Black And White Birth Announcement

I have a friend who wants me to make her a birth announcement from a pattern I have. The problem is that it is for a white baby and she wants the baby in the announcement to have a darker skin tone. I would rather have a pattern of some sort to do this than guess what would work. Any ideas? Thanks.

since you already Have the pattern, all you really need is to choose shades that are darker & complement each other. eg. if the present skin tones are in pinks/beige [i'm not very good at Naming colors ;-/] & there are 4 shades, then choose 4 shades of browns that will have the same degree of difference [between themselves] as the former.

Or, you could start with the 'darkest' of the 4 pinks - use this as the starting point or as the lightest shade of the new dark tones. then choose the rest of the 3 shades in darkening tones, following the same principle.

also, take the pattern And the cloth to the shop while buying the skeins. place the skeins on the cloth & it will help you decide whether the colors will go well with the cloth And the entire pattern.

i do this often since, even when i'm using a book pattern, i don't get the same brand as recommended. hence i have to improvise a lot. but it all comes together in the end.
don't be afraid to try out something new - you'll feel even More satisfied & happy with your work when it's finished :-))

hope this helps
all the very best & have fun :-))

ADDITION : if you have a photograph or picture of a dark baby, i can convert it into a cross-stitch pattern for you.

2009-07-12 16:58:22 by sajj1026

Helen, both music teachers, are also each half-white and half-black. And they must have had a premonition, because Vanessa's birth ...

I would like to learn photoshop and don't know where to begin. I am interested in digital pictures of babies to be placed in birth announcements. I would appreciate any information you can share with me, ie: books, version of photoshop. I personally like black and white photo's. I have searched ebay and found some adobe photoshop birth announcements, but is this all I need aside from the picture? Please help.

Just google photoshop tutorials. its a popular program so i am sure you will find lots. also include the word "basic" if you are learning from scratch.

2008-05-09 15:55:43 by Jodie24

D.W. Griffith’s 1915 film “The Birth of a Nation,” the very first-ever Hollywood blockbuster, illustrates a present-day political issue which brings into apparent conflict two popular values: the desire to protect minority social groups from persecution, and the desire to protect freedom of expression.

Based on a novel and play entitled “The Clansman,” Griffith’s film is credited with having provoked riots in several cities, including Boston and Philadelphia, in which gangs of whites, apparently inspired by the deeply racist point of view of the film, attacked blacks. A white man in Lafayette, Indiana murdered a black teenager after viewing the film. In response to the outbreaks of violence and unrest, and at the urging of the NAACP, many cities actually banned the showing of the film. The KKK, which had been relatively quiescent for many years, enjoyed a complete rebirth with a tremendous surge in membership and a nationwide spread that reached a peak of public prominence in a huge Washington march during the 1920’s.

The film, itself, contains a written announcement denying any racist intent:

“This is an historical presentation of the Civil War and Reconstruction Period, and is not meant to reflect on any race or people of today.”

The actual content of the film is blatantly racist, however, and gives the lie to the studio’s apparent attempt at misdirection similar to misleading descriptions of today’s films that are sometimes put forward by studios. It would appear from the film’s plot that the main interest of reconstruction-era blacks was the disenfranchisement of whites and the defilement of white womanhood.

A brief plot outline will give some small idea of the depth of racism revealed in “The Birth of a Nation.” The film is in two parts separated by an intermission. Part one concerns the period just before the Civil War and the war, itself. Two families are introduced. There is the Northern congressman Stoneman, inspired by the real-life figure of Congressman Thaddeus Stevens, and his beauteous daughter Elsie. There is also a Southern family, the Camerons, which includes a daughter Flora and a son, Ben, who later is to become a founder of the KKK.

Part 2 is described by the Wikipedia article on the film, and I can’t do any better than to simply quote it below:
“Part 2 depicts Reconstruction. Stoneman and his "mulatto" protégé, Silas Lynch, go to South Carolina to observe their agenda of empowering Southern blacks via election fraud. Meanwhile, Ben, inspired by observing white children pretending to be ghosts to scare off black children, devises a plan to reverse perceived powerlessness of Southern whites by forming the Ku Klux Klan, although his membership in the group angers Elsie.
“Then Gus, a former slave who has educated himself and gained a title of recognition through the army, proposes to marry Flora. Scared by Gus' lascivious advances, she flees into the forest, pursued by Gus. Trapped on a precipice, Flora leaps to her death. In response, the Klan hunts Gus, tries him and finds him guilty, and leaves his corpse on Lieutenant Governor Silas Lynch's doorstep. In retaliation, Lynch orders a crackdown on the Klan. The Camerons flee from the black militia and hide out in a small hut, home to two former Union soldiers, who agree to assist their former Southern foes in defending their white birthright, according to the caption.
“Meanwhile, with Austin Stoneman gone, Lynch tries to force Elsie to marry him. Disguised Klansmen discover her situation and leave to get reinforcements. The Klan, now at full strength, rides to her rescue and takes the opportunity to disperse the rioting "crazed negroes." Simultaneously, Lynch's militia surrounds and attacks the hut where the Camerons are hiding, but the Klan saves them just in time. Victorious, the Klansmen celebrate in the streets, and the film cuts to the next election where the Klan successfully disenfranchises black voters and disarms the blacks.”

