Ada @ ada @lemmy.blahaj.zone

Admin of lemmy.blahaj.zone

---

Read more

Posts

292

Comments

3,101

Joined

3 yr. ago

Moderating

---

Instances that don't have email approval, captcha or manual approval, tend to get defederated pretty quickly, because they attract spam bots

I started transitioning at 41, and that was 8 years ago. You've got this.

As for the rest of your post, you're putting the cart before the horse. Your priorities will change. What you value now isn't what you'll want in a year or 5 years. That's because not only will you change, but the world is changing and your family and friends will change with you as well, as the relationships you have with them shift.

The advice I can give you is focus on what feels like a good next step at that moment in time. It's not about knowing and planning a specific future or outcome, it's about giving yourself permission to explore, and experiment and find out what works for you. It's giving yourself permission to acknowledge that this is all new, and you don't have the answers.

I guarantee that your relationship with cis passing as a goal will change. I'm not saying it will go away, just that for newly self accepted trans women, the focus on the medical and physical steps of passing is often all consuming and the lens through which we see our journey, but it rarely consumes the same amount of headspace for trans folk that have been out for a year or two. Again, I'm not saying it will go away, but as you journey down this path, the things that will matter to you most will change, and invariably, they won't relate to cis passing in the way you think they will.

So for now, give yourself permission to explore some things, and start exploring. And then just keep doing that.

Now I can go back to the last remaining two books.

Look, the TV series is good, but it's not that good :P

CachyOS, because I wanted something arch based due to the archi wiki and rolling releases.

My media boxes run Ubuntu, but that will change when they get rebuilt/replaced at some point, most likely to Debian

This whole season has been really good. I feel like the show has hit its stride

There will not be any corrective steps anytime soon, because the UK government, who would need to implement those steps, is actively disinclined to make them, because even though it's less transphobic than the previous government, it is still doing transphobia for political reasons.

This is a setback for immediate protections, but my view is that this isn't necessarily bad in the long term, so long as corrective steps are taken to address the root issue.

There will be no corrective steps.

it should spur on actually solving the issues

It won't, because it was brought about to achieve the exact opposite

Sorry, you found the one place I hadn't updated it with the new code! Done now :)

So why do they call it a bluethroat?

That doesn't work. They don't give a shit if they make trans people uncomfortable or put them at risk, or if they are inconsistent.

Why would I care what your uninformed opinion on my response to oppression is?

Judges hear the case that's brought, not the agenda of the groups that bring things.

Uh huh.

If that were true, this wouldn't be an overturning of a previous ruling on appeal. If this were not influenced by political bias, you wouldn't get different results in different courts. Judges wouldn't be "conservative" or "progressive". Judges wouldn't nearly all be straight, elderly and white.

They are though, because the appointment process is shaped by political perspectives, because the acceptable rulings are shaped by political perspectives and the cases that get seen and funded are shaped by political perspectives.

The fact that no trans people were called during the trial is shaped by politics.

The judges chose to read and rule that sex is "biological" and binary, despite the legislation making no mention of it being biological, and despite the biological understanding of sex being that is very much not binary... All of that, you guessed it, shaped by politics...

That's really all I have to say about that part.

Good for you. Trans people don't have that choice.

If this were protecting trans people, it wouldn't have been brought to court by a transphobic group, or the win celebrated by them.

This actively excludes trans folk from vital protections and exposes them to environments that increase their risk of violence.

There's no context that makes this anything other than incredibly damaging to trans folk

Because transphobes

That's not mental overload, it's the opposite. It's a job without mental stimulation, boring, repetitive and requires very little cognitive processing. And people doing jobs like that seek stimulation to escape perpetual boredom.

Give that guy a job that didn't bore him to tears, and the picture would have been very different.

As I said, it's always about hitting a threshold, and boredom is a threshold. And if an employer cares about quality, rather than the appearance of quality, they'd have designed that job differently.

That can work, but the bright area starts leech in to the dark areas.

If you're looking for an analogue solution, your best bet is a graduated neutral density filter. It's pretty much designed for this exact scenario. It's a filter that sits on your lens. Half of it is grey (like sunglasses, but without impacting the colour tone) and half of it is clear. You can rotate it around and align it with the light/dark boundary in your subject. It will reduce the light from the bright area of your subject, whilst leaving the dark part of your subject unaltered. This will let you expose longer for the shadows without blowing out your skies.

I don't often go to concerts, but when I do, I fly to New Zealand to see Bryan Adams and relive my teenage years

Cameras don't have the same dynamic range capabilities as our eyes. This is especially true when the end result is a JPG (even if you start from a RAW file). Reduced dynamic range means that details get lost in shadow, or they get lost in bright white blow out, when our eyes would still be able to make details out in that same situation.

So when you shoot a dark subject with a bright background like you've got here, you've got the two extremes, bright and shadow, and that's where your important details are, and because of the reduced dynamic range, the contrast appears even stronger than it does to the naked eye, and details get lost.

Assuming you can't reframe, or reshoot, and you have to work with what you've got, you've got two real options.

If you shot in 10 or 12 bit RAW, you could convert the file to a HDR capable image format. That will save more details, however most browsers, apps and monitors won't be able to display that image, or if they do, they'll display it incorrectly.

Otherwise, you can do something called "tone mapping". This allows you to take a high dynamic range image and compress and remap that range in to a lower bit depth dynamic range. Basically it uses an algorithm to shift the tonal range of the image to fit within the range available to it, artificially altering the tone (brightness) of the image to make the details more visible. So your window sky will appear less bright than it was, and your shadows will appear brighter than they actually were. Sometimes this looks weird and unnatural, but for an image like yours, it would work well, especially given the monochrome colours. Typically you would do this starting with a RAW file (ideally a 10 or 12 bit RAW file) and end up with an 8 bit JPG.

If you do have the option to reshoot, then you can do what is called "exposure stacking". You shoot multiple images of the same scene, under exposing some, over exposing some with photos covering the exposure values in between. This ensures that you have images exposed well for the bright parts, the dark parts and everything in between. Then you composite them in your image editor. You're still using tone mapping to remap the final tonal range in to the range available within your JPG, but you get better results than working from a single file.

That's not laziness, that's looking after yourself and your own needs, and prioritising that over non urgent chores.

At some point, the balance changes, and you do the stuff.

And if the balance doesn't change, and you always put it off, even when you shouldn't be, there's something going on behind it.

There's no such thing as "lazy". It's always, always, always a word used to make someone feel guilty for hitting a personal limit or threshold.

Even if you want to work on those thresholds and improve them, you can achieve that without framing yourself as fundamentally selfish and uncaring.