[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/ic/ - Artwork/Critique



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.




Post art that starts to fall apart the more you look at it. I'll start: I thought this was good for about 20 seconds before noticing the deformed shrunken feet and dislocated hand. I feel like often times art I initially like starts to sour the more I notice anatomical or perspective issues. Post art that looks good at first but gets bad.
>>
Teen thread
>>
>>3800063
Stop making threads about other peoples art that you don’t like.
>>
>>3800094
Is it against the rules??
>>
>>3800119
it's just obnoxious
>>
>>3800121
agreed..
>>
>>3800119
Nope not really. You're critiquing work and you're not singling people out to talk about their personal lives and you're not claiming this as your own.

Only questionable thing is the age in OP image though. It illustrates the point of getting worse the longer you look, it's just an iffy image to start off with.
>>
File: tumblrshit.jpg (90 KB, 500x400)
90 KB
90 KB JPG
>>3800063
A classic
>>
>>3800127
Jesus this isn't the cringe thread. Read the OP again.
>>
>>3800139
No but really look at it
>The impossible legs on bottom right
>the beefy bowser hands
>the disconnected tits on top left, and contorted floating legs
>top right has one stubby one long arm
>everyone is blind
>oh god the tangents

You just don't want to look at it for very long
>>
File: 8e7.jpg (129 KB, 684x1000)
129 KB
129 KB JPG
>>3800063
>>
>>3800143
That's still not the thread's theme but shit you're right. This is some next-level garbage. Awful art that gets even more awful the more you look at it. How did those tumblrinas do it?
>>
>>3800151
kek
>>
>>3800153
That's their only superpower
>>
>>3800143
So? IS the artist here asking for critique? This thread is just you and op circle jerking tearing down people who aren’t here. Does it make you feel better about yourself? How about you go draw and post your work you pathetic retard?
>>
>>3800161
This board is for critiquing art, I think it's fair to show a picture and say "this is rendered well, but this is what is wrong with it" and use it as a learning experience for what not to do.

It's not against the rules, so fuck off saltyboi. Sorry the thread is triggering you, just hide it and go about your day if it's not for you.
>>
File: 1523855261962.jpg (145 KB, 651x633)
145 KB
145 KB JPG
>>3800063
Ive seen this artist stream on Twitch, I wonder how he'd react
>>
>>3800151
>6 fingers
>beefy shoulders/hips, tiny hands/feet
>left hand is far away but somehow is holding fabric close to the body?
>legs are in 2 different perspectives
>thicc neck
>wind doesn't have a particular direction
>multiple different light sources that don't work together
>literally didn't bother rendering her right arm because it's covered in fabric
>cross-eyed look
>jay leno chin
>left shoulder is loooooong
>tits aren't attached the same way
>criss-cross straps on cleavage are supposed to go around the neck, but one goes off to the side and the other goes INTO the neck????
>??????
>>
>>3800119
I really fucking wish it was.
If people put in the same effort in improving and analyzing their own work as they do bitching about the middling details of more successful artists or shitting on DA randos, they'd have made it by now.
>>
>>3800167
Probably like this guy
>>3800161
>>3800176
>>
>>3800178
Could be, the other day someone in chat pointed out something looking off in a painting he was working on and he got a little pissy saying that he knows when things look off but simply hasn't gotten to fixing it, and that he can fix stuff with the liquefy in PS if he has to at the end.
>>
>>3800184
Ah, the good old "I'm too lazy to fix it right now I'll do it later" excuse.

