FA+
Shop
Furry Art Pet Peeves/Criticisms
6 years ago
General
I’ve mulled over this list for a while because I wasn’t sure about the framing, because if you know what you’re doing, any art can be appealing. Therefore there are no “absolutes”, as well as the fact that it’s rather subjective. This is just another part of my musings about aesthetics from months ago.
But regardless, here are criticisms I have with quite a bunch of furry art, that don’t have to do with bad anatomy (because that’s a separate can of worms):
-Numerous painting errors like lighting with pure white, shading with black, pillow-shading, and poor rendering... all of which make the character look like plastic.
-Animals being drawn with the same canine head template, which is awkward on species that not even remotely resemble canids.
-Related to the above, drawing different animals with the same body type. Different animal parts can’t hide sameface syndrome if you’re using the same base for all your characters.
-Reptiles with big round craniums that just look a bit too mammalian. It looks uncanny most of the time.
-Hybrids with extremely cluttered and garish designs.
-Skins being covered with brightly-colored artificial patterns (squares, polka dots), which are mostly distracting eyesores that don’t really contribute to the design.
-Fursonas whose designs show no resemblance to the species they claim to be, and the art style is too awkward for the design to be justified with artistic license.
-In fandoms of specific media, furry OC designs that completely ignore the source material’s art style, mostly for the sake of “sex appeal”. A character looking so clearly out of place is always a turn off, no matter how attractive.
Like I said, it’s not impossible to make any “flawed” art look good, but these things are going to be a turn-off for me. Others with knowledge of aesthetics could decide that these could be either personal complaints or genuine criticisms.
But regardless, here are criticisms I have with quite a bunch of furry art, that don’t have to do with bad anatomy (because that’s a separate can of worms):
-Numerous painting errors like lighting with pure white, shading with black, pillow-shading, and poor rendering... all of which make the character look like plastic.
-Animals being drawn with the same canine head template, which is awkward on species that not even remotely resemble canids.
-Related to the above, drawing different animals with the same body type. Different animal parts can’t hide sameface syndrome if you’re using the same base for all your characters.
-Reptiles with big round craniums that just look a bit too mammalian. It looks uncanny most of the time.
-Hybrids with extremely cluttered and garish designs.
-Skins being covered with brightly-colored artificial patterns (squares, polka dots), which are mostly distracting eyesores that don’t really contribute to the design.
-Fursonas whose designs show no resemblance to the species they claim to be, and the art style is too awkward for the design to be justified with artistic license.
-In fandoms of specific media, furry OC designs that completely ignore the source material’s art style, mostly for the sake of “sex appeal”. A character looking so clearly out of place is always a turn off, no matter how attractive.
Like I said, it’s not impossible to make any “flawed” art look good, but these things are going to be a turn-off for me. Others with knowledge of aesthetics could decide that these could be either personal complaints or genuine criticisms.
