
Here is my part of a trade with
Ernst
Seems Ernst himself decided to leave the band and go single, but first he decided to tie up some ends ^^
This is his half ^^
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2057398

Seems Ernst himself decided to leave the band and go single, but first he decided to tie up some ends ^^
This is his half ^^
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2057398
Category All / Fat Furs
Species Mammal (Other)
Size 885 x 651px
File Size 144.6 kB
Nice work, BD!
Remember, though, when you draw eyes, that the furthest eye must be partially obscured behind the bridge of the nose/snout. I've drawn a little correction in MSPaint to illustrate this:
http://i483.photobucket.com/albums/.....as/compare.png
Keep at it :)
Remember, though, when you draw eyes, that the furthest eye must be partially obscured behind the bridge of the nose/snout. I've drawn a little correction in MSPaint to illustrate this:
http://i483.photobucket.com/albums/.....as/compare.png
Keep at it :)
yah but the way my drawing style has eyes it makes it difficult to show that ^^:, i had 2 choices, not use my style, which i could of i guess or go with it which i did ^^: ... anyway thanks again i do appreciate the feedback ^^ gives me something to think on in my next pic ^^
But cartoons DO apply the laws of physics and anatomy. Cartoons don't ignore them, they subvert them. You must first have a good grasp on both before you try to selectively ignore them. It's verisimilitude - the act of making a picture believable within its own framework. BD drew these eyes so they looked like they were floating in front of the nose. This is unintentional, it isn't done for humour, and it doesn't look right unless there were other elements likewise subverted like this. Unless BD's characters are unilaterally flatfish, the "style" or "it's a cartoon" excuse doesn't fly.
Please don't give bad advice. Saying that the laws of our universe don't apply to cartoons wholesale is a false assumption. Cartoons are a simplified reflection of life, and so they must follow the same rules (even tenuously) in order to make sense within their own framework.
Please don't give bad advice. Saying that the laws of our universe don't apply to cartoons wholesale is a false assumption. Cartoons are a simplified reflection of life, and so they must follow the same rules (even tenuously) in order to make sense within their own framework.
I'm not giving false advice. For I can name several cartoons that had been aired on TV which were drawn without the verisimilitude. Instead they created something all different. For example the two stupid dogs series on cartoon network.
Cartoons aren't simplified instead they are drawn in the laws of its creator. Many of these cases its simplified but that isn't the standard which a cartoon is based on. Another example is that you can make a cartoons legs more shorter then the actually real life animal has. This is done by the artist to make the cartoon more funnier.
Cartoons aren't simplified instead they are drawn in the laws of its creator. Many of these cases its simplified but that isn't the standard which a cartoon is based on. Another example is that you can make a cartoons legs more shorter then the actually real life animal has. This is done by the artist to make the cartoon more funnier.
"Two Stupid Dogs" is stylised (and possibly inspired by Picasso) and also consistent with it's stylisation. The "Eyes on one side of the head" only works if the picture is completely flat, like in that cartoon - that way, there's no preconception of 3D. Also, it makes animating the characters a lot cheaper. Still images do not have that excuse.
Cartoons, especially cartoon animals, are usually caricatures of real things. For example, a hyena could have really tiny legs and huge forearms because it's an exaggeration to bring these details to the forefront. Departures from reality also serve to shape a character's personality into their physical form.
Finally, an artist should try to develop their skills without committing themselves to a style. "Style" is a tertiary goal. Once you develop enough, you've already got a style. But while you're learning, you should never, ever, ever stick to one style. It's tantamount to stagnation.
Cartoons, especially cartoon animals, are usually caricatures of real things. For example, a hyena could have really tiny legs and huge forearms because it's an exaggeration to bring these details to the forefront. Departures from reality also serve to shape a character's personality into their physical form.
Finally, an artist should try to develop their skills without committing themselves to a style. "Style" is a tertiary goal. Once you develop enough, you've already got a style. But while you're learning, you should never, ever, ever stick to one style. It's tantamount to stagnation.
I see your English is far better then mines because its not mine mother language. ^^; Anyway everyone has different opinions and views how they see the world and its stuff like art. I'm of the opinion once you have found a style you like you should try to stick to it. Improve it only when you find it's important to do so and not what others think/say. Of course other can give you tips or their opinion but in the end its the artist himself who decides if it should chance.
What I mean to say its up for BD to decide if he wants to alter his style and not us. We can only give him our opinions and its up to him to decide. And someone who gives his opinion can't ever give the person false advice. At least that's mine opinion.
What I mean to say its up for BD to decide if he wants to alter his style and not us. We can only give him our opinions and its up to him to decide. And someone who gives his opinion can't ever give the person false advice. At least that's mine opinion.
Comments