|
deathbot posted:I'm working on that 'draw a mermaid for May' challenge floating around, albeit with a sea slug (they're cuter) but after doing the base of the slug half.. I realized the human half was awful and erased it. Now I don't know how to position the new human torso to look natural and relaxed. Ideas? If you're doing this the way I think you are, you're attempting to re-draw from the bottom up, since your slug-bit is already solid in your mind? People are super difficult for me to draw from bottom up and always end up wonky, what you do is you draw the new human sketch starting with the head like you normally would, all nice and floppy, but you keep it away from the slug bit. Once you're happy with your torso pose, you move the sketch over the slug and rotate to adjust if needed, or you can just add a bit more slug to cover up.
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 11:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 18:48 |
|
|
 Learning how to do some colors
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
Sharpest Crayon posted:If you're doing this the way I think you are, you're attempting to re-draw from the bottom up, since your slug-bit is already solid in your mind? People are super difficult for me to draw from bottom up and always end up wonky, what you do is you draw the new human sketch starting with the head like you normally would, all nice and floppy, but you keep it away from the slug bit. Once you're happy with your torso pose, you move the sketch over the slug and rotate to adjust if needed, or you can just add a bit more slug to cover up. e: wait is "draw a mermaid for may" like, a thing? I may have to get on that at some point 
a hole-y ghost fucked around with this message at 17:45 on May 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
a hole-y ghost posted:e: wait is "draw a mermaid for may" like, a thing? I may have to get on that at some point There's a thing for everything. This one's called Mermay. See also: inktober, dinovember etc.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
Med School posted:
So hey you might benefit from looking at some photo reference - or life drawing - when learning how to do colour, because currently your light sources are inconsistent on the body and aside from the highlights, don't seem to affect the underlying colours much. 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
Diabetes Forecast posted:The art association here really liked my work, and they're a bunch of old people! Hell, this is Georgia, it's nerd central all over the state at this point. There's ten year old kids that know what 'Tsundere' means and I feel incredibly old when I think about that! It's just jacky-offy, it's "tits are fun, for me, the guy on the other side of the picture plane." You already get that it's not about how explicit or polite it is. It's sex without personality, context, reciprocity, without even desire unless you count the audience. "Objectification" i guess but usually if someone's using that word it's for an audience they think knows and agrees already. I think it's just like, if a woman has had to deal with impersonal male desire for her body alot, or even not a lot but enough to see a pattern, this treatment of sex in art may start to give her a super bad vibe-- one that she recognizes from real experiences that were frustrating or humiliating or scary. It starts to say "PUSHY BONER GUY INCOMING," and if you don't heed that and you give ppl the benefit of the doubt, maybe someone who renders 3D models of disney princess pussy takes it as an invitation to send you creepy PMs. It's hard to explain and it's hard to critique without getting personal, because it kinda is personal. My life just doesnt involve a lot of come-ons from dudes who don't care what i want except that they might get pissed about it. I doubt yours does either. I really wanna see a video of you showing this stuff to a bunch of old hippies though.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
swamp waste posted:It's just jacky-offy, it's "tits are fun, for me, the guy on the other side of the picture plane." You already get that it's not about how explicit or polite it is. It's sex without personality, context, reciprocity, without even desire unless you count the audience. "Objectification" i guess but usually if someone's using that word it's for an audience they think knows and agrees already. I'm trying to understand what you're saying here but i don't quite get it. I mean, aside from the obvious jab at Elsa which gonna be honest more I get to know him the less I want to do with him, which he's been getting bad plenty enough.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
the fact that you can't comprehend what's being said is exactly the problem dude
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
Troposphere posted:the fact that you can't comprehend what's being said is exactly the problem dude please explain to me, an idiot. I'm not what one would call terribly smart.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
what exactly did you not understand about swamp waste's post
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
Anything I could say (experiences, conversations with other artists and women, the artist lady who directly got me into drawing hot robots) would be brushed off as anecdotal. I just don't get it. I don't think it makes sense to react as things being so harsh, especially since i have no interest in objectifying persons, stalking, or any other things that could be seen. I can't be held accountable for other's actions, and I won't be blamed for other people's lovely behavior. I just draw for simple, idiot person reasons!
