>>2324340
Why would I save anything made by the anon's here? It's a waste of hard drive space.
>>2324344
Mad as hell.
i only save the sillyshit i see people post
>>2324340
>>2324358
>>2324340
>>2324359
youre acting as though this isnt an accurate fact that the drawing is proportionally wrong, especially abdomen up.
>>2324363
But that's how the original picture is
>>2324359
He is right. Look to The neck and rips, there all wrong.
>>2324366
i forgive you for not seeing the difference but just compare the height of both heads and youll immediately see its off. also look at the vertibrae where it first splits of at the beginning of the back. the arm is super thick obviously. if you look at the way the neck initially goes into the boob its easy to see that as well. Ignoring the major DIFFERENCES in the hands.
TLDR there is a lot wrong with it. and im not even the best.
>>2324366
To be fair, references can be very deceiving and look incorrect at first, sometimes its better to draw something that 'looks correct' over something that 'is correct'. Theres one picture that I've seen posted occasionally on /ic/ that comes to mind, its of a girl stepping out of a pool with her hand on the railing and her arm seemingly bent at an impossible angle.
The only mistake that guy made was assuming Firez was good enough to pull something like that off without reference.
>>2324371
easiest part to look at would be the height of the elbow.
>>2324371
Meh, maybe the shoulder could be more narrow, but that's about it. Chill anon, you seem angry nitpicking stuff.
>>2324375
I don't know anon, I like it when artists challenge themselves and draw stuff that, although isn't pleasing to the eyes, is still correct. Get out of your comfort zone yo.
>>2324368
disgusting dirty gradient user, eurgh, no edgework, no brushmanship. Fucking kill yourself.
>>2324386
actually you know what that was bang out of order, sorry, don't kill yourself mate. I've just been having some problems lately. But try to get some brushwork in there and variate edges as well. also dont rely too much on the gradient tools.
>>2324389
Gradients are amazing what the fuck is wrong with you
>>2324340
Never did see if this got finished.
>>2324359
>anatomy, perspective, and proportions are wrong
>it was literally only the proportions that were wrong.
This is why /ic/ is generally full of shit.
>>2324405
the proportions aren't off either imo. Like, in order to find something wrong with it I'd have to squint my eyes very hard.
>>2324405
I agree /ic/ is pretty full of shit most of the time. They should've been getting on his case for doing a straight up paintover.
>>2324415
No, the proportions are off in comparison to the ref. That's not to say those proportions are unbelievable overall. But in comparison to the ref, they are off. But anyone who claims the anatomy and perspective are wrong too are full of shit. The proportions not being 1 for 1 was the main problem, but people on /ic/ like to ramble about nonsense that either doesn't matter or just isn't true in a poor attempt to make it seem like they know what they are talking about.
>>2324415
The hand with the painted nails too big. The arm closest to the viewer is painted too fat at the joint. The furthest boob is off ever so slightly, but enough to make it look weird.
All in all, the fact that the painting is so well done and accurate is why the flaws are most noticeable. The reference that was chosen is a bit awkward to begin with.
>>2324423
>http://kjkallio.deviantart.com/gallery/
>>2324427
I'll take that as a no
>>2324423
I'm confused, the painting in the picture says Firez on it. I remember when this dude was here painting that samurai girl.
>>2324434
The guy I linked is the one who gave Firez that crit.
>>2324435
>The guy I linked is the one who gave Firez that crit.
>>2324427
>http://kjkallio.deviantart.com/gallery/
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>2324434
Firez painted it and KJK gave the crit and paintover. The paintover can be seen here for the curious:
https://i.warosu.org/data/ic/img/0018/08/1408198756213.jpg
He's changed the pose a bit, but imo it looks a lot better. It's an example of not slavishly following ref and instead using some knowledge to improve upon it.
>>2324435
Yeah but why? I'm the one who said /ic/ is full of shit "most of the time", but I guess it wasn't clear I didn't mean this was one of those times. I wasn't criticizing that guy for trying to redline Firez's paintover because even tracing it still had quite a few problems. I was just saying it would've been better if he'd gone after Firez for doing a paintover altogether.
>>2324432
Given the quality of his gallery, it definitely doesn't validate his critique at all. The only thing he got right about it were the proportions were off, the anatomy and perspective were hardly the issue.
>>2324423
there's at least 3 people that constantly post here that are better than that.
>>2324444
>asking irrelevant questions in the first place
>>2324368
>tfw someone actually saved your work
>tfw it's one of your worst
>popping pills
>>2324445
Theres a few more in the tumblr thread as well, and the skype thread, but I doubt those are the anons I'm talking to right now.
>>2324446
Irrelevant but amusing nonetheless. A simple yes/no would have sufficed but instead we get people cherrypicking and posting their own reaction may-mays, and that reveals more than enough.
>>2324445
who
>>2324452
bbc <3
>>2324340
>>2324451
>knows it's irrelevant
>expects people to entertain it.
>>2324427
>>2324437
>http://kjkallio.deviantart.com/gallery/
i feel like that's cherry picking a bit-- not everything someone makes is gonna be great. these skeleton characters were kinda nice tho.
>>2324451
if you're on the skype thread you're definitely procrastinator/10 and probably spend most of your time in the beginner thread.
>>2324451
>Irrelevant but amusing
It still doesn't make sense to me though. Him being taken in and not realizing he was critiquing a trace doesn't mean that he's bad. I think every time I've ever seen that macro, most people agree that the trace still had flaws. So the skill level of the guy giving the critique really isn't in question, it's just funny because he was tricked. More often than not when I see that come up people are usually shit talking Firez, I think this is the first time I've ever seen anyone bring the critiquer into it. I don't see why you would have to be better than him to think it's funny he was tricked. I know the original intent of the macro was probably to discredit the critiquer but it doesn't hold up. A better example would've been that one where a whole bunch of anons tried to crit those pencil sketches from some like famous teacher or something.
