you seem to have done better, but still have a long way to go (^^;

holy crap you improved!!!!!!!!!! :)

-Gamgam

Depends on your idea of "improvement".
You surely improved outline-wise, this looks much better compared to that messy thing from before; but your anatomy seems to have gone from "chubby" all the way to "bulimic", which seems kind of a weird progression.
Your eyes were too wide, now they're too narrow; your neck was too short, now it's too long.
What I'm trying to say is, you HAVE improved because your lines are more steady, but my guess is that you tried to change your style too much and ended with something far too different from before, which isn't necessarily a good thing.
So just, go a step back, make those eyes further apart, give Poniko's head a little bit more of a feminine roundness, maybe shorten her neck a little, and you'll be gold.
BUT if you're going for that sharper, sort of cartoonish look, then you're doing great, 10/10, keep it up.

You've definitely improved - congrats.
That cranium is looking a little huge though, and the nose a bit long on the face. Her chin looks a little recessed, too, and that ear shape is, I'm sorry to say, just...odd. Here's some redlines - they're not perfect. I'm no great artist myself, obviously. But I hope they're at least a little helpful!

Thanks guys!
These critiques are really helpful.
also thanks >>2550 the redlines are very helpful, gives me more of an idea (:!

>>2541
this doesnt come off as incredibly good advice to me

>>2552
Then you're probably a bad artist and/or critique.

>>2552

>>2552
What the advice is saying is that, while taking the previous advice into account, the OP has sort of overshot. Has to nudge backwards a bit.

ok wait this thread is ridiculous and i think it should be addressed as such because this artist is pretty cool

are they going for 100% realism here y/n
THEN redline with perfect faces and shit

this looks great as is, i want more in this style, it's really cool, it has personality, i think this way can really express some characters well.

are things anatomically accurate in relation to each other should be the actual question if you are going to ask about anatomy at all. is it pleasing. is it characteristic or is it identical/photo-like. what are you trying to do with your art and how do you want to improve? ask yourself this. what do you want to see in your drawings.

not everything needs to be cookie cutter. not everything has to be realistic. not everything has to be idealistic.

Last edited 11/06/05(Sun)22:08.

>>2733

Jesus Christ, go back to deviantART and stop bawwing like a fucking hipster about "BUT NOT E'RRYTHING NEEDZ TO BE REALISTIC YOU GAIZ PROPORSHUNS R MAINSTREAM AND NOT UNIQUE". We're not talking about perfect realism. All we're doing is critiquing the artist because they ASKED for critique, and then you come in here in a whirling cloud of butthurt and asspats and tell everyone they're ridiculous for pointing out a few flaws while maintaining a balanced critique, and claiming that reasonable face shape = NOT UNIQUE.

Plus, you type like a fucking scene kid.

>>2733
Redliner here. Nobody said this artist was not cool. This artist is trying to improve and asked for critique which makes them pretty much the coolest person on this board. We gave crit, the artist thanked us. S/he can choose to take what parts of the crit s/he'd like into a consideration and what parts s/he'd prefer to not bother with.

Nobody in this thread told this artist their art has to be 100% anatomically accurate and photo-realistic. I have no idea where you think you read that or why you think you need to whiteknight in a thread where nobody has been rude to this awesome artist.

Please don't start drama where there is none.

>>2736
>>2738

I think you guys are overreacting to my post. very heavily.
you are also causing even more of a disturbance than i am, >>2736 , so that doesn't help the thread much either :p

I skimmed, so what I was discussing was the fact that they asked for very generic critique with no specification of what they were TRYING to do with their art/work. the link doesn't work for me so i cant really trace them back to their other works, as well.
also, see
>>2552
>>2554
>>2558
those posts are way more inflammatory than mine could be interpreted as.

when trying to critique someone, one has to take into account the end goal they're trying to reach; not everyone's is the same, there are so many different things to do with art, art isn't this one set thing that everyone aspires toward, and that is what i was saying. Think of all the different types of imagery from all the different cultures you know of; im sure that an art style sort of represents each culture for you if you think about it (or not).

I think people were being ridiculous to each other before they were being ridiculous to the artist. I said nothing in my post about people being ridiculous to the artist.

most of the things that >>2736 said aren't even in my post and are just very weird assumptions and impressions that they got... not only that but almost all of your argument has little to do with what i said and more to do with what you think of me and my character :/

keep posting art OP.

Last edited 11/06/07(Tue)21:13.

>>2736
>>2738

Butthurt kids who got another opinion whirled at them and retaliate by acting as if they don't give a fuck.

If you can't deal with people disagreeing with your opinion, then you better get the fuck off the internet and learn how to deal with real people --- because that's how the real world is like. No one's going to agree with you 100%.

And this is my opinion, but never redline without asking for permission first. We have no fucking idea if that style in the first post is the style that he is going for. If it isn't, and it's a work in process, then don't mangle with it by redlining and consequently nearly forcing upon him your style or technique. He's gotta learn, on his own, like all of us, and shoving pre-chewed knowledge on him won't help at all.

Just my $ 0.05

>>2741

>>2742

>And this is my opinion, but never redline without asking for permission first. We have no fucking idea if that style in the first post is the style that he is going for. If it isn't, and it's a work in process, then don't mangle with it by redlining and consequently nearly forcing upon him your style or technique. He's gotta learn, on his own, like all of us, and shoving pre-chewed knowledge on him won't help at all.

yes. very yes.

When you ask someone to critique your work, you ask for everything.

All the critiques are valid, whether or not you or the artist thinks so. If she decides to take it into account or not is all on her.

That being said, stop arguing about this shit or I'll start deleting posts. I don't want to delete this artist's thread.

>>And this is my opinion, but never redline without asking for permission first. We have no fucking idea if that style in the first post is the style that he is going for. If it isn't, and it's a work in process, then don't mangle with it by redlining and consequently nearly forcing upon him your style or technique. He's gotta learn, on his own, like all of us, and shoving pre-chewed knowledge on him won't help at all.

Redliner here. I absolutely see what you're saying, though it was never my intention to force a style on the artist - I'm just better at explaining things through visual aid rather than words.

I get what you mean about asking for permission, though. I didn't imagine anyone would be offended by it if they asked for crit, but I'll remember not to redline in the future unless someone specifically asks for it. I'd never want to hurt someone's feelings.

SO ANYWAY op should post more