That's how these things come to be. That's the lesson that needs to be learned. Don't do that, guys.
>>
File: 254rtge45.jpg (89 KB, 1280x720)
89 KB
89 KB JPG
>>3800063
>>
https://vb.booru.org/index.php?page=post&s=list&tags=all
this page
>>
>>3800127
i know some sjw chewbaca-esque dildo in the butt lesbian thought this was a good idea and her friends said it was good because it "challanges cutlural ideals of beauty", but i cant deal with this type of shit anymore. what were they thinking?!?!?!?
>>
>>3800063
I'm so proud of my boy.
He finally made it to the status of " artists that make /beg/ envy enough to make threads about it".
Truly the highest respect you can have as an artist.
>>
>>3800151
Everytime
>>
File: ok.png (169 KB, 271x319)
169 KB
169 KB PNG
>>3800261
OP here, I didn't mean to hate, I love him and totally envy his rendering. I just think this piece of his has some flaws that I fixate on. I wanted people to post some bad art, this was just my only example of semi broken anatomy that doesnt stand out that much.
>>
>>3800063
it's not bad; it is flawed. you brainlets can't vocabulary. works that are technically accurate (100 percent or super close) usually fall into the categories of rare and boring.
>>
>>3800402
There's a difference between knowing what you're doing and stylizing something, and making mistakes in the sketch phase and just rendering over them.

That picture is the latter, not the former.
>>
>>3800192
>/v/ermin
Are you that autist that keeps trying to make threads about it on different boards?
>>
>>3800063
AHAAAHAHAHHHAHAH what the fuck are those shoes man xDDDD
>>
>>3800161
Your here anon :)) post yours. I learn a lot from these threads on what not to do and looking at detail. Your the only one who doesnt belong here because you come in a thread not meant for you just to shittalk. Please leave and consider suicide
>>
>>3800261
You mean you wouldn't be embarrased if you rendered on a professional level but had weak anatomy?
Yikes bro
>>
>>3800161
Some of us are capable of learning from others peoples mistakes anon, sucks you cant coprehend unless you fail yourself
>>
>>3800121
Who gives a fuck. Can't we just do what we fucking like to do
>>
>>3800127
Nope
>>
>>3800171
The only valid points you have given is that there are 6 fucking fingers and that the cross is supposed to go around the neck
>>
>>3800189
Isn't that proko
>>
>>3800515
Oh I'm sorry mister artist man, why don't you educate me on what is good and bad about that image then since you know so much more than me?
>>
I remember getting really mad at this image. Most of its subtle but pay close attention the background and where the light is shown to be coming from.
>>
>>3800579
So out of everything in this picture it's the multiple light sources that checked your box?
>>
>>3800579
She's using those chopsticks backwards. Goddamint I'm so triggered right now.
>>
>>3800518
Yea, it's from one of his first youtube videos.
>>
>>3800588
I think it was because they had the thought to have dramatic lighting, so they put the dinner in a room with no lights and a staircase leading to what appears to be the after life, then just made up new rules for how the light was cast on every object.
>>
File: IMG_8838.jpg (136 KB, 726x1000)
136 KB
136 KB JPG
>>3800063
>that hand
>those shoulders
>that arm
>>
File: moni crab foot.jpg (177 KB, 850x1233)
177 KB
177 KB JPG
>feet look weird
>>
>>3800611
lets see you do better anon, that goes for everyone else in this thread hating on the op image with zero critique on how it can be fixed
>>
>>3800613
I'm not hating on anything anon. I'm just pointing out anatomy mistakes that can be easily avoided. I think it is interesting, especially since the rendering is well done in comparison
>>
>>3800613
dude what the fuck. itt we post art that looks good at first but it has serious flaws. critique has no place here, since the author probably is not here
>>
>>3800579
There could easily be other light sources out of view youve become far too stuck in your rules
>>
>>3800612
Why do so many artists draw stubby feet
>>
>>3800619
>>3800643
Obviously Anon drew that pic
>>
>>3800649
to annoy foot fetishists
>>
>>3800063
I thought for a moment the pokemon in the background was puffing on 2 cigarettes with a lot of smoke. Anyone else see that
>>
>>3800648
if an object isn't interacting with an image, then it doesn't exist. For this picture to make sense, multiple dim diffused light sources would need to be coming from the left and right of the scene,
Do you think the artist thought all that out?
>>
File: 1517347241698.png (142 KB, 429x418)
142 KB
142 KB PNG
Post your work faggots.
>>
>>3800714
No but with diffuse light you dont need to worry as much. Youre being way too anal. I bet your art follows every lighting angle and rule precisely and you calculate it all with perspective grids and it looks stiff and lifelwss and dull. I can tell your a left-brained kind of guy
>>
File: 1549522925778.jpg (10 KB, 300x300)
10 KB
10 KB JPG
>>3800717
this

