/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>4237675
Thanks for wasting a thread

>>4237682
Shut the fuck up or I'm going to bump old shitty threads

>>4237675

>>4237687
You already are fuckwit

>>4237675
I've always pondered about why western fags spam their watermarks on their shit pieces meanwhile Nips post a beautifully high res piece with no watermarks, no signatures no type of faggotry what so ever.

The same goes for when you slightly miss the pigmentation for a brown character and all hell breaks lose.

>>4237696
>14 minutes is old
Duurrrr

>>4237675

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

>>4237675
>artists
You are an artist when you can create beautiful things from imagination. The creator of that beg shit is not an artist. I am beg and I am not an artist. We need to stop with the "you can be an attack helicopter if you want, no one has the right to hurt your feelings" mentality.

>>4237675
Pyw

>>4237698
It's because nips have more importance for the quality, it's why you only see godly nip artists rather than beg tier ones, they dont get retweeted in their circles if its not good

>>4237698
>>4237727
>see western artists make scratchy /beg/ doodles on paper
>10 retweets
We need to shame more

>>4237714
What do you consider to be art? If art is skillful expression then how exactly do you measure skill? Does everyone have to go to a govt building and see how straight of a line they can draw before they get their official artist license?
Is it creativity? Because if it's creativity then why should we all study drawing when the real goal is just thinking up cool shit. And for that matter, how do you measure creativity? If creativity is uniqueness then would a robot that generates a 2 billion letter word that has never before been written be the pinnacle of creativity?
>you can be an attack helicopter if you want, no one has the right to hurt your feelings
Attack helicopters and outdated "Muh libruuls" jokes have nothing to do with the definition of art.
>>4237737
Shaming people isn't the solution. We don't need less creators, we need more people to engage in content curation. The entertainment industry is stagnant because customers like you refuse to actually look for indie shit, so we get to a point where you either accept the already curated shit pushed by big names or do the sorting and finding by yourself with no direction and have to start at the bottom of the barrel. 10 retweets is about as valuable as giving a busker a haypenny and a handshake.

>>4237714
Beauty is subjective asshat. God you’re the definition of a crab, projecting your own limitations on to others.

>>4237675
trust me I wish I didn't have to watermark. I hate having to put my username on my art like a dA teen. But after some bastard put his name on my free art and sold it as prints I'm not gonna take the risk

>No stealing
>the drawing is just a /beg/ rendition of a photograph
WELL DONE GOD I HATE INSTATHOTS


>>4237714
Ignore the NGMI retards, keep up that attitude.
Today you should study the neck/upper chest muscles not to reproduce this attrocity.

>>4237801
Just put your fucking handle somewhere in the image like a normal person. Images like the op is cancer. You're seriously going to destroy your images posted because of scummy people?

>>4237752
>Shaming people isn't the solution.
Shaming people is an absolute necessity, unless you want to continue the downward death spiral from calarts and the like.
>We don't need less creators, we need more people to engage in content curation.
More Rebecca sugars, yeah that's exactly what we need.
>The entertainment industry is stagnant because
Because of special snowflakes trying to shoehorn in all the riffraff nobody gives a shit about and then the globohomo further pushes the agenda of the emasculation of young males and calling all men "toxic" and encourage transsexual faggotry. Nobody wants to hear or care about whether or not it is okay, healthy and normal to take it up the butt they want entertainment not indoctrination and a reeducation seminar.

>>4237698
>>4237727
>>4237737
It’s because japanese ip protection is worthless, you might as well ask how come chinks don’t bother with it

>>4237820
>japanese ip protection is worthless
Apparently this is what made them better than us when it comes to the average fan art I guess. People are more worried about getting a like/follow than they are eager to improve and have fun

>>4237687
absolutely BASED and shit thread pilled

>>4237752

Art is skillful. Not expression. That's a faggot invention to try to impress normies and sell overpriced pretentious talentless garbage.

>>4237814
mine is not as big as op, but still semitransparent, usually on the side or low. I used to have a cute sign like that, but it got phtoshopped off.

>>4237818
>Shaming people is an absolute necessity
You shouldn't try to shame, but instead guide other artist. Its constructive and feels good for both parties

>>4237818
>unless you want to continue the downward death spiral from calarts and the like.
False dichotomy.
>More Rebecca sugars, yeah that's exactly what we need.
If you don't like sugar then don't support her or people who draw like her. Instead of trying to censor people you don't like, lift people up that you do like. Monopoly and stagnation isn't good and you have no idea if the Rebecca sugar's of yesterday will become the Raphaels of tomorrow.
>Because of special snowflakes trying to shoehorn in all the riffraff nobody gives a shit about and then...
Special snowflakes wouldn't be a problem if people got off their ass and actually found indie shit that they enjoy. "Globohomos" are only a problem because you have given power to big corps out of laziness. Being a petulant child won't fix things, but taking your cash out of their pockets and putting it somewhere useful just might do the trick.
>>4237839
>Art is skillful.
Great. Now define skill precisely and show us how we measure it.

