/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.3225852]

Let's have another one of these

[Anonymous No.3225859]

>>3225852
I came to /ic/ 5 days ago
I also read the sticky

[Anonymous No.3225860]

>>3225859
>forgot pic

[Anonymous No.3225863]

[Anonymous No.3225865]

>>3225863
(how do i into basic colour and shading)

[Anonymous No.3225869]

this but also hentai
tell me it isnt the patricians choice

[some yet unknown dork No.3225870]

>>3225852

[Anonymous No.3225871]

>>3225863
>4 figures
>all from exact front angle
ngmi

[Anonymous No.3225873]

>>3225871
you're right, thanks

[Anonymous No.3225905]

>>3225852
Haven't visited /ic/ in a long while but here I gave this a shot.

I have a hard time steering away from cartoons because I like them so much.
I'm super interested in more horror/moody aesthetics though which are really the polar opposite of cartoons.
trying to focus on both at once will just jumble up my art and it will feel lacking in general since I can't decide which direction is best. I'm happy with my coloring but my values could be much better. I tend to focus on goofy exaggeration instead of perfect anatomy in my doodling and need a better mix of both. Also god forbid I actually finish an image for once I've been fucking horrible about that lately.

>anthroshit
pls forgib

[Anonymous No.3225918]

>>3225905
That rendering in the Garchomp is looking fucking nice, fetish shit aside. Your work is really appealing looking even if I don't vibe with your subject matter.

I feel you on having goals that don't align at all with what you actually produce. I think your skill is getting to where you can produce a lot of work on the right but the only thing that's stopping you is your subject (not that you should stop doing what you love, but maybe try emulating the horror/moody aesthetics?).

Also, Joanne Nam is the shit. I do find it a bit funny to see her work in contrast with yours.

[Anonymous No.3225945]

>>3225918
God bless.

Actually if you're talking about lewd work not being my goal I do want to produce lewd artwork I was just comparing my own work to the level of art that I want. right now one of my goals is mixing a horror with sexual and creating a unique feel for lewd art out of it. lewd art is a bit limiting like you say though because you have to focus on emphasizing the sexual side of things and it doesn't leave much room for the different rougher styles since things are normally soft, round, and glossy. once you stop focusing on the erotic side it just sort of blends into the background and is no longer sexual. trying to strike a decent balance between emphasizing rougher horror aspects and the sexual aspects is tricky.

Overall though I think as much as I try to be capable of drawing more realistic moods and styles I tend to instinctively stick too closely to cartoonist mentality of making things pop as much as possible even when I'm trying to avoid it. not that I really mind cartoons I love them to death. most realistic styles stick more to dulled out colors and darker values so even subtle changes in color are emphasized. meanwhile you can tell all my coloring is way over saturated and doesn't have the proper value range to feel actually realistic. not to mention the lighting in all of them is about the same. nothing unique or moody about it. it's not that horrible tho it has its own unique simplistic flair to it. but I think for the horror style i have in my mind it definitely has to feel more dark and moody. I'm still experimenting on my own time trying to get closer to that feel.

meanwhile I also love that goofy thick cartoon style too. which is the polar opposite in style. going back and forth between those two style wise is a bit fucky.

[Anonymous No.3225948]

>>3225852
I think i am already pretty good with my fav medium watercolor. But i want to create more mood and dramatic atmosphere in my watercolor painting. It's not always about details.

I still can't put a proper story together for my line artworks/comics, my dream would be a finished comic book. I must overcome my fear about creating a lousy story...

[Anonymous No.3225987]

>>3225852

[Anonymous No.3225996]

>>3225948
Your watercolour painting is densely packed with little to no room for emphasis or the appreciation of space from the reference material.

I’m not sure what you intend with the colours but it looks very bold and deep. (As intended I think)

I think your technicalities are well established but lacks experimentation. I suggest you check out artists who emphasise emptiness.

Perhaps you are too keen on over rendering stuff whilst the structure is not concrete.


Any ways, Looks good in my crabby opinion.

[Anonymous No.3226037]

>>3225852

[Anonymous No.3226046]

>>3226037
lol !!

