[–]▶ No.73461>>73493 >>73518 >>73537 >>86014 [Watch Thread][Show All Posts]
talk about what the best anthro would/should look like or rant about the most annoying anthro anatomy trends
i don't have an actual opinion; i just like to listen
▶ No.73493>>73500 >>73535 >>73573
>>73461 (OP)
My sona is a bestial iguana with a curvy fit chimp/bonobo waifu and a hung femboy zonkey. what is your opinion on my anthro tastes? Also, the pics I posted aren't my actual sona with spouses, they're just close approximations.
▶ No.73500>>73519 >>73544
>>73493
>ape furry
What's the fucking point?
▶ No.73505
All furries look like dogs because an animal face given the means to express emotion is by necessity dog-like
▶ No.73507>>73573
This sugar glider looks like a flying cat.
▶ No.73518
>>73461 (OP)
Just stop drawing everything as a human.
That's all I ask.
Please.
▶ No.73519
>>73500
It's technically bestiality.
▶ No.73520>>73573
I hate how furry artists never seem to understand where balls go
▶ No.73535>>73544
>>73493
man your taste is shit
▶ No.73536
I think that's sarcasm.>>73534
▶ No.73537>>73573
>>73461 (OP)
This is mostly issues ponyfags encounter but:
>overly detailed, meaty, realistic horse pussy and inside out asshole on a mediocre pony drawing, or ruining a great pony drawing
>U-shaped clits
Otherwise:
>gigantic dick and balls, making the artist seem even more pathetic
>obviously traced live action porn with unappealing looking traced whore pussy
>dog pussy on anthro
>multiple tits on anthro
>rainbow/ glowstick dick. Stop pretending dicks are popsicles. Dicks are stinky and meaty.
>Animu style, I'm so sick of it these days.
▶ No.73546
>>73544
I don't get mad at people who're mentally disabled. I pity them.
▶ No.73556>>73564
>>73534
>3 years ago
No shit. Nowadays you usually can't make a fucking comment criticizing the art in any way without getting downvoted into oblivion, and possible dinged by the retard mods for whatever reason they just fucking make up. They wanted to turn e621 into a goddamn artist hugbox like FA, and they succeeded.
▶ No.73564>>73589
>>73556
One ought to be either supportive, or silent. There is no market for criticism.
▶ No.73565>>73573 >>73589
I really dislike how 50% of red panda art is just foxes with a more pronounced stripe on their face. Like, not even the right coat patterns throughout the entire body.
▶ No.73566
It's either Balto or Lion King as the base for everything. Get original.
▶ No.73573>>73638
>>73493
I really like it when the human anatomy is warped for more animal so that iguana is pretty cool, but I'm not much of a fan of monkeys and I haven't made up my mind on femboys.
>>73507
>>73565
Always disappointing when everything looks like a cat or dog when it's not
I don't think I've ever seen an accurate red panda
>>73520
Ouch yah, looks like it hurts
>>73534
HAHAHaha Oh No The Leg
>>73537
Overrendered pussy or anything is really off-putting. The art style should match all the way.
▶ No.73589>>73607 >>73618 >>86004
>>73564
E621 isn't a market, it's a fucking repository. Denying the ability to call out shitty art is like a movie review website disallowing anything but positive reviews. What fucking use is that to anyone?
>>73565
And a raccoon is just a fox with rings on his tail. Most of them don't even bother to round off the fucking ears or make them plantigrade, and of course they all have dogcocks.
▶ No.73607>>73628 >>73630
>>73589
In case you haven't noticed, we're becoming a positivity culture. Facebook doesn't need a "dislike" button, because a lack of likes speaks volumes in itself. YouTube's thumbs-down buttons on comments no longer do anything, but at least pressing them satisfies the people who would otherwise start arguments. This isn't some new way of thinking; Japanese culture has long emphasized showing positive replies, while giving negative replies in an indirect manner that a clever person should understand. We all need to get positive and embrace our newfound positivity as a good thing. Love the positivity. Spread the positivity. Because the world would be better, if everyone was positive.
▶ No.73618>>73622 >>73703
>>73589
The use (other than being nice) is preventing a high barrier of entry. If artists are being activly discouraged then they aren't going to share, new artists aren't going to try, and the good ones likely won't tollerate the enviroment.
Plain negative comments are fun, hence the thread, but posting them on an artist's page doesn't get anything done.
What you want can be done through curation, not culling.
▶ No.73622>>73624
>>73618
Meanwhile, if artists are only ever hearing "good job", they never improve...
▶ No.73624>>73634 >>73703 >>76366 >>76368 >>86015
>>73622
Artist can improve on their own, but calling them shitty doesn't boost the process. Crits only help if done right. This is a formula that most artists I know agree to:
>Point out what is good
>Explain why it's good
>Point out what can be fixed
>Explain why it doesn't work
>Explain how to improve
This format does help if they're willing to listen, but if they try policing this kind of feedback then there really is a problem and I totally agree.
▶ No.73628>>73630
>>73607
>We all need to get positive
>Spread the positivity
>the world would be better, if everyone was positive.
