/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>3783954
show me some visible evidence. they're dead now so they clearly weren't that good. not even a community rez. shit sci communities get more devotion with only a few dudes or less. saying conceptart was good is like self-proclaimed 'oldfags' trying to pander to the imaginations of those who never partook.

>>3578487
>comparing a single western cartoon to the complicated swamp that is anime & manga culture
>anime culture ruined the Japanese kids
>not capitalist-imperialized Japan
do you even know anything about Japanese culture or are you doing the usual thing on this board of talking the most crap about the things you least understand?

>>3529431
>Computers will replace people dumbass
you an expert in artificial intelligence? cause the actual experts laugh at this popsci fantasy. computers replace dumbfuck jobs that humans shouldn't be doing in the first place. that is all.

the issue with this whole thread is people are asking questions to answers they don't want to hear. barely anyone on /ic/ is even fine arts educated. to them art history is equivalent to fucking dynamical quantum particle interactions. you try to engage with them and they get upset at the first thing they misunderstand.

the cold truth is there is a huge number of underage posters who shouldn't be here.

>>3446307
you're one of those pedant cunts i guess.

call it art if you will but it's still trash. you're basically showing us the shit stains that were leftover after you tried cleansing yourself.

>>3301605
>muh instant recognition of mastery meme
this only works for identifying people in recognizably similar work as your own. no wonder a teacher would say it.

the difference between two veteran artists' work can be greater than two formally spoken languages. the arrogance of being able to know anything about them from palette choice is smug posturing.

this place really truly is the stupidest place on the internet. no wonder so many ppl here do digital art.