>>2324474
Are you seriously this upset from my question?
>>2324476
Not a trace jelly faggot
http://firez-tbr.tumblr.com/post/94040095336/wip-ic-photo-study
http://firez-tbr.tumblr.com/post/94932062206/done
>>2324485
It's definitely a trace, it's the only thing I've ever seen from him that has a face that doesn't look like a lifeless mannequin. None of his new stuff does and his older stuff looks even stiffer and lifeless. I refuse to believe he had a breakthrough on one piece and reverted back to his old patterns on everything he's drawn since then. And
>jelly
Please.
>>2324495
It's definitely not a trace, I remember him posting the progress across 4-5 draw threads.
Stay jelly
Stay mad
thdark.
I /need/ to see you do a long project/comic/animation.
I wanna see you get big, brah.
>>2324496
Just because he posted progress of his paintover doesn't make it not a paintover. To his credit, you can tell the referenced pieces he does now are just referenced and not directly painted over, but the lack of major changes from wip to wip just further convinces me it was a trace. It's cute that you're white knighting though. You must be one of the people who thinks Firez is a girl lol.
>>2324503
>stayjellystaymad
Is the signature of one of his biggest bootlickers. Ignore when you see it.
>>2324503
I think your are referring to his imagination works, which requires a different skill level altogether, which would explain the gap. But then again, it's not possible to tell for sure whether he really ever works from imagination.
>>2324512
I've yet to see anything he's done purely from imagination. There was some astronaut girl he was drawing from imagination but during his progress posts he said he relented and grabbed reference after all, and it was immediately noticeable. I still say it about his studies too though, like that Bjork one. He even posted the reference, so it was easy enough to see that he did actually replicate the picture instead of painting over it, but it was just as stiff and lifeless with the same structural problems as the rest of what he does, and I just don't buy that he really did the same thing on this one picture yet it somehow came out way more structurally solid and lively than stuff he's doing some two years later.
>>2324506
Definitely.
i used to save tableguys stuff until i found out he has a tumblr
>>2324523
that man is a true bro,my shit got no notes for the longest while but i could always count on this guy to be there
I think I have all of 'em.
>>2324359
Some people say the proportions are off, some people say its a trace.
This is why you take what people say on ic with a grain of salt. This isnt the place for proper critique most of the time.
>>2324340
>mfw someone finally post one of your works in these threads
>>2324359
This redpilled me on /ic/
Now I only come to shitpost and dispel bullshit.
>>2324469
Looks like Loomis was a waste of time.
>>2324498
we all do
thdork da bess
>>2324695
Why is Loomis in the sticky then? Anons here constantly say that it's just a meme.
>>2324708
Because Creative illustration is actually a good book.
And because the original meaning of trolling is making people believe and spread wrong shit.
>>2324340
>mfw imagining the sheer amount of butthurt this image alone would cause
>>2324340
kek this pic is so fucked up
>>2324753
>"fucked up"
Lose some weight fampai
>>2324436
Very stiff, besides that its okay.
Loomis Loomis and all that
>>2324622
>>2324359
>>2324363
>>2324423
You guys know why people do this? Because they don't come here to learn jack shit, no they don't .
They come here to reconfirm their skills or boost their self-esteem. I mean, fucking hell, when people are giving advice, do you really think they're doing this because they care about you and your progress? No fucking way. The only reason why people give advice is to sound as if they know more. And once in a blue moon, you might get lucky that someone who's genuinely skillful will comment (he also does it for his self-esteem, but at least you get something out of it). And now I'm just talking about those who give critique. Not to mention there are also attention whores who post stuff just to hear "this is good". I mean, fuck, if the advice here is mostly "the elbow is off", and you come here for this sort of advice, fucking hell, just put your picture over the original one and see where you went wrong...
Stop faking stuff, lying to yourself and others: you come here for validation, and it's not as different as those little girls posting pictures of themselves, fishing for compliments and attention. If you genuinely want to learn shit, be quiet, do some self-study, go to join a real model sketching class or something.
>>2324796
Fuck, I'm not the only one to think this
Do you know, by any chance, any decent art communities?
>>2324803
Heh, of course you're not the only one, because this is true. The only reason why it hasn't been pointed out a lot is because of circlejerk. Why lurk here if you hate it here? People love to pat themselves on their backs, and an anonymous community is the perfect way to do it. Sometimes, I have the feeling people aren't drawing because it's fun, they are drawing because they need to find a place where they get validation if they work hard enough. Some people do it in sports, other work on their looks like in /fit/ or /soc/ for attention, what makes people think /ic/ is different?
Recommending art communities, hmm, I have a hard time finding my place too. Because not a lot of people give tips because they genuinely care, so on the net, you'll mostly have to deal with licking people's asses to get genuine critique back. And even then you don't know it's good critique for YOU, because everyone evolves in a different way. Just like in any art, you might make something more interesting if you do it in a different way. Michael Jackson didn't know how to read notes, Muhammad Ali improved boxing by dancing around, Rick Barry throws free-throws in basketball with the granny style, Van Gogh started painting at the age of 28, and he wasn't even accepted by his peers.
But look at what they all achieved by doing something different, because guess what, it works? To me, art communities seem to exist, not because they want to see real movements or revolutions, but because they want certain rules to keep existing, so when newcomers come, they can brag about how they have learned stuff, and teach the newbies "how to do it the right way".
You'll have a hard time finding a teacher who'll genuinely care about your personal improvements. Not to mention, you yourself need to be open for a lot of things and accept the stuff that people consider arty farty here. I suggest you go find that person irl.