is what everyone who thinks op is bad should do
>>
I imagine all the cranky ngmis gathering in this thread and procrastinating by complaining and pretending they're learning
>>
>>3800515
>n-no you're wrong because reasons
kys sakimidrone
>>
>>3800728
this
>>
>>3800726
why does everyone keep falling for this fallacy. nobodys says the OP is bad but you can see small mistakes. like you dont need to be an architect to see a missing light switch in a finished building
>>
>>3800728
>>3800731
Regardless of the quality of the thread, you hypocrites read the thread and are procrastinating too...
Hide and move along. Don't browe /ic/ if you're not in a procrastinating mood, holy shit.
>>
File: 1549525304259.png (580 KB, 698x1080)
580 KB
580 KB PNG
>>3800734
>>
>>3800734
What do you mean hypocrites? I'm rather the one pointing out hypocrisy. I know I'm procrastinating by coming here (not that I'm not alt+tabing between my drawing and /ic/ right now), but I don't have any pretensions about it. Lame thread.
>>
/ic/ mods don't have crabs up their butts like /a/ mods that but in times like this i wish threads like this would get deleted. op didn't even draw the art or isn't even seeking specific critique
>>
>>3800611
Anon, if you did this I'll redline it for you. Did you do that ?
>>
>>3800127
He said
>art that starts to fall apart the more you look at it
not
>art that destroys your brain cells
>>
>/ic/ mods
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooof
>>
>>3800127
I never understood this. Why look at at art you dislike, save it, and post it all the time? I get that this is lel tumblr art and I'm pretty active on tumblr and still have never ever seen anything this stylized/bad. Can't help but feel like people are searching for the absolute worst stuff they can find, just so they can be angry at it.
>>
>>3800603
literally who cares besides crabs like you.

Its visually very pleasing and attractive, no normie is going to look at it that deeply. That being said, there could easily be a large window or something at the top of the stair case
>>
File: a1039252408_10.jpg (374 KB, 1200x1200)
374 KB
374 KB JPG
>>
>>3800897
I keep it to remind myself that hugbox sites are bad for art and to never join them again.
>>
>>3800986
social media in general, if you find a niche that people like you might get a lot of positvie feedback on that but then when you try something new theres nothing, this might lead to you making the same thing over and over again jsut to feel validated
>>
File: attack of the crab.jpg (516 KB, 720x551)
516 KB
516 KB JPG
>>3800903
>>3800579
>>3800588
>>3800648
>>3800719
>>3800903


let me try and reword this. The design of the image is a problem because they are so focused on the individual character designs. Even though there is a clear light source that would cause the scene to have interesting lighting, it is forgone for individual character details that are unnecessary to convey the characters appearances. This level of detail adds to the cluster fuck of visual information in the scene
The food on the table ruins the visual hierarchy. There was an attempt to have a circular flow, but all of the details camouflage the silhouettes of the characters.
The table wall door and coat rack appear to be hastily made to fill space, the wood texture is enormous and lazy.
And if you want to get to nit picks, the red head has a t-rex forearm, fish man has classic side mouth while smashing a fish against his face. starburst all over the unimportant food, and just to be a crab birds eat other birds
>>
>>3800965
I ain't clicking on that thing
>>
ITT: post others shit art to make yourself feel better about your own shit art
>>
>>3800897
Its how they cope.
>huurrr this artist is well known but I can tell they are shit
>I could do better
>if I tried
>probably
>>
>>3800063
redline please!
>>
>>3800579
/ic/ is fucking stupid and can only interpret fucking spotlights as light sources.
The worst thing on that pic is the perspective.

