the other thing about shape is that the shape would also be based somewhat off the person the costume is being designed for if it is a customizable one. id think expression would be the most important but i dunno.

Well, shape is a big part of how you get expression. so, they are really one in the same. Well, somewhat.

Half of the fandom is a lol dog/woof/fox so therein tells you just how creative it is as a collective.

I think everyone is very capable of understanding the concept. I just never seen it laid out this way. Most of the time the artists that understand it don't really go around preaching it. As important as it is, I could see why it started to become overlooked.

I disagree a little, in a fandom where much character artwork comes from the minds of people who are not emotionally invested in the character, you're going to see a lot of variation in things like shape.. My character has been drawn in like 40 different ways, as an example. So the features that stay the same from one image to the next tend to be things like coloring or special markings. In my case, wings with two-tone feathers, a particular type of collar, a particular color of mane.. but from there I usually offer the artist freedom to do their best work.

I've seen some people nitpick their commissions, to me it's like sending a meal back at a restaurant four or five times because the steak isn't oriented properly on the plate, or the potato doesnt steam the perfect amount, or whatever..

I agree with you. but you do have to realize that my experience makes my opinion somewhat subjective. As I do not have an eraser, and what I make is the representation of the character as a mascot for years at a time.

though there is something to be said in stylization. I do think that any artist could draw Micky Mouse, and you could tell it was Micky Mouse regardless of how stylized it was. http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://images.easyart.com/i/prints/rw/en_easyart/sm/8/3/Mickey-Mouse-Andy-Warhol-8380.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.easyart.com/art-prints/artists/Andy-Warhol-208.html&h=150&w=150&sz=10&tbnid=5waTujjMoJbt5M:&tbnh=94&tbnw=94&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dmickey%2Bmouse%2Bandy%2Bwarhol%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=mickey+mouse+andy+warhol&docid=36HWMWzTwIikyM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=h5uETtzMGcagtgfQkeA7&ved=0CDIQ9QEwAw&dur=1203

To be fair, Mickey Mouse is also a highly protected and extremely popular trademark

I think that's fair to mention. But What makes him able to be trademarked is the very topic of this discussion.

http://images.easyart.com/i/prints/.....arhol-8380.jpg

sorry about the broken link

Agreed! I had an incredibly hard time when i attempted this with my own fursuit. I couldn't decide what pictures to use as the actual reference for him, and my first attempt suffered greatly because I focused more on things like the fur pattern and what type of eyes did it have as opposed to the expression. It was all quite overwhelming for someone who hasn't done it before, but I'm glad I made an attempt. The next suit I have planned focuses more on building a distinct character and tone as opposed to just the making it look like a *insert animal type here* with specific markings. But you're completely correct: It all starts from a good reference sheet.

I think one of the issues is finding an artist that can do justice to how you imagine a character based on yourdescriptions. While I know exactly what my character is supposed to look like, getting someone else to understand that is difficult; plus many artists won't pay that much attention to the more detailed instructions. A friend of mine is a boxer dog but a lot of the art he gets back isn't shaped like a boxer, but a more generic dog. If you're also on a limited budget and consider the language barriers you can run into then you can't always afford to keep trying for a better piece.

this. I learned from my first commissioned ref sheet that it is hard to get across EXACTLY how you see your character to someone else and not everyone is artistic enough to make a perfectly shaped ref of their character. would be interesting to see just how many people have this issue and how they take care of that.

sometimes people buying a fursuit can't draw very well, in which case they should go to a person who can do a ref sheet for them, like myself, or others. it really is about the 3D presentation. I have to redo my fursuit ref soon so I my fursuit maker can have it and hopefully the suit will come out looking somewhat how I picture it.

It's not easy. I hope I am not coming across as if it is not a challenge to get it perfect.

A lot of makers point out this exact fact. If you are making an investment in a fursuit, you should be able to afford something additional that is less than 2% of the cost.

I spent a whole whopping $40 on a ref sheet for and it made a huge difference. I didn't give the person references, I just gave them a long description of my character.

How did that effect the end result? You be the judge.

Ref: http://daverab.net/share/muah.jpg

Final Suit: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4232624/

$40 is cheap

just saying

Maybe it was $60. I do not remember at the moment. Regardless, I would have paid up to $150 or $200 easy. The suit is "my" character, it's important to me.

$60 is also cheap lol

Exactly. Getting the perfect reference is VERY important

the colors are off slightly in the fursuit, but sometimes fabric colors are limited to begin with, but that's pretty damn good looking! I might look into getting someone to make specifically a fursuit ref for me, though I should be able to do that myself, since I'm not a bad artist. but if it works out better I'll probably go to someone else soon

I disagree. People choose YOU to build their fursuit because they like your style. They usually want their character portrayed in your style, so all you need in a ref sheet, is colors and markings (and special extras like wings if the character has them).