>>2324796
I come here to kill time and to help out people. I enjoy teaching and have more experience than most of the people here so I figure it can't hurt to help out the community. It feels good when someone is thankful and can learn something new. I also hate when bad information is spread so I will step in and correct things or offer opposing views if I feel it is necessary. You've got a very pessimistic view of things, and while there are some people here that will fit your description you are painting everyone the same way when that's not the case.
>>2324814
I think the majority of the people are like that, and I'll give you the benefit of doubt, because I don't know you personally, but does your happiness come from the fact you've helped people, or the fact that people stroke your ego? Don't just reply "I don't do it for attention" because it's a harsh thing to admit, if you don't do it for me, do it for yourself. Good questions to know the answer would be: would you still help the person if he isn't thankful?
If he isn't thankful, but he does improve, and you're still willing to help, then you obviously don't do it for compliments. Otherwise, sadly, you'll do this until your advice isn't appreciated.
>>2324363
You're acting as though you know what you are talking about, so I guess it evens out the stupidity.
>>2324818
Well it's both obviously. I personally will feel good when I get a thankful response, but I still give out lots of comments that are thankless and it doesn't bother me at all. The only reason I may be slightly annoyed is if I put in a lot of time and effort and get no response--but only because I don't know if they have seen it or not. If I do a paintover and write a multiparagraph post, and then the person doesn't even take the time to check the thread again then I feel like it is wasted time on my part (which it is if they don't see it at all). In any case I have left hundreds or thousands of posts here over the course of year. I purposely don't use a trip because I am not looking for an ego stroke.
You're basically using the argument that literally every action is selfish at its core. People who donate to charities do so because they can feel good about helping out the world. Is it selfish though? Not really I don't think.
>>2324823
Well, obviously everything we do is for self-satisfaction, but I can draw a clear line.
I think people genuinely care when they don't do things that need others validation. If you donate and don't brag about it on FB, then it probably means you did it for yourself. If you comment and give advice, despite never getting a word of thanks (even though you deserve it), then you clearly like teaching.
You see, it may be a very pessimistic view to look at things, but it doesn't make it less true. I've studied under teachers who don't accept other ways, even though the result clearly works. It got me thinking what their motives were. It works, but it didn't worked the way they try to teach stuff? It's clearly an ego thing.
It's also the same on /ic/ and I really see no reason denying it. Sometimes, I really want to learn something without being involved in all this bullshit called pride. Just look up and you'll see people discussing about the neck, abdomens and whatnot, while you can clearly see these drawings are okay, but it's fun to nitpick because "I can see these details, look at how objective I am".
I'm someone who loves both abstract and technical art, and some people here truly believe that anatomy is the ONLY way to go (and vice versa). I will not comment on anatomy when people try to be expressive, and I'll won't ever say shit like "this drawing isn't daring enough" on a concept art. They both have their own purposes. But /ic/ doesn't understand this, so I'd rather stay away. Today I came back because I wanted some legs reference, but I keep reading shitty advice, probably from 15 year olds who think they're enlightened because they downloaded Loomis... Sigh.
>>2324814
blog?
>>2324830
>... Sigh.
>>2324830
I think some teachers were only taught one way of working and it's all they know so it's all they can teach. Also I remember seeing a study that showed that the more experience you get the more closeminded you get because you assume you have all the right answers and know more than other people who suggest other options, so you dismiss it earlier than other people.
Anyways, I think it is silly to come here as your main source for learning. Come here, grab some resources people post, laugh at the shitposters and gossip, ignore the dumb threads, and now and then post a crit or a painting and maybe you will get something useful maybe not. The majority of your learning should be through self-analysis. The longer you stick around here the more you realize that the average poster has maybe 2 years experience and is still super early in their development.
>>2324796
>you come here for validation, and it's not as different as those little girls posting pictures of themselves, fishing for compliments and attention.
You're right. /ic/ is about as cancerous as /cgl/. It's not surprising that there are so many femanons here.
>>2324838
I like this conclusion, and I agree. Get whatever advice you need and ignore the rest, which is so obvious, but not less true.
>>2324462
looks like a trace lol
>>2324803
for me personally /ic/ is the best art community
sure, the whole self-esteem-boosting and attention-whoring is pretty disgusting, but once in a while you stumble across a thread that actually helps you improve
before I regularly went to /ic/, I was unmotivated and knew next to no digital artists, I had no ambition towards gitting gud, I even felt great for being a decent photo-copier
I'm really thankful for the things the board has taught me and the senpais I can look up to when feeling down
>>2324423
G E N E R I C
E
N
E
R
I
C
>>2324890
Self-esteem-boosting?
90% of anything said here are basically insults and pure hate, it's actually quite hard to see objective critiques, like "arm is too long", instead, you see things "I wouldn't even clean my ass with that, you fucking loser".
It's like /ic wants to feel better by acting like know-it-all bad boys.
>>2324359
I don't get why this is posted all the time, KjK said in the post itself that the advice might not be accurate. You should really take critiques from /ic/ with a grain of salt.
>>2324796
>just put your picture over the original one and see where you went wrong...
but what if it's from imaginoo?
people shamelessy posting their own stuff pretending it's not them: the thread
>>2324934
>his work didn't get posted yet
>>2324890
Well, let me boost my ego and teach you something else.