Diabetes Forecast fucked around with this message at 03:53 on May 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 03:50
|
|
|
I suppose I'd simplify objectification to the idea: "Are your pictures of this woman (robot or otherwise) essentially indistinguishable from a stick with tits and rear end stuck on?" Ignoring all details and talent in constructing that stick. Is the focal point just the tits and rear end? Does the posing, facial expressions, interaction with the environment etc. give the character any sense of personality, or is it nothing more than a dull object possessed of tits and rear end? I literally just finished a game in which the developer threatened to fire people if they didn't construct the perfect robot rear end, and it didn't bother me because the character could definitely not be reduced to just fap material without doing massive disservice to the care and thought put into her construction/design and the game's thematic interplay of sex, violence and literal objectification (which applied to both sexes.) But if 99% of the pictures shown in that game were a static pose of an expressionless robot exposing their vulva or an expressionless dick-wielding megarobot, AKA a stick with sexual organs stuck on it, then obviously that wouldn't give the same impression.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
deathbot posted:I literally just finished a game in which the developer threatened to fire people if they didn't construct the perfect robot rear end, and it didn't bother me because the character could definitely not be reduced to just fap material without doing massive disservice to the care and thought put into her construction/design and the game's thematic interplay of sex, violence and literal objectification (which applied to both sexes.) Ehhhh. I'm extremely skeptical that your game director had pure and non-fap related reasons for wanting the "perfect robot rear end". Like how could you spin that as essential for their deep and meaningful characterization? Like if your going for sex appeal or whatever that's fine but it seems really disingenuous to claim it's anything but. At least be honest about it.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 05:56
|
|
|
JuniperCake posted:Ehhhh. I'm extremely skeptical that your game director had pure and non-fap related reasons for wanting the "perfect robot rear end". Like how could you spin that as essential for their deep and meaningful characterization? Like if your going for sex appeal or whatever that's fine but it seems really disingenuous to claim it's anything but. At least be honest about it. Let's be reminded that Skullgirls was largely directed artistically by a lady and is almost exclusively wank material as well.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 06:03
|
|
|
no one doubts that women can be perverts too, that's not the point
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
Diabetes Forecast posted:Let's be reminded that Skullgirls was largely directed artistically by a lady and is almost exclusively wank material as well. I think the problem here, is you are trying to defend your art in such a way that people who are uncomfortable with it or at the very least don't like it, will change their mind about it. That's not a winnable battle. The fact is, your sexy robot art does make people uncomfortable in this thread, you know this because they've told you so. Swamp waste gave you some good reasons why. That doesn't mean you are bad for making it or whatever, it just means exactly what it means, they are uncomfortable with it. You don't have to defend your work's right to exist, or that you have good reasons to make it. You gotta do you. You have a right to be happy and make the work that makes you happy but just understand that the art that means one thing for you can mean something entirely different for other people who have had different experiences. If it helps, think of it like this. As an audience, we aren't the right ones for those kinds of pieces. You can keep putting those pieces up but the reaction to them isn't going to change. Though people have responded well to your other art, so why not focus on that in here and leave those other pieces to other venues where they might be better received? JuniperCake fucked around with this message at 06:32 on May 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 06:26
|
|
|
Oh no, it was definitely fap-related too. And the butt is perfect and very appreciable. The point is you can have sexiness without the 'stick with boobs on it' problem, since sexiness and objectification are not one and the same.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 06:35
|
|
|
guys I already said that I get this isn't the place. frankly though this site is stuck in it's old ways so it's not suprising. That, however, is in one giant contradiction of things, but no need to stew on the matter. But honestly, if I were totally sincere and actually wrote down even a quarter of my ideas, I don't make alot of 'fap material', I just make things that are fun to me. What is expected of my work based on a few pieces isn't always the same as the other. I shouldn't have to explain that but that's how things seem to go. This is why people I meet IRL don't have an issue 'getting' my work, because most of the time it's clear when I take a different approach. I just wanna make toy robots with cool gimmicks. but i like writing stories for my dumb toy robots. I just don't care to post paragraphs of poo poo about things here because it'd ultimately read like a book report and no one would like it.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
The thread's title is startlingly appropriate.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 07:22
|
|
|
Diabetes Forecast posted:guys I already said that I get this isn't the place. frankly though this site is stuck in it's old ways so it's not suprising. That, however, is in one giant contradiction of things, but no need to stew on the matter. I wanna hear more about this opinion right here. Edit: Also I'm not sure that the lack of backstory and context to your sexy robots is what's rubbin' people wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 09:25
|
|
|
mutata posted:I wanna hear more about this opinion right here. Nobody wants to hear that one.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 09:41
|
|
|
no please tell us how we are prudes who just don't get it lol
