FA+
Shop
Transfur's new application process
14 years ago
If you're familiar with a thing called transformation art, then you're probably familiar with Transfur and its reputation of turning away artists wanting to join its noble ranks. It's "quality controlled", and of course in order to do that you have an application process. Quality controlled galleries are not my cup of tea (which is why I'll always come to FA over other sites that cater to TF) but nevertheless I try to maintain a presence there, if only because I find the politics of it fascinating and I like to get involved to uh, protect my own interests, as it were. You know, keepin' it weird, keepin' it accessible to people at various levels in their artistic development, that sort of thing. Plus, the comments there are pretty brutally sincere, which I can appreciate, from time to time.
Anyway, Transfur's new application process involves a round of committee commenting by existing Transfur members, giving critique and such, before the head honcho makes the final decision. It's a democratic approach I have no qualms over! In fact, I'm not even going to say anything with regards to whether the new application process is good or bad, it's too new to make those kinds of proclamations. It's certainly a step in the right direction. Rather, I'd like to use the application process as a springboard to ask some questions!
The main question is... what makes a TF picture better than another one? If it's a subject matter we all want to get better at, what do we improve on that's specific to the genre? When we talk about individual artists, it's easy to talk about their line quality, anatomy, perspective, color harmony, the rendering of light and shadow, composition, contrast, action lines, all sorts of stuff that there's a correct way to approach if the end result is an image that reads as visually pleasant. If you can level up in all of these skills, you can be a good artist.
There are, however, a few more esoteric skills that are specific to TF art that never get discussed because it's very hard to advise people on them. Technical skill or style are ancillary to the development of a great and effective piece of transformation art. Transformation is never a neutral subject matter, as emotional transformations are at the core of any character-driven story. Physical transformations are just a metaphor, then, for whatever emotion you want to get across. Anger and rage turns into a bloody, painful werewolf TF. Whimsical goofiness is a 'toon TF. A desire to be cuddled is a plush TF. A desire to be frightened might turn you into something that you're afraid of. It's about an interior emotion being made visible through a literal physical change in someone's body, and naturally the dual identities of this transforming person are crucial to interpretation. Before you even put pencil to paper (so to speak), knowing what emotion draws you to wanting to draw their changing body will tell you exactly how to pose your characters, what expressions they should have on their faces, where they are in the world, what their hopes and dreams are, the ways in which their body is being changed, what they're being changed by, etc.
Then again, does introspection make for a better piece of TF art? Like, does the community we're all supposedly drawing for prefer the expressive quality of TF art over the technical skill of the artist? I have no idea. Based on the critiques I read on Transfur's various applications, a critique of an artist's ability to connect their emotional lives with the art they draw is far below improving anatomical rendering. Here we are, all gathered around a very specific genre, we all have a common interest, but we're just farting around on the shore.
What are the qualities that make a good piece of TF art? What should we be saying to point beginners in the direction that's most relevant to the genre?
Anyway, Transfur's new application process involves a round of committee commenting by existing Transfur members, giving critique and such, before the head honcho makes the final decision. It's a democratic approach I have no qualms over! In fact, I'm not even going to say anything with regards to whether the new application process is good or bad, it's too new to make those kinds of proclamations. It's certainly a step in the right direction. Rather, I'd like to use the application process as a springboard to ask some questions!
The main question is... what makes a TF picture better than another one? If it's a subject matter we all want to get better at, what do we improve on that's specific to the genre? When we talk about individual artists, it's easy to talk about their line quality, anatomy, perspective, color harmony, the rendering of light and shadow, composition, contrast, action lines, all sorts of stuff that there's a correct way to approach if the end result is an image that reads as visually pleasant. If you can level up in all of these skills, you can be a good artist.
There are, however, a few more esoteric skills that are specific to TF art that never get discussed because it's very hard to advise people on them. Technical skill or style are ancillary to the development of a great and effective piece of transformation art. Transformation is never a neutral subject matter, as emotional transformations are at the core of any character-driven story. Physical transformations are just a metaphor, then, for whatever emotion you want to get across. Anger and rage turns into a bloody, painful werewolf TF. Whimsical goofiness is a 'toon TF. A desire to be cuddled is a plush TF. A desire to be frightened might turn you into something that you're afraid of. It's about an interior emotion being made visible through a literal physical change in someone's body, and naturally the dual identities of this transforming person are crucial to interpretation. Before you even put pencil to paper (so to speak), knowing what emotion draws you to wanting to draw their changing body will tell you exactly how to pose your characters, what expressions they should have on their faces, where they are in the world, what their hopes and dreams are, the ways in which their body is being changed, what they're being changed by, etc.
Then again, does introspection make for a better piece of TF art? Like, does the community we're all supposedly drawing for prefer the expressive quality of TF art over the technical skill of the artist? I have no idea. Based on the critiques I read on Transfur's various applications, a critique of an artist's ability to connect their emotional lives with the art they draw is far below improving anatomical rendering. Here we are, all gathered around a very specific genre, we all have a common interest, but we're just farting around on the shore.