Light behaves differently depending on the environment and intensity of it, plus people also have windows.
>>
>>3800612
>perspective is fucked up
>pillow shading
>proportions fucked up

Yet still I don't understand how japs can draw such thin lines, not only are they thin, they vary in color in extremely sublet ways.
>>
File: 173.jpg (69 KB, 583x583)
69 KB
69 KB JPG
>>3800119
No, but most of the art posted in these threads aren't even that bad most of the time. These threads are only entertaining to the people who are underage or people who just lack skill and need to look at art they find worse then their own to make themselves feel more secure and validated.
>>
NGMI - The Official Thread
>>
Jesus I don't get why some people are so mad about this thread. I'm guessing they just felt personally attacked?
This thread isn't really about BAD art. It's about art that works well at a glance (aka the artist successfully designed the thumbnail) but have a few glaring and detracting flaws that became obvious after a minute of observation
It doesn't mean that the art is actually bad as a whole or that the poster hates the artist.

There's absolutely nothing objectively wrong with making observations like this. It's interesting and might even help some of us avoid similar trappings
The only counterarguments against doing this I've seen are just plain ad hominems (hurr durr they're jealous cuz their bad XD) that adds absolutely nothing to the discussion
>>
>>3801320sage
>I'm guessing they just felt personally attacked?
uu nice homined lol XD
>>
>>3801320
It does not help because nobody puts their observations into practice. It’s just pointing out how something is bad for the sake of it. The only assumption left to make is that its in aid of the poster feeling superior about themselves. There’s no redline, no improvements no anything.
>>
>>3801320
Ya, like i know /ic is a crab breading ground, but there is a reason for critique with any piece of art.
There is some major Dunning-Kruger after the "competent art" stage here.
>>
>>3801321
That's not ad hominem because I'm not using it as my argument of the validity or invalidity of this thread.
I didn't use it as a way to invalidate your opinion. Whether or not you actually felt personally attacked does not have any effect on whether or not I think you're wrong.
I was just trying to understand why people are so instantly and violently dismissive of the mere existence of this thread.

>>3801327
>It does not help because nobody puts their observations into practice. It’s just pointing out how something is bad for the sake of it.
I don't understand how you came to this conclusion. And it does not matter anyways. We have some best instructional drawing books here (Loomis, Hampton, Vilppu, Huston, etc.) and yet a lot of people here very poorly practice them anyways. Does that mean those books are trash? Does that mean we should abolish them? Should we just destroy the entire idea of artbooks?
Your critique should be directed to those people that poorly practice them, and not the idea itself.

>The only assumption left to make is that its in aid of the poster feeling superior about themselves.
You're repeating the same talking points that I've countered. What the poster feels or their motive does not have any bearing on the validity of his critique.
>>
>>3801320
cause someone shit on art they look up to and theyre a bunch of pussies about it.
>>
File: 20190208_024219.jpg (200 KB, 600x603)
200 KB
200 KB JPG
>>3800965
Ever wish you could just unsee things?
>>
File: kawaiiuguu.jpg (1.89 MB, 1496x2227)
1.89 MB
1.89 MB JPG
Hey stop being white knights you dick suckers post some art and spot the issues

let's see if yall can even critique properly
>>
File: 1514308123504.jpg (75 KB, 590x623)
75 KB
75 KB JPG
>>
>>3801354
that actually fucking jumpscared me wtf
>>
>>3801361
It's the eyebrow, eyelash, and a dot on the forehead of the original painting but it looked like a spooky face on its own so some glorious anon here on /ic/ shopped it into the face
>>
File: 1.jpg (313 KB, 1000x750)
313 KB
313 KB JPG
>>
File: vmHplYT.jpg (197 KB, 801x735)
197 KB
197 KB JPG
>>
Can't forget about the classic Rob Liefeld
>>
>>3801342
It is ad hominem. You attacked the man and not the argument.