You see, I assume most people started to draw because they like it. A lot of people started drawing when they were kids, doing fan art and all that. For a while, they enjoyed it a lot and didn't care about what people think. Because it's fun. But I assume that part got lost when they became angsty teenagers, and being the "good drawer" gave them plenty of attention in HS, or on the internet. This gave them another reason to draw, it feels good to have people compliment you on stuff you're good at. But just like many things, having too much of it will consume you. Those people don't draw for themselves anymore, and as soon as they finish a drawing, they post it on Tumblr, dA, 4chan, just so people can like them, fav them, or whatever. I mean, can many here claim they'll still continue despite people saying they suck, or not liking it? When that occurs, people "get better" and draw the things 4chan/dA/Tumblr likes, and get over that specific hurdle. They didn't change anything about their self-confidence: they just adapted to other people's need. Did you know why people invent stuff like sports and make rules? Because when there are rules, people can compare to each other. If the rules of football was "do whatever you want", then nobody can actually win. I see this mentality in drawing, which is ridiculous. People make up rules for a certain type of artstyle, as if that's the only art style that should exist, and for what? Just to prove who has a bigger d/ic/k. Oh, by the way, that's also where the fake humility comes from: users here only act "I'm not the best", as a self-defense mechanism for when there ARE people who are better, but trust me, they're quick to drop that act when they see they are "better".
>>2324939
>reading walls
>>2324949
> People like to brag
> Others feed the bragging because feeding braggers confirm their own ways
> Making standard rules in drawing allows people to compete -> hierarchy -> more bragging rights
> People are too goddamn lazy to read long text for more nuance
>>2324796
The thing is, even if people are only helping to make themselves feel better (and you can apply this philosophy to literally any 'selfless' deed) they're still helping, or trying to.
If they display false knowledge, the way this board tends to operate is another anon with something to prove will happily call him on it and say he's a retard. You get discourse and competition over who is right. If you're lucky, they might even try to prove it.
A smart man is critical of all advice he receives, and decides for himself whether it's worth taking into account. The nice thing about /ic/ is that with the propensity to shit on everything, that includes bad critiques.
There's plenty of garbage on this board, but there's also plenty of dialogue. It can be harmful to people who don't know better than to just follow whatever advice they see without thinking, but it can also be beneficial to people who can differentiate the bad from the good, or the useful from the useless. Like most of 4chan, a majority of posts on /ic/ are shit, but there's usually something worth finding here.
>>2324953
Those shitters don't even
>post things you saved that were made by anons from here
Just look at this shit >>2324966 Go back to /lit/ autist
>>2324939
dude, i just want to get gud, to make work that i would be proud of. the only reason i post shitty work is to track progress and information that i might have overlooked. also, being defensive is ok, but it's better to just ignore the shitposters and ego strokers.
>>2324966
You're right about the "take the right advice, leave the shitty ones out". But you also mentioned the dangers of doing that. In order to do that, you need to be self-critical too, and boards create a hivemind that let's you *think* you're self-critical, while you're just applying other people's definition of being critical.
I think that each person should improve based on their own would-be self, not someone else's path. It could be that concept art was never your thing, but because of this hivemind attitude ("go read Loomis", "go watch Vilppu") people think that's the perfect self they need to become.
>A smart man is critical of all advice he receives, and decides for himself whether it's worth taking into account. The nice thing about /ic/ is that with the propensity to shit on everything, that includes bad critiques.
Except that everyone can feel this underlying hivemind. If you don't know enough about something, the logical thing to do is to think for yourself and see if that advice is correct or not. But the quicker (!= not better way) is to feel what the hivemind thinks and to act on that. Hang around enough, and you'll start to feel what /ic/ appreciates. You don't necessarily do things for yourself anymore, but to gain validation from the hivemind. Sometimes, that might stop people from doing what they really want, because you know it won't be well-received. You start digging for what the general consensus is and try to cater to that, which results in people doing the same thing over and over and over and over and over again. It's the reason why memes are popular. Why people love to have these fanboy war over consoles, soda and even sites (omg fuck le tumblr). You do what the general public likes, enjoy the attention, and punish those who do something different, because you worked damn hard to sacrifice your "self" for validation. So should others. No way another person gets compliments by doing something easier "that's just not fair".
>>2324973
Hey, you mad about something bro? You can always not read it if your little mind cannot comprehend it. I think you'll learn a thing or two, more than from those shitty drawings you post that nobody gives a fuck about...
>An innocent thread about posting works from other Anons you've saved
>Somehow a shitstorm manages to brew
Stay golden, /ic/.
>>2324988
>I think you'll learn a thing or two, more than from those shitty drawings you post that nobody gives a fuck about...
>>2324939
Dude, you sure got a pessimistic view on life..
I mean, you're right for the most part, but there are still artists out there who like to improve for their own, not to impress others
I remember the first time I posted into a draw thread, just to see how many anons would compliment me on my great picture (it was a photo-copy, of course)
the only answer I got was from a guy who told me to stop copying from pictures and that I should go out, study some Hampton and draw from life, which redpilled me once and for all
From that point on I only lurked, posted in draw threads for tips and studied, instead of posting every little doodle I made
It's nice to see that someone likes your work, but that's nothing that will help me improve, like you said:
>But just like many things, having too much of it will consume you.
I think it will boil down to two camps, do you want /ic/ to be full of ego-strokers or a safe-space for every shitty artist there is?
We definitely can't change the mentality of those who seek recognition or even fame and ruin art communities like /ic/
>>2324340
That's genius. How triggered were tumblrites?
Post Hemingway
>>2324424
Gr8 b8 m8
>>2324436
Belly button is way off but still better than me
>>2325037
It's not just the bellybutton, the whole torso has no structure, looks like a hotdog. I get the feeling some people aren't taking this thread too seriously.
>>2324813
This should be the new sticky
>>2325047
It really does capture the smug pretentious cynicism of the place. Probably not in the way it seems considering he sounds like a smug, pretentious cynic.
