>critique something someone made
>well let's see YOU do better
How do you respond to this?
>lol that's so easy he's so bad a 3 y/o can do this!
>w-what do you mean post my art? You don't have to be good to critique!
You post underwater-gate-guardian-wip
>>2382478
Explain and give examples and if they're really being obstinate I check my mood. If I'm not in the mood, I shrug and walk away. If I'm in the mood, I will fite u m8 swear on me mum. It usually doesn't come down to that though because I try not to be inflammatory with my initial critique.
>>2382483
>something obviously wrong with it
>if you're not good your opinion is worthless!
this is how retarded you are
>>2382478
Only people who think like children rebuttal with that.
My normalfag friends are generally a lot more upfront about something looking off in my work than my art friends. They won't be able to tell me how to fix it, but I should be figuring that out on my own in the first place so I don't hold that against them.
>>2382487
>implying this is how it ever goes
People challenge you when you trivialize things not because you point out errors. If you're pretending what someone did was easy, then you should be able to do it yourself, otherwise you have no business saying it's easy and you're probably too ignorant to understand anything.
People don't challenge you if you point out errors is perspective or anatomy unless you're being an ass about it, and as a rule of thumb, the only people who get away with being assholes are the bottom of the barrel who have nothing to lose (you) and people who are good enough it doesn't matter how they act. If you can't put up then it's obvious you're the first category and your opinion is useless.
>>2382492
>the only people who get away with being assholes are the bottom of the barrel who have nothing to lose (you) and people who are good enough it doesn't matter how they act.
/ic/ is the former.
>>2382492
>People challenge you when you trivialize things not because you point out errors.
BS.
> If you're pretending what someone did was easy, then you should be able to do it yourself,
Except there's no part of this where I'm pretending it was easy, only saying that there's something wrong with it.
>People don't challenge you if you point out errors is perspective or anatomy unless you're being an ass about it
That's completely untrue, have you ever seen the beginner and porn threads on this board? Let alone drawthreads on other boards. People get defensive to the most benign of criticism.
>>2382498
I frequent quite a few drawthreads on other boards and people love critiques there.
>I was just saying something was wrong I swear!
No you weren't.
>beginner threads
They're beginners you dumbasses of course they're bad, but unless you're being an ass about it people rarely get defensive.
I stick by my point, you're just an asshole who can't walk the talk. People don't come to /ic/ for a hugbox, they come here hoping for good critiques, if people are challenging you it's because you're pretending something is trivial without being able to do it yourself.
>>2382503
>but unless you're being an ass about it people rarely get defensive.
>I stick by my point
And you're still wrong.
>>2382498
>People get defensive to the most benign of criticism
I've been on the receiving end of this too much and it's usually when I'm not even actually criticizing their work I'm just suggesting they research something I think they're lacking. And I never just say "loomis" I go all out and give them specific keywords to look up, sites with good tutorials or explanations, example images, etc. Usually it goes over well if they stay calm enough in the first couple of posts to ask their questions and hear me out but a few times I've been told to fuck off rather rudely.
>>2382506
Prove it faggot. Link me one of your "critiques" that generated so much hate innocently.
>>2382508
Not everything is online, lad.
If a roofer makes a roof that collapses the first day it's installed, that's a shitty roofer. You don't have to be a craftsman to know someone's bad at their craft.
>>2382511
>brings up beginner threads and porn threads on /ic/
>brings up other drawthreads on other boards
>It's not online
Okay, good to know I can just go to sleep knowing you're intelligence is about as good as your art.
>>2382514
Those are called "examples". It's okay if you don't know what that means, it is a rather big word, and X is a tricky letter.
>>2382518
Then you should be able to show me one of these examples that are in such an abundance as you seem to think.
>>2382519
>hurr spoonfeed me
Literally anything BBC-chan posts in the porn threads.
>>2382520
It took me 3 seconds in the porn threads to realize anything involving bbc is a troll meme.
Congrats on losing any bit of credibility I was going to give you.
Just stop being an ass or git gud enough that you're allowed to be a huge asshole and people will love you for it.
Until then expect to be called out on your blatant bullshit.
>>2382527
>It took me 3 seconds in the porn threads to realize anything involving bbc is a troll meme.
If you honestly believe that, you're very sorely mistaken.
>>2382528
I believe you anon, I was going to use one or two interactions I had with BBC as an example but warosu is still down. He's incredibly defensive and it gets worse and worse all the time. Granted I think it's because most of the replies he gets are shitposting, but it's made him so defensive that now he reacts the same way even to legitimate attempts to help.
rate my drawing. Its real deep.
