Duplicate Image: Mundane Fantastic

The image on Mundane Fantastic is a cropped version of the one on Arbitrary Skepticism, and I think it fits the latter much better.

Mind, I'm not sure what would make a better pick for Mundane Fantastic. Any ideas?

edited 30th Sep '12 8:39:31 AM by GGCrono

Although I don't have any images on hand for it, that last IPD we did with Jimmy Olsen does make me think of this trope, considering how nonchalantly he takes the transformations ("Oh, wow, I'm made of rubber. It's one of those days, I guess."). Wait, no, that was Fantastically Indifferent I'm thinking of.

edited 30th Sep '12 8:53:20 AM by ShadowHog

Agreeing to keep it on Arbitrary Skepticism.

Agreed, the pic should stay on Arbitrary Scepticism. How's this for a replacement?

What's the difference between Mundane Fantastic and Fantastically Indifferent that we want to convey in an image?

edited 30th Sep '12 1:04:53 PM by AnotherDuck

As I understand it, Mundane Fantastic is about a world or setting, whereas Fantastically Indifferent is about an individual reaction.

That seems like it could work for either Mundane Fantastic or Fantastically Indifferent.

...Mundane Fantastic has a lot of individual reaction examples.

Then that's a problem for the Repair Shop, no?

Most likely.

I wonder if there's an image somewhere of a modern daylit street crowded with pedestrians and storefronts, mixing both the normal and the obviously fantastic.

With the above in mind, I think the EGS image works much better for Fantastically Indifferent.

I really hate the EGS pic. Way too much text. You could remove the pic entirely, put the text up as a page quote, and it would work just fine. In my mind, any pic that fits that description is a bad pic.

How do you suggest we illustrate the trope with less text?

It's a little text-heavy, but the parents' expressions give it a pass from me...and to be honest, I'm at the point where I'm going to start automatically dismissing the "too much text" argument for anything that I can read in 5 seconds or less.

edited 1st Oct '12 5:50:08 AM by Willbyr

I think a lot of text is always^note unless a lot of text is a point of the trope a negative. However, in this case, it's spread out in short sentences, which makes it easy to read quickly on a glance, as opposed to where you need to read a longer paragraph. Also, while a negative, it's not something that automatically rules out a picture.

So in other words, if I put up a pic that was nothing but the words "THIS IS THE TROPE" on it, it would get a pass from you?

Sorry to snark a bit, but I think a pic must be visual, and that means if it relies completely on the text, it's no better than JAFAAC. My rule of thumb is as I've said, if the text could stand alone without the pic, then it's just a glorified page quote, not a page image.

That said, I think this can be fairly easily represented without a lot of text. Just have something amazing happening and it shown as normal. That can't be too hard to find.

I think you need to turn that definition around. By that definition, a picture with a great visual illustration, and a text that by itself can stand alone, it wouldn't qualify. I'm pretty sure that's not what you meant.

If it's fairly easy to illustrate without a lot of text that's not too hard to find, I'm all for it. If someone actually finds it.

Also I think it's important to distinguish between syntactic and semantic content; that is, between the information in the text (the text itself) and its style (typeface, color, etc.).

There are page images that are technically "all text", but the way it's written conveys information (e.g. Spoof Aesop, weak but okay; this suggestion for Dare to Be Badass). Another way to tell might be to ask, "would the image say anything if I couldn't read the language its text is written in?" rather than asking how it would be with no text at all.

Speech bubbles tend to have no semantic content, only syntactic.

edited 1st Oct '12 11:18:18 AM by rodneyAnonymous

@Nitro: I don't think it's ideal, but I do think the fact that the second panel visually shows that the daughter is a cat pulls it out of "relies entirely on text" territory.

Clock's set. At this point I'd be fine with just removing the pic from Mundane Fantastic and calling it good.

Bump...any thoughts?

Alright, the clock's up and what consensus there is is to keep the GG pic on Arbitrary Skepticism, so it's pulled from Mundane Fantastic. Locking up.