/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>2129527
kek, at least that's an interesting response.
i won't even bother with arguing about some definition of the word "artist". in the end i don't think most people care wether they can be called artist under yours or anyone else's definition.

>With all this clambering for respect and skill why make such a cookie cutter product out of it? Where is the fun and challenge in that?
that's like saying why "why learn the guitar if you could learn the violin?". at least if i read you right, you are just saying that anime is shit, right?
if you have a different taste compared to us, don't force your view on ours. saying things like
>dull
>uninspired
>uninteresting
have you considered the opposite? if you showed us some of the shit you liked, i really doubt i would fawn over it.

in fact, cartooning (anime) is good because it is creative, fun and free. the fact that one has to simplify their drawings also means that everyone will have to work with a different interpretation of things.
now you, what do you have to offer on your side? what is this "art" you're talking about supposed to be? it also sounds like bullshit to me.

>>1798042
i like it though
i like it because cartoons/cartooning in general is fun to look at.
that's the case with simple things like pic related.

with more complicated things though, it's a different category.
the op for example is not that interesting, fun nor is it that well made. i don't particulary like it.
it's a different standard for these images.

i absolutely love images that are cartoonishly fun but still have a good level of complexity in them. i think anime/manga-types of drawings have really pushed the front in this area.