>>2382478
With contempt
We should make an image for ease of reposting that explains why this is a stupid thing to say in a friendly and reasonable way. I think some people could be brought back on the right path with that.
>>2382478
You stop giving them useful critique, tell them to go fuck themselves, sit back and enioy watching the cunt drown.
>>2382513
/thread
> ok lol
>>2382508
See this fuck right here >>2382691
I've never personally given him a critique because I think he's tracing but I've seen this a couple times. If warosu wasn't dead I'd pull up the stylization thread where he posted a girl with a boxy jank ass ribcage that was plain wrong looking and went through this whole passive aggressive exchange trying to defend against everyone telling him it looked wrong. If I said anything it would've been to just post the photo he traced because I know that's why he was so insistent but I just left it alone. He never posts progression or updates using anyone's critiques, and bristles at almost every critique he gets no matter how it's phrased. If this chain isn't a perfect example of people who come here for anything but critique I don't know what is.
>>2382913
A lot of good artists just post to get asspats, I do it sometimes too because I'm a faggot.
>>2382773
>implying there ever was any useful critique given in the first place.
99% of the time, when someone says "post your work" it's in response to some retard making a completely outlandish claim. Like "KJG sucks, he spams fisheye perspective and is a hack!"
>>2382913
>it's well copied/referenced therefore it must be traced
Such is the price you pay for staying true to reference and having skills and trained observation.
I myself have have been accused of tracing when i simply spent more time observing ref and trying my best to reproduce it accurately.
Of course, a neanderthal who can only draw stick figures is going to think i traced. Of course false accusation would make me angry, especially after all the time and effort i spent.
I understand that Jace Wallace guy completely, even though im not nearly as good as him. I suppose he has a harder time controlling his emotions, considering how depressed he is.
I still think the critique sinks through, as it did with me, thats why i still give him critique.
>>2382958
What's the origin of these memes?
>>2382913
The issue is I've seen so many of these specific people who are attacked constantly because people know who they are.
Firez for example, every post has 10s of "critiques" that are useless and half the time wrong, but because people hate him they feel the need to point out things wrong with the drawing even though they're complete amatuers.
>b-but you don't need to be good to critique!
For many things you need to at least have the knowledge to understand what the artist was going for. Too many times I see amatuers "critique" and be wrong. I've seen people say a drawing is bad because they didn't 100% render every part of the drawing, only a noob would think that's how good drawings are done.
Naturally there's SOME things that are obvious, but from a good artist those critiques are nitpicky level and irrelevant to the piece as a whole.
One does not need to be a top tier chef to tell his food is shit as one doesnt need to be a top tier artist to see flaws in someones art.
>>2383081
>comparing complete failures to 1 minor thing wrong
Yes everyone can tell a complete failure, but those are the edge cases here. Most the people receiving these "critiques" are not slapping shit on paper.
REDLINE OR BTFO
>>2382997
It's what the thread implies- those artists offered crits so in response people asked to see their work. IMO you shouldn't show somebody your work if you're critiquing them unless you're god-level (because fags will always find something wrong with your work no matter how good), it'll de-rail the discussion from focusing on their work to focusing on yours.
>>2383108
This just gave me a great idea on how to get people to actually give me critiques.
That's fucking genius.
>>2382478
I don't critique things without first asking "Do you want a critique or do you want asspats?"
>>2382969
I've been accused of tracing myself and I still think he's full of shit. Doesn't matter though, he still fits the bill as way too defensive. That first dude just told him to double check some anatomy and listed specific areas and he reacted like a cunt.
>>2383074
I get you. My first ever comment to BBC was that he shouldn't post here because hardly anyone was on a high enough level to offer him real critique instead of nit pick shit and salt. I told him he was going to bring himself down and I've watched and he has imo. I don't excuse his defensiveness as he inflicted this place on himself. I'm not even gonna talk about Firez but I've seen him and nameless nobodies get real neutrally worded critique and bend over backwards making excuses why they shouldn't do it, sometimes getting incredibly hostile. For instance nobody knew who Brian was til he started derailing thread after thread defending his formless figures and insults to hatching. I know there's a lot of bunk critiques but there are absolutely those who get defensive to legitimate ones.
>>2383119
Nose bro has been trying that and it hasn't gone well for him.
>can't draw for shit
>pretend as pro artist
>critique other people works
>give them bad advices in beginner treads for keks
>post meme pic when they asked about my work
I'm glad /ic/ support my actions. Keep going guys. "Post your work shitters" should go on reddit with your redline shit. We are legion here lmao.