[Anonymous No.3226103]

>>3226037
upvoted XD

[Anonymous No.3226123]

>>3225987
Value groups, my dude.

[Anonymous No.3226152]

>>3225852
I'm actually glad I took the time to do this. I didn't realize how directionless I was until I started to actually look at works I was interested in.
Also I see a lot of helpful anons here.

>subject matter irrelevant ofc

[Anonymous No.3226173]

>>3226152
I think you are going to make it in a few years Kounosuke-anon!

[Anonymous No.3226175]

>>3225905

Man I love your stuff mr bee and I kinda want to emulate some aspects of it, specially them thicc characters.

I am still grinding fundies in an effort to get up to a level I'm more confident in so that I can try to break into the smut art world while visually developing a sfw fantasy board game I've had in the back burner for a while.

The one thing I'm afraid of is exactly that, being able to focus on a specific direction. I love work that focuses on the attractiveness and the 'feel' of the form of a character but at the same time the subject matter of my project isn't sexual in the least, not necessarily grim, but it's a more grounded subject matter.

[Anonymous No.3226180]

>>3226173
T-thanks

[Anonymous No.3226186]

>>3225860
gonna make it

[Anonymous No.3226193]

>>3225852
I need to learn how to deal with colors and light better. As it stands I’m super inconsistent

[Anonymous No.3226373]

>>3226152
blog

>>3225905
dont you make a shit ton on patreon and through commissions though

[Anonymous No.3226381]

>>3226175
The grind is real brah. And thick is a way of life.
I'd say just keep improving until you're able to easily shift between any style you want. So basically forever. It's what I try to aim for myself. Don't be too much like me though and never finish your art. Finishing things is best for mad art gains.

>>3226373
I don't have patreon and barely do commissions. I could make dosh tho. Also that has next to nothing to do with improving my art. For me art is just something I love to do and think about, same with fat monster tiddies and asses. if I wanted money I would be doing something else, art is too hard for that shit even furry bucks ain't worth this workload.

Then again some people who make games make ridiculous dosh. I have considered it.

[Anonymous No.3226394]

>>3226193
anatomy is decent, proportions & placements are BAADDD

[Anonymous No.3226402]

>>3225852

[Anonymous No.3226473]

>>3225905
Who drew the spynx?

[Anonymous No.3226474]

>>3226473
Sphynx*

[Anonymous No.3226480]

>>3226381
What do you do for a living then?

[Anonymous No.3226502]

>>3226373
iscrooble.tumblr.com

>>3226473
I think this is the source: http://illestofill.com/portfolio/audrey-benjaminsen/

[Anonymous No.3227309]

>>3226394
Gotcha, any exercises you know of that could help me?

[Anonymous No.3227345]

>>3225869
fuck anon i feel this on so many levels

[Anonymous No.3227731]

>>3227345
what did he mean by this?

[Anonymous No.3227786]

>>3226402
>>>/3/

[Anonymous No.3227793]

>>3225869
me too ,bro ,the history first

[Anonymous No.3227802]

>>3225948
If you told me the painting on the right was done by the same guy as the painting on the left, I'd believe you.

Well done desu

[Anonymous No.3227857]

short term: get work for wotc, applibot, etc.

long term: art director for a studio

maybe produce my own IP if i ever feel it

[Anonymous No.3228524]

Just started. Currently going through drawing on the right side of the brain.

[Anonymous No.3228547]

I've got a lot of work to do, namely going out of my comfort zone in terms of subject matter

[Anonymous No.3228597]

>>3225905
theres been so many trolls on here pretending to be people.
How do we know youre the REAL sunibee?

[Anonymous No.3228601]

>>3225852
o-one day soon(tm)

[Anonymous No.3228602]

>>3225905
we have a couple anthro/furry artists on /ic/, no need to feel bad about it

[Anonymous No.3228637]

>>3228524
who be that artist you want to be?

[Anonymous No.3229814]

>>3225869
start by dropping digital and using an actual pencil

[Anonymous No.3229868]

-kago shintaro
-katsuhiro otomo and akira movie
-burne hogarth

[Anonymous No.3229888]

>>3228637
Reinaldo Quintero (ReiQ), of JigglyGirls fame

[Anonymous No.3229965]

>>3229814
digital is a perfectly functional medium, more so than traditional in fact.

