/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.4117583]

Explain in detail why this is shit. I know its shit, but i want to know why its shit,

[Anonymous No.4117586]

>>4117583
All the round surfaces look like they're made of wall padding for crazy people.

[Anonymous No.4117590]

>>4117583
It’s shit because you are a cum gobbling faggot who can’t keep a conversation in the thread where it started.

It’s shit because you murdered another thread to post an asinine question

It’s shit because you posting a fucking 3.9MB image that takes an hour to load

It’s shit because you are a new fag who came here for the summer

[Anonymous No.4117670]

Style over substance.

[Anonymous No.4117676]

>>4117583
story. what the fuck is happening.

[Anonymous No.4117693]

>>4117583
line weight has no variation, over detail figures and backgrounds make it difficult to distinguish shapes and slows the comprehension time for each panel.
Guy in 2nd panel looks like he has a short elephant foot instead of a knee. It's a combination of extreme foreshortening with no tapering and "sci-fi" armor that makes a knee not look like a knee.
Venom poofs into existence with no foreshadowing or establishing shot to show him not there and then to have him surprise them. there's no sense to time passing in the last three panels

[Anonymous No.4117705]

>>4117583
Reminder that spam is a reportable offense
Reminder that sage exists

Nothing to do with this thread, just saying

[Anonymous No.4117718]

>>4117693
>line weight has no variation
stopped reading after this because you're objectively wrong

[Anonymous No.4117784]

>>4117583
the foot in the 3rd panel is kinda weird, but other than that its pretty good

[Anonymous No.4117831]

>>4117693
>line weight has no variation
What the fuck?

[Anonymous No.4118227]

>>4117831
I think when people say Tradd Moore's "line weight has no variation" they mean the line weight is inconsistent with the form of the objects. Thick lines are way too thick, thin lines are way too thin.
It does look a bit odd. His work in general has no texture (he seems to never uses hatching for texture, only to express plane changes) which is why people say the lines look inorganic. The pavements all look like literal grids, the windows in panel 2 are just rectangles in perspective. What material are the walls? Concrete, steel? He drew the explosion by outlining the forms instead of hatching which makes it look like a creamy thing rather than smoke.

There are definitely flaws like the aforementioned and the weird paneling shit he does which might not be his fault, and subjectively I think it's ugly. But I don't get the hate, he's a skilled artist by capeshit standards and he's drawing action stuff, not Wonder Woman undressing. Better than some Tumblr shitter getting greenlit to fill a quota.

[Anonymous No.4118240]

>>4118227
I was just looking at this and yeah, I feel like he's a Moebius if not a Hergé fan but he fell into some twisted idea of "ligne claire" as super slick and clean and set himself a lot of limitations (no texture > a little texture > too much texture?). By all means that makes him distinctive but if he would loosen up, add some texture etc. his work would look more "complete".
My 2 subjective cents of course, he's good as he is.

[Anonymous No.4118241]

>>4118240

[Anonymous No.4118243]

>>4118241
man moebius was so fucking good

[Anonymous No.4118245]

>>4117583
the lack of texture makes it feel like a coloring book. perfect grids just sitting in perspective w/o breaking the horizon at all makes the scene feel completely artificial. more subjectively, the cleaness of his inks & shape design is incongruous with the dynamism he's pushing for.
in contrast, take this panel from the goon. it's just a basic 1 shot that anyone could do but there's enough texture and asymmetry that i know far more information than one of tradd's panels

[Anonymous No.4118246]

>>4118240
His B&W art looks like it's supposed to be colored but hasn't been yet. His colored works actually look fantastic because his style suits it.

[Anonymous No.4118251]

>>4118246
True but this also >>4118243 >>4118240 was meant to be colored

[Anonymous No.4119106]

>>4117693
KEK, that was his knee?

[Anonymous No.4119128]

>>4117583
Not enough variety when it comes to shape.
Too many round edges.
No variety in line weight.
Everything is outlined, making everything look flat.

[Anonymous No.4119164]

>>4119128
>>No variety in line weight.
Blind retard
>Everything is outlined, making everything look flat.
Complete retard

[Anonymous No.4119413]

Okay I went and looked at more from the dude, it's not that there isn't line variation, its what he decides should be a solid line and how thick that line should be is whats off.
It makes everything flat, it looks intentional, but his art looks like it comes out of one of those, This is how you draw super hero books.

[Anonymous No.4119427]

>>4119413
actually this looks fucking terrible
so as long as the linework is really clean people will say it's good?

[Anonymous No.4119511]

>>4119427
Are you able to explain why it’s bad?

[Anonymous No.4119535]

>>4119511

[Anonymous No.4119542]

>>4119511
Because his lines are garbage, is it that hard to tell?

[Anonymous No.4121290]

>>4119542
>>4119535
so basically hatching good and clean&spotless linework bad?

[Anonymous No.4121316]

>>4119542

[Anonymous No.4123374]

[slurping slushie shit dripping]

[Anonymous No.4123396]

>>4117583
because it's unappealing as fuck
Aftercoming back from roaming on twitter looking at godtier artists I can't be bothered to take it lightly on this guy
it's shit

[Anonymous No.4123673]

>>4119542
>Because his lines are garbage, is it that hard to tell?
they arent tho, just cuz u dont like them it doesnt mean they are objective wrong

[Anonymous No.4123677]

>>4117583
Is that Tradd Moore? His art is really weird.,

[Anonymous No.4124096]

>>4118245
>the lack of texture makes it feel like a coloring book
Maybe you shouldn't criticize a "colouring" book for being a colouring book.

[Anonymous No.4124112]

>>4117583
the shape language is too circular and smooth. makes everything look goofy as fuck. Also the panels are extremely monotonous.Not enough variety. the storytelling is not very clear either.

[Anonymous No.4127041]

>>4124096
this is really disorienting, trying too hard with the details

[Anonymous No.4127045]

>>4117590
t. polack who can't afford a computer made after the year 1997

[Anonymous No.4127070]

>>4117583
Try not to use lines that thick for anything but the silhouette. The anatomy is wonky, but you probably know that. Build the armor around the body, not vice versa.

[Anonymous No.4127071]

>>4127070
lol

[Anonymous No.4127074]

>>4127070
Anon, I...

[Anonymous No.4127101]

>>4117583
Not enough straight lines and your drawing looses its structure, too many curves and you end up with more of a boneless blob. You can compare hogarth and bridgeman to see what I’m talking about, one Doesn’t have enough straights and the other doesn’t have enough curves. They’re both great to learn from but you still need to learn a good ratio of cs- for your subject and style to differ from other while still looking good.

[Anonymous No.4127180]

A better comparision than Moebius would be Magnus, I think. Alan Ford too has this 'clean' inking, but has much stronger black-on-white contrast

[Anonymous No.4128437]

>>4127180
based and greenwhiteandredpilled

[Anonymous No.4128541]

>>4127180
Based

[Anonymous No.4128670]

>>4117583
IT DOESNT HAVE SOME HOT ANIME BITCHES

[Anonymous No.4128756]

>>4117590
shut the fuck up faggot
no one cares about your bitching

[Anonymous No.4131709]

[juicy poo poo sloshing slushie shit drinik]