I came to that conclusion because that’s exactly what happens in these threads, again and again and again. Your thing about the books makes no sense. I pointed out how people keep dragging out middle ground artists to trash, with seemingly no result or self progress. You haven’t countered anything, in fact earlier in this thread an anon already pointed out that people like you will claim its a learning thing when really its just bitter procrastination and dragging people down to their level. Yet here you are, claiming its about observation.
>>
>>3800579
dont you think this is kind of hilariously based on a certain classical painting tho lol
>>
>>3801375
Like I said it's not an attack on his argument. It's not even a part of my argument. I'm not saying that he's wrong because of his prejudices (real or not), am I?

>exactly what happens in these threads, again and again
This isn't your usual cringe or vendetta thread. To repeat, this thread is literally for GOOD art that have a few glaring mistakes in them.

>I pointed out how people keep dragging out middle ground artists to trash,
There's nobody dragging anyone down to trash. Even the OP admitted he likes the artwork. It's just that he noticed these few unfortunately glaring mistakes in them.

>Your thing about the books makes no sense
Elaborate

> with seemingly no result or self progress.
There's no absolutely way to prove that, and any efforts will prove unproductive as this is an anonymous board. Whether or not the contents of this thread will be useful is entirely on you.

You can choose to use it as a vehicle to be bitter and jealous about other artists or you can productively integrate these little observations that you may or may not have noticed before into your own works.

Again there's nothing objectively wrong with the core idea of critical observation of artworks which is what this thread about. Their motives can be questionable and people can choose to abuse it, but it shouldn't be used as a reason to invalidate them when their observations are absolutely correct.

If you want something to attack, then attack those specific invalid criticisms you can find, and not the idea of criticism itself. Or just ignore them, don't let them ruin the thread, especially since this thread starts with what I think is a decent and level-headed OP.

>You haven’t countered anything,
I have repeatedly, I don't know what you're talking about.
>>
>>3801399
> in fact earlier in this thread an anon already pointed out that people like you will claim its a learning thing when really its just bitter procrastination and dragging people down to their level. Yet here you are, claiming its about observation.
I don't know why you think this is a good argument. I hate for repeating the cliche, but that's once again plain ad hominem. He completely fails to show how the observations made in this thread are incorrect or how it's not useful. He just resorted to attacking a completely made-up character and personality and use that as a reason to why this thread is not useful. I just simply can't see how that invalidates my argument in any way.
>>
Remember when /ic/ was decent?
>>
>>3801424
Don't try to gaslight me with fake nostalgia, anon! /ic/ was never decent.
>>
>>3801282
I'm 67, so that's not true at all faggot.
>>
>>3800515
They're pretty much all valid, retard.
>>
File: 1533264890590.jpg (446 KB, 2500x1143)
446 KB
446 KB JPG
>>3800612
>>
>>3801739
Good job
>>
>>3800171
The only one i don't agree with is:
>tits aren't attached the same way