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
Sharpest Crayon posted:So hey you might benefit from looking at some photo reference - or life drawing - when learning how to do colour, because currently your light sources are inconsistent on the body and aside from the highlights, don't seem to affect the underlying colours much. Ok, thanks for the critique. I'll use some more reference next time. It can get complicated fast, and you end up in over your head.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
Diabetes Forecast posted:guys I already said that I get this isn't the place. frankly though this site is stuck in it's old ways so it's not suprising. That, however, is in one giant contradiction of things, but no need to stew on the matter. It's like if some guy says to you, "You know, I think sheep are really sexy, I want to have sex with a sheep, "and then two days later he comes to you and says, "Hey man, I bought a sheep farm - nothing sexual though, just made good economic sense. Come visit my sheep farm and give me some feedback on all the sheep I am now responsible for, in a purely economic non-sexual sense!" Likewise every time you post a big titty robot, no matter how non-explicit or innocent it may seem, it's all filtered through the lens of your previous posts of the exact same big titty robot spreading her labia, and your fanart of some weird big-titty-sex-bot-fanfic-tumblr, and all your posts talking about how much you love big titty sex robots and how you don't care who knows you want to gently caress robots with big titties. Like, if you don't want to be known as a big titty robot fucker stop posting big titty robots. Your inability to understand why we view your postings of innocent big-boobed robots as connected to the sexually explicit big-boobed robots you posted is what creeps people out and makes them assume you are a socially inept creepy person.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
gmc9987 posted:It's like if some guy says to you, "You know, I think sheep are really sexy, I want to have sex with a sheep, "and then two days later he comes to you and says, "Hey man, I bought a sheep farm - nothing sexual though, just made good economic sense. Come visit my sheep farm and give me some feedback on all the sheep I am now responsible for, in a purely economic non-sexual sense!" You really, really gotta get in that last word don't you? You don't get what i'm trying to say so I won't bother, aside from saying I haven't drawn the super offensive one in ages and really only ever posted it because troposphere is such a over-reactive baby over things that were even more innocuous than my own.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
This thread owns, as usual 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
hahahahahaha holy gently caress, is robo labia guy actually arguing that we're all prudes because we're not cool with robot sex because OOOOhhhhh my GOD 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
Perhaps the problem is he who draws the dick and labia robots, not she who finds herself disgusted.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 20:36
|
|
Cat Army 
|
I love the thought process of heh is little baby triggered by naked anime barbie babes? well look at this ROBO PUSSY!!! OWNED!!!
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Someday a woman will be programmed to love me and she will have the puffiest labia the world has ever known
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
*puts a gilded frame around the roundest, fattest robot labia* this is art and y'all are just too prude to understand.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Your titty robot artwork is offputting because your sexuality boils up into your designs in a way that contributes neither a pleasing and tasteful eroticism nor any aesthetic function. The robot has tits because your dick likes them and the buck stops there.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
How long until "actually labial robots turn you on and you're just confused/angry/afraid!" Taking bets now folks
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Diabetes Forecast posted:I'm trying to understand what you're saying here but i don't quite get it. Yeah I know. It's OK, it's hard to explain. I think you will get it at some point though, and that for now you would be best served to chill and consider it for a while, because people cant explain it any more than they have already and the argument's just going in circles.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
Diabetes Forecast posted:I'm trying to understand what you're saying here but i don't quite get it. Diabetes Forecast posted:please explain to me, an idiot. gmc9987 posted:Your inability to understand why we view your postings of innocent big-boobed robots as connected to the sexually explicit big-boobed robots you posted is what creeps people out and makes them assume you are a socially inept creepy person. Diabetes Forecast posted:You really, really gotta get in that last word don't you?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
It's funny because GMC hasn't posted in the thread since december.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
when you're designing a character, when you give it a trait or a feature ask yourself why you're doing it. what does adding x or y convey about this character? why is this an interesting, useful or necessary thing for your character to have? in the first place, being inorganic, robots don't need sexual characteristics -- and if you're doing organic robots, why are mammaries necessary? are you making mammal robots? do they actually add anything to your robot at all, aside from being a lazy signifier that "this robot is a female robot", and also "i like big boobs so i put big boobs on the robot"?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
robot need tiddy because tiddy make my pee pee hard Art.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
If you, as a thought experiment, completely removed those aspects of the character and feel that it would totally undermine that character's design to do so, that should be a signifier that perhaps that detail plays too prominent a role in that character's conception.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 18:48 |
|
|
Does ghost in the shell count as robo tits?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 04:54
|
|