Mmm, I think I can help spread some of my "positivity"~
▶ No.73634>>76308
>>73624
>but calling them shitty doesn't boost the process
If you're too vague yeah, but calling their anatomy shit would tell them they need to improve their anatomy.
It's not as good as also giving them direct advice on how to improve their anatomy, but if the artist isn't a little bitch with paper thin skin then bad criticism can still help.
▶ No.73638>>73668
>>73573
>I don't think I've ever seen an accurate red panda
here are a few of my favourites. tohfu (last picture) draws some pretty good red pandas, but his art style in general is just very pleasant to look at. he still needs to learn some stuff but he knows how to make things look good if nothing else.
▶ No.73668
>>73638
Oh wow! I like these, the first one and the fourth one are really nice. Thanks for sharing. These pandas are cute.
▶ No.73688>>73695
>fag draws anthro reptile
>human legs
>breasts
>hair
>thin tail
▶ No.73691>>73696
>>73544
I've seen what this guy does to that poor monkey, I honestly think he's probably a danger to society.
▶ No.73695>>73697 >>73718
>>73688
Well to bad, cause I love argonians.
▶ No.73696
>>73691
His demon and mutant girls didn't tip you off, anyway, I just really like the way he draws chimp girls.
▶ No.73697>>73700
>>73695
I fucking love that artist.
▶ No.73700
>>73697
Which one? The first three or the last two, they're from different artists.
▶ No.73703
>>73618
E621 isn't "an artist's page"; you're missing the point entirely. I'm not about to go on someone's FA or whatever just to start something personal; but if someone posts utter fucking garbage on e621, I'm going to call it out, because it's NOT personal.
>>73624
It doesn't matter. Most popufurs have hoards of fanboys/girls (including the mods) who refuse to hear any criticism at all. Reminds me of a picture Aaron did of MCU Rocket Raccoon. He was drawn ultra-buff, with piercings and a tattoo, with the wrong number of fingers and even the wrong color, and missing any of the cybernetic parts. There was literally no connection to the character; it was just some random buff raccoon, and someone said so. But the response to calling this out was bitching about how it's just his "style".
▶ No.73718
▶ No.76308>>76309
>>73634
Saying "your anatomy is shit" is entirely useless to an artist. If you are unable to specify or put into words a criticism of a drawing then you are unable to actually help them. If you find yourself in that situation, find someone who does have a good amount of experience with art and ask them what's wrong with the drawing, and relay that information.
Otherwise it truly does nothing. It's like telling a carpenter their roof is house is fucked up, and then walking away. There's nothing they can do with that info.
With that said, if you're the kind of person who says "they need to improve their anatomy", but can't put into words what they need to improve, then you probably shouldn't be the person trying to critique their anatomy. Seen way too many horror stories of people taking in critique from people who have no idea what the fuck they're talking about and their art ends up all the worse for it.
▶ No.76309>>76310
>>76308
It's useless to the kind of artist that would be learning this stuff anyway.
The thing is, it usually gets directed at the type of person who thinks they can draw well without studying anything, in which case everything about their anatomy is shit. This kind of artist maybe learns the very basics of blocking in shapes (probably without understanding why we do it) and then just takes that and runs to drawing from imagination, even though they never built the gestural portfolio to have realistic poses to pull from imagination. In this case, "they need to improve their anatomy" means they need to do literally pick up any fucking book that mentions anatomy and read it and study bodies. It's not rocket science, it's just extremely boring work.
In your comparison, it would be like a roofer who learned how to nail boards together and ran straight to trying to build a roof when they don't know anything about structural integrity, building standards, etc.. There's just.. No singular place to start with how wrong they are, so you just tell them to go the fuck back to school.
▶ No.76310>>86005
>>76309
Sure, and then you can go about recommending them Hampton or Proko; doing that alone is miles better than just "your anatomy is shit". If they have no fundamentals then recommending them proper sources to build them is always the best option. What they end up doing with that information is up to them; they'll stand or fall on their own accord.
It's definitely a pet peeve of mine, though, to see someone tell an artist their anatomy is shit (particularly ones that do have some sense of fundamentals and would find great use of proper critiques and redlines), because they are actually capable of processing and making use of more specific critiques. Stuff like "the arm is fucked up", or "the hand doesn't work like that" is no more helpful to than veteran artist than it is to one pressing pen to paper for the first time.
I do agree though that if some absolute beginner is trying to create a really ambitious illustration, then chances are nearly every aspect that is capable of being fucked up is likely to be fucked up, and so more general guidelines or sources would be way more beneficial than trying to nitpick why every appendage is wrong. I was more referring to people who can actually make use of proper critiquing.
▶ No.76366
>>73624
I should not need to "pay" for a criticism with positive feedback. Your ego does not take precedence over honesty and quality. If it's shit then I'm going to call it shit. And there's a 99% chance I don't care if you get upset because there's a hundred other people doing exactly what you do but better.
The only problem comes in when moderators ban you for not jacking off everyone you meet. We need to get the enablers out of positions of power.
▶ No.76368
>>73624
Also known as the pee-pee method.
▶ No.76371>>86002 >>86018
MLP overall.
