/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>3656349
So your spergery continues.

>>3656340
> Are you legit saying the pic on the right is not using the same principles?
Okay, it seems like you are completly braindead, so let's brake this down for the couple of anon that maybe fall for your retarded advice:

Fundamentals that use the image on the left:
>Perspective,
>3d construcction,
>Anatomy,
>realistic rendering of light,
>natural looking compostion and
>realistic use of colors.

Fundamentals on the image of the right:
>morphology and gestalt
>Heavy iconic abstraction
>Visual rhetoric
>Composition defined by gestalt
>Minimalist, flat color pallete

Just the first three fundamentals of the left image take years to practice and have almost no use on the right one.
Not to mention that if you studied Loomis composition, almost everything happenig on the right illustration is breaking the rules. Of course this is because the principles Loomis gives are for achieving natural, realistic compositions, but you wouldn't know that if you were just a beg.
I use Loomis principles of composition on my paintings because I do want to achieve a natural look, but since I'm not an absolute retard, I would not send someone that wants to do the illustration of the right to go study Loomis, I would tell them to read Wucius Wong or Scott McCloud.

>Let me tell you how you feel about Loomis
Okay, retard.