Same with artists, it'd be so boring to get the same again and again. That's why I ask different artists with different styles to draw my character, because I like the variety and because I can expect what I'll get when I look at their gallery. :)

It's not about getting the same thing over and over again, so much as letting the artist take what they do, and 'interpret' your character.

But your character should still have a specific 'shape' to them that is recognizable. Let's take my character Sasha for an example.

Sasha has a rather unique shape that is pretty identifiable, with or without colors.

She's a rabbit, around 5'7" or so in height. She-male, with wide hips and a big, round butt. Shoulder-length hair, and a small but not entirely flat chest (around an A or B cup).

Just as a warning, some of the artwork I'm linking to is adult in nature. Just so you're not entirely taken by surprise.

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/3840989/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/3855239/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4078738/

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4767427/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5760421/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5760481/

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/6043889/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/6062643/


...see how through the various pieces she has a specific 'shape' to her? This is what he's getting at. Some of the pieces are colored, but many are not...but you can still tell who the character is.

Oh, I like that you mentioned that. Excellent point.

Because you do make a very good point. What is my style?

But what I would like to add is that I rarely give myself artistic freedom. At least to the point you woiuld think. I offer "fursuit previews" form an artist friend who makes them up for me. So, most of the time we can give somebody who is commissioning me an idea of what would work best in 3d. But I just leave that to the artist, then basically find the technical way to make it match the sheet.

Though I do like the idea of style. I think I may have worded this post in such a way that it seems that I do not appreciate artistic spin. That's not true. What I really mean to say is that even with artistic spin you should be able to tell what the character is regardless of the spin. Even if you prefer the style of an artist over a strict style of your character (witch is perfectly fine) you can sacrifice the identity of the character if you have too much.

Well, when it comes to trademarks you have to be able to associate a character with a product, brand, team, or company. You can't do that, no dice. And if you fail to protect said trademark, you lose the right to it, which is why Disney will sue your pants off if something looks similar enough and I typically don't mess with Disney Characters XD


I think the problem here lies a lot in the "everything is a dog" state of the fandom. Huskies, wolves and foxes really just don't look that different from other huskies wolves and foxes once the color is gone unless they're super toony so most people just slap them on a templated ref sheet

I totally meant to reply above. Dangit FA!

I see what you are saying, but the topic itself remains the same regardless of the trademark state of the character used as an example. If I used a non-trademarked character in my example, it would still stand as the same argument.

I'm unique, I'm a dog.
But uhhhh I'm a yellow polka dotted dog with star pupils that are silver and the tip of my tail changes colour and has to be an LED.

I think people are so wrapped up in LOOKING unique that they forget about BEING unique.
Example: JD puppy is a brown fucking dog
A BROWN DOG

everyone knows him on sight.
Clearly being unique has nothing to do with stupid colouration, and everything to do with what you invest in that generic animal.

But thats just my opinion after being asked to make a trillion hideously coloured things with hideously coloured things that go on their hideously coloured butts.

Yesss I agree on JD! It's his bouncy acting that made him extra special :)

Its his engine FUELED BY PURE RAGE that never lets him stop bouncing XD

But yes, I wish all us fursuiters could be as unique in character as he is!

THIS has been eating at me for ages. The huge rule of character design is you have to be able to recognize the character as a SILLOUHETTE. WHO'S THAT POKEMON?! etcetera. As far as fursuits are concerned, 90% of the fandom just wants the same recolored humanoid with digitigrade legs and animal head X.

I actually wonder what the point of most of these furries getting character model sheets even IS. No one draws them on model anyway. It's my style, etc. :/

It was a pretty fun challenge to draw a shitload of b/w icons for furries, especially with so many canines! The nice thing about cartoons is that I can shape the head to fit the personality (if I have a clue at all). I don't mind all the similar shaped anthros with complicated markings, ...they're just a different style and less fun for toony artists, I guess.
The way I draw my own character is very stylized but I do like it when people change it completely to fit their own drawing style. It's even better when it fits their drawing style, but you can still see that it's my character and not just any random lemur. Makes me super happy :D

I should have used you as my example instead of Mickey Mouse.

YES, shaping the heads to fit the personality! That's what's kinda missing around this site...
So many soulless fap fodder characters.....

...Pretty much my comment from yesterday: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/6582560
I'm happy that by now Kiki is pretty regocnisable! I hardly ever draw in her markings. In fact her markings kind of put me off, I don't like the patches around the eyes, the markings on the hands and such, but that's because she's based of a real lemur. If I designed her knowing what I know now she probably would be all one color... and not a lemur, haha. Then again, all one color doesn't really work well for fursuits! Markings are important in a way that they can enhance the shape. I really tried to do that with Lindy and Hop, hope it works out.