The US Supreme Court supported the right of governmental censorship boards to ban the public screening of certain films in “Mutual Film Corp. v. Industrial Commission (1915),” in which the court found that:

“It cannot be put out of view that the exhibition of moving pictures is a business, pure and simple, originated and conducted for profit, like other spectacles, not to be regarded, nor intended to be regarded by the Ohio Constitution, we think, as part of the press of the country, or as organs of public opinion. They are mere representations of events, of ideas and sentiments published and known; vivid, useful, and entertaining, no doubt, but, as we have said, capable of evil, having power for it, the greater because of their attractiveness and manner of exhibition.”

The Supreme Court reversed its earlier decision regarding this matter in 1952.

“Hate crimes” and “hate speech” are present-day legislative issues. “Hate speech” which inspires “hate crimes” may actuall

Today it would win awards at Sundance.

Different times, different measures

2009-07-14 17:10:06 by kscottmccormick

.. your stall warning plays "Dixie."

... your cross-country flight plan uses flea markets as check points.

... you think sectionals charts should show trailer parks.

... you've ever used moonshine as avgas.

... you have mud flaps on your wheel pants.

... you think GPS stands for going perfectly straight.

... your toothpick keeps poking your mike.

... you constantly confuse Beechcraft with Beechnut.

... just before impact, you are heard saying, "Hey y'all, watch this!"

... you have a black airplane with a big #3 on the side.

... you've ever just taxied around the airport drinking beer.

... you use a Purina feed bag for a windsock.

... you fuel your wizzbang 140 from a Mason jar.

... you wouldn't be caught dead flyin' a Grumman "Yankee."

... you refer to flying in formation as "We got ourselves a convoy!"

... there is a sign on the side of your aircraft advertising your septic tank service.

... when you are the owner of Red Neck Airlines and pilot of Redneck One.

... you subscribe to The Southern Aviator because of the soft paper!

... you have ever incorporated sheetrock into the repair of your aircraft.

... you have ever responded to ATC with the phrase "That's a big 10-4!"

... you typically answer female controllers with titles like "sugar" or "little darlin'."

... she responds with the words "Honey" or "Big guy" then she may be a redneck.

... you have ever used a relief tube as a spitoon.

... you glance down at your belt buckle to help you remember your N-number.

... you have ever tried to impress your girlfriend by buzzing her doublewide.

... the preprinted portion of your weight and balance sheet contains "Case of Bud."

... your go/no-go checklist includes the words "Skoal" or "Redman."

Additional Details

5 days ago
Ya might be a Redneck if.....

...You think the nutcracker is somethin you did off the high dive.
...You wont stop at a rest area if you have a empty beer can in the car.
...You think Iraq is top-of-the-line Camaro.
...Your spring wardrabe mostly involves scissors.
...you know atleast 6 ways to bend a baseball cap.
...you own a lava lamp thats over 5 feet tall.
...there are more than 10 cats livin under your trailer.
...you've ever thrown up in a squad car.
...your frist bra was a Wonderbra.
...you've ever had to appear in court due to your dogs.
...You think Thunderbird is an acceptable wine choice with a bean burrito.
...your grandma enters wet t-shrit contests.
...your local grocery store also has a few pool tables.
...your septic tank is the subject of a petition.
...you have ever tried to use food stamps to mail a watermelon.
...you had to hitchhike on your honeymoon.
...your car and its motor are more than ten feet apart.

5 days ago
...your brother-in-law is also your uncle.
...you sent out birth announcements for your new puppies.
...you've changed a diaper on a Denny's table.
...you've ever named a child for a good dog.
...your T.V. is on 24-7.
...your last keg party included a couple of 911 calls.
...you have to mow around a refridgeator and a bed frame.
...you've ever taken a date flowers you stole from a cemetery.
...Everyone in the house learns somthing from the potty training videotape.
...Diners change tables when your family sits near them.
...your prom dress was knitted.
...you were born with a plastic spoon in your mouth.
...your bridal veil was made of window screen.
...you think people who have elictricty are uppity.
...your college graduation ceremony includes parallel parking an 18-wheeler.