[Anonymous No.3229971]

>>3229965
>more so than traditional in fact.
elaborate on that please.

[Anonymous No.3229975]

>>3229971
fucking everything dude, layers, ctrl z, precise numerical colour selecting, functional erasing, etc etc.

[Anonymous No.3229981]

>>3229975
Would you say that an oil painting is the same as a digital art print?

[Anonymous No.3229983]

>>3225852
>I want to become just like that artist I like so much
creative cucks incoming

[Anonymous No.3229984]

>>3229981
asymmetry doesnt mean imbalance

[Anonymous No.3229991]

>>3229984
Use of big words without understanding don't mean shit.

Please point out the main differences between an oil painting on canvas and an ideal art print of digital art on Bristol paper or similar.

Tell me where you typically find oil paintings and where you find digital art. Do they exist in the same places?

[Anonymous No.3230000]

>>3229984
>>3229975
>>3229965

Do you realize that you are comparing apples and oranges here?

[Anonymous No.3230005]

>>3229991
>4 syllables
>big words
ok bab

[Anonymous No.3230009]

>>3230005
>says digifart is superior to tradifart
>basically compares apples and oranges
>doesn't answer properly as to why
answer the questions maybe?

[Anonymous No.3230011]

>>3230009
technically superior and aesthetically neither better nor worse

[Anonymous No.3230017]

>>3230011
>technically superior
you are basically comparing computer work to a craftsmanship.

why?

the two have nothing, absolutely nothing in common materialwise.

[Anonymous No.3230019]

>>3230017
>the two have nothing, absolutely nothing in common
empirically fucking false you jaded biased underman

[Anonymous No.3230021]

>>3230019
tell me again how an electronic plastic pen with a plastic board is the same as working with a brush, canvas, oil colors, pallet and actual materials.

[Anonymous No.3230023]

>>3230019
>empirically fucking false you jaded biased underman
somebody is going full autist here
major upsetty? realizing what a bunch of steaming bullshit you talk?

[Anonymous No.3230030]

digital art to real fine art is like a flightsimulator compared to really flying a plane: it's othing more than a simulation / all in your mind and quite literally, nothing can happen.

[Anonymous No.3230060]

>>3230030
But all good digital artists are better at traditional art than you are. People who are good at flight simulators can't fly an airplane, good digital artists all can draw traditionally, so clearly there must be some crossover.

[Anonymous No.3230063]

>>3230021
It's the same in the way that the artist makes use of the universal fundamentals of art to create an end product that communicates ideas with an audience. A writer who writes a novel using a computer is not automatically a worse writer than someone who writes a novel using a typewriter, or who writes it all by hand. The end result is what determines who is the better writer. There are thousands of digital artists who are objectively better at art than you are and who are also better at traditional art, despite the fact that it's not their main medium of choice.

[Anonymous No.3230066]

>>3230060
Ruan Jia is a major meme on /ic/
>"One of the best digital artists bla bla"

Look at his "way better traditional art". The neck area is a complete mess in color mixing terms. He is trying to emulate a "masterful" ease in the brushstroke when applying rough hints. The problem is that he can't do it. He is obsessed with details and has little to no talent for abstraction. It comes out flat, unmotivated, mushy. If you remove the obsessively detailed face, you can see that his way of working with real colors is very awkward.
That is the problem with most digital artists of that league.

[Anonymous No.3230069]

I'd like to go from degenerate -> degenerate who can draw.
Link because of content:
https://i.imgur.com/Si7PdsW.jpg

[Anonymous No.3230070]

>>3230066
There is a shitload of chinese artists who concentrate solely on hyper realism, fantasy realism and concept art. What most of them are completely missing is an individual signature and actual, thematical depth in their works. They are highly decorative and impressive, but the impression hardly lasts.

Edgar Degas was a master in only hinting at plasticity and space, while he uses strong colors and a lot abstraction. It still comes out with a convincing feeling of realness. It is this vibration between total abstraction and the feeling of realism that most concept artists can't emulate at all. And part of the blame lies on the generic tutorial-obsessed culture on the internet and the self-aggrandising attitude from beginners and working digital artists alike.

