![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Process Disciple
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,199
|
Quote:
However, this all seems like nitpicking though. Last edited by TrumanGrace; 10-17-2007 at 04:02 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Slave to the Process Forum
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 12,781
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
*ching* *ching*
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,138
|
How about we call it clothing alteration to separate it from clothing transformation, which is an entirely different interest?
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Slave to the Process Forum
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 12,781
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
---
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,865
|
Quote:
Human altered into clothes. Human transformed into clothes. Clothing altered into other clothes. Clothing transformed into other clothes. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Process Disciple
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,199
|
Quote:
Also, I don't know, I think "Human altered into clothing" such an awkward way of putting it, that I doubt anyone would actually consider it unless they had heard it before or were actively looking for an obscure way to describe it. Clothing being altered, on the other hand, is quite standard, just not in the way they were using it. Anytime I've seem the clothing changed, it's always been described as the clothing being morphed, but that could fit into the same confusion as you had for "clothing alteration" And yeah, it does fit into inanimate tf's, a lot of things do, which is why there are subsets of it (food tf, statue tf, so on and so forth). I mean, that's why we separate all teh different tf types, even though they could technically all fit in the "tf" forum. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|