/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6877661
Are you saying you got to this point doing only a single painting study?

I remember a time nudity period was meant to be some sacred thing, honored as some "no mere mortal must see" kind of deal, not because it was bad, but because it was like a value only the righteous mind should endue.

In other words, nudity /= sexualization, but it was never not meant for arousal. There's a big reason we biologically want to strip naked when we wanna fuck raw, and since the only thing that matters in sex from a reproduction standpoint is the pussy and penis, seeing tittles is not needed for sex, just to make it sexier. So if nudity was always for this purpose, why would anyone draw naked children for? There's a reason we don't let real life children wander around buck naked showing their under developed sex organs. There's a long time value our for fathers bothered to protect and value, now humanity is filled with mentality fucked up people that doesn't understand this "outdated" view and why these people have trouble trying to cope with that fact and has to try to normalize what they actually want just to justify they are attracted to the under developed human form.

How long would it take for me to get to a level at which I can make decent porn drawings for people and get money for it? If I read all of the important books (Loomis, Robertson, etc) and do focused practice 1 hour a day minimum.

How's your mecha going, lassies?