>>4237825
In a way, since you could argue it’s what allowed them to adopt a culture of cons, but the real answer is is that drawn entertainment in the West became something infantile that you make fun of people for liking or marginalised as boomer strips combined with a general distaste towards art education from both the general population and the art academia itself.

>>4237881

>Now define skill
Doing something aestethically pleasing is skill. Smearing shit on a canvas is not.

Should not be difficult to know what "skill" is, but with retards like you I'm not surprised I have to explain... be glad I did.

>>4237818
shaming people is useless, they are going to cry to their personal circlejerk and sink even deeper in their own delusion.

The only solution is to educate and make them reach better taste.

>>4237925
You're missing the point, what you want to do is weed out and thin the herd to leave only the most robust and talented individuals as talent is a pursued interest. If you let something insignificant such as someone shaming you affect your outlooks then maybe the craft just wasn't meant for you.

>>4237929
this reminds me of that video of never telling /begs/ good job

>>4237921
>aestethically pleasing
Not even him, but you’re running in circles. Rothko’s shit is definitely aesthetically pleasing, but exhibits 0 artistic skill unless you believe mixing paint to be an artistic skill.
Most children’s drawings are aesthetically pleasing, yet none of them can draw.
I can tell you’ve read nothing on aesthetics, since you show complete lack of understanding of the word.
There is no aesthetic value, things are aesthetically pleasing within their own context, but not outside it. An example is a fat cook. A fat cook in a cook’s garb is aesthetically pleasing. A fat jovial German with a mustache in a lederhosen is aesthetically pleasing. If you put those two people outside their context and into a context of let’s say a waiter and an expensive lawyer, they become aesthetically unappealing.

>>4237948
>Rothko’s shit is definitely aesthetically pleasing
>Source: My ass.

Nigger, what have I said about skill? You need skill to make art. You need skill to make something aesthetically pleasing regardless of context. If you make something aesthetically pleasing with no skill, then it's not art.

>>4237921
>Doing something aestethically pleasing is skill
So skill is whether or not you can appeal to people? And the only way to measure if it's pleasing is to see how many people like it, since aesthetics are subjective things rather than measurable universal laws.
If I extend that logic then I'm guessing you'd agree that the food scientists at McDonald's HQ are the greatest and most skilled chefs on earth, since MickeyDees is the most popular/profitable food company on earth.
>Smearing shit on a canvas is not.
If shit on canvas appealed to more people, would it not be better?
>>4238101
>If you make something aesthetically pleasing with no skill, then it's not art.
But you literally just said that making something aesthetically pleasing is your definition of skill, and that skill is your definition of art. How can skill not be skill and art not be art if it meets your own definition?
>>Source: My ass.
His source is just as good as yours. Aesthetics are subjective and ever changing things. Aesthetics are not measurable laws of the universe like gravity. The closest you can get to measuring aesthetics is ad popular shit like I explained

>>4237695
No one gets the pun :(

>>4237737
pity retweets, they are friends, parents being supportive, no hes not better than me NO HES NOT NOOOO I COULD DRAW LIKE THAT TOO GIVE ME ATTENTION

>>4238179
OMGGG DONUT STEEEEL XDDDDDDDDDD1!!11 SO ORIGINALE11!! HAHAHA

fuck off retard. The joke is 10 years old and it stopped being funny 9 years and 11 months ago

>>4238155

>skill is whether or not you can appeal to people?

Not even close. Skill is very objective. You can measure skill. Skill is the mastery of the fundamentals of art. There is a very clear difference between skilled, aesthetically pleasing art, and just pop art garbage.

>If shit on canvas appealed to more people, would it not be better?

You phrased it as a question. But is still a straw man argument. Again, skill is very objective, and measurable.

>>4238199
watch out guys we got internet scientist over here!

>>4238205
>You can measure skill.
By what means?
>Skill is the mastery of the fundamentals of art.
Can you give me an exhaustive list of those 'fundamentals' and what precisely mastery means? How do you measure mastery? You mentioned somebody with no skill making aesthetic art, why does skill matter but not aesthetics?
>There is a very clear difference between skilled, aesthetically pleasing art, and just pop art garbage
First off, pop art is a very specific genre of art. It's not just "shit I don't like". You probably don't like cubism or impressionism or 'modern' art but none of those are pop art.
Secondly, you're adding a qualifier there. Is art defined by skill or aesthetics?

If you aren't getting my point by now, I'm trying to illustrate that every answer you give is ultimately subjective. What aesthetically pleasing means or which skills are fundies and what defines mastery depends entirely on who you ask, even among people you might consider pros, and trying to make objective statements about subjective shit is impossible.

>>4238199

Man, 4chan sucks why do I come here.

>>4237698
>pixiv artists upload hi-res art without watermarks
>china steals it for wallscrolls and mousepads
>pixiv artists lose their shit and nuke their entire account

>>4238221
I feel you anon. Let's elope

>>4237881
>gets a real life example
>>false dichotomy
reality ignoring libtard

>>4237701
Based beyond belief

>>4237737
Its called having supportive friends anon. You get them when you stop being such a crab.