>>3230066
btw, the dynamics of the hair is absolutely shit if you look at it without the face. It's a complete mess with no feeling for haptic.

[Anonymous No.3230072]

>>3230066
You can feel Ruan Jia's Ctrl+Z base in his timid, short brushstrokes. To anyone who paints with oils, it is apparent that his color mixing with oil is very amateurish, as it becomes marshy and shifts to the typical brown-green mess that you get when you mix too many colors. The whole head and hair has a very dull oval shape.

Thematically – copied photograph of a girl looking straigt at the viewer – it is not worth any discussion.

[Anonymous No.3230073]

>>3230070
that pic, it's shit. git gud.

[Anonymous No.3230074]

>>3230073
>calls Edgar Degas shit
ngmi

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=edgar+degas&bext=msl&atb=v94-3&iax=images&ia=images

[Anonymous No.3230078]

>>3230074
at least I'm not the one drawing T-rex arms and if he's so good then why is he dead?

[Anonymous No.3230079]

>>3230070
>the hair is absolutely shit if you look at it without the face
>x looks bad without y
W-woah! Isn't it great then, that on the canvas, x and y are together? It's almost like...the basics of composition...
Unfortunately the pseudo-intellectual babble you wrote to aggrandize your piece can't go on the canvas, and without it it looks shit. What's the point of art that can't stand on its own merits?

[Anonymous No.3230084]

>>3230078
>if he's so good then why is he dead?
good one

>>3230079
hm, strange! Why does this still work when applied to paintings by real artists?

[Anonymous No.3230085]

>>3230079
huh, maybe Ruan Jia sucks at abstraction and real painting! weird.

[Anonymous No.3230088]

>>3230066
Well, yeah obviously digital artists are nowhere near traditional masters at traditional art, but that portrait is still better than anything YOU can paint traditionally. So a digital artist who paints traditionally like once or twice a year is better at the one thing you dedicate all your time to.

[Anonymous No.3230090]

>>3230084
>>3230085
>blurring and removing the ears on ruan jia's painting while not on those
>asking why it works

uh oh someone's bias

[Anonymous No.3230091]

>>3230088
>better than anything YOU can paint traditionally
cause you know, of course.

nice way of deflecting from the meme that digital artists "can paint in traditional media just as well meh meh meh! shitty trad fags!"

[Anonymous No.3230093]

>>3230074
It's a very flawed drawing. Not sure why you can't see that. If Ruanjia had drawn that, you would use it as example of why digital artists suck.

[Anonymous No.3230095]

Why don't you two make a thread about your ruan jia tear apart bullshit.

[Anonymous No.3230096]

>>3230090
better, cherrypicker?

[Anonymous No.3230100]

>>3230091
How am I deflecting? I stand by that sentiment. Good digital artists are obviously better at anything art related than bad tradfags like you are. Master painters are obviously better at their medium of choice as they have an insane amount of experience. On the other hand, very few traditional master painters can do what (digital) illustrators can, as they heavily rely on copying what's in front of them.

[Anonymous No.3230103]

>>3230095
I'm discussing this, because there is a shitload of people like the folks in this thread >>3228960 who unironically believe that digital artists are automatically fine artists.

[Anonymous No.3230106]

>>3230084
>its' a realist painting
>>3230085
>that vest
and
>mimicking my tone

As soon as you leave everyone will call your favorite paintings shit and go back to praising ruan the man
keep floundering though

[Anonymous No.3230107]

>>3230091

But it's a fact. Ruanjja IS better than you are at traditional art and it absolutely infurates you that you know you can't prove me wrong. You can not post a painting done by you that is better than that mediocre, half assed portrait Ruanjia painted like 5 years ago. All you can do is crop out faces on paintings to try to prove some weird point you want to make and look like an absolute autist in the process.

Not even to mention all the digital artists who also do traditional art somewhat seriously and regularly as a hobby.