What am i missing?
>>
>>3800063
I think OP is a good example of a balanced intermediate-tier artist. Sure, the anatomy is wonky and straight-up nonsensical in places, but because he has a decent understanding of composition, simple rendering of forms, likeness, color choices and so on, he is able to produce illustrations that have a decent level of appeal, whereas your average anatomy-grinding crab may be able to point out the technical flaws in one of these aspects, but couldn't apply their knowledge to create anything that would come close to it in terms of cohesion because their skill set is too one-sided.
>>
>>3801780
Oh poor wording on my part. One is attached to a very different part of the chest than the other, it's almost as if it's kind of floating around.
>>
>>3801862
Oof we white knighting hard on this guy huh?
>>
File: 1547767789780.jpg (24 KB, 612x612)
24 KB
24 KB JPG
>>3800161
People get entertainment from critiquing or outright taking the piss out of work they think is bad, deal with it, you little pissbaby.
Secondly, some of us want to see the mistakes other artists are making so we can learn to avoid them. Especially mistakes that are not outright apparent to beginners or without closer inspection.
>>
>>3800717
>>3800726
> "if you can't build a cathedral then you can't make fun of someone else's architecture"
>>
>>3800063
post your top tier art, mine bruder.
>>
>>3802102
yea. get good, faggot.
>>
>>3801280
Who said that's a jap? It's a fan art of a non-jap game so I doubt it is
>>
>>3801354
i wish you fucks could draw properly instead
>>
>>3802102
yeah if you can't then don't laugh as you can't do better. which in itself is laughable if you want to laugh at the trying.
>>
>>3802129
And I wish the artwork/critique board was skilled enough to actually give a critique but apparently none of you understand enough to even do that. Sad.
>>
>>3800063
Anatomy and perspective issues aside, I wish I could render that well
>>
>>3802177
Rendering that well is easy. Line control, brush control, blending. All you need is a hard round and soft round brush for anything.
>>
>>3802180
You'd think so, but I'm a retard when it comes to light.
>>
>>3802190
Oh so it's like the form and values part of it.

Have you ever tried playing with light and shadow on a cube or cylinder in perspective? It's pretty easy since you just map out the point the light source is at and then trace lines from the point to the edges of the cube to the floor and then there's your shadow, all that's left is to throw down values.

I don't know why but that's the exercise that made it really click for me.
>>
>>3802198
Maybe...if I made dummy shaded shapes to reference in my larger pieces, I'd get less lost in where to place them.
>>
File: 'O'.jpg (185 KB, 658x1109)
185 KB
185 KB JPG
>>3800745
no I didn't draw this anon. The artist's name is in pic related
>>
>>3803113
kek
>>
>>3801369
the (fix) is the real cringe, they completely changed the pose and made it 100% stiff.
>>
>>3800171
i like this artist"s works but didnt see the 6 fingers holy shit
>>
>>3802102
If you build shitty buildings you probably shouldn't be bitching at other people's architecture.
>>
>>3801242
Has crab been used so much and for so long to the point no one knows it’s original meaning anymore?
>>
>>3801369
Why can't scrubs understand that dynamism >>> realistic anatomy?
It's ok to bend the rules of anatomy a little to make your poses more dynamic. That "fix" is so rigid and bland looking
>>
>>3800195
>what were they thinking?
Exactly what you described. It's just soulless virtue signaling.
>>
>>3800063
>>3800266
Michelangelo met Titian once.
Miche Giorgio Vasari arranged the meeting.

Titian showed them his latest picture—a nude Danaë—and “naturally, as one would do with the artist present, we praised it,” says Vasari.

Those old-timers could be pretty eloquent. Michelangelo probably told Titian the Danaë was a magnificent painting and Titian scoffed and said he was much too kind, it was a mere trifle. Then Michelangelo, getting inspired, maybe called him the greatest painter in Italy and Titian replied that he was just a poor apprentice who tried his best but produced clumsy results; not like Michelangelo, who was a real painter. Whereupon Michelangelo in his best confession style would have retorted that he was no painter, just a bungling sculptor, God pity him–and so on.
The three said goodbye, no doubt with brotherly embraces and promises to repeat the honor and the enjoyment.

