Looks unrelated to trope: Power Nullifier

Yeah, that's better.

Best so far.

I have a little concern over it being Supes's... well, Kryptonite Factor, but other than that it works.

Bump...any objections to the pic from post #26?

Just happened across a decent example of generic superhero power-nullifier device:

When you're a descendant of Dr. Frankenstein, you know it's important to keep an Iron Man Armor Polarity Reversing Handcuff Machine handy!

Interesting...pretty decent suggestion.

None of those show the trope at all; they're all text-based.

Text should assist an image, not replace it.

• sigh* Can we please put a stake in this notion? We're evaluating the image in its entirety, which includes text.

And even if this notion was our standard, which is isn't and never was, the Iron Man image clearly shows Iron Man being successfully restrained.

I'm really pretty goddamn sick of this argument, especially when it's just used as a heckler's veto, with no constructive suggestion attached beyond "I don't like text."

edited 12th Nov '11 7:14:23 PM by suedenim

Text is only bad if it pulls the entire weight of the picture; like if you removed the visual element entirely and didn't lose anything at all, it would be too text reliant. But that's not the case here. The fact that the image clearly shows Iron Man being successfully restrained adds to the image, and as such it isn't reliant on text.

I am sick of the "too much text" argument being thrown at everything that has more than 10 words in it. If it strains people's patience to take in a few lines of text, tough.

With the Superman image, I see a shrunken Superman. Nothing power nullifying about that.

With the Iron Man image, it just looks like his arms are bound. That's not exactly what this trope is about.

It's also about what the text describes. The text is part of the image.

Again, if it relies entirely on the text, it's a bad image. If I look at them and get a gist of what's going on, then the text elaborates further, that's fine. If I need the text to understand, though, then it doesn't work.

Huh? What you're saying there is you want text to contain only extra, superflous bits of information. That has never been the standard around here.

So if one "need[s] the text to understand" then the image "relies entirely on the text"? What kind of false dilemma is that?

Count me in the "stake this notion" camp.

edited 15th Nov '11 12:17:17 AM by Catalogue

The Pope has an idiosyncratic notion of what trope images require. Which is fine, but others should be aware that it is not, and never has been, a community standard for selecting trope images.

Yeah, official policy is okay with text in images as long as the visual element isn't completely negligible.

Text-in-an-image is a common cause of the 'I Can't Believe It's Not JAFAAC' where Image Pickin' posters get a little overzealous and unfairly condemn a decent image. It happens.

I think it's quite good, actually.

We really need to make that an official page.

I never said that text should only contain superfluous information; I said that, with the text removed, an image should still at least be able to get the idea across, which I didn't get from either of those (I see a shrunken Superman and Iron Man being handcuffed, not having his powers cut off).

I've got one from Gunnerkrigg Court:

The third panel of this page: [1] with maybe the first panel as well.

Coupled with a panel from one of these two to show the phlebotium in action:

[2]
[3]

edited 19th Nov '11 8:52:51 PM by ArcadesSabboth

If the image should be able to convey it without text, that means precisely "text should only carry superflous information". And no, that's not how we do things despite some people wanting it to be that way.

That Sliding Scale Of Image Pertinence page is sexy.

Ooh, that's nice.

Clock is set.

I think both sides of the text debate can be prone to zealotry, honestly. I don't agree that any image that leans on text (either in-image or in a caption) for help is worse than no image at all. At the same time, arguing that text should be regarded as just another part of an image no different from anything else is a bit much. If that were the case, the advice on How To Pick A Good Image to Show, Don't Tell and to avoid Wall of Text would be incoherent. And let's face it: we've got the whole page to describe the trope using words, and just one small corner to try to illustrate it pictorially. That alone strikes me as a good reason to keep our pictures as pictorial as possible.

And the "as possible" is important. I liked seeing the image from What Is Evil? held up as a good example in that Sliding Scale Of Image Pertinence page, as it's an image I've defended before. But part of the reason I like that image is because it's a conversation trope, so an image of people talking whose body language and clothing are at least suggestive of the trope is likely to be the best we can do. The Avengers image that was posted way back is comparable to that image as far as how good a job the pictorial elements do of conveying its trope, in my opinion, but I can't help but think that it should be possible to convey this trope purely through images.

(The other difference, of course, is that with the Avengers image I think the text that's there actually makes the image worse rather than better. The Iron Man image has the same problem.)

But of course, I said the same thing about that Avengers image ten months ago, and this theoretical simple, clean image has yet to manifest itself. So if we're voting, I vote to slap that Avengers picture up as a "Keep Until Better Image Suggested" and call it a day.