>>2383161
I mean I get that there's some people who get overly defensive and they need to grow up, but these people are the minority and that type response is usually the result of hostile critiques. I've almost never seen someone who draws at a good level use the "well you do better" unless someone is trivializing something.
A prime example is the photorealism drawings everyone claims are so easy yet nobody can do it.
Using named artists here as examples is just bad because they're usually hostile for a variety of reasons, one of which being 90% of responses to them are plain wrong or unhelpful. If they were smart they'd fuck off to a new place, but while they're here the responses wear you down.so while it's not excusable, it's perfectly understandable why they act the way they do.
>>2383260
It's not understandable. I've gotten worthless critiques and I never once said 'post ur work faggot'. I either said thanks for your input or ignored it. But none of this is the point. It may be rare as you say, but that anon, if it wasn't you, was arguing it never happens that someone gets defensive unless the critique is flawed in some way and they do. There was a drawthread about a month ago that burned to ashes in a flamewar over some girl's crappy doodle of a curly haired ginger chick with clay colored skin. Someone told her to stop shading with black and that she needed way more work on her anatomy and fundamentals before she got into rendering. She didn't go all out but she did get pretty damn huffy for a minute and didn't end up using any of the good advice that was given to her until a day later she ended up trashing the thing having finally realized the people telling her she wasn't ready to do what she was trying to do were right. It happens, that's my only point.
>>2383315
A few months ago there was this other guy trying to paint some kind of gorilla monster only for it to keep looking like a child drew it. People kept telling him time and time again that he needed to a) get better at drawing and b) practice drawing actual gorillas along with whatever actual advice and I was one of those people and I did my damnedest to keep my initial comments to him as plainly worded as I possibly could, and saw others doing the same. Eventually he was being such an ass that yes people did start yelling at him. So it definitely happens and personally I don't think there's ever any excuse for you to say anything defensive if you're asking for opinions. When I want critique I post my picture, maybe ask about a specific area that's giving me trouble, and let the chips fall then on my own, not in thread, I decide what input I'll use or discard. That way I don't piss people off and put a target on my back so I can get critiques when I need them with no problem.
I only listen to redlines/paintovers.
Yes, you critique COULD be right but by mere writing is very hard to explain what is happening in a visual medium. Like "the grastocnemious medial head looks too awkward for this perspective". There are dozens of ways to interpret that. Which is guaranteed to devolve into hours of internet arguments.
A redline takes like 10 seconds max. A paintover can be done quickly in less than 5 minutes.
If you can't even bother with it then you're being lazy and cheap or you don't know what you're talking about.
>>2383328
>A redline takes like 10 seconds max. A paintover can be done quickly in less than 5 minutes.
WTF? Redlines and paintovers take a lot longer than that. Typing in words barely takes any time by comparison.
Redlines and paintovers are for when it's easier to explain whats wrong in picture than in words, but it's still a time investment. Chances are any fix that can be done in 10 seconds or 5 minutes could have been easily explained in words.
>>2383359
>WTF? Redlines and paintovers take a lot longer than that.
They really don't. A rough figure from imagination(from scratch) takes 15 minutes. A rough speed painting around 30.
Fixing something that already exists is much faster.
If your times are longer than that then you most likely don't have a grasp on the fundamentals.
Besides you're an artist(I hope). You have absolutely no excuse to refuse an opportunity to draw. If a student must draw at least 10 hours a day, then 5 minutes for a redline shouldn't be an issue.
>>2383387
I'm gonna be that guy.
Post your work.
>>2383390
I will do so when I criticize someone. Like this one, something done in 1 minute to explain how to use references.
>>2383398
There's literally no possible way you put that together in 1 minute. Looking for the reference and pasting it into photoshop would take a minute by itself, let alone the airbrushing over the other picture. You obviously have a weak internal clock.
>>2383401
I have photoshop open and my ref library open all the time, maybe not a minute but certainly less than 5 (as I said a paintover takes).
But that's not the point.
How would you describe those color differences in words? Would you attempt to explain color temperature and bouncing lights? The other person probably won't even grasp what you're talking about.
If you really know what you're doing, just draw it. There are no excuses.
>>2383413
No no I'm totally in favor of redlines and paintovers. But I don't think a good one is going to take as little time as you quoted, no matter how good the critique giver is. And I don't buy that you spent 5 minutes on that either, sorry.
>It sucks lol xD
How the fuck am I supposed to respond other than
>Let's see YOU do better
?
>>2382478
I rarely see people invite someone to post their work unless they're being a complete stuck up shit with very little to contribute.
>>2383601
You don't respond to that.
![wax].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/qXZZ4kX.jpg "wax].jpg")