Pink Poogle Toy Forum

Thanks for the great advice. I totally agree with you. But for some reason I'm bonded to "dancing".

I'm slightly confused to the fact that we should be linking our Subtexts to "Rachel". To be honest, I feel that the Subtext should sum up the picture as (in this case anyway) the main text is who the sig belongs to. If someone we didn't know asked us to make a signature for them with their name on, then what would we put? I agree with the rest of the points you made but that one confused the bejeebers outta me!

EDIT: I have to agree with Twinkle on this one, I dont see that it was necessary to tie in the main text with the subtext as it was the persons name. If it had been anything other than the name of the person whose set it was then I would be wanting them to tie in but as it stands there is only one person who I have judged partly based on the main text.



Kitten Medli I know you were abit rushed to complete this but I do feel that you could have done better. I can see why you would think that the flowers are dancing but it just doesn’t feel right with the main image. You could definitely get away with this subtext in a normal set but for a competition I am looking for a little bit more.

Dawn2 Very simple, yet I like it. The subtext could apply to the picture or to the person who had the set. I also like the fact that you steered away from the obvious choice of paradise (no offence to any that used it) that strikes me as originality.

Twinkle I love this one! This is definitely a case of where having fading text works well with both the image and the subtext. There’s not much I can say about this subtext because I just love it!

Robert2100 I agree it does look quiet and beautiful so the subtext does tie in with the image. However, it struck me as a little bland and I feel you could have added a little something to it. Even fading in-between would have made it abit more interesting. As I said above, it would work in a set but in a competition I’m looking for something that stands out, and this just doesn’t, sorry.

.:Requiem:. Again, I have to say that I didn’t really get your subtext. I think that if I saw the set on a board with that subtext I would be confused. Its the word 'feeling' that throws it for me, if it was just 'Beauty for the heart' it would make more sense to me, 'feeling' just seems like an unnecessary word here. However it did tie in with the image and was a definite improvement on the last round.

Kugetsu I like that fact that it rhymes, was that intentional? I really like this subtext because it is simple yet effective. Its actually kinda catchy too because I’ve just said it 4 times in my head! It ties in well with the image and any more detail would've ruined it.

DM was on fire! This is just too long. Each section is very good and all would be great subtexts in their own right, but all four of them together seems like over kill to me. The most I would want in a subtext is two of those sections. Ideally for me the first section would be absolutely fine on its own. You linked the subtexts and the image very well though and I find no fault in the subtext other than that it is too long. I want to see you in the next round as your subtexts are very good, just too long. Don’t over complicate them!

Ammer I like how you have tied the flowers into the main image. Again very simple, but I feel that it works very well with the sig. Not much else I can really say because I personally don’t see anything wrong with it!

Amarise I like this subtext because it does seem very serene and beautiful so ties in with the sig. Yet again, I love the simple ones so it definitely appeals to me. You also avoided going for the obvious choice and I think your subtext is very original.

JellyFish72 Im quite divided on this one. I think that having your subtext split into three sections would work in this case but I’m not completely sure on the word 'shady' I think there are quite a few other words that you could have chosen that would, for me, have fitted in better with the picture. However, I do like that you have brought the small flowers into the main image and tied it all up together.

Ziggy I love that you have named the flowers! But you seem to have forgotten the main image completely. I also don’t think that your subtext ties in very well with the main text of the sig, having three names is a bit too much for me. This would have worked if the main text was something different but as it stands I’m afraid that it doesn’t appeal to me.

o_0 I recognise this as your own personal style and its definitely original. But unfortunately I see this as a more serious sig and I don’t feel that your subtext does it justice. I can understand that you may not like to do serious subtexts but I think that whoever is crowned king or queen needs to show that they can create different types of subtext.

Watericesage This fits in well with the image but I feel that the last bit “untouched by the seasons…” would have been sufficient on its own. I don’t think that with this particular subtext you needed to have “A Tropical Paradise” as the picture speaks for itself and it just added unnecessary words into your subtext. Although 7 words isn’t really that long for a subtext, you chose words with rather a lot of syllables which seems to lengthen it. Just something to keep in mind!

Hellyer Nice! I like it, you have connected the flowers to the main image very well. The length is perfect and I could easily see this subtext on the sig. Good job!:)


I hope you guys appreciate how hard it is to put anyone up for elimination because I can honestly say that there isnt anyone who I feel hasnt improved. But I think Autumn Elf may poke me if I dont Eliminate sooooo

Eliminate

.:Requiem:.
Ziggy
o_0

I'm not saying the subtext has to be related to Rachel specifically (though it could if you wanted it to ) I'm saying that the subtext should at least make some connection to the fact you have a person's name on it...just relating it to a person would do

Basically I just think it looks weird to have 'Rachel' on it and have the subtext talk about something nothing to do with Rachel

I didn't eliminate anybody because of the fact they didn't have a Rachel connection in it. I just thought I'd voice my opinions


EDIT - You forgot to judge Hellyer x

Woah! How did that happen, I copied and pasted my original list into word and some how Hellyer disappeared.... So sorry Hellyer, Ive edited it now and added you in...

Kept TDG on his toes though eh?!? Well spotted!