>>2324834
Screenshots a simple unclever text reply from twitter
>sigh
>>2324796
i help people out because i was helped in the past. Its a contract. Its nice to do a nice deed once in a while too.
>>2324919
MOAR MOAR MASSS
>If you don't know enough about something, the logical thing to do is to think for yourself and see if that advice is correct or not.
How exactly is that logical? If you don't know enough about something, thinking for yourself isn't going to magically make you know more about it. You need to research the subject, preferably taking into account various opinions and resources. As much as you bitch about 'hive mind' /ic/ disagrees on many subjects, including the oft cited 'memes' such as the value of Loomis.
/ic/ has memes such as Loomis and 'read the sticky' because they conveniently answer the questions that the steady stream of beginners with no knowledge of their own ask. If these beginners "thought for themselves" they would, with astounding consistency, make all the same mistakes that the 'meme responses' instruct against and aim to fix. Half the reason they're so often cited is because they address the most frequent mistakes made by beginners. There are alternatives, certainly, arguably better alternatives too, but the 'hivemind' responses exist for a reason. And once you get your footing in art, you start to learn which resources are more valuable to you, and you can begin to accept or dismiss advice based on your preferred approach.
And yes, of course every community will have a more agreed upon standard of what they like. This is not unique to /ic/ and does in fact exist in every human community on basically every subject with a hint of subjectivity. People who agree with one another accumulate, and they argue in favor of their opinion, convincing some and not convincing others. If anything, 4chan is generally pretty contrarian, and most boards frequently nitpick anything that's popular or 'a meme' for things that are wrong with it. Most threads have at least a few dissenting voices regardless of the subject.
Thread has gone to shit but I liked this
>>2324919
does he have a blog or something?
>>2325034
what? i liked it.
>>2324359
It looks ok. The pose is stiff, but then again the photo reference chosen wasn't that good anyways. Like the study looks more alive than that dead ass photo.
>>2325236
>study
>>2325235
I think he's called lolibro something like that
This artist was pretty good, got a source on him?
I remember that there was a regular who did a lot of art for APB, posted it in the drawthreads constantly.
>>2325280
it's bbc I guess
Someone did a monster design for a drawthread here. Super old though.
I'm noticing a disturbing trend. It seems like a lot of these people no longer post here.
>>2325298
As soon as your stuff is recognizable on its own merits you become a target of our crack teams of dedicated shitposters.
>>2325305
I had suspicions about that for a while but this thread has really laid it out because I remember when a lot of these people posted these things and I'm finding myself saying "oh yeah, wait what happened to that dude?"
That and there is a guy who's been literally commenting on every single one of BBC's posts to say "you suck" so if there were ever any room for doubt it's gone now. Shit man, these are the people you'd want here giving critiques, at least some of them. Fuckin hell.
>>2325302
is that the dickbrush?
>>2324340
looool I remember this
>>2325338
>>2325339
>>2325340
I really like this guy even if he is a zedig ripoff
>>2324842
>It's not surprising that there are so many femanons here.
This, fucking this.
>>2325513
dude shut up and be nice to women. Maybe if you were kinder you get a your little dick sucked.
>>2325516
fuck off cuck
>>2325516
Oh shut the hell up you dumb cunt
I like the style of the face
>someone saved and posted my art
>proceeds to be called bait
Just end me
>>2325235
https://chan.sankakucomplex.com/?tags=lolibro dumped what i had here
>>2324830
>but it's fun to nitpick because "I can see these details, look at how objective I am".
>a no fun allowed guy complaining about /ic/ being fun
>>2324359
What If the reference image was photoshoped ( to exaggerate body proportion ) in the first place? maybe that's why some people see it wrong. When we see photograph, subtle wrongness is easy to miss. But when it comes to drawings, We tend to deliberately seek for mistake.
>>2324982
>let's you *think* you're self-critical, while you're just applying other people's definition of being critical.
You're missing an important point. The hivemind is there for two reasons. One is that some people believe in beauty being quite objective. Therefore, a Bouguereau is better than a random DA kid's abortion. You might argue that this is "applying other people's definitions" or "someone else's path", but really you could say the same for the opposite. We don't live in a jar and our perception of the world is automatically influenced by others from the moment we start breathing.
The other reason is that many people here have a concrete objective: becoming a professional illustrator/concept artists/whatever. No feel-good relativism is going to get you far there I'm afraid, at least statistically speaking. Imagine applying your line of thought to engineering. Sure you might end up discovering something crazy if you shun the entire engineering compendium of knowledge (because, clearly, whether something works or not is entirely subjective) and go down your own path, but you're that much more likely to simply not find a job and become a hobo.
>>2325711
It's exactly as you say, people give tips to those who do not necessarily want to make concept artwork.
I mean, if someone here made stuff at Picasso level, nobody would even realize or acknowledge it, because they're too busy with guidelines for normal concept art. However, I agree with the notion that you need these guidelines in order to have a job.
A big difference between engineering and art is that it is in fact in the eyes of the beholder. If you want a job as an illustrator, be prepared to make stuff you don't necessarily want to make, or make stuff that's popular at the moment. It's convenient for a lot of people here, because their taste seem to fall in line with what's "in" right now, but be aware that might change within a decade, and you'll become one of those old grumpy people who'll say "illustrations used to be so much better". You know why? Because they did whatever was popular at that time and don't realize there is no objective taste. It might SEEM that way here, because of the echo chamber, but hypes change all the time. Be prepared to give up what you love at one point.
>>2325720
It's not just concept art though. People here like ARC-approved artists like Sargent etc. I can see how someone who thinks that art is the representation of beauty would shit on Picasso for instance. You write like the idea that art is in the eye of the beholder is set in stone. This is, funnily enough, in perfect line with the current wave of relativism. Not everyone thinks like that though, though your point about changing standards of popularity in the industry is obviously right.
