Complete and total noob here. I'm trying to make an image with the phrase "Excuse me, who are you?" on three different lines, and the words "I AM" hidden in the negative space between the lines, so that the text could be read as either "Excuse me, who are you?" or "I AM who I AM". As you can see, it just looks like a jumbled mess. Either it's illegible, or the words "I AM" are completely invisible. The two "I AM"s are also not aligned, which is kind of a bummer. The fact that the I is a single straight line makes this really difficult.I also tried putting all the text on a single line, instead of three separate lines, but that didn't really work. For this type of "negative space" text to be legible, each letter has to be the the opposite of the previous letter, but since I want all three letters in "I AM" to be invisible, that's not really an option.Any advice here?
we dont do bible stuff here
we don't do much at all, to be frank
>>464018You have only two color/light values that are extreme polar opposites but are trying to convey a concept of something being only patrially obscured...when pure darkness would hide things completely and pure light would expose them completely.You need a middle ground where such a thing might not be noticed at first glance but won't be missed by a longer assessment. Pic related would be one way of doing it.
>>464021good lord are you actually retarded? they explicitely mentioned how they want the negative spaces between the letters to form the secondary text...
>>464025Op's words cut and pasted->the words "I AM" hidden in the negative space between the lines>hidden in the negative spaceNOT>negative spaces between the letters form the secondary textThe darker gray of course IS the negative space, and the "I AM" text is placed there with minimal contrast that obscures it between the other lines so the graphic EXACTLY follows the OPs parameters->the words "I AM" hidden in the negative space between the linesFucking mong...can't wait to hear what other psychotically inane blather you will pull out of your ass now that your stupidity has been thoroughly documented
>>464026you are kidding, right?! LMFAO>For this type of "negative space" text to be legible, each letter has to be the the opposite of the previous letterbruh everybody who is even mildly interested in design knows what OP is talking about. and you are an absolutefuckenmoron for feeling the necessity to "educate" anyone about white text on white background being invisible TOPKEK
>>464027LOFL SO triggered and flailing for dominace that he's defending the design assumptions of someone whose first words were>Complete and total noob herewhose EXACT words were->Either it's illegible, or the words "I AM" are completely invisible...any advice?Yet when someone explains *why* that's happening and suggests other approches to CONSIDER, you sperg out like a retarded bot and act like everything this admitted noob says is solid graphic design theory that cannot be disputed.Once again, troll refuses to address the OP's questions, offers zero opinions on OPs example, just attaches to anyone who tries like a tick in order to make the forum useless. What a sad child.
>>464025lol i was like you til i realized >>464021 is much better than what op was conceiving and much more clear.but yeah >>464027op it seems wants a hybrid
>>464028>proudly unable to grasp instructions when they are formulated by a noob>tangent about alternatives and white in white is clearly invis, bre>defending>triggered>sperging out>oh such a sad, sad, sad little childyep. clearly me who is flailing rofl
