/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>1532807
Sorry I was trying to take a jab at the way you wrote "fundamentals".and how you criticized my knowledge of them when you also have some construction misakes.

Just to be fair. I did the same comparison with my construction and it was better than I expected:

The tilt angle was much closer to the original than I though, the eyes despite being bigger, are on the proper angle and the 4th quadrant (ear) is aligned with the eyes and the bottom of the nose

I drew extra hair but honestly I think it compensates the stylization of some other features.

>>1532852
As for the neck, like I said before I didn´t even pay attention to it.

>>1532843
I like this approach.

>>1532807
Sorry I was trying to take a jab at the way you wrote "fundamentals".and how you criticized my knowledge of the fundamenttals when you also have some construction misakes.

Just to be fair. I did the same comparison with my construction and it was better than I expected:

The tilt angle was much closer to the original than I though, the eyes despite being bigger, are on the proper angle and the 4th quadrant (ear) is aligned with the eyes and the bottom of the nose

I drew extra hair but honestly I think it compensates the stylization of some other features.

>>1532852
As for the neck, like I said before I didn´t even pay attention to it.

>>1532843
I like this approach

>>1532807
Sorry I was trying to take a jab at the way you wrote "fundamentals".and how you criticized my knowledge of the fundamentals.

Just to be fair. I did the same comparison with my construction and it was better than I expected:

The tilt angle was much closer to the original than I though, the eyes despite being bigger, are on the proper angle and the 4th quadrant (ear) is aligned with the eyes and the bottom of the nose

I drew extra hair but honestly I think it compensates the stylization of some other features.

>>1532852
As for the neck, like I said before I didn´t even pay attention to it.