/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>5008386

>>3417532
That's sadly false, with a particularly poor example to boot (just look and the hands and the little logic most of the cropped limbs make). Most of this sort of art, and even professionally published stuff, is just visual parroting

From an interview with Otomo and Inoue:

> One always makes tweaks here and there in one’s art as you go on drawing, so the art keeps evolving. All you have to do is buckle down while you’re young and draw as much as you can, and you’ll get really good at it. Manga these days, though, is drawn with symbols — predetermined symbols that people just arrange on the page. That’s not really drawing, and I don’t think someone can make any real breakthroughs that way. It’s important to actually look at things and draw them, I think.

>>2284035

>>2120697
There are a lot of manga and anime with interesting styles, this "cute little girl" trash is what weebs really love, though, so they just give them what they want, for the money.

Manga has a huge variety different styles. Work on your fundamentals, this means construction, perspective, anatomy, proportions, values, etc (know the rules before you bend them). Find a few manga artists you admire, study the key elements of their styles, why you like them, what and how they choose to stylize, etc. Emulate these features. Develop your own style.

If you want to learn about making comics, read Scott McCloud's "Making Comics" the principles discussed carry across all regional styles of comic making.