HOME | DD
TSWT — Chapter 1: TORNADO - Cover
by-nc
#1 #friendshipupdate #chapter #comic #cover #fancomic #fluttershy #rainbowdash #mylittleponyfriendshipismagic #twilightsparkle
Published: 2015-08-27 04:41:50 +0000 UTC; Views: 10717; Favourites: 174; Downloads: 60
Redirect to original
Description
www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnL2eX…Previous Page
Next Page
aaaand i finally hit chapter one.
i'm really happy with this page. it looks closer to what i saw in my head than maybe any page i've drawn so far. some parts actually look a little better. (although some parts do look a little worse)
i am super thankful god has let me get this far, and that he is okay with me being okay at art. i hope i can use the ability for him somehow, and i hope you all get enjoyment out of this story!
Related content
Comments: 53
four years, and still my favorite cover of all time.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
So I was staying up late last night, and started thinking about how amazing this cover is. The frog's eye perspective, the location, the composition, the wind in the mane 6's manes. It's just amazing, it's possibly my favorite piece of art of all time. I'd do anything to see this story finished. If you truly do not intend to finish it (you are still alive, right? Please tell me you're alive), could you at least upload the script?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Out of everyone I've seen, you draw the best Canterlot scenery. I really feel like you get what makes it cool.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Definitely! I'm super-digging what you've made so far
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Looks like you have an infinite loop in your links. If I click next here, then next where that brings me, it leads back to here.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
hey! quick question: i edited the page slightly--including her smile: does she still look as happy as she did before, or has this edit screwed something up?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I know this isn't addressed to me, but... ^^
Checking it against the original post, though I'm not an expert, I'd say it looks anatomically better. Though I suppose it lacks that slight exaggeration it had before, also with the larger irises. But that's kinda negligible I guess. I certainly like the rest of the changes. 
Also, updating with notify would be good in this scenario IMO. ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
hey, hahah, i just realized that i didn't actually understand this sentence: "It'd be cool to see the un-cropped version."
if you meant the cover, then this is really it—there's only a few millimetres of bleed outside of the picture, if you mean the LOGO, then i'm afraid i didn't exactly detail underneath the logo very much u_____u
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
oh for crying out loud. i thought i fixed all the tangents.
i'll move those out of the way--thanks.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Late reply, and Adam took the cake there, but better late than never right? I think she still looks happy, but maybe not as happy as she was before. Like, before it was super happy this was happening, now it's just fairly stoked for things to come, I don't really know though, I'm no artist myself
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Had there never been a change, no one would be the wiser.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I guess that's why I'm not an artist huh? Haha
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, I'd say your reading of the expression seem pretty good.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
ehh, someone complained about the larger irises. oh well--can't please everyone, right?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
rainbow dash, stop photobombing the dramatic scene
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
lets face it, it wouldn't be nearly as awesome if it was just twilight and fluttershy standing around looking soulful
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Man, that is a gorgeous depiction of Canterlot.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Awesomeness!
Even if it's been so long, I'm likewise thankful to see it again and that you can find the time. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
hey! i'm glad you like it!
i know this is kind of a dumb place to add stuff on, but i saw your signature:
remember when Jesus gave Peter 'the keys'? biblehub.com/matthew/16-19.htm Jesus said that he was THE Rock for people to build their lives on, but he also said that Peter would be his rock to build the church on. Jesus does have all authority, but he can grant pieces of it down to people.
It's an interesting concept, the granting of authority. I didn't realize until recently that it's where the Catholics got the idea of the succession of popes from—this concept started as early as Peter, who they have recorded as handing down his authority to another when he could no longer be a leader.
Of course, the glory still belongs to Jesus, and that's what people almost ALWAYS forget when they go on about how they follow this guy instead of that guy, etc. People are so eager to belong to a group that even after they become Christians, they like, almost instantly forget that they're part of one, and start trying to factionize.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No place is a dumb place when it comes to the Bible good sir.
I definitely understand the concept of delegating authority and it's clear Christ did so. 
- In Mat. 23:8-12 Jesus said, “Do not call anyone on earth your father,” and “he who is greatest among you shall be your servant,” among other things.