Thanks for the advice. I agree, I thought my subtext was a bit bland too, but I couldn't think of anything else . I definatly agree on the fading though, thinking about it now, I think that would actually look really nice

I can only imagine how difficult it would be to judge all these subtexts. (Even worse to eliminate someone, but I guess that's better than if it were easy to get rid of someone. ) This was an increadibly tough round, mainly because serious sigs are usually made for one specific person, who wants a certain feel conveyed by their set. I have to say, however, that I don't entirely agree that a subtext has to necessarily relate to the name on the sig. Most of my subtexts do indeed relate to me in some fashion, but I don't really think most of us know rachel enough to make a subtle connection to her name. (Although, thinking of it, I do suppose that the proactive subtexter could have contacted rachel about the stuff she likes.....)

Well.. I haven't had much time.. just popping on for werewolf.. can you delay the judging a teeny bit for me? thankies.

I've just realised that this topic had hit 7 pages. Wow, it's been a really big success and I'm enjoying it (thus far). Thanks Dawn for the idea and HUGE BIG thankies to AutumnElf for keeping this going!

Okay, if you can't get it in by Sunday, I'll extend the deadline to Monday, and maybe a day later if that doesn't work either.

I thought judging ended tonight.. Oh, I can most definately get judging in by Sunday.. I was just not sure if I could for tonight.

Gah! Thanks for the comments.

Its ironic, because at first, I only put:
"Untouched by the seasons"

Then I quickly flip-flopped and put:
"Living in a Tropical Paradise *fades* Untouched by the seasons"

Then I thought of that as too long, so I put:
"A tropical paradise *fades* untouched by the seasons"

THEN, I wasnt sure on the fade, so I put:
"A Tropical Paradies, untouched by the seasons"

I said shady because of all the trees... they just stood out to me...

Kitten Medli I like the format of this subtext, it could definitely be on the sig, but I don't know if I would have used "dancing". I could see how that might fit in with flowers, and how they "dance" in the wind, but I think something that ties in with a beach/island like "Relaxing in Paradise" or something close to that.

Dawn2 This is simple yet effective. The length is just right to fit under "Rachel" and on the left side of the flowers. It also captures many aspects of the picture in just two words. Not much more I can say, but I do like it. Very nice.

Twinkle Ooh. I love this subtext by itself, but putting it onto the signature may confuse readers. By "two small beauties" you could be talking about literally anything on the picture. Even so, I think this subtext could go onto the sig very nicely. Well done.

Robert210 This subtext really ties in with the picture, but I feel a fade between "So Quiet" and "So Beautiful" would make it more interesting and somehow fit into the sig better. I really don't like the comma in between and how it's all on one line. Even putting it in this format: "So quiet... (Enter) ...so beautiful" would make it look better.

.:Requiem:. I don't know. Something about this subtext just doesn't seem to "fit". I can see how the beginning fits in with the picture, but I'm not quite sure about the second part. I'm especially not sure why you put "Beauty for the feeling heart" I don't see where the feeling part comes from. I think the subtext would have been great with just "Beauty for the heart"

Kugetsu This subtext is another one thats simple yet effective. It fits perfectly with the picture, and is just the right...amount of detail, I guess. I think adding or subtracting any words would ruin the whole effect.

DM was on fire! The little "poem" is lovely, but it's waaay too long for the subtext. Even with the fades, I think each section may look a bit squished. Also, people really become very uninterested if your subtext drags on. You *might* have wanted to just use one section of the whole subtext.

Ammer This subtext is quite nice. It fits perfectly with the signature, and I like how it ties the flowers and the island together. I don't think there's anything wrong with this subtext

Amarise Way to be original! You didn't go for the obvious choice of subtext (paradise, tropical etc. etc.) and yet the subtext still goes quite well with the signature. It's also a wonderful length to put onto the signature.

JellyFish72 I like the format, and I think the fading is fine, but it really confuses me how you first say "Shady" meaning the trees, then "Pink". I know "Pink" stands for the flowers but at a quick scan, it could seem as if you're saying the trees are pink. I think the subtext would have been fine if you said something along the lines of, "Shady *fade* Green *fade* Paradise". I think you could have gotten away with not mentioning the flowers in your subtext.

Hellyer I think this is an excellent subtext. It goes very well with the image, is a perfect length and...just sounds nice? Not much to say, as I find nothing wrong with it. Great job!

Ziggy I see your point in the subtext, but I really don't think it fits with the picture, and at first glance a reader might not understand what you're trying to say. A subtext can be short, but it isn't always effective. In your case, it's short, but I'm not so sure about the effective part.

o_0 I understand you may not like serious subtexts, but it's necessary to be able to think up different types of subtexts. In this case, the sig isn't a humorous sig, so a more serious subtext suits better. The first part of your subtext is good enough by itself, in my opinion, and the second part can be let go.

Watericesage I think a fade would be good in this subtext as 1) It's a tad too long and 2) I think it sounds better. Otherwise, this is a nice subtext and I don't see anything else wrong with it. Wonderful job

Eliminate: Ziggy, o_0, and DM was on fire!

I'll give Plducala and Rachel until tomorrow, but after that, it'll be a strike.