Then afterwards, on the way back to the hotel, Michelangelo and Vasari, with their masks off, shook their sour faces and said it was a pity Titian didn’t know how to paint. Or rather, didn’t know how to draw.

tl;dr
OP's artist is a good painter; it's just a shame he's rending a stick figure. and it's anime at that; an animation style that was developed for fast, cheap depictions of characters.
>>
>>3800598
t. uncultured swine
you use the chopsticks backwards to get the food onto your own plate, so that the food won't be contaminated by your saliva (from the tip you eat it regularly from).
>>
Remember that OP's art is still better then 90% of /ic/
don't be a crab. Go draw.
>>
>>3800094
pussy
>>
>>3800171
lol
don't worry, i agreed with the whole list
especially:
>6 fingers
>jay leno chin
>??????
>>
>>3800161
PUSSY

stop crying and accept that your art here is seen as shit.
>>
>>3800612
after all, it is a

fucking cartoon, moron
>>
>>3800151
The 6 finger thing is just an edit tho
Still took me a good minute to figure this one out lol
>>
>>3804424
Are you retarded, moron?
>>
>>3800094
Board is literally called art critique you moron
>>
>>3800696
I thought it was because they sucked at anatomy.
>>
File: 1508285034419.gif (518 KB, 500x715)
518 KB
518 KB GIF
How do you anons deal with having a clear idea of what you need to draw, but at the time of starting, the base looks like a deformed spawn of satan?

[spoiler]I just recently started doing doodles and stuff as part of formation to work in vidya industry, so I'm still very green and wet behind the ears[/spoiler]
>>
>>3805330
If your current progress is holding you back, start all over again. Some times I need multiple attempts to get a result I'm kinda satisfied with, but trying to fix an already broken concept will only work against you
>>
>>3800063
>>
>>3804992
No, it's actually real. She's posted on twitter acknowledging it with a fixed version.
>>
>>3806324
What the hell, how?? Kek
>>
File: 1456876691817.png (450 KB, 1000x1000)
450 KB
450 KB PNG
>>3800127
I like this version instead.
>>
>>3806466
ITS SO CUTE
>>
>>3806221
Ah, the old big tits make the chest cavity larger error. Exorcist neck turn, and doll arm attached in a socket.
>>
>>3806466
who ever made this cute better version deserves an award
>>
File: redline.jpg (116 KB, 1000x561)
116 KB
116 KB JPG
>>3801272
:^)
>>
>>3807531
very dandy
>>
>>3800063
why do small mistakes like this bother you artist types? Who cares? If you wanna make it, dont let fear of mistakes hold you back. The normal people who consume most of art and media dont give a fuck or even notice.
>>
>>3807841
I guess many of us are perfectionists. Once you spend 5h of drawing details you know the pain of not spotting this kind of mistakes earlier. I guess this thread is a thing everyone can learn from. At least I do
>>
>>
>>3807902
Do you really have to disprove the point I just made kek
>>
File: 1550039610960.jpg (351 KB, 1235x1800)
351 KB
351 KB JPG
I saw this artist being posted regularly on /v/, decided to click it one day and oh boy
this artist is the definition of mediocre and lazy
>""simple""" lightning which is the lack of understanding of it
>garbage anatomy
>uses """style"""" as a crutch instead of actually learning how to copy shit and draw proper anime
>>
>>3800063
>look at pic
>hey this looks cool
>read OP
>can't unsee this shit anymore
why did you have to ruin it?
>>
>>3806466
>when you fix the unfixable
>>
File: DzIAdv6X4AE44xG.jpg (49 KB, 453x604)
49 KB
49 KB JPG
>>3807902
the more i look at it the better it gets
>>
>>3809205
Anyone who uses pussyass thick lineart sucks anyway.

Unless you're a cartoonist.
>>
File: stamp.jpg (422 KB, 1280x720)
422 KB
422 KB JPG
>>3809205
>>
>>3809205
there is no lightning tho, just flat colours
>>
>>3800579
>the only thing right about this picture is the dog
>those dog eyes
>not even the fucking dog is drawn right.
>>
>>3809205
He used to be better, or at least cuter when he drew Samus art near exclusively, but once he moved on to more lewds and other characters, I too feel like he hasn't impressed, moreso digress.





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.