For example, I'd normally describe an image in my images at roughly the same level of detail as my images themselves. I didn't do that this time. That's also because it would have gone completely out of hand. One of the teleporters has a preview image on it that shows lots of similar teleporters, many of which have their own preview images. If I had wanted to go all the way, I would have had to describe all the preview images on the teleporters in the preview image on the teleporter in my image.
If I look at the preview image on that teleporter in my own image, what I see looks more like a beige kite in front of a blue background. The 564 (!) individual teleporters in that preview image are so tiny, they aren't even visible. And my local copy of the image has a higher resolution than the one that I've uploaded. I can only see these teleporters when I'm in-world, and I move the camera so close to the teleporter that the preview image fills the viewport of my viewer almost entirely.
If I really wanted to see what's on these teleporters, I'd have to go where they are standing and look at each one of them individually up close. In fact, I've done so. And when I was there, I discovered just how many of them also have text on their preview images. Some of them even show images or other textures on these preview images which, in turn, have text on them.
Strictly speaking, I would have had to describe dozens of images in all details. Strictly speaking, I would have had to transcribe hundreds of bits of text. Text in an image in an image in an image. Sometimes text in an image in an image in an image in an image.
And strictly speaking, I should not even have embedded this image in my post. I should have linked to it. That's because some of the preview images on these teleporters have avatars on them. With faces. With eyes.
If I were on Mastodon, I would have to flag this image sensitive because there are images in an image in this image that have eyes on them and added a "CW: eye contact" content warning. I could have done the latter here on Hubzilla, but I decided not to let anyone know what's in this image on a microscopic sub-pixel level. And here on Hubzilla, I don't have the means to do the former.
So I decided to only describe one image in detail, namely the one that I've posted. And it took me a few days, and it took over 60,000 characters to only even do that. Call me ableist, but I wasn't too keen on spending weeks technically only describing one image, just to find out that my image description of hundreds of thousands of words happens to exceed the maximum number of characters which the Web server underneath this Hubzilla hub can handle at once. Then all the work would have been in vain.