, maybe you're writing a knight that doesn't really care much for looking after his horse, but his squire is really dedicated to keeping up with it? There's a better chance of the horse having a more affectionate relationship with the squire thanks to the time the squire spends on looking after it, while the horse is more likely to tolerate the knight that owns it as being a source of discipline if it misbehaves. That doesn't mean the knight is its favorite person. When it comes to horses, their love must be earned, and you can only earn it by spending time with them hands-on.

-Horses can graze anywhere without concern.

This is a mistake that results in a lot of premature deaths! A big part of the cost of owning a horse - even before you buy one - is having the property that will be its pasture assessed for poisonous plants, and having those plants removed from being within the animal's reach. This is an essential part of farm upkeep every year, because horses really can't tell what's toxic and what isn't. One of the reasons it's essential to secure a horse when you aren't riding it is to ensure it only has a very limited range to graze on, and it's your responsibility as the owner/rider to know how to identify dangerous plants and keep your horses away from them.

There's probably more. AMA in my askbox if you have any questions, but that's all for now. Happy writing.

[studioironwolf]

With all the surviving dresses and all the girls considered worth photographs being waifish as heck, what can you tell me about how a heavier lass might have Been Fashion in the 20s? could I have flapped?

You absolutely could have flapped! People have always existed at every size, and extant garments have major survivorship bias that preserves mostly the tiniest, fanciest things. Looking at vernacular photography from the era shows us tons of people in every shape and size wearing 20s styles.

The thing is, what looks flattering and fashionable to us, now, was not necessarily what looked flattering and fashionable to them, back then.

That said, there definitely was some social pressure to be (or look) slimmer:

(did you know Lane Bryant’s been around this long?)

But honestly, most people who weren’t Hollywood stars or socialites just kind of committed to the loose, boxy silhouette.

[studioironwolf]

Superheroes are everywhere.

In many ways, they are the American mythology. The superhero exemplifies popular concepts such as rugged individualism, American exceptionalism, and the reluctant sheriff. A superhero assumes the task of policing the world because they have the power and supposed moral authority to do so.

However, there has been a shift away from such interpretations of the superhero. Perhaps one explanation for the shift is dissatisfaction with current superpeople (billionaires, tech moguls, politicians, etc.). Such dissatisfaction leads to stories that critique the concept of singular, exceptional beings exerting their will on the world.

[studioironwolf]

For the seafolk, the wide open ocean provides many things. The fish that fills their bellies and the wind that fills their sails. Fluids wrung from catches or skimmed from the surface, and great beasts of the deep that can bring food and wealth to entire villages. But of course one of the greatest things the sea provides to them is something that cannot properly be measured, for it is freedom. The open ocean is vast and wild, ruled by no master, governed by no laws. And these folk sit upon the very cusp of it, looking out into a blue horizon of endless possibilities. It goes with a question that outsiders to this world may ask: why are they called "seafolk" when they are just regular people? Why are they treated as some separate group despite being just like you and me? It is that vast endless ocean that makes all the difference...

Living upon the coast and sea changes a person, perhaps not always physically. Working in the sun and salt, at mercy of the weather and temperamental waters. Cast enough nets, hunt enough leviathans, and you see things that cannot be conveyed by land words. Witness events and strange beings that fly in the face of terrestrial teachings. If you were to ask the Church, indeed the seafolk are different people despite the similarities, and that is because the ocean has a place in their very essence that can never be purged. For those on land, the golden faith is absolute and everywhere. There are not many other options for religion or beliefs, and there is little escape for those who wish to separate themselves from it. But that great sea is a world the Church cannot control, where their laws and reach are weak and scattered. They may be able to enforce their teachings when folk are on dry land, but for the seafolk, all it takes is a single boat and sail to vanish into another world entirely. So easy to submerse oneself in powers and ideas that cannot be held back, to bear witness to divinity that is not found on dry land. Thus, the Church does label them as "seafolk," for they are a different breed for sure.

