>>5215
about the pixelated Luna, you were right that using that filter for her was the least fun part of those.

Has this edit made it better? The changes that I notice here are: more blurriness and pixels, and turn that eyeless Luna into a vivid one by using sparks.

I suppose that the blurriness makes this image softer visually speaking and so it becomes more pleasant in comparison to the radical colours exposed before. As none of us can change that pose, it has gone from looking like a badass to "Equestria, I´m CIA".

Is this attempt better? It is simply because you put more effort in it than me because I only cared about using one single filter, so in this regard, yours deserves more respect because you were focused (yet the results are blurrier ironically enough) on it.

Does it have any personal aspect from you? Yes, you edited a few pictures with huge sparks before and you have used the right proportions for this one.

>>5219
>Maybe you should have a edit contest to see how many Nightmare Moon would be good for the change.
hey, that´s not as bizarre as it sounds, one could compile a good gallery with Nightmare Moon looking like her opposite. However, the negative effect doesn´t always translate all that well. You edited a Cadence gif with the emboss filter and nailed it...here it´s the same happy accident (and realization) but in terms of combining correctly both the body and the sky. I have tried to use that negative effect and the colours don´t match all that well unfortunately. You can try it on your own as well an you will see how the biggest problem for using the negative is when it comes to the surroundings, not the body.

>Simplest advise is to just have fun.
yeah and I should listen to that advice from the stars more often but I am like Cosmos in this regard