What are the qualities that make a good piece of TF art? What should we be saying to point beginners in the direction that's most relevant to the genre?
Also it might be that Transfur it also trying to screen for less than desirable users (art skill aside) before they even get on the site. Weed out trolls, people who might be uploading the wrong things entirely, banned users, art thieves et cetera. So there's that possibility as well.
My main consideration is whether or not the person will benefit from being on Transfur. I hate to say it, but you kind of have to be a little self-conscious to survive on Transfur. Otherwise you won't be expecting the lukewarm response you'll inevitably get because the community standard is in this really weird place. At any rate, there's a core to the TF artist personality, and you can generally tell when someone's on the right track. Most people are, they're using art to explore some aspect of themselves in flux. You can tell that they see the potential in the medium. Regardless of how advanced they are in their technical explorations, that core is what I personally look for.
This probably does not apply to sequences of images, but I find it interesting when an artist can draw a single picture of one thing turning into another and we can picture clearly in our heads a before and after.
and yet I don't even use my account there anymore :V oops
It would be great if there was a place where (if I can be somewhat immodest) people capable of quality art and written transformation material could get together to help beginners learn what differentials good transformation material from crappy. God, there's so much crappy TF stuff.
So, on to what I actually think makes good TF art. Playing with the basic stereotypes can be fun, but because the basic themes have been done so often, it's hard to be impressed or (which, let's be honest, is a huge part of TF) excited by a man or woman turning into a bloodthirsty werewolf any more, unless it's done very well indeed.
Or perhaps that's just my personal taste. I'm realizing right now that my opinions on transformation art will require more time to explain than what I have to give right now. I will add more in a little while, if a discussion is desired.
That place is... everywhere! Wherever possible. Even in shitty places like the Tanuke comments section. :)
Makes me jealous of people like Swatcher who can "turn a phrase" in even a simple sketch better than I can.
I think that the expressive quality of an art piece is far more important than the way it's drawn. It's a problem only when the bad quality makes it hard for the viewer to get what the artist is trying to express. Correct communication of the message is usually why well drawn art is preferred, but just drawing well doesn't make your work immune to being boring. Meme faces are a good example of crude drawings with а well expressed emotional message.
The old approval process is a strong deterrent for many artists because it's an elitist club. It becomes not about quality, but about attitude - if a person keeps getting rejected, by the time they can draw well enough to be accepted, they will have accumulated enough spite and prefer not to participate on that website. Transfur is losing both people who draw well and those who don't, but have potentially good ideas.
It's great that you're trying to be as helpful and friendly as possible (because "you're not good enough" is just plain rude), but that doesn't make Transfur's system any better.
The biggest thing is the ability to show... motion? action? Conveying that the subject is indeed changing either through asymetrical transformation, the motion of tearing clothes, poses which would otherwise suggest the character is taking a huge dump, a collection of subjects at varying stages of transformation, or most simply, draw out a comic or series of images. It's a matter of telling a story and while the ability improves other forms of art, it's simply necessary to transformation.
It's also important to me to know the character's reaction, or, even better, show a change or a hypocrisy in that reaction. A character who is disgusted by or afraid of the change continually instigating (jekyll and hyde) or exacerbating the change, or a character who wholeheartedly wanted the change filling with terror on realizing the environmental implications of the change.
... I thought I had more to say, but I'm feeling rather tired.
As to the question pose, I agree with Githe to an extent(hi Githe, that's why you're getting this giant comment in your inbox for now reason!) I'd like to compare it to comics. I've always felt it is most important in TF (come to think of it I don't think i've ever drawn or painted a TF piece before so feel completely entitled to disregard everything i'm about to say) is story telling. If the piece doesn't seem to tell a story, and instead offers a snapshot with no past or future, then it no longer feels to be a transformation but simply a state of being we may not fully understand. This is why it seems to be easier to get a good reaction to a TF comic or sequence. Even in a singular image, however, the best TF pieces seem to tell a story.
You speak of baring an emotion physically, and I agree, it is this emotion that ties you to the story, makes it feel both real an relevant. And as to the quality of the art representing the story, it can help make it feel more real or more abstract. For example a piece may be crafted in vivid living detail, leaving nearly nothing to the imagination. This tells the story most accurately and makes it seem more real, but separates the audience to an extent since they obviously aren't the subject of the piece (unless they are, at which point it becomes entrancingly creepy and surreal.) Compare this to a piece where the anatomy, shading and overall technique are poor, but the artist leaves the work vague and open enough that the subject could be nearly anyone. While the piece itself lacks the reality of the beautiful rendering, the audience can more easily attach to it, since they could just as easily be the subject as any other.
Like a comic book story, either piece stands the potential to come across as a wonderful bit of TF if the story telling is well done. Just as many people read Archie comics as they do any of the more detailed pulp fiction comics, but speaking to both readers I am willing to bet most would say they read it for the story, even if the art is what made them pick it up the first time.
You have an interesting standpoint on that seeing as you work both writing and artwork, I'm actually curious that you didn't bring up the point yourself.