And for the seafolk, life is different compared to those who remain on land. While they do partake in farming and livestock rearing, most of their food and resources are collected by harpoon and net, rather than shovel or pitchfork. Just as a farmer casts seed upon fertile fields, the fisherman casts a net into rich waters. Where the hunter may draw back their bow to down a beast for supper, the whaler readies a harpoon to sink deep into blubbery flesh. Similarities and differences alike. To the landfolk, life on the turbulent and violent seas seems insane, going after leviathans that could easily crush boats and end the lives of dozens. But to the seafolk it is all normal, an everyday thing. To them, life locked on the unchanging land feels imprisoning and mind numbingly boring. Just another day of tending to dirt! For sure, there are some who may find such a simple dry life good and peaceful, and history has shown a number of fishermen and whalers who retired to the land after particularly haunting voyages. But a fire still burns within many seafolk, a desire to sail out into that great blue yonder and see what the ocean has in store for them. That is why, despite the fact whalers live dangerous and volatile lives, you would be hard pressed to find more driven folk ready to dive into the unknown.

Hunting the leviathans of the deep is a rough job, but it is a vital aspect of life for the seafolk, for the riches that come from such hauls are irreplaceable. Upon the coast, there are very little in sake of mines to dig up stores of ivory and fluids. Instead, it is through these beasts that they harvest ivory, scales, blubber, oil, ambergris and fluids in vast quantities. Each leviathan slain provides a treasure trove of resources, be it building materials, food, fuel or even medicine. Thus the ships must sail out to find these great beasts, or else they will be required to rely more and more on landfolk for certain supplies. And to the seafolk, each desperate trade and emergency deal with them or the Church is another shackle to bind them. So ready the sails and sharpen the harpoons, it is time for a hunt!

For whalers, one of the most common leviathans they hunt is known as the "Twin Spout Leviathan." A great fish with the body of a barrel, a crimson mane, six curved tusks and two mighty spouts that erupt like geysers. The Twin Spout is a hardy species found in a variety of fluids, feeding upon the schools of fish and invertebrates found in the open sea. Scaly hides protect them from predators, while their sharp beak and curved tusks give them weapons in fights or mating disputes. Twin Spouts travel in pods, using numbers to keep away greater threats and to aid in corralling prey for easier feeding. These leviathans are well versed in using their dual blowholes, and know how to control the direction and power of their eruption. It is believed they are used for signaling others, for bubble-net feeding and perhaps even washing off parasites and hitchhikers when they surface. Unfortunately for them, these iconic spouts are precisely what the whalers are looking for, leading them straight to the pod. They gained the name "Twin Spouts" not just because they possess two of these structures, but because that is what watchers up high would yell out to the crew below when they spotted the two geysers upon the horizon.

Twin Spouts are considered a good "all around" leviathan, providing a fair balance of meat, blubber, oil and scales. When one wants a little bit of everything, the Twin Spout is the good choice. But like all leviathans, these resources don't come for free. Twin Spouts have heavy scales that can deflect harpoons, and great bulk to slam into ships. Their precise use of their dual orifices has led to them learning the skill of blasting ship decks with watery eruptions. It is advised for the hunters to ready safety ropes and bailing buckets when one of these leviathans is approached, as it won't be long before waves of ejected fluid will be washing across the deck. But when victory is achieved, the spoils go to the victor. The scales of a Twin Spout are sold or used for armor, be it for a person or a boat, while smaller imperfect pieces may be carved or fashioned into talismans and good luck charms. The tusks are popular for weapons and scrimshaw, which is a treasured art for the seafolk. Any sailor, fisher or whaler that truly lives on sea will have scrimshawed pieces on their person, be it their weapons, equipment, jewelry or decoration. For many on the high seas, it is their greatest visual art and method for storytelling when words cannot be used. Families tend to have scrimshawed tusks or pieces as heirlooms, stories of their ancestors passed down again and again.

------------------------------

Now that we are all done with those puny fish, time for some REAL sea beasts!