inspirationfeed:

Safwat Saleem is a graphic designer, filmmaker, artist, and the creative director at Arizona State University. When he isn’t working, he spends most of his free time creating satirical art. He recently published a series of prints depicting complicated relationships between two or more objects. The prints are clean, beautiful, simple, and best of all smart. All illustrations listed below are available for purchase on Society6.com. 

See the rest prints here: http://bit.ly/14aWNz9

(Source: inspirationfeed)

Mikasa Ackerman

Wow… just wow. Episode 6 of Shingeki no Kyojin wrecked me! It’s been a while since I’ve watched a scene that felt so epic and heart-wrenching!

Anyways, here is Mikasa Ackerman depicted through a raven with wings fashioned to look like the blade she used to save Eren.

If you would like to see this on your wall then feel free to message me for the details. I also have a Big Cartel (though limited in product numbers, so let me know if you want something not on there).

geek-art:

Geek-Art.net : This wednesday on the Geek-Art Store ! Lord of the Rings Chess series by French graphic designer Patrick Connan ! Limited edition of 20… Stay tuned !

nikrapzil:

typeworship:

“You’ll thank me on e day”

Sheffield based street artist and illustrator, Kid Acne, has been producing these striking slogans all over the world. His distinctive lettering work has also adorned products for a diverse range of companies, such as Prada, Warp Records and Brompton bikes.

This guy taught some of our course in my first year at uni. Just saying. 

sirmitchell:

“Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?”

One of 30ish portraits that is on display at Mondo Gallery in Austin, TX until May 25th.  

the-malicious-manifesto:

tittybasket:

areyoutryingtodeduceme:

silvermender:

ilikelookingatnakedmen:

negacrow:

nightmareloki:

newvagabond:

Omfg.

OH MY GOD

Well, that was unexpected.

Funny AND I can justify putting it on my pr0n blog! Hurrah!

OHMYGOD

WHAT

I don’t know what I expected but that wasn’t it!

omg

OMFG

(Source: wanderingcynic)

whycantithinkofacoolname:

sillylaureate:

theknighttoyourtime:

super-scout:

aetropos:

starexorcist:

tehmostaewsumblogevar:

starexorcist:

ecrusher:

10knotes:

M&Ms Droplets

now that’s what photography should be about… not a black and white picture of someone’s shoes

The top picture is full of M&M’s. They’re bule, red, orange, green, yellow, and brown.

But in the bottom picture we clearly see there’s white, pink, and even purple candies in the bowl.

The bottom picture is of gumballs! This concludes that the bottom picture is not taken with that camera at all. I’d even go as far to say that it was edited in photoshop with a filter!

Yes the above image and the below image are not the same photograph being taken. This is rather obvious.

BUT Mr. Wright there is one thing you overlooked. Examine the droplets on the bottom image. None of them are from the same angle. This is a natural occurance when looking through water droplets.

Is it not possible that the photographer took the second image first?

Would it not be more probable that when asked HOW it was taken he/she took the above image of their setup Using M&Ms, something much more common in a household rather than many gumballs, something they may have just bought for the original photo? 

So to claim it was not taken with the same camera is indeed a long shot Mr. Wright.

Thank you for your time.

Really Edgeworth, is that you’re argument.

Aren’t you overlooking the fact that there are no pink M&Ms. This proves undeniably that these are not, in fact M&Ms, but some other kind of candy.

And one other thing, I find it highly improbable that not one piece of candy is facing so the M logo is on the candy.

So in conclusion, there is no way these are possibly M&Ms.

hey mister I think you’re confuuuuuuused. Edgeworth agreed that they weren’t M&M’s. He was just refuting that there is a possibility there wasnt any photoshop used and that the above image was only depicting the method used in the bottom image.

I think someone might be getting a little senile hehehe

Everyone seems to be walking around the accusations by examining whether they are or aren’t M&Ms. That is not what’s important. What we should be looking at is instead, the so-called droplets, compared to the background image.

The angles within the droplets do not realistically coincide with one another! As well, I don’t spend much time staring at drops of water, but I can surely say I’ve never seen such clarity in any water droplet. Also, as in the former picture, there is an obvious fogging on the glass, surely caused by whichever process was used to spray the water. Where is the fog? 

On top of all that, the drops are amazingly tiny compared to the anonymous-candy. One could argue the sheet is further away than in the ‘example’ pic, but the blurring of the candies definitely objects to that. We could also try to assume that the spray method used in the ‘original’ photo caused much tinier water spots, but are we to believe that the photographer was so careless that they couldn’t recreate the correct droplet size in the ‘example’? Surely, they should have been able to cause at least a closer resemblance.

Sure seems like they went out of their way to showcase the methodology of how the photograph was taken, yet neglected to go far enough to ensure it could be a like-comparison?

Rather unlikely!

Actually, Mr. Godot!! 

Well, according to the properties of light and the way it’s refracted…

If you mirror it the right way, they line up just fine!

Hold on there, pups. You’re all going in completely different directions. Shih-na, if you will?

Lang Zi says: “The truth lies not at the exit, but rather, shines outside the maze itself.”

You need to see past the boundaries given to you in order to figure out the actual purpose and, as much as I’d hate to admit, both Mr. Prosecutor and the crow-girl have some pretty tame ground under their feet with those assumptions.

As said before, it’s logical to assume the photographer is merely depicting the method used in order to get the results shown in the second photo—and it can be just that.

But what if it’s something else entirely?

We’re all wolves who’ve been swindled by the coyote that has stolen our kill. How do we know if the photographer just isn’t using some clever ploy to get us all confused? He could have taken these pictures separately and simply put them together with getting us riled up in mind.

I think we all need to reconsider our options, here.

Casually brings it back.

amazing use of gifs, ladies and gentleman

sirshon:

tarantinospankmyass:

would you stop this

WAIT. i just reblogged this thinking this was the architectural outline for the building or something but then i realized in the outline there were OUTLINES OF PEOPLE meaning THIS IS A FUCKING PAINTING OR SOMETHING ARE YOU FOR REAL RIGHT NOW

(Source: matt1308)

dotcore:

Minimal Pokémon.
by Daniel Stanley.

Check out the artist’s Tumblr.

thenintendard:

Game On

by rubbishmonkey

pirate-king-luffy:

“Inherited Will, the Destiny of the Age, and the Dreams of its People. These are things that will not be stopped. As long as people continue to pursue the meaning of freedom, these things will never cease to be!”

-Gol D. Roger

A Wild Repost Of Your Work appears!

geek-art:

Forma & co - Re-Vision

Great Superheroes designs by the Spanish team Forma & Co !

Superbe exercice de style à la gloire des héros et super-héros par les Espagnols de chez Forma & Co. 

Via

oestranhomundodek:

Don’t Touch Pac-Man by ricepiratenewgrounds

xombiedirge:

World Premier Detailed First Look!!!

Blackbird by Matt Ferguson / Tumblr / Website / Twitter

18” X 24” 4 color screen print with a bright neon orange ink layer, produced by maestro printers Nakatomi Inc. Numbered edition of 50.

Part of the Righteous Rides…and The Dudes Who Drive Them art show at the Hero Complex Gallery / Facebook

larrystylinsmosh:

asmymlivural:

If anyone ever asks me to define love, I’m just going to show them this

THIS ABSOLUTELY EXSTRAWORDINARY

(Source: femburton)