/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6498019
Imagine being on 4chan and whining about the ethics of theft lol.

What the fuck happened to this place? Went from being a bunch of anarchic Americans that stole literally everything and used 4chan to share it, to being a bunch of radicalized foreign bootlickers screeching about “ethics” to protect corporations from copyright infringement.

>>3693183
>Do you think my ability to animate came from thin air or something?
Like I have some animation experience using photoshop, final cut pro, after effects, adobe premiere. In my experience you can get the gist of it in a weekend.
>But it's not the only example
But it is a very clear example of something with barely any labor put into it that is clearly a silly WIP. The fact that you highlighted it for your example without really looking at it or recognizing what paintings look like when you start them speaks to your refusal to interact in an intellectually empathetic way. You sought out the sloppiest one that looks retarded for pretty obvious reasons related to the paint layering process, and used it to supplement your argument about "symbol drawing" even though it has nothing to do with that.
>THE SAME PROBLEMS WITH SYMBOL DRAWING AND PERSPECTIVE
I honestly don't think you really know what symbol drawing is.
>No depth,
that generally would nailed home with the final highlights layer and last look shadow retouch and stuff.
>drawing what you assume a mouth or nose looks like based on the picture without even understanding.
Again I've done some pretty intense courses in an academic setting entirely devoted to understanding facial anatomy. Plus it's something that I study and work on full time. I specifically seek out scrunch faces and twist faces and cringes because it's more of a challenge and you have to think about how the face works practically and understand the anatomy of the face and how it all works together. That's much more of a learning experience than the standard portrait mona lisa face or vague smile you see in traditional portraits.
>You're not extremely bad
Duh.
>and you have a few paints that look pretty good but given how sparse they are
It's a matter of labor in time. Literally none of them are finished. Most are stopped 2/3rds through to be eventually be "finished" on camera.

>>3617043
I mean was it ever really going to end any other way?

>>3605500
EXACTLY. Like you can blast out some base layers mixed with gesso or water or whatever on acrylic easy peasy and then use oils on top to trick people into thinking that it's a good painting. That's what I'm looking at for starting on dooing in year 3 and becoming a weirdo about in like year 5 probably.
>>3605503
>*inferior
I kind of think it's hard to actually argue this. Like there's kind of a lot more that you can do with acrylics when you start getting goofy with chemicals. It's a technology that didn't even exist yet when all le masters turned oil into the boss meme.

Like you can kind of emulate the benefits of oil with acrylic. But you can't emulate the benefits of acrylic with oils. It's like the digital versus film debate in movie history kind of. Is digital "inferior" to film?

>>3594499
there is no such thing as Truth in this context kiddo. You're just an impotent virginal nigger that chooses to be act out like a malignant faggot as an ego defense to justify why absolutely nobody cares about your narcissism bullshit.

There is no meaning. There are no rules. All the strawmen shit and "conservative" cultist faggot faggot memes you maintain to justify why nobody likes you is your problem. You aren't whatever the opposite of "degenerate" is because you're too disgusting and embarrassing for anyone to want to interact with. You are degeneracy personified.

Nobody will ever be impressed by how much of a virginal unfuckable faggot you choose to be, and your lack of life experience doesn't make you better than people. It makes a boring, self-important loser.

You will not be witnessed. You will not be missed.