Staredit Network

7-7, that wasn't a renderless... And, sadly, you still weren't able to say that what I said was wrong.

That wasnt renderless?

Frenzy do you know where the regular picture is? I dont think I still have it. Centreri, I thought you would see that that was a renderless picture. Guess not!

Where did I say you were wrong?

That looks like it has a render on it to me unless you drew that

You didn't.

How is that a renderless.. just because you drew it doesn't make it renderless.

That one you uploaded is the real sig, 7-7.

Duh that was a render. -.-

Here is the regular picture before I even touched it.



Is this good enough evidence?

Yes I know that was the real sig, but that was showing it because I thought they could tell it was renderless.

Whats your definition of render?



it isnt a renderless

Render = No backgrounds. It has to be transparent with only the object or character picture only.

So do the renderless = opposite

I know what a render is, I got that picture just the way I showed you there, I didnt add anything but text and some effects to the background. Yes maybe where ever DoomStrike got that image from it may have had a render put on it, but when I got it it was just one picture.

Just because you didnt put a render on it doesnt mean it is renderless

Its a picture, i call a picture a render, he made the sig. ITS A RENDER.

What the heck is this "background" crap your talking about?

A renderless is usually considered a signature completely custom-made.

I didnt just take the background. This is between me and Centreri, he asked me if I ever made a renderless sig. I didnt put any renders on that. Just text!

render = the item or person itself?

anyway people have a right to judge other peoples signatures any way they see fit. If you posted it on this thread dont complain about people giving you bad scores. Some people have high standards others dont. Accept the rating that you have gotten and try better next time.

The dumb thing is, is that this whole thing started because I asked one person (Lakai) what I could do to make my sigs get a better rating. Then cetreri posted, dont complain when I never did.

If I acted rashly or irrationally, I apologize.

On the other hand, you were at the very least implying what I countered to.

This would have been easier suited out in pm's but it is kinda too late now all you really can do is take everyones comments and learn from them

Ya, no biggy but I was just explaining myself.


Not exactly sure what you mean by this. Please explain.

How's this?

No, you didn't put any background in it. It's text on a render. That's a backgroundless signature, which is basically, "I'm gonna take this kewl render and add some filters!"

Syphon, this is already over.

I took this picture:


And added text and changed the entire image to make this:


The text is the only thing I added to it. Its not a render. It was a picture that I edited. No transparentness at all.

7-7, please, stop. This is pathetic. You took an image, applied a filter or two, resized it, added text and border. Except for the text/border, that's what I always do to my avatars in signatures. You're wrong. The blue/teal neon-style signature you showed is a renderless (I think), but still not the best quality - 6/10.

Rate this new sig by: Silentecho

3/10. Text SUX!

7/10 Thats sweet. I like the colors. That yellow looks mean.

Should I change my current sig to this:



or keep my current?


Does it look too wierd with both in there?

If I had to choose between those two, I'd pick the halo one.