>>4238422
They're supporting your stagnation to quietly laugh at you 3 years later

>>4238428
Taking out the competition early

>>4237925
the problem is that those people are "long gone", they're so fucked with their pseudo-intellegent logic and won't acknowledge hard true facts no matter how you word it.

the best solution is to not give them a megaphone to speak in the first place- but sadly corporations got greedy/stupid and thought if they created a cult of similar ideology, it'll benefit them by having fans who'll never leave you. But atleast this time in history is well documented and future civilizations won't fuck up (unless the nuclear war meme happens world wide)

>>4237698
>western artists
You mean teenagers with daddy issues?

>>4238218
>By what means?
Just by looking? You can perfectly observe whether an artist has the fundamentals properly mastered or not.

>Can you give me an exhaustive list of those 'fundamentals' and what precisely mastery means?

Why does it have to be exhaustive? Perspective, anatomy, rendering... are the well known elements needed to form art works. Mastery is simply being able to use them and recall them from memory to make an original piece. An artist without mastery of those fundamentals will not produce quality art, and will not produce art.

And before you ask, the abilities needed to create aesthetically pleasing pieces are also fundamentals, since "aesthetics" can be divided into fundamental skills: Rendering, color mixing, lighting, composition, and even mood and storytelling.

>why does skill matter but not aesthetics?

Mastering skill takes commitment, that's fucking why. A committed artist is more serious than a casual retard selling pretentious pieces.

>What aesthetically pleasing means or which skills are fundies and what defines mastery depends entirely on who you ask

That's not true. Every commited artist needs to learn the exact same fundamentals.

Why are we here then if "what defines mastery depends entirely on who you ask"??

If you did not read it correctly:

Art is measured by skill, and skill is the mastery of the fundamentals.

Only after you have mastered the fundamental skills, you have the right to deviate and bend the rules of what is considered "art". Otherwise, you're a pretentious faggot that makes no effort and tries to look "deep" to impress idiots.

>>4237714
youre an artist, your just a shitty artist

>>4237675
I never put watermarks on my pictures, the only time I do is when I post animations because its hard to reverse image search the gif to find me, who cares if some ching chong will make mousepads with it

>>4237698
i just hide my signature somewhere in the actual piece, usually in clothing folds or in the hair. i understand watermarking your work, but i don't understand faggots who use those huge, hideous "stamp" watermarks or the fucking tiles that blot out the entire piece

>>4237675
There’s a lot of art sins to unpack in this image, and I’m not sure what you’re referring to specifically.

>>4239511
Why and who keeps making these edits

>>4237682
Threads on /ic/ are shit anyway. Here's a bump, 4u.

>>4237675
As an artist and shoop guy I could easily shoop that out, but the artwork is too shitty

>>4239915
I just tried it and failed, how do you shoop it out? You'd need some kind of subtraction tool(by that I don't mean the brush on subtraction mode)

>>4237925
Better than any anime
Two colour palette, essentially.
Perfect composition, excellent anatomy understanding.
Proko and Marshall, you could never...

>>4240174
redraw/paintover

>>4241260
Wow, pro "shoop guy".

>>4239789
this is what happens when you don't watermark

>>4237793
>Beauty is subjective asshat.
Still not an excuse for lazy half assed work.

>>4237675
I'm traumatized.

>>4242349

>>4239097

i agree but god i wish norman rockwell bent the rules a tad

what a chief, chief lighthouse of working hard surely, but nah i'll say it; neat little, if not a tad naively hopefully 1950s aspirational postery aesthetic

>>4238374
is there anything in the world more based than chinks?
those guys dont give a shit about anything, shitting on our laws and making all the big corps suck their dicks if they want to be allowed to access their market

>>4239097
based and blessed post

>>4242349
It's a little better now. Wow. Now let's do something about that useless space

>>4242399

Eww. So you unironically like commies?

>>4237714
unrelated but
>gif didn't end with him casually walking through the door like in the original
fucked

>>4242073
like im gonna waste time doing it on a shitty drawing

>>4242420
The horror

>>4238220
>>4238209

>>4237675
Because they are faggots.

>>4237675
Because westerners prefer being litigious and 'right' about things rather than acquire knowledge and improve things.

>>4239511
>who cares if some ching chong will make mousepads with it
I'd be happy to get my shitty art on a chink print page lol

>>4237737
>western artists make scratchy /beg/ doodles on paper
oh, so like jap artists

>>4237675
I attempted to avenge blue-haired girl.

>>4243576
Better but wheres her noggin

>>4243576
You should've try to avenge her microcephaly

>>4237675
Fuck it, here you gooooo

>>4244280
Ey I started shading using that technique too recently. Things look so much better now

>>4244360
Can't show that in a christian manga.

>>4239097
If only quality art is art, then saying "quality art" is redundant.