[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

View post   
File: 499 KB, 604x476, which one.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2877408 No.2877408 [Reply] [Original]

The 2016 is better.

>> No.2877410

New phone who dis

>> No.2877417

The critique in your image doesn't agree with you

>> No.2877420
File: 5 KB, 194x197, vilppu.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2877420

>>2877410

>> No.2877427

>>2877408
How can it be better when it demonstrably has worse volume and perspective and everything else is virtually the same?

>> No.2877432

>>2877427
They probably can't see the difference and just don't like the yellow overlay on the new one.

>> No.2877433

>>2877408
Throwing a bunch of random lines on an image does not show why something is better

>> No.2877435

>>2877433
>anons here genuinely think the lines are random
Are you even looking at the image? It's clearly showing all the corrections in form and perspective.

>> No.2877438

Does OP realize the 2017 is on the left?

>> No.2877444

>>2877408
the entire background looks copied and pasted from the last one. lazy bitch

>> No.2877448

>>2877444
D:

>> No.2877449

>>2877444
It's clearly just the artist painting over the original file. Though I agree they should have repainted the cat . It wouldn't have been difficult to find a bit of ref and really improve it.

>> No.2877502

2017>2016 by far

>> No.2877536
File: 17 KB, 600x600, 1487891368737.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2877536

>>2877408
The 2016 is objectively worse in every way.

>> No.2877541
File: 11 KB, 210x251, 1427435327420.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2877541

loooool

Intuitively I thought the images were placed in chronological order - as in 2017 to the right - and thought, damn, OP is actually right for once.

But then I realized 2017 is to the left and OP is a fag.

>> No.2877650

>>2877408
random circles? and random AO note? do you even?

>> No.2877859

>>2877408
>The 2016 is better.

The you are retarded.

>> No.2878210
File: 258 KB, 295x476, 1488217705462.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2878210

>>2877408
Body is of course better but hat is shit because it's too high and flat, it's just a circle

Now it's perfect

>> No.2878211

>>2877410
>>2877420
What

>> No.2878220

>>2878210
op here.
lol I was gonna do that, but then it got out of hand. I only like the 2016 one because he drew the hat right. The 2017 one hat is so wrong that it stands out more, and makes the piece look horrible.

thumbup.jpeg

>> No.2878227

>>2877408
2017 is better. Hat is only issue.

>> No.2878252 [DELETED] 

2017 megane > 2016 no megane

op is correct

>> No.2878275

>>2877408
I like the pose and the face better in 2017. Looks more like you're looking up at her.

>> No.2878276

Can't see much because of tiny image and lines hurled all over but I'd say 2016 has better atmosphere. Another thing is that the hat in 2017 is just not appealing, it doesn't suggest the 3D shape at all beyond being round, which would benefit from forcing the perspective.

>> No.2878286

>>2877408
Some parts of 2017 are better, some parts of 2016 are better.

Why do retards keep putting their afters first?
It's a BEFORE and AFTER. You put 2016 FIRST.

>> No.2878294

>>2877410
Is Gorge foo wer u at

>> No.2878311

No