https://kotaku.com/pokemon-ken-sugimori-original-art-red-blu...
Japanese people take copyright more seriously which would explain why there would be literal interest in creating illegal scans of them.
To me it was obvious there was one correct colour for Pikachu to be, she approved of my choice and said "Ahh yes the original design" which puzzled me at the time, but I guess there a nuances to the shades and versions of characters like this, which evolve over time (pun intended).
As for me? Tattoos fade over time so the colour is different than it used to be, but everyone who looks at it knows exactly what it should be so that's fine.
I always feel like it's too mainstream, I like the uncommon ones more
So there's a Moomin character (Little My) because we're in Finland and he loves them, there's Tom & Jerry because he loved those cartoons, a new-life mushroom from the years we spent together playing Super Mario Bros on the Nintendo classic.
But rather than list all the parts, you can see where this is going now, there's also Pokémon because he was obsessed with playing with the cards, memorizing all the evolution chains and stats/types.
When I was planning it was obvious there'd be a Pokémon due to his (continuing) interest in those and to me as a non-fan that's the most immediately-recognizable one.
Plus the colour works well with the colour-choices made in the other pieces. Although ironically the part I like best is the "naked" LEGO minifig. I like to colour him in with felt-tip pens every now and again, or draw a facial expression on him to reflect my mood when bored in meetings.
Did I just miss this phenomenon entirely because I grew up right before it became big on the internet?
* I think I’ve still got a VHS tape of the promo material Nintendo used to originally introduce Pokemon to the US.
https://www.scribd.com/document/586237858/Pokemon-Red-Versio...
https://archive.org/details/NintendoPower1998PokemonRedBlue/...
I'm really skeptical about this. Maybe someone who knows more about this could say a bit more about it?
As an aside I just had a realization: how can this typical representations of color spaces (larger blob of perceptible color and the smaller polygon of the color space) work?
Isn't the image encoded in one of those color spaces? That should make the perceptible-but-not-in-space colors impossible to represent, shouldn't it?
I remember seeing most of these comments too, even though they all seem to have been posted just a few hours ago.
The posters’ own comment lists seem to agree that the comments were posted three days ago.