>Overly simplistic design, way overly detailed genitals
>Shading/detailing that don't match the artstyle and oftentimes gives it uncanny valley, disgusting visual, unfitting environments
It gets worse.
>Decides to make it look "realistic" or a completely different style but won't separate it from MLP
>HAS to make it MLP related by forcing in a clearly out of place butt-stamp and other details
At that point it's like "Why are you even bothering?"
This is a random selection, am I crazy or is this just really all over the place?
▶ No.85992
▶ No.86002
>>76371
Took the words right out of my mouth; I share your sentiment. Art like this feels like 90% derived from the artist's own imagination, and 10% based on the source material. But that 10% is what makes the art findable by viewers; people like and search for what they already know.
▶ No.86004>>86048
>>73589
>and of course they all have dogcocks
to be fair, raccoon dicks are shit tier
▶ No.86005
>>76310
>Sure, and then you can go about recommending them Hampton or Proko; doing that alone is miles better than just "your anatomy is shit".
Yeah, but calling that kind of criticism "entirely useless" is just plain wrong.
Looking up anatomy lessons because someone told them their anatomy is trash could easily lead them to finding those two on their own.
Beats the shit out of stagnating for 15 years because everyone says you're good enough.
▶ No.86014>>86019 >>86035
>>73461 (OP)
>what the best anthro would/should look like
ke
mo
no
▶ No.86015
>>73624
>calling them shit won't help them
Says you. It entirely depends on how they handle criticism of any type. Some will initially take it hard but actively improve. Others will quietly improve. Others none at all because they like it that way and are dealing with the problem fetishinduced or not doesn't matter.
Others still only because ego and any criticism is a hate crime against them REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.
▶ No.86018
>>76371
Griffons tend to look okay, at least.
▶ No.86019
>>86014
This but without hair.
▶ No.86035
>>86014
>kemono
Can't really agree with that, since it's just more styles that still have their own pros and cons.
I like two, four, and five, but one and three look boring with how low detail they are.
▶ No.86048>>86777
>>86004
>Not liking a dick that can hook into and restrain your rape victim as long as you keep your hips raised
Ever wonder why raccoons mate for up to an hour, with the male having several orgasms? It's not because SHE wants it, that's for sure.
▶ No.86769
Things that piss me right off
<excessively animalistic genitals
<sparkledogs and non-avians with wild colors
<snouts on anthros whose source has no reason to have a snout.
<wrong genital position on a -taur.
things I'm neutral about
>digitgrade vs plantigrade
>legs on anthros whose normal animal is legless
>human-like hair vs hairless head
>cartoon styles vs realistic shading
Bueno, gimme more
>black lipped vagina with pink flesh past the lips.
>firm ass and titties, animalistic autism be damned.
>well-defined and emotive eyes.
>non-excessive stretching of the vagina to show how filled-with-cock it is.
▶ No.86777>>86780
>>86048
No, not really. I haven't really attempted to watch the wildlife fucking.
▶ No.86780>>86848
>>86777
Well, now you know better.
▶ No.86848>>86852
>>86780
I feel like all these extraneous facts about animal sex I've heard from people online are going to have negative after effects on my psyche or something.
▶ No.86852>>86911
>>86848
Information is information; it cannot be in any way bad or good. Whether you choose to be affected by it is your own choice.
▶ No.86911>>86938 >>86995
>>86852
We get it. You have to constantly prove your intellect because you have no friends.
▶ No.86938>>86995
>>86911
WROOONG AGAIN. I'm not trying to "prove" my intellect in order to impress YOU. Think of it like this: if someone has a very high IQ, then everything that they say is intelligent; a wise person becomes incapable of making an ignorant statement. That's why all my posts contain wisdom - I'm physically incapable of doing otherwise. And whether or not I have friends isn't the topic of discussion here; that's just your way of insulting me. But keep in mind this fact too: people like to have friends who have the same IQ as themselves; if you're on the end of the bell curve IQ-wise, then the population of people from whom you have to select friends from becomes greatly diminished compared to if you have an average IQ. And finding wise people to befriend - especially if you're already in a minority interest population like the furry fandom - is a difficult task.
▶ No.86995>>87004
>>86911
Okay, first of all, >>86938 is not me. No idea who that is, but it's probably bait.
Second, I do have friends. Most of whom enjoy my company partly because I can solve nearly any problems and am a never-ending font of information and (mostly useless) trivia without being a pompous shit about it.
But I do find your passive-aggressive defensiveness about this to be a lot more telling about YOUR intelligence than anything else.
▶ No.87004
>>86995
You're not really doing yourself any favors by essentially restating a slightly neutered version of what the bait post had to say. I will give you the benefit of the doubt in that not being you however. That being said, stating the obvious in response to someone stating their displeasure with the amount of animal sex trivia they've accumulated through osmosis is rather pointless.
Having the ability to spout off random trivia isn't really a remarkable trait, but it's better than having nothing at all to have meaningless chatter over. I'd be a bit less pompous in my assessment of my social abilities if I were you, those who rate themselves that highly tend to be slightly egotistical. Not that it matters, given I'm some random degenerate that's likely a thousand miles or more from you.