[Anonymous No.3230110]

>>3230100
>as they heavily rely on copying what's in front of them.
lmao, you don't seriously believe that yourself, do you? Get out of your shell. Fine art is in no way limited - unlike digital art - to constantly resort on references. You sound awfully uninformed on the subject.

I hardly paint realism myself, as it is completely obsolete ever since the invention of photography. Artists used to portrait life sized kings realistically (and doing a lot of cosmetic improvement in the course), because there was no photography.
Digital artists, clinging hard to realism, is actually the most conservative, reactionary stance you can find in contemporary creative areas. It typically comes with a blatant ignorance on art history, contemporary art and fine art techniques.

[Anonymous No.3230112]

>>3230107
>some weird point
that you will never in a hundred years understand.

[Anonymous No.3230115]

>inb4 /3/ or learn matte painting

[Anonymous No.3230118]

>>3230110
>I hardly paint realism myself, as it is completely obsolete ever since the invention of photography.
This is how you can tell he's full of shit.

[Anonymous No.3230119]

>>3230110
Representational fine art is incredibly limited. The handful of good fine artists who aren't limited to painting naked women and dog portraits call themselves illustrators.

[Anonymous No.3230120]

Remember, >>3224319 these are the /ic/ tradfags acting all superior and elitist towards digital art.

[Anonymous No.3230122]

>>3230119
You are completely clueless. Name some contemporary fine artists that you know who do painting / collage / drawing.

Again, no concept artists work of the type "hot girl with medievil kitsch armor" will ever be found in a fine art field / museum / fine art gallery.

Olga Tobreluts has done a quite nice take on that sort of kitsch and mixed it with criticism of the Soviet social realism and heroism.

http://www.artnet.com/artists/olga-tobreluts/modernization-li-detail-of-triptych-a-NFhVb-SnraFwJuRu64nH9g2

Digital art is nowhere near fine art and never will be, as it is flat and shallow, both thematically and literally in terms of material.

The arrogance and outright audacity of people on /ic/ proposing that it is "better than fine art" surpasses every major clinical delusion.

[Anonymous No.3230124]

>>3230122
>(((fine art)))

[Anonymous No.3230125]

>>3230122
>fine art

http://www.sfgate.com/art/article/Museum-janitors-mistake-modern-art-for-trash-6596479.php

[Anonymous No.3230129]

>>3230118
>This is how you can tell he's full of shit.
Unlike you, I find nothing less appealing than masturbating over a picture for months, only to make it look photorealistical.

There are artists who have found a very apt middleground, like Michaël Borremans. He started out as a photographer and ended up becoming a painter. He uses his own models and arrangements to paint from.

>>3230125
this guy again with the "monkey art" meme.
yawn.

[Anonymous No.3230132]

>>3230129
A camera's ability is very limited in capturing colors compared to a human eye, you should at least know this much. It also has no subjectivity, it can simply focus on certain things and blur others. Painters will always outperform cameras.

[Anonymous No.3230133]

>>3230132
for now

[Anonymous No.3230134]

>>3230125
>modern art mistaken for trash by janitor
That makes it a decent piece of performance art.

[Anonymous No.3230137]

[Anonymous No.3230141]

>>3230132
This makes absolutely no sense. The way a camera captures a scene is way more neutral, accurate and documentary than a painting.
A painting always comes with reduction, simpification, abstraction. A painting as a means of representing reality is way more abstract, however it connects to the human memory very well, as we analyze gestalt, colors and debth based on experiences and memories. A photograph is way more like a freeze-frame of a moment in time and you are much more likely to subconsciously accept "it is a real thing i'm looking at". That's the whole point of staged photographs in journalism – you can bend reality and people will still be tricked into believing it has happened that way.

[Anonymous No.3230145]

>>3230118
I can paint realistic when needed. I just hardly need it or find it worthwhile as a concept.

http://i.4cdn.org/ic/1512591017417.jpg

[Anonymous No.3230148]

>>3230107
>and look like an absolute autist in the process.
oh, because analyzing painting styles has become autistic! I guess art historians, painting teachers and professional painters alike are all autistic then. Thanks for the enlightment.