>>2325726
Meh. To me, Sargent is exactly the same as concept art, except concept art isn't being displayed in a museum and it features lasers, big tits and katanas. It's not so far-fetched to have people like Sargent, Delacroix or Turner here. But don't expect them to give Mondriaan, Pollock or even Picasso any chance.
>You write like the idea that art is in the eye of the beholder is set in stone.
I don't get what you're going for here, elaborate.
>>2325750
Of course I can't be sure from having exchanged just a few posts with you, but you seem to have a very modern view of art. While the idea of aesthetic relativism goes way back in time, it was certainly not the common way of thought throughout human history. I think many people here adhere to a completely different principle, closer to that of Romanticism (as in Romantic philosophy rather than Romantic art itself).
Your first posts >>2324796 >>2324982 sounded very Nietzschean to my ears. Your general distrust of other's based on the idea that altruistic actions (giving critique) are in fact based on egoism (wanting validation from the community); your giving particular attention to the self and your own desires. It is a rather common mentality nowadays, for those who aren't full-blown postmodern at least. However I would urge you to consider that others might just have different staring points, especially on 4chan right now. You see, as someone else said here, 4chan is very contrarian. Back in the days it was full of wannabe commies, now it's full of conservatists. From this point of view, art is most definitely not in the eye of the beholder. There are several ways you could go about that: you could argue that beauty stems from biological needs which can be objectively evaluated and art stems from that; you could say that art is a direct expression of nature through the artist; you could subscribe to various kind of idealism. There are really a lot of philosophies that argued in favor of certain ideas being objective.
Sure you could argue that all these people are 15 year olds who are doing it for gratification. But you know what? It doesn't really matter. When you see a post saying "x is wrong" maybe it's an angsty teenager, maybe it's an experienced artist who thinks art should be treated as objectively as engineering. Why do you care so much about the motive? If you want to be an Übermensch with your own set of values, you're free to do it here.
>>2324368
>pregnant dyke with swords
>>2324654
Is there anymore?
I just liked the lines for some reason.
>>2325924
only these sadly
fag-kun if youre reading this, please link me
We'll all make it.
>>2324340
Why didnt they make her fat?
>>2326086
>photobashing done right
>>2326105
That's the joke.
>>2326105
But then she wouldn't be beach body ready. Also, he wouldn't have gotten the chance to watch tumblrtards sperg, though not many took the bait unfortunately.
>>2326104
But anon, this was posted in a draw thread a long time ago.
There was also another one with a wizard looking over to a castle...but this one looks better.
>>2326176
I know, but it's catbib, anons saving his shit from here goes without saying.
>>2324362
Epic Name Bro?
what, no merc-wip???
>>2324939
Bang on anon. When I was a kid I genuinely enjoyed drawing, I could shut myself in my room and draw shitty things for days. Now I am a complete whore for likes and attention. Whenever I see someone in my news feed posting their crap art I get an immense ego boost. I sometimes obsessively stalk art pages and people's profiles just so I can find every mistake in their art, patting myself on the back for being better than them. I love giving condescending comments disguised as helpful criticisms, it fucking feels amazing, I love being the best artist I know. Certainly I am not alone, I recently discovered that if I post a shitty rough on art forums, I'll immediately get a lot of loaded "compliments" from haughty artists like myself. Then I post the finished piece and suddenly everyone changes their attitude. I don't know how to describe it but fuck does petty shit like this make me hard. I lie to myself and the people I know that I love art, when in fact I just like the attention. If I had no internet I am not sure if I would even pick up the pencil at all. After seeing what you wrote I finally accepted what I am. Call me a faggot but I this sure beats not making art at all.
>>2324340
I don't understand that show. Not a single character is attractive. They're all some iteration of what i'd expect an irl lesbian to look like.
>>2326301
Do you just like a show depending on how many characters you'd wanna fuck?
>>2326301
What show is that?
>>2326329
steven universe. op's pic is a skinny version of rose quartz, probably made to piss of the idiot sjws who try to police how people draw fanart for the show.
>>2326086
Glad you liked my process anon
>>2326453
we love you Nile don't ever leave us Nile
>>2326322
No matter which way you put it, a show like that is MESSAGE MESSAGE MESSAGE and not a shit to do with realism. Real people care about fucking (triggering all asexuals here), it's natural that some would be attractive. This is not society's oppression, it's nature predisposing us towards picking healthy and strong partners. Now can you fuck off back to Tumblr already.
>>2326086
Oh and if anyone has the other one I did of the similar nature please post it, i accidentally deleted it
>>2325673
What the fuck
>you will never bareback an asian qt while she hugs you
>>2325798
I can get behind what you're saying, it's not like you're not making a point too. I'm saying that realizing stuff like this could produce better artists, because isn't that what /ic/ preaches? Stop making excuses and lying to yourself will get you further than circlejerky comments. Albeit these critique are not the same as dA "OMG I FAV YOU WHEN YOU FAV ME", it is still circlejerky nonetheless, because you're not getting anything new out of it. You hear the same thing over and over, and in the end it all just boils down to: get your anatomy 100 %, so we see another artist being formed to the general consensus.
I mean, fuck, if that's what you want, then do that; you said people are very contrarian here, but I don't really see that desu.
>When you see a post saying "x is wrong" maybe it's an angsty teenager, maybe it's an experienced artist who thinks art should be treated as objectively as engineering.
You're not wrong, as I've also said that I love technical art in it's own context too. I geek over stuff like Kim Jung Gi, but I don't feel the need to see 100 more Kim Jun Gi's being born. Because that's just... boring? But I know what I'm getting at here. It's super ironic to go to a technical driven imageboard and tell people who practice to have an illustration job to be more open, because that openness doesn't really help them get anywhere. I just wish to see people making more weird stuff and hope it's generally accepted.
