(no subject)

[mewbirb]

I guess it's okay if people enjoy these patterns, and I can see how sentimental value can be a factor, but... photos run through a generator Do Not Look Good as cross stitch patterns.  This is because a) the generator has to lower the amount of colors because there literally aren't enough floss colors in existence to match the photo exactly, and b) it doesn't know how to do anything else, so c) it comes out just looking like an extremely low-quality version of itself.

It's possible to use a photo as a base for a beautiful cross stitch, certainly, but it will take some human thinking to put together the appropriate colors and any additional types of stitches that would benefit it (backstitching tends to have an amazing effect on things that use it).  And because of this, it seems to me also that an artistic embellishment of a valuable photo would have more meaning than a straight-up pixellated and shittily-colored copy of the same photo.

Comments

[ladytroll]

Augh, this takes me right back to the Housekeeping (no, seriously) lessons we had in middle school, where we had to do... exactly that. Take a photo, run it through a generator, and then cross stitch it.
IDK why the teacher thought this was a good idea. She then gave everybody, like, ''5'' or ''4'' (which is a ''D'' in USA), because for some reason a bunch of 14 year old girls, most of whom HATED the subject with passion, did NOT make museum-quality paintings.
Sorry. Rant over.

That being said, cross stitch looks beautiful, and it's probably possible to get very close to a photo-quality, if, as you said, you add additional types of stitches, BUT it's the same as with those geode cakes and galaxy hairstyles - just because a select group of individuals CAN do it, doesn't mean everybody else can, too.