Does "modernizing" your art style to cater to modern audiences always make your art look blander by default?
Maybe artists should aim to express their own style instead of trying to formulate some sort of magic spell that will magically guarantee them attention from the lowest type of potential potential maybe potential consumers.
in that particuliar case i feel is more him using digital than anything
>>7908688also claymore was in monthy while ariande was a weekly but for the question i think the medium play a lot people in japan read more manga on thier phone than bying magazine society divertisement became more blander by defaut too
>>7908682You can't make money anymore if you really express yourself. Doesn't matter how good you are, people won't buy it. Manga is mainly bought by kids and retarded adults.
>>7908674Not exist the modern audiences, is a fucking woke shit for idiots go who like to waste time and money
Modern audiences don’t buy art. They get what they want for free online. Don’t cater to them. That’s a common beginner mistake.People who support artists are relatively wealthy and interested in niche works. That's where the fame and money is for us small literally-who artists. What modern audiences want has already been done by a million other artists.
>>7908750Anybody intelligent enough to appreciate art has realized by now that all artists are whores. I don't give money to whores
>>7908674if you're lucky then your natural style will already be appealing, but for the rest of us we have to brute force appeal and change how we draw.
>>7908724>anymore*ever
>>7908674>>7908688Claymore was monthly and Ariadne was weekly.Changing tools (switching to digital) may be a part of it. We only really had blurry raws of Ariadne for a while too so that affects the look too.Anyway >Does "modernizing" your art style to cater to modern audiences always make your art look blander by default?No. Go look at Baki's older book covers and compare them to the more modern covers. He clearly adopted a more modern, digital approach that made it a lot more stylish and evocative. But it's entirely possible what actually happened is he just hired somebody else to do the covers. That's a possibility.>>7908750Demon Slayer sold 220 million books. You are wrong.
>>7908877No, in the 80s manga artists were still alllowed to express themselves and draw what they want. Same like movies. You still could make enough money out of arthouse films. But nowadays it's so commercialized that only billion dollar productions get any attention. Same like videogames.
>>7909206You're stupid if you think 80s didn't have their own cliches and tropes and "industry best practices" the suits expected everyone to follow in lockstep.It was just a different set of rules so it looks more original to you.
Also I've seen at least a dozen new arthouse films in the last few years what are you talking about. You just don't watch movies. Sure indie prods are a thing but those were never the big money makers.
>>7909210This anon is right. The blackest blackpill is that everything you grew up with was always cancer and it was always infested with the propaganda that is so insufferable today, cause they knew they couldn't go full niggertranny globohomo right after WW2. They needed to psyop the youth one step at a time. It's obvious now that all the media heroes of the past are all on board with the same shit today. we got boiling frog'd for generations and worshipped mercenaries who were serving the same agenda that is obvious today
>>7908956What if you fail to create the next Demon Slayer?
>>790921080s manga artists literally say themselves that they had more freedom back then, retard. They probably know it better than you. Katsuhiro Otomo for example said it. Back then you just could draw whatever you wanted, while nowadays you always have editors telling you what to do.
>>7908674Jesus christ I almost named my blonde short haired OC AriadneThank god i saw this post, it's really hard to come out with something original
