3 measurements spanning 4 days, net -3. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 2,186–2,189 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
12 Aug 2026, 09:57
2,186
-2
9 Aug 2026, 01:44
2,188
-1
8 Aug 2026, 05:00
2,189
first reading
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 20 May 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
57.2%
avg views ÷ 2,186 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,250
8 posts measured
Reaction rate
7.81%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
8
of 20 held
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 August 2026
Posts held
20 (20 May 2026 – 6 August 2026)
Views total
10,010
Reactions total
782
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
8 Aug 2026, 05:00 UTC
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
30s
Average length
30s
Measured directly from 1 video with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
Reaction mix
2,490 reactions across 20 posts, in 29 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 47.8% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
1,190
47.8%
💯
317
12.7%
❤🔥
176
7.07%
🔥
158
6.35%
🥰
105
4.22%
🐳
88
3.53%
💔
78
3.13%
🦄
77
3.09%
👀
65
2.61%
🙏
33
1.33%
😁
29
1.16%
✍
25
1.00%
💘
24
0.964%
🤝
24
0.964%
💊
23
0.924%
🍌
18
0.723%
😡
18
0.723%
👾
16
0.643%
😎
5
0.201%
🫡
5
0.201%
9 further kinds
16
0.643%
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 20 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 2,490reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 20 May 2026 to 6 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
13
across the posts below
Posts paid on
2
of 20 we hold a reading for · 10%
Most on one post
11
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @katrinchjournal. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 20 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 20 May 2026 to 6 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
Тут один либертарианец печально знаменитый, высказал тейк про ТАЛАНТ, который ии бро уже очень давно толкают и у меня сгорела жопа (может быть поэтому в Сербии на пару градусов теплей, чем должно быть).
С одной стороны ии бро орут, что художники плохие, что занимаются гейткиперством и не пускают их в свои круги, с другой стороны на тревоги людей в профессиях, о том, что скоро у нас не будет новой крови, потому что на…
Я посмотрела новую Супергерл и мне не понравилось. И этого бы поста не было, если бы после просмотра мне муж не сказал, что в основу фильма легла лимитка, написанная Томом Кингом. Так что у меня был интересный опыт: сначала я страдала от фильма, потом лечилась комиксом. Который оказался весьма хорош! И это говорю я, человек, который не читает супергероику.
Конечно, это не первый раз, когда сценаристы берут и портят п…
Ладно, я слабый человек, поэтому вставлю свои пять копеечек про клип монеточки.
Точнее даже не о самом клипе пойдет речь, а о том, как легко яркими блестящими свистоперделками, которые получаются быстро, даже если и не с одного промпта, прикрыть отсутствие базовых скиллов.
И это проблема была не только с нейронками, просто они ярче всего это подсветили. Вспомним блендер с китбашами, или там, фотобаш, который потом …
У Димы Шрамко подглядел такой ресурс с сканами архитектуры. Открытая библиотека с возможностью скачки моделей, кайф для всякого китбашинга https://funes.world
С чего начинается родина новая работа? С базовых страшненьких скетчиков!
Да, не зря я там выше стадила деревья, как вы поняли х)
Правда все это идет очень медленно, потому что, оказывается, если на работе тебе дают интересные задачи, которые тебе нравятся, сил на свое и мотивации не хватает (или просто старею, что тоже валидно). Но хотя бы по чуть-чуть я буду пилить этот сук (на котором сижу, да х)
https://youtu.be/w-BBYE2BpCM?si=sGV5gZmaa_tRSpDw
В эти волнительные для арта времена, иногда полезно вернуться к подкастам с крутанами... Вот почти два часа Джефа Симпсона!
Кстати, а мне кажется, или времена больших имен в сиджи прошли? Как-то уже нет той атмосферы вокруг больших признанных крутанов (или это потому что крутаны с радаров пропали?). Или это я так подостыла просто? х)
Увидела у Татьяны Ветровой в тг, посмеялась.
Я вот смотрю на этот тейк и думаю, насколько люди иногда не понимают, что чтобы дойти до какого-то артдирского видения, надо ну, покопаться в грязи, поработать ручками и побыть этим самым презренным исполнителем. Посмотреть на команды, на процессы, поворчать на своих артдиров, которые, по твоему дилетанскому (или не очень) мнению делают херню (и только лет через пять поня…
Я думала, что не смогу выкупать, где музыка - продукт человеческого труда (как минимум вокал), а где иишница. НО.
Если вначале, как ии-песни начали появляться, я реально не отличала, то сейчас почти всегда могу сказать иишка или нет. Как минимум в русскоязычном сегменте.
И сейчас, я их удаляю из трек листов, из предложки, отмечаю, что мне не нравится, нет спасибо.
Потому что они ОДИНАКОВЫЕ. Одинаковые и плоские, личн…
Икстером принесло мне логотип Якитории (или это своровано у якитории?) и в комментариях дали ссылку на процесс разработки лого студией Лебедева. Опустим дискуссию персоналии владельца и тп, но сама по себе статья интересная и познавательная, как мне показалось.
Да и логотип мне нравится :3
https://www.artlebedev.ru/yakitoriya/identity/process/
Отличная дотошность до пикселей еще, завидую! х)
👀55❤26🦄7❤🔥5🐳1
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @katrinchjournal. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 612,335 of 1,340,412entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Declared links
One URL this entry has put in its own public description, shown exactly as written there. A declaration, not a verified association— we measured that the description contained this text, and nothing more. It is not a claim that this entry owns, runs or is connected to whatever the link resolves to; a description is text anyone controls, and anyone can put anyone else’s URL into it. How this is measured.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 12 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“KatRinch journal” (@katrinchjournal), 2,186 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/katrinchjournal.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.