I agree somewhat. Blue would not be Blue if she was not short, skinny, and flatchested with her strangely shaped head and large ears. Li would not be Li without being short, skinny, having a long poofy tail, large ears, and a large nose. But i feel that its personality and backstory that REALLY makes the characters.

I can agree with that. but character design focusing on the artistic point is still the most important for character recognition. Implied attitudes and emotions in the character are part of that, it may even make the character "come to life". But on paper, as boring as it is, you still need to be able to tell who it is before you get to see the character act in character.

Oh yes i understand. It really annoys me when people draw Blue (a pitbull bull terrier mix) with a generic dog head. She doesnt look the same like that 8/

CONE FACE PLZ

You mention some good points, I would love for my character to be recognizable through silhouette alone, but without needing to use gimmicky clothes/accessories to do it. (Of course I want to make a ton of gimmicky and joking clothes and accessories for fun, but I also want to be able to be recognized without them.)

But to be perfectly honest, I have no idea what the perfect 3D shape of his head or body is. I can't even decide on a hairstyle, because like me, it can change at anytime.

Usually I'll just tell an artist that I'm a lion with a gold mane. (Gold. not blonde. big difference) And then he's me. Base as much as you'd like off of the personality you've met, how I look or hold myself in real life. That seems to be the easiest way to get my own attitudes or emotions implied into the art well, without it turning into a caricature of one thing.

I disagree that character design boils down entirely to shape. Also, it's a bit unfair to take something like Stitch or Mickey Mouse and use them to prove your point when they are characters who have appeared just about everywhere. We're not talking about someones personal character that maybe a couple thousand of people will see once or twice, you're talking about international celebrity characters who've been seen by millions of people over and over again. Of course recognition is easy when one has been exposed to the same thing, perhaps even for years. So it is not really that these characters have a 'unique' shape, quite the contrary, both examples are very basic (and are almost designed around simple geometric shapes---no doubt for ease of animation) and would easily fail to be 'unique' were they not legally trademarked because of their appearance in films, cartoons, merchandise, ect. The basic design element of any character can be rehashed only so many times---it is the combination of a unique shape and other design elements (ie: colors, markings) that also set the character apart and make it recognizable.

Incidentally, I've done several reference sheets for people getting fursuits, and now I just don't do them anymore. The customer wants a fursuit in a specific fursuiters style. The fursuit maker wants a ref sheet to work off of. The artist just wants to draw the ref sheet to the best of their ability (ie: in their style). So now you have a team of 3 people, all of whom don't want the same things from one another.

Character design beyond markings and color is important, yes, but so is how someone actually draws or constructs things. That is why I like getting badges from tons of people---because each artist puts their unique spin on the character based on their techniques for drawing. Most people who've approached me for commissions have always had art from lots of other artists because they enjoy the variation.

Going back to your example, a silhouette of a Pokemon is recognizable, but when drawn by another artist, that same Pokemon silhouette is probably not nearly as recognizable and one must take into account the markings/color/environment/actions as well.

However. you do have to realize, the reason I go to such extremes in my examples is to get people thinking about how they in-vision their own character. It is contextual in the fact that I make expensive costumes for people. For me to truly make them happy in their purchase I need them to have a good idea of what they would like. Of course it is fun to have an artist take a swing at a character stylistically. Stylization is HUGELY important. However, as fun as that is, are you truly representing the character? Well.. it's not so simple. There is no black and white to what our little fandom is.
I do think that as fun as stylizing a character is, the term "stylization" cna only be applied if there is a solid character to start with. Without that, you are not really drawing a character in your style, you are just drawing the animal in question your way. that dose not denote a character with your spin on it. Rather, it denotes...well.. I am at a loss for words on what that is. the bottom line remains, you need a character first. (not to imply that it is easy to do so)

If I had to make an argument for a side, I guess I would do what I am dong with this post. Ask how we could make our own characters as notable as Stitch, or Mickey. I know that it's not going to happen. I do think it is important to strive towards knowing what your character is beyond color and markings.

The real issue came to me after I had posted this initial rant (sorry for the late reply, I failed to see this, and, let's face it, I am bad at keeping track of comments on FA). I have explored the topic a little more, and I wanted to get out the new perspective I had.

You are an artist. so, this may look a little different to you.

To shift our perception a little bit, I am going to ask you to mentally participate in some role playing. Okay, let me set up the scene for you.

You are a furry, (okay, you got that covered already), and you are not an artist. You cannot draw to save your life, BUT you want a drawing of your character.

Okay, you hit a wall.

so you go to an artist (such as yourself, well, not yourself when you can't draw. The other yourself, the one who can draw. But for the sake of our role playing you have to remember that you can't draw, except that you can, however that is not you) and ask for a commission.