>>2326264
This has got nothing to do with art, but it's nice to hear a more personal story from you, so I'll give one back.
My friend is an awesome artist, and I don't mean a regular nice artist, but this guy can literally work for Disney or Pixar if he wanted. The thing is, I kind of "ruined him" by saying stuff like this. He also realized he didn't draw because he liked it. The whole reason why he became so good was because he needed to be special at something, he craved for the attention, for being the best artist at every school he has been to.
After realizing that, he quit art college, now he wanders around the world with a backpack. He says he's never been so happy before. He said he realized he doesn't like to draw, but instead he found something else he liked to do for real, so there's that...
But you know what, we all don't know what life is for, so indeed, you might as well fill your time by drawing shit.
>>2326364
>steven universe
holy shit, i hate the art so much i can't even bring myself to watch one clip.
>>2326589
> now he wanders around the world with a backpack. He says he's never been so happy before
i have also traveled a little and found that i'm the happiest in my basement. i honestly don't understand people who love to travel or what's so good about it, unless you like to meet different people.
>>2325798
>You see, as someone else said here, 4chan is very contrarian.
You mean it's used to be. That's not the case anymore. The hivemind and circle jerk is heavy on 4chan. Variety is the spice of life and 4chan hates that.
>>2327170
Cute style you have, are u a ghost or have some way to contact?
>>2327189
Ghost.
>>2326460
dog, it's a kid's show
>>2324939
you can like the process of creation and the end product along with the attention you receive from being ""good""
i see absolutely nothing wrong in the idea that someone may create content that is consciously targeted towards what they think others may like when they also happen to be one of the others, in fact, i expect that.
i find it much rarer to imagine someone who creates purely for attention than someone who happens to really like a thing that happens to be popular along with the attention from creating things based off that. sure, there are a fair few who obviously pander to the flavor of the month, but their supposed ubiquity is merely the direct effect of them intentionally playing to whatever new base pops up. you see them everywhere because that's what they're good at, being seen everywhere.
also fake humility is more complex than "i'm not the best", that's just an obvious statement of fact that actually works in favor of your argument. they're not the best because "best" doesn't exist, it's just levels of being good at the specific things you, personally, want to be good at. that, combined with a complex intersection of miscommunication/misinterpretation of interpersonal communication informed by societal conditioning (read: fear) ala "the emperor's new clothes"
>>2326134
cause when you try hard, that's when you die hard
>>2327281
Kanye bro, I love you.
>>2327285
thanks, i love me too
>>2327290
kek
>>2324484
anymore of this?
>>2326086
haha holy shit
>>2326478
Found it
>>2325286
Looks like a mutated turkey.
"In theaters this Thanksgiving"
>>2324419
The proportions are not off for fucks sake. The human eye isn't going to do a 1:1 fucking copy job without a grid you faggot, VERY TINY discrepancies are not considered as being "off." What the fuck do you want him to do, trace it?
>>2328216
It is pretty. But I don't get the narrative. The pope is shaking hands with some shady lookin' dude? And there is a dog in the back... mkay.
>>2324359
Values are way off on the furthest boob and her lips are fucked up. 6/10
>>2328229
There doesn't have to be a coherent story in every image you fucking sperg.
>>2328229
I just thought it was cool. I don't do any sort of art but I come here to check out everyone else's art cuz it's cool
>>2328229
He's hiring that guy in black to kill that girl in the background and the dog redirects you to her.
>>2328216
I've seen like a million versions of this one
>>2324359
welp its time to stop posting here
>>2328323
then fuck off
>>2327277
Obviously there's nothing wrong with anything at all. People do whatever they please, but at least have the balls to admit it's an ego thing.
I mean, the critique here given are often off, and given to stroke ones own ego. I said in a previous post, if it's about stroking their own ego and giving the right tips, then I guess there's nothing wrong.
But circlejerking makes it so that people give tips they know other circlejerkers will like. In the end, all opinions end up being the same, and people don't help each other to make nice work. The tips end up being repetitive and useless in most cases.
Just look at retarded comments in this very own thread, why do you think they exist? Because of the exact reason I mentioned: people want to act interesting and pretend they know a lot about drawing.
>anatomy, perspective, and proportions are wrong
>it was literally only the proportions that were wrong.
>Honest question, are any of you better than him?
>It is pretty. But I don't get the narrative. The pope is shaking hands with some shady lookin' dude? And there is a dog in the back... mkay.
I mean what the fuck man, did they really think those tips are helping at all? Even though it's true, they don't say how it should be better. They only give retarded comments because they feel like they have to say something. That's what happens when ego-stroking comes into play. And even if they give good tips once in a while, they'll give thousands of wrong advice in return, because they don't draw for fun, they draw to know what people will say about the work in the end. I'll ask this again: how many people here will still draw if can never show it again? I don't think a lot of people will to be fair.