5 days ago
...the Marlboro man is your idol.
...all your golf balls come in egg cartons
Asian Jokes huh?

hmmm. I'll get on that

Well, I see muh ceekret can't las loooooong; so if I cop out I'll do less time right? Bwaaaaa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! Hey but I ain't guilty of all jus SOME! LMFAOOOOOOOOOO Good un!

http://www.total-knowledge.com/~willyblu es/

2006-08-02 11:38:06 by Whiteboykilla

D.W. Griffith’s 1915 film “The Birth of a Nation,” the very first-ever Hollywood blockbuster, illustrates a present-day political issue which brings into apparent conflict two popular values: the desire to protect minority social groups from persecution, and the desire to protect freedom of expression.

Based on a novel and play entitled “The Clansman,” Griffith’s film is credited with having provoked riots in several cities, including Boston and Philadelphia, in which gangs of whites, apparently inspired by the deeply racist point of view of the film, attacked blacks. A white man in Lafayette, Indiana murdered a black teenager after viewing the film. In response to the outbreaks of violence and unrest, and at the urging of the NAACP, many cities actually banned the showing of the film. The KKK, which had been relatively quiescent for many years, enjoyed a complete rebirth with a tremendous surge in membership and a nationwide spread that reached a peak of public prominence in a huge Washington march during the 1920’s.

The film, itself, contains a written announcement denying any racist intent:

“This is an historical presentation of the Civil War and Reconstruction Period, and is not meant to reflect on any race or people of today.”

The actual content of the film is blatantly racist, however, and gives the lie to the studio’s apparent attempt at misdirection similar to misleading descriptions of today’s films that are sometimes put forward by studios. It would appear from the film’s plot that the main interest of reconstruction-era blacks was the disenfranchisement of whites and the defilement of white womanhood.

In one example, a black union soldier first proposes marriage to a white girl and then pursues her through the woods when she refuses his advances. Cornered by the lascivious black at the top of a precipice, she leaps to her death rather than allow him to even approach her. The soldier is then hunted down and executed by the KKK. In another example, the “mulatto” governor locks a white woman in his office and attempts to force her to marry him. The KKK, alerted to her plight, rides in full regalia to her rescue, scattering “rioting negroes” in the process.

The US Supreme Court supported the right of governmental censorship boards to ban the public screening of certain films in “Mutual Film Corp. v. Industrial Commission (1915),” in which the court found that:

“It cannot be put out of view that the exhibition of moving pictures is a business, pure and simple, originated and conducted for profit, like other spectacles, not to be regarded, nor intended to be regarded by the Ohio Constitution, we think, as part of the press of the country, or as organs of public opinion. They are mere representations of events, of ideas and sentiments published and known; vivid, useful, and entertaining, no doubt, but, as we have said, capable of evil, having power for it, the greater because of their attractiveness and manner of exhibition.”

The Supreme Court reversed its earlier decision regarding this matter in 1952.

“Hate crimes” and “hate speech” are present-day legislative issues. “Hate speech” which inspires “hate crimes” may actually lead to criminal prosecution in the future. “The Birth of a Nation” could easily be described as constituting “hate speech,” and the film is generally agreed to have inspired “hate crimes.” The popular value of protecting minority social groups from persecution is thus brought into conflict with the value of protecting free speech.

My own guess is that people today are so throughly opposed to any form of censorship for any reason that they would support “The Birth of a Nation” as protected artistic expression despite whatever undesirable behavior might be exhibited by some people who viewed the film. My experience has been that supporters of free expression say they can’t be held responsible for what other people do. To me, that’s a little like saying if you shout “fire” in a crowded theater, you can’t be responsible if other people unreasonably panic and trample others in a rush to the exits. But maybe I’m wrong.

What is your opinion? If you were transported back to 1915, seeing the results of the public screenings of Griffith’s film, would you say art trumps censorship, or would you say a minority has a greater right to be protected from persecution?
Guys, the question isn't about how the film would be received now, but about whether governments were right to ban it in 1915.
So, Matthew, if I yell "fire" in a crowded theater, it won't be my fault if others panic and injuries result?
Dittohead, sorry if it doesn't appear to you that as much research went into this question as usually goes into questions on Yahoo Politics.

it's hard to say...

I think there is some social responsibility...

but free speech must be considered...

what's really scary is how such a movie can be a "hit"

2009-07-15 16:26:42 by kscottmccormick