I'll start: furries with a head of human hair (completely breaks immersion for me)
When animes do that nose-shadow-line thing and then not shade it in despite other parts having proper shading.
>>8044547characters with an anatomically incorrect number of digits
Artists who only upload screenshots of their work.
>>8044574worse: artists on deviantart who share their work but don't enable image download, meaning you're stuck with a heavily compressed jpeg thumbnail
>>8044539furries with hair a cuteI hate balds
>>8044539Not as bad at furries with pubic hair or furries that sweaty and shiny as if they had normal human skin
>>8044588furries with pubic hair isn't that bad if it's just a fur tuft the same color as their crotch furI don't think I've ever seen one with pubic hair that was like, the same color as their head hair though... that would look strange
>>8044586>>8044539What about short hair
>>8044586furries are literally the opposite of "bald", your brain just interprets them as "bald" because you are used to seeing humans with head hair.>>8044595i can tolerate a small tuft, but i don't really like it. i'm okay with a wolf mane though, like when the fur around the neck is quite long and floofy and blends in seamlessly with the fur on the lower back and neck. the main reason why i dislike head hair on furries is because i think head hair is such a uniquely human trait that when i see non-humans with hair, it reminds me that these are characters designed by human authors meant to resemble humans, instead of being some hypothetical convergent evolution or genetically uplifted animal species that's merely copying the human body plan as it is quite well-suited for intelligent life. for the same reason, i prefer natural fur colors outside of androids or custom-designed organisms.>>8044590i've seen some furry art with pubic hair, usually by weirdos who actually like body hair on their human women and are trying to replicate that with anthros. see here: https://e621.net/posts/5024672>>8044588a lot of the hairless colored-skin furries are people trying to ape anime style, but really it's laziness. look up shirsha and furromantic for god-tier fur renderers
>>8044539"Line of action"
>>8044617do you mean that thing they teach in gesture drawing in beginner figure drawing class (my junior college doesn't teach any anatomy until halfway through the class, i absolutely hated it), or do you mean speed lines and swooshes for comics?
>>8044569Does it bother you when they're off real life, or just mixed in universe? Does it have toe be five all the time, or is it fine if everyone has four?
>>8044539It's fine as long as the hair is a part of the fur // matches it's color lmao
>>8044586Furries can't be bald by definition, unless it's furless like a sphynx or a scalie>>8044980Yea, but several times is a fucking wig. Almost as bad as the anime girls with animal ears
Le funny ironic meme "artists"They are everywhere on the internet
>>8044932i'm not sure what you mean. it bothers me a lot less with stylized humans like the Simpsons because it was a deliberate design choice, but for furries, different species of animal have unique hands and feet: a rat or mouse has 5 toes on each foot and 4 fingers on each hand. dogs and wolves are the opposite (if you count the dew claw as a vestigial "thumb"). seeing a rodent with 4 toes or a rabbit with paw pads just tells me that the artist is defaulting to dog anatomy and hasn't studied the animal in question. but generally i make exceptions with five-fingered hands since that's what humans have, and there are different levels of anthropomorphization, but mixing in anatomy from a third animal is a no-go for me. but i'd still prefer bad anatomy over inconsistent anatomy.>>8044991it's okay to draw animal ears on girls, as long as they don't have human ears too
>>8044605>>8044991>furries are literally the opposite of "bald", your brain just interprets them as "bald" because you are used to seeing humans with head hair.>Furries can't be bald by definition, unless it's furless like a sphynx or a scalieI know they're not literally bald but their heads just look empty and dumb without hair to meit also depends on the style, if they're more realistic and animal in the face then I wouldn't want hair on them or it'd be like a khajiit in a maybeline commercial
>>8044539That one is a robot so it can be as retarded as anyone wants
current western animated kids cartoons style. that is, it feels just like the next generation beanmouth. it just makes me tired, but only because i keep getting wrangled into watching it by a kid i don’t want to let down.
>>8046372yeah but she also shares a universe with regular furries that don't have the same excuse. would still plap ARA though... she is best girl and i have a machine fetish... although even with other characters, at least Fluff-Kevlar's lore is ambiguous enough that it's possible that all furry life forms are designer beings.>>8046478you mean like the art style seen in "the bad guys', "ellio", "hoppers", and "the forgotten island" that's basically a better polished 3D Beanmouth with comic-book stylization like with flat-shaded eyes and speed lines? i think "the bad guys" has some pretty decent looking anthros but i agree that the style is tiring now, but you can blame the success of Spiderverse for that.a lot of autists on /co/ will get upset if you criticize beanmouths because the 1980s had pretty cookie cutter designs made to sell toys, but at least GI joe and He-Man had a nice combination of realism in anatomy coupled with bright colors. no one shits on Invincible's art style for the same reason. RETVRN
>>8044539>blocks your path
>>8046669oh sorry, i should’ve posted an example. i don’t mind calarts style, and i don’t really mind this one, it’s just if i’m exposed to it for long periods and i’m an adult, it makes me tired. there’s always a reconciliatory message at the end, and there are always the same two formulaic expressions, a sparkly-eyed simper and an eyebrows-tilted-up understanding smile that are always featured at key moments, in all the shows. it feels like i’m being calculatedly forced through the script to accept the message, and these stylized, 2d or 3d, faces cue the scene where the message is being announced. it’s really just kids-only stories and humor, and embedded messages are great for kids, it just wasn’t written for an adult to enjoy for long periods.
>>8046776ick, half of those are AI slop, please post a content warning next time, my eyes do not consent. but yeah, i agree. CW Lewis had a quote about how a kid's story that can only be enjoyed by kids is a bad kid's story. i think this carries over to stylization: Studios are refusing to make designs realistic or angular because it's more threatening subconsciously. ironically, a lot of these designs look good with non-human characters. the dog dude from "Island Of The Lost" isn't nearly as grating to the eyes as the human MCs.
>>8047008i feel you. the non-humans don’t come off as being contrived, good catch. they’re almost necessarily more unique, and it also makes sense because it’s really hard to successfully stylize humans, especially for wider audiences, without relying on these formulaic stylistic choices, and since people are the least abstract and most familiar subjects we can depict, the audience knows what it wants to see and how <human> characters would behave if believable in a story, and as you mentioned, our subconscious reactions to certain forms almost force the choices made in stylization into the same old grooves.