[Anonymous No.3230149]

>>3230148
the ol' muh style excuse

[Anonymous No.3230153]

>>3230149
you -> absolutely hopeless case

[Anonymous No.3230154]

>>3230153
m-muh style

[Anonymous No.3230161]

>>3230154
yup, individual styles are very bad. i get it. you are another Loomis, Vilppu, Hampton cuck

[Anonymous No.3230165]

>>3230153
>tfw when noble anti-loomis tradbro calls you le absolutely hopeless case
it hurts desu, hold me brahs

[Anonymous No.3230170]

>>3230161
look at me muh style!

[Anonymous No.3230171]

>>3230165
styles are very bad, mkay?
>> 3225852
I want to become like xy
I don't want to be individual.

[Anonymous No.3230176]

>>3230170
>individual style
>something bad

lol, that is your mindset? fuck off mate

[Anonymous No.3230177]

>>3230176
if it's shit it's shit no muh style would make it not shit

b-but it's muh style!

[Anonymous No.3230185]

>>3230165
>noble
>anti-loomis
pick one

[Anonymous No.3230187]

>>3230177
tell me, what exactly is your point with the "muh style" yapping?

Would you say that Ruan Jia has "no style" / "a unique style"? Is that bad or good?
Do you think that it is an achievement to develope your own approach, or is it a disadvantage?
Do you think that, as soon as we talk about individual styles, all objectivity is gone?

I don't get your bullshit at all.

[Anonymous No.3230188]

>>3230185
>one liner
>cheap joke
fuck off lmao shill rofl

[Anonymous No.3230192]

>>3230170
>muh style
applies to when an artist (see: kid on deviantart) defends amateur mistakes and fundamental flaws in his work saying it's his style

style in that case is the way he draws things due to some misunderstanding / holes in knowledge

[Anonymous No.3230197]

>>3230192
Ruan Jia would probably also defend it as "muh style" then, no? --> >>3230066

[Anonymous No.3230468]

>>3225852

[Anonymous No.3230490]

>>3225852
i would put in animations in this but im too lazy/stupid to export it into gifs

[Anonymous No.3230598]

>>3230490
Once you pratice more on dynamic poses and compositions, getting out of your comfort zone. Also Ctrl+paint tutorials and Brushboost will help in the direction you're going.

[Anonymous No.3230679]

>>3230598
yes i agree with you, i struggle with very dull expressions and poses, been trying to get better at it with doing live gestures. I havent been doing much of these color paintings and thats why i feel very akward with color, i have watche a couple of ctrl+ paint videos but just watched them. I def will take some time and paint along with them. Thanks for the feedback

[bones No.3230889]

>>3225852

[Anonymous No.3231115]

>>3225852

[Anonymous No.3232067]

>>3231115
that's horrifying simpsons gay porn isn't it

[Anonymous No.3232081]

>>3232067
oh god I think you're right

[Anonymous No.3232082]

>>3226152

[Anonymous No.3232093]

>>3226152
>furry

Never gonna make it

[Anonymous No.3232099]

>>3230069
>furry

never gonna make it

[Anonymous No.3232115]

Only ~80% done with my image but you get the point. Still missing some detail on some of the focal areas, particle effects, splashing water on the rocks on the foreground (cropped out now) and a proper background but you get the point...

It's not that I love art like this but I'd love to get to do some promotional art for triple-A video game/movie companies some time in the future. Also herd it pays pretty well...

[Anonymous No.3232122]

>>3230066
>posting and critting a WIP
Begone from this place and take your salty bait with you

[Anonymous No.3232130]

>>3232115
Not enough blue/orange.

Real talk, are you currently doing art as a profession?

[Anonymous No.3232136]

>>3232130

Not really... Worked at a production company for a year doing compositing, crude 3D, image/video retouching and and other crap for commercials. Didn't really enjoy it.

I'm not even going to apply anywhere until I have 8-12 pieces that are good enough to hang on the front page of ArtStation. Currently I have 0. Picked up ZBrush 2 months ago so I'm trying to make sculpting/other 3D fuckery a part of my workflow now.

I think I shat blue and orange this morning.

[Anonymous No.3232138]

>>3232136
>I'm not even going to apply anywhere until I have 8-12 pieces that are good enough to hang on the front page of ArtStation
heh, are you me?