What, as a commissioner who can't show you the image in your brain of your character to another human being have control over? Color, and patterns.

So, my theory comes from this situation. It all boils down to character control. If you are not an artist, what is the one thing you can control, thus distinguishing you from other characters? Color, and markings. Regardless of the artist's style, the novice can identify his/her own creation by the one element they can control.

This can cause a problem though. I feel it can lead to an "identity crisis" in ones idea of their character. Aside form the obvious implications of one not being able to actually get their idea out of their own heads, I feel this can cause a problem in a much more broader context.

We can agree that Mickey and Stitch have good character design (well, not Mickey, I am not a huge fan). I think, though you are 100% correct in stating that they are indeed Internationally recognized characters, the real point is that we should be striving to do our best. Furthermore, how are we to teach universally sound ideas such as true character design in an atmosphere of so many ill-informed furries? The fact is that without a proper basis for what makes something your own we don't have much left. This goes even further when you hear about CHARACTER THEFT! In the real world the idea of only haveing color and markings decide what makes a character is laughable. In a legal context it is laughable. The point is, with such a limited scope of what makes a character, style itslef is thrown out the window. When the simple mistake of making an animal the same color scheme can illicit such backlash, and evoke such terms as "copycat", I think we are missing the point. This is unhealthy.

We cannot allow our pedantic impulses to override our common sense. we need to educate beyond our comfortable elements of control, and realize what we really want to make of our characters.
I do, of course, agree with many of your points. I do also think that we should not allow ourselves to be defined only by a few less important aspects of character design. Our identity should not lie exclusively in a misunderstanding of what it is to be a character. I think we could all be a little deeper than that.

It was because of this that I chose you to make Porter. You did serious research into Corgis; proportions, head shape, ear shape, leg-to-body, head-to-body. You did an amazing job with her, too!

But yeah, I see this in art commissions too. "/ Too many unoriginal characters floating around, and you can't really tell who's who because they all look the same..

(Also, I'm hoping I'll be able to get my next suit from you!)

http://fyuvix.deviantart.com/

one of the best artists that I've seen in the line of characterization.

This drives me nuts when I see auctions for suits that do not look like what is being sold.

Totally agree with Corgi, I'm glad to finally see a fursuit maker cater to what the suiter wants, not what the maker sees in his/her head

Shape and expression mean everything...if Taffy looked like a stick figure with just a flat expression she would not be the character I see her being. She could be black and blue for all I care- her shape and her adorable expression is what really makes her Taffy, setting her apart from other characters and making her unique.

Everyone's insight is really interesting to read. Great stuff, but I agree with what's being said. Really hope that my character design sheet I sent you isn't the one that made you go onto this rant though If it was though we should fix it xD

And amen :3c I need to think about this more myself, really. I should do that.

I hope I'm unique enough :V

I highly agree with this. It's always a great thing when you have a character that even if the piece is coloured or not you can still say "Oh hey, I know that's (character here) because it's anatomy looks spot on like them."

Like how you said with Stitch, Mickey mouse as well as other characters that have something to them anatomy wise that separates them from the rest.

I have simple anatomy for my characters, nothing really sets them as "unique" except for them either being very voluptuous, or being very lithe. There is one character of mine I'd love to have of in two different suit style, one as how I draw her, and the other suit with a more recognizable silhouette (Renamon's anatomy with her colours, since I can't find anyone to touch the idea of a renamon suit for commission)

And in regards to the user saying "You can't make a Mickey Mouse or Stitch Mascot suit because Disney will sue you" is incorrect, they can't just slap you with a lawsuit. You'd need to:

1. Have open commissions and make/sell multiple (in mass amounts, not just one or two) suits that would attract attention away from the company
2. Have them mass produced and sell them off without corporation permission

However, if the suit is your own personal suit, they can't even whine at you about that. Though, back on topic, even if you were doing situations one or two, the company would have to personally contact you via email, snail mail, notes on the art sites, or even a phone call and say to you (basically) "Hey you need to stop this, or we'll sue you"

They have to give you pretense of their actions and cannot come out of the blue with a lawsuit. Most people don't know that and just simply don't delve into the subject of making copyright characters on anything.

*babbles*

"I can do stylized, yes. My job is not to stylize, it is to capture your character exactly how you want it. I have the technical skill to do it, but the reference to get it off the paper in in you hands is up to you to decide."

I can vouch for that! When you made my head, I couldn't believe how EXACT you got my character! It is the perfect shape and I couldn't ask for a more perfect fursuit head of my character.

I agree wholeheartedly. And it would also be helpful if a summary of the character's personality didn't boil down to "Badass" like every other personality description.