- When the 12 asked who would be the greatest in Luke 9:46-48, Peter wasn’t set apart, but “... he who is least among you all will be great.”
- Peter denied Him three times. (Mat. 26:75 et al.)
- Peter was married. (Mat. 8:14 et al.)
- Paul had to rebuke Peter “to his face.” (Gal 2:11-13ff)
- Peter rejected worship. (Acts 10:26)
- Peter refers to himself as “a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ” as much as Paul, (2 Pet. 1:1, Rom 1:1, Titus 1:1, et al). No special distinction is made between the apostles' authority.
- Paul also says in Eph. 2:19-20, “Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone...”
- Then there’s the famous prophecy of Psalm 118:22, “The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief cornerstone.” Jesus was the Christ and the Jewish nation rejected that and thus rejected Him.
So based on the rest of the Bible, (The NT in particular), would it sensibly follow that Peter’s confession of Jesus being the Christ is the petra upon which Jesus would church according to Mat. 16:15-20? If Jesus wasn’t the Christ, then there wouldn’t be anything to build upon. Now, that’s not to say Peter wasn’t the first to use the keys Christ gave to him and the rest of the apostles in Acts 2 as he spoke and told Israel what they needed to do.
Also, I hope this isn’t perceived as a debate, attack, or some-such. I’m always up for a friendly discussion!
Disagreements or questions don’t bother me.👍: 0 ⏩: 1
i think you misunderstood me, i was not actually claiming peter to be filling in all those prophecies in place of jesus. also i never claimed peter was single, or sinless o_o and to be perfectly honest i'm not sure what half of these verses are meant to prove. i feel distinctly out of my depth here, as if i've been involved in something i wasn't aware actually existed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, I realize you didn't say that or make those claims. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
well i'm pretty sure that if this wasn't a debate before, it probably is by this point. why don't we cool our heels a bit and if you like we can continue this discussion somewhere it won't clog up miles of comment pages
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
debates don't have to be harsh, though. i think you may have conflated a couple meanings. what you MIGHT have been trying to say was not so much: 'this isn't a debate, it's a friendly conversation', but probably more like: 'this isn't a screaming, torrid internet fight which will end in a committed plan of long-term antagonism. it's a friendly debate', because when you haul out the bulleted lists and use words like 'illogical' and 'irrational' with a complete stranger, you are almost certainly debating in your heart, whatever words you WANT to call it on the outside.
but the word 'debate' is a real hot button on the internet. gosh the internet is so full of jargon these days; words and phrases misused to shut down any conversation by instantly discrediting your opponent:
debate, 'take too seriously', passive-aggressive, privilege, receipt, blaming, toxic, mis(andr/ogyn)ist, over-react, 'just' this or that, opinion, calling out, reality, logical, problematic, intersectional, over-simplify, liberal, right-wing, narrow-minded, and—of course, the most terrifying phantom of our time—"p. gross"
if these words were banned from the english language, people wouldn't be able to use these arguments in a rational discourse any more because no-one would actually know what the concepts meant enough to explain them.
i appreciate that you're—or at least i'm pretty sure you are—trying to shield yourself from catching the blame of 'taking things too seriously' and 'turning something into a huge federal issue' by insisting that it's nothing LIKE a debate or argument or anything, but i was the one who addressed you first so you really don't need to worry about that.
anyway, yes, i'll probably get back to you in notes in a day or two. i just left this particular comment in the thread, here, because i think it's probably better for everyone viewing this to understand that this IS a debate and to be OK with that, instead of trying to pretend it's not a debate and feeling vaguely uncomfortable about the discussion's existence for some reason nobody can understand.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, I do want to be objective and thorough. Can't hardly do that without details. 
People can get pretty hostile, and again I realize that text without tone doesn't help the situation. 
As much as you suspected that I misunderstood you, I wanted to clarify such was not the case, (at least not at the time as far as I was aware). I recognize that one of the worst things to do is misrepresent someone, and I don't want to be guilty of doing that. Of course if people could communicate telepathically, information could be conveyed in full with understanding, but that's not gonna happen.
No rush, and I appreciate it! 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wow, I remember this project! Good to see you're dipping your toe in again!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
| Next =>