>>2328932
i feel like an idiot because i rewrote that thing a couple times to try and make it read smoothly and ended up removing the most important part of what i was trying to say
i meant to say that i think most people who draw happen to enjoy the actual process of drawing along with enjoying looking at the thing they have created just as much, if not more so, than the attention they receive from sharing such works. the amount of time and dedication it takes to even get moderately skilled at drawing in such a way that you could imagine "doing it for attention" based purely on drawing skill is rather ludicrous (i'm obviously barring intersections with other disciplines such as comics or what have you, most of them obviously draw for the sake of their desire to tell stories and/or jokes and don't necessarily need as much skill in draftsmanship).
i know i'm getting anecdotal here, but the vast majority of artists i know have folders and sketchbooks filled with countless drawings that i thought were great, but when i asked them why they never posted them, they say they didn't like/care about it enough to go through the hassle of posting it (the 2-5 minutes it takes to scan something/take a half decent phone pic and post it on tumblr/twitter as compared to the much longer amount of time it took them to create it)
i'll make another post in a bit where i address what you said in your comment directly, sorry for fuckin up in the first place and wasting time correcting myself (but isn't that what, at it's heart, this board's all about, hahahaha)
>>2328932
you have to remember that you're on 4chan. the type of posting that 4chan tends to attract is impulsive, without much thought, very quick, often with the direct intent of being a joke and/or pissing someone off.
there's absolutely no blowback for anything you do here as long as you're careful enough not to drop any identifying information (and obviously not break any of the actually enforced rules).
also, obviously, the vast majority of people who post on /ic/ won't be that good at art (i feel i should clarify that by "good at art" i mean at making images that come out in a way that they're happy with). i don't mean that as an insult, but a statement of the obvious. a lot of this ties back into the impulsivity of 4chan, as i said in the previous post, it takes a lot of work to get decent at making marks on a surface that look anywhere near what you want them to, meaning there will be a lot of people who just started and probably won't make it past the first few growing pains, especially when starting in such a caustic environment as /ic/. and even then, once one gets decent and finds some community that works for them, they will probably leave /ic/ for the most part, it is a rather annoying place at times. what you're left with, for the most part, are absolute beginners and people who's behavior has yet to find a more receptive home.
and even when trying to earnestly help another person, the ability to give a decent critique is itself something that must be learned. that's mostly why i'm here, i'm good at drawing but bad at teaching. trying to give good critique when limited by only text and a single image upload in an environment where people mostly read things in a derogatory tone, it's like practice weights. not to mention that it's filled with people looking for actual critique, which is actually kinda hard to find elsewhere in my experience.
>>2324363
Here is his paintover placed over the original photo at 50% opacity. Other than slightly raising her back arm up and slightly adjusting the curve of her breast and ass, there is no difference. In other words, you much like the dipshit in the original critique here have no fucking idea what you are fucking talking about. Please stop chiming in on things, you are out of your element, Donnie.
>>2329130
give it a red tint so we can actually see the difference faggot
>>2324359
there's a whole lot going on in this image when it comes to the dog piling of firez, the most likely lack of knowledge that it's been heavily photo reffed, and the terrible compositional quality of the reffed photo that leaves anyone who regularly draws from imagination reeling. it was the perfect storm of a genuinely-bad-yet-well-intentioned critique of a half-decent-if-not-too-direct copy of a terrible photo.
>>2329130
For me it's very carefuI measuring I also remember that it took him week and posted the wips in the draw threads
Moreover he's also very good at studies. Finally it's quite sad you took the time on doing this when you could have draw something yourself.
>>2329155
My point was not to shit on the original artist, but instead to point out all the rubes that think he made "proportion errors" don't now what the fuck they are talking about. In other words, you are defending him to the wrong person, or have no reading comprension skills whatsoever.
Also, it takes like 30 seconds to cut right image, paste as new layer, and adjust opacity of said layer. Honestly this response took longer than the layering. So your concerns about my not spending enough time grinding away on studies is appreciated, not unnecessary.
>>2329143
See above.
>>2329130
Protip: easier to get proportions right/copy if you use exact same canvas proportions.
>>2324484
Interesting.
You have a site you post to other than here?
>>2329856
Isn't this that Kyle guy? Sometimes I wonder if I should use reference more often and I think of him. Seems to have worked in his favor.
>>2329867
but then you have to search for references all the time!
>>2329882
Yeah, that's usually why I don't use them unless I'm specifically doing a study. I also notice things I reference don't have nearly as much energy to them as things I draw on my own. But I could at least use them for lighting and rendering guides, maybe...
>>2329885
just make sure you dont pull a Firez and become bad at anything drawn without reference
>>2329887
lol there's no danger of that happening, I'm already better at drawing without reference than he'll ever be.
>>2328216
This guy quit doing art. I thought that was kind of depressing.
>>2332072
Man, I could've sworn they were posting a month or two back. Why'd they drop it? It would've been neat to see their future works and progression.
>>2329889
Post your stuff I'm honestly curious. Firez imho has some really decent works. Also he has only been using references for studies nowadays.
>>2332090
He sounds far too smug to actually post his work and potentially get his ego ruffled.
>>2332090
>>2332091
Here's a wip I've been working on, and yes it's without reference. He does have some decent work but that's mainly because he's good at rendering, in my opinion, and I would definitely say he's better than me at rendering. I know people like to puff up their chests around here, and I'm not normally one to do so because I can't stand how that Brian guy acts, but I honestly feel like I'm more skilled fundamentally and I don't think I'm out of line saying so in this case.
>>2332139
Here's a more direct comparison with some of his recent unreferenced sketches >>2330717 >>2329345 and mine. So, you guys can judge for yourselves I guess, but I think my unreferenced work is more solid, but of course everyone loves their own brand. Part of why I feel confident saying it is I've just been doing stuff without reference longer, and I've gotten to take formal classes while he hasn't, so I don't think it's unreasonable for mine to show a difference in experience alone. So whether or not you think I'm "better" than him, I don't think there's any danger of me becoming worse than where he is now if I start using reference more often get better at rendering.
>>2332139
Sure kiddo, you're better, that's the spirit
>>2332139
I think you jumped on the Firez hate wagon and personally I think his stuff is more appealing, but I'm not going to get into the "from reference vs from imagination" debate.
Either way, kudos for actually showing work and putting your money where your mouth was, your stuff is pretty good as well.
