/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

more art

This is where I think I may have got too stylised.

Let me know if you want more.

i like it

>>1789712
to me it seems like you're covering your lack of ability. the lack of fundamentals of your art is clearly visible.

>>1789809
this, but to be honest it looks pretty good.

i actually think >>1789717 is where it gets looking a little clumsy though. the wolf's arms and hands in particular don't look as harmonious as the rest of the character. not to mention, even as a cartoon, the wolf's head seem a bit too large. a little understanding of anatomy should help with that.

i rather like >>1789720 though.

you don't need to be fantastic at the fundamentals for cartoons, but it will give you some flexibility when drawing and help you flesh out your own style.

ADVENTURE TIME! I fucking hate how it looks, yet everyone thinks it's awesome. The colours are nice, but the drawings simply disgust me.
>pic related, a horse. Yep, a horse.

>>1789820
Heads being too big I am well aware of. Preston Blair's 'Advanced Animation' is a good book on construction and the like.
Also, could you expand on what you mean by "harmonious" Thanks

>>1789712
>Cartoons I'm mostly inspired by are 40's cartoons, but lately I've got more into 50's and modern art. I'm worried that I might be too inspired by that style and that I'm diminishing my quality.
There's nothing wrong with being inspired by anything, just remember that it's important to always refine your skill set.

Your paintings have a real charm to them but they do show your weaknesses, notably in composition and perspective. 50s animation artists would skew perspective in order to bring in visual interest and direct your eye to the focal point (which would usually be the character) while many of your distortions are just mistakes (like the figure on the wolf character, the entire telephone drawing which has no structure and character couldn't have possibly gotten in, or the rabbit girl piece a wonky design, useless visual elements and not enough value or chroma range )

So to answer your question, "too stylized" when when you distort *everything* and there's no structural or compositional logic that keeps it visually sound.

>>1789875
I seriously have no idea why people praise this so much.
I'm all in for minimalism but this got on telly somehow. I guess he learnt Family Guy's secret.

>>1789893
I guess by composition you're not on about cinematography, but more the hierarchy of the characters.

What fundamentals am I missing out, or should I go through the Preston Blair book again?

>>1789913
Well that character isn't constructed so I'd say yes to going through it again.

>>1790664
That could be the dip pen. I'm still figuring that out. The characters head is made out of a rounded cuboid, but yeah I'd admit I'm not good at bodies.

>>1789913
Construction and "3d" shapes, try to see how other artist do it, your forms don't feel like they are 3d but flat.

>>1790664
I've recently come across a book called "Fun with a pencil" by Andrew Loomis which also covers the centre line construction which is quite good.

This is how I usually construct my characters. Anything I'm missing?

This is my attempt at a more realistic anatomy. This wanders dangerously close to "furry" so apologies for that.
The construction is visible under the black lines which is why I'm posting this.

>>1789899
The show is chalk full of waifus and the autistic fanbase view it as a reverse harem. I used to be more into it when the show was new and the characters actually had adventures, but even back then you saw people obsess about which character they fap to or who is OTP with Finn.

Go to a AT general on /co/ right now and you'll mainly see them obsessing over the females.

>>1792626
I think I'll pass actually.

>>1789875
>>1789899

It's not about making the best work, it's about making the right work. The naive and simple illustrations of AT compliment the show very well.

>>1792642
Picasso is well known for his minimalist style, but at a young age, he painted like Davinchi. He did a contemporary style, but was still well aware of the fundamentals and essentials in drawing. AT's style is artistically getting ahead of itself.
The show's fun though.

>>1792580
The way your bodyparts connect needs work, like the elbows, shoulders, knees, ankles etc. The joints are lacking form and volume and bring down the rest.

>>1792646
Thanks for the advice. Do you have any tutorial links on connections?

>>1792645
this shit again?
Come on granny, wake up, "prodigy child picasso" is a fucking myth and you're swallowing it whole.
Would like to see the work of anyone so ignorant and blind as to think picasso was the same as davinci or any old master in any way, shape or form.

AT is a good and fun show though, simple yet effective animation and character designs, it just has an awful fanbase plagued with retards, and like anything else, the retards love to be loud and stupid, as >>1792626 states.

Don't let the loud retards prevent you from enjoying something that you might like, the same shit happens with homestuck and everything actually.

>Another AT horse.

>>1792648

Bammes has a good section on it:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/97139969/Gottfried-Bammes-Die-Gestalt-Des-Menschen-Anatomy-amp-Visual-Arts-3-3

It's in german, but the diagrams are still there.

Otherwise, you could look at Hampton.

>>1793261 (OP)
Another case of the vocal minority. I know that too well; the awkward part of the fanbase are always the loudest.

>>1793273
Thanks for that link. Who's Hampton?

>>1793497
>what is google
His name is Michael Hampton and /ic/ loves him. He's a great figure drawing teacher and every artist should know him.