/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

It can be true. But it'll also make getting there harder.

If by "muh style" you mean overall appeal, I agree with you. Art doesn't have to be perfect to be appealing. You don't need every bone and muscle to have the perfect anatomy, you don't need all that detail, and you don't need your perspective to be perfectly in line to make something that looks nice.

>>3399161

>post image that's drawn with at least basic understanding of fundamentals.


fucking retard.

>>3399161
MINISTER YOU, SATOSHI

>>3399161
I agree

>>3399161
Usually "muh style" is just an excuse because they can't do any better

there are only two people who don't value fundamentals

shit artists with no talent

and

pretentious faggots who's art doesn't even require fundamentals since their portrayal of anything barely takes the world as we know it into account (aka abstract trash)

>>3399289
there are only two people who don't value style

shit artists with no talent

and

pretentious faggots who's art doesn't even require style since their portrayal of anything only takes the world as we know it into account (aka hyperrealist trash)

>>3399161
Fundies + Muh style is the only proper way to go.

>>3399161
All you need to prove yourself wrong on this matter is just show us your """style"""

fundies enhanced your style.

>>3399161
I... I can't!

>>3399161
You have to know the rules first in order to break them

>>3399349
objectively wrong
>>3399369
wrong, people have been breaking the rules long before they existed

>>3399403
> people have been breaking the rules long before they existed
People die when they are killed.

>>3399177
Isn't this just one of those signature deformed, super expressive animations from that famous animator who occasionally did some fight scene choreography for Naruto? If you actually believe that requires no fundamentals, because some still frames look weird, you are out of your fucking mind.

>>3399403
>objectively wrong
Post some great stylized artwork then that has no fundamentals. I'll wait. From every single stylized image I have seen so far though, you at the very least need to know perspective and a basic understanding of anatomy. Otherwise you will just draw Chris Chan tier autism.

>>3399584
THIS.
Wish people weren't so fucking pedantic to the point they don't see the artistic value in this "bad animation ahahahha"

lmao I find it funny how people who disagree to OP >>3399161 aren't responding to >>3399164

>>3399631
Why should they? Those are entirely different claims and most people probably agree that you don't need perfect anatomy or perspective to make something look appealing.

>>3399470
HAHAHAHA

Why is everyone ugly? are they saying everyone should be ugly?

>>3399470
>>3400254
They're not ugly. Everyone is beautiful, anon.

>>3399289
t. Angry art student who spent 10 years studying the human form only to get shown up by some self taught anime artists on Tumblr

Get real anon. This whole board and their agenda is a joke. Follow a few how-to's on YouTube then keep drawing and you're good to go.

>>3399596
I can see you

>>3399592

>>3399470

>>3399470
negative style

>>3399169
not the point.

>>3400265
Post your work.

>>3399631
> I don't need no stinkin' fundies
vs
> I know enough fundies to make something decent even if it isn't perfect

Are you legally retarded by any chance?

>>3399470
but... why

>>3399470
>hairy legs
Why. Fucking why. Hairy legs are never considered attractive in any measure on men or women, so why the fuck do these tumblr artists put it on characters?

>>3400579
Because either
A. They don't shave their legs themselves and want to project that onto the characters they draw (same with when they draw characters overweight, freckled, etc)
B. They want to "fight the rules of gender" and do things that most girls don't do. In this case, not shaving their legs

>>3400579
>Hairy legs are never considered attractive in any measure on men

That’s not true.

>>3399161
Probably but fundies never hurt so why stop learning when you can always get better

>>3400725
For hard faggots maybe

>>3400278
I'd expect these memes on /a/ or /v/, but to see someone on an art board be this uneducated to believe an animation still frame mid-movement is a sign that you don't need fundamentals is kind of mind blowing to me.

>>3400579
>men that shave their legs
Ew
>>3400820
Most people don't get animation, even if they like art. A person has to be interested in animation specifically to give a shit and understand its rules.

>>3399161
vilpoo is living proof that this is true

>>3399592
This.

The only correct answer to OP is: Fundies > Style but only a moron looks at a problem like a child, with an all or nothing attitude. When you grow the fuck up you'll understand that an extreme in any direction is bad.

Style is just an artists shorthand on how they draw and simplify information (shapes) from life into a 2D image. Some people draw by including lots of information using realistic shapes, some by showing less and boiling down a form to more exaggerated shapes.

Im assuming OP is talking about doing work suitable for commercial jobs. If so you have to reach a basic level of skill before someone is going to bother hiring you to draw their knight/dragon/weeb bullshit. What amount of information you include when you draw, a Knight for example, is irrelevant as long as the viewer can understand they're looking at a Knight. If you don't understand the basics of how armor is constructed, fits on a figure or can't paint metallic surfaces your work will be shit no matter how awesome "muh style" is.

Only shit artists constantly talk about "muh style", its an excuse to explain away bad drawing and the lack of motivation needed to study from life.

>>3400917
Nah, you're a dumbass, style is more important today