[Anonymous No.3232146]

>>3232138

Maybe I am! Maybe sitting at home 12h./day doing this shit is actually making "us" crazy... Another route "we" could take would be getting a low paying junior/internship position in a game company and learning all this stuff that way but I think I'd rather focus on the things I really like to do as long as I can stand eating ramen an canned food.

What kind of stuff are you shooting for in terms of occupation or style?

[Anonymous No.3232157]

>>3232082
>>3232093
Your crabbiness... only fuels my motivation!!!

[Anonymous No.3232172]

[Anonymous No.3232176]

>>3232172
So where you at now?

[Anonymous No.3232178]

>>3232176
At blank, I do not draw.

[Anonymous No.3232180]

>>3232178
I too wish to do things when I don't do them

[Anonymous No.3232214]

>>3232157
i believe in you! dont give up

[Anonymous No.3232351]

>>3232122
go eat a dick, babyboy. can't take criticism? get off the internet.

[Anonymous No.3232496]

>>3232099
are you fucking retarded? furries are the ones most likely to "make it" (if making it is being happy with your own work while making large amounts of money for you)

[Anonymous No.3232527]

>>3232115
Tell me you secret to how you achieve this quality sensei? Is it a 60 000 x 80 0000 canvas?

[Anonymous No.3232673]

>>3232496

Give me one successful rich furry artist that is satisfied with it's life.

[Anonymous No.3232675]

>>3232527

photobash

[Anonymous No.3233350]

>>3232675
Nope. Nothing in the image is in the character itself is photobashed. Only thing that could be considered a photo is the ~40% overlay paper texture I have over the whole thing.

I sculpted the base character and the chains without all the clothes and a lot of the skin detail in Zbrush so there is that.... I'm actually trying to learn rendering stuff without the use of photos in this piece. it's all still pretty messy if you look closely. Nothing wrong with photobashing though if it makes your piece look better. Just didn't do it this time.

>>3232527

The image is 6500 pixels high. I'm running on old hardware so I'm always having to merge the layers so my computer doesn't crash. Having detail everywhere isn't really a sign of quality. If I was painting this I would have started with the silhouette and only rendered out the focal areas or where the light is hitting. I'm not sure if I'll be doing this overly rendered shit with Zbrush->Photoshop in the future if this piece comes out looking too sharp everywhere.

[Anonymous No.3233354]

>>3233350
>bellybutton
kek
nice work senpai

[Anonymous No.3233385]

>>3225852

[Anonymous No.3233450]

started two months ago

[Anonymous No.3233471]

>>3232673
Who said rich?
Kihu makes a decent living and he is pretty happy fron what I see.

[Anonymous No.3233473]

>>3233450
wow how do i get as good as you xD?

[Anonymous No.3233475]

>>3232673
I hope this is bait because there are so many furry artists out there who are able to make a living doing what they love.

[Anonymous No.3233480]

>>3233473
just lack fundies, commitment, line confidence, depth, values, hues, etc.

[Anonymous No.3234645]

>>3225852
How does a /beg/ scrub like me git gud at animation?

[Anonymous No.3234653]

>>3234645
Practice

[Anonymous No.3236114]

>>3226152
get better taste than that fucking eye rape

[Anonymous No.3236128]

>>3230137
who is the middle painting?

[Anonymous No.3236171]

>>3225852

[Anonymous No.3236175]

[Anonymous No.3236241]

>>3230115
who made the bottom two pictures?
>>3233385
tight. gotta blog?

[Anonymous No.3236254]

>>3229981
As a oil painter I find it faster and less challenging to do art traditionally opposed to digitally. It seems distant

>>3229981

[Anonymous No.3236279]

>>3236171
so you want to get worse and decrease in skill?

[Anonymous No.3236281]

>>3236279

[Anonymous No.3236709]

>>3226037
excellent perspective on the frame. blog?

[Anonymous No.3237444]

>>3236241
Jan Wes and Brent Hollowell

[Anonymous No.3237452]

>>3237444
thanks!

[Anonymous No.3237469]

>>3233385
fantastic. you're gonna make it