#mod vark

[f-nodragonart]

why would someone make a character who has really bad anatomy on purpose tho

Like our mascot? For shits and giggles, of course!

-Vark

[f-nodragonart]

am i the only one who gets really irked when someone refers to their fc as an oc? like "spyro oc" "mlp oc" no those aren't original characters those are fan characters stop and learn the difference ty

Hahahah yeah man, I feel you. It’s always bothered me a bit as well. -Vark

[f-nodragonart]

do ya'll dont have summer break or just busy haha??

I’m pretty sure Spiral is very busy! I’m not sure whether she has summer break or not but I know that she has a huge to-do list which has a higher priority than running this bloggu.

For me, well. No. Break hasn’t started yet (starts in ~ July) but I have a job so summer break doesn’t apply to me. Crying 5ever.I’m just very busy, too. I’m going at it full-time and /if/ I do something that’s not work-related, it’s probably spending the little time I have on other responsibilities. Doing some drawings, and whatnot, haha. I’ll try to slip in some queue material at work when boss isn’t looking. Shhhh….

-Vark

[f-nodragonart]

Long-time follower and bad art enthusiast here! Upon seeing your last eat post, it made me wonder the mods' opinions on accuracy vs stylization. Obviously the aforementioned post is not the best example lol. But yeah! Where do you all draw the line?

I’m not rly sure what u mean by “eat post”? does “eat” stand for something?

anyways, idk what Vark’s mental process may be, but for me, deciding what’s “good enough” (or bad enough, rather), to end up on the blog can be a p delicate matter sometimes. since this is a public, largely fan-driven blog, I try to keep it so only art that most people could objectively agree is “bad” ends up on here, so I actually end up deleting a handful of submissions that tread onto, “this isn’t toooooo bad,” territory (but that’s my more of my subjective opinion abt them, so even when I’m trying to be objective, I’m being subjective AHA)

the “line”, I suppose, is art/designs that may have some wonky aspects, but don’t ruin the overall piece (and may even enhance it, in some cases, depending on just HOW wonky the art is, what the overall style is, etc.). like this piece that was recently posted. most people would agree that this is a p good piece, and it rly is. even the wings aren’t toooooo bad, all by themselves (they could’ve been a lot worse). it’s just that THOSE wings paired w/ THAT dragon just completely ruin whatever “strong/majestic/realistic” atmosphere the piece may have been goin for, THUS the piece finds a place here in the unspoken category of, “missed it by THAT much,” cus’ u have to admit, it’s kinda hilarious to see so much effort put into the realism/anatomy of the rest of the design, then see the wings (literally) flop. it’s like trying to stick Pokemon wings on a GOT dragon, it just doesn’t work out

I get into that topic of style consistency a lot more in this post, and now that I think about it, I think that’s what it rly comes down to, for me. when a piece of art is RIGHT on that thin line of, “bad or nah?” the thing that usually pushes it over to either side is how well the piece handles its style

EDIT- I’M SORRY VARK, I rly wasn’t sure what happened there when I tried to go back to add the tags, ah a,,,,,

-Mod Spiral

~  ~ 

oh no Spiral u deleted my thing wuuhuuu how dare

ANyway basically, I kind of draw the line when at the first glance, I notice that something is not right. Like- when I INSTANTLY spot the mistake/shitty stylisation thing/whatever.

In most works, as long as one actively seeks and analyses for mistakes, they’ll be found. If they’re not really noticeable to me in the very beginning, it should be fine.

I also kind of draw the line at the point when something ends up looking abstract even though it’s meant to be figurative. 

Yadda yadda, we’ve talked about this one a lot; one must know the rules before bending them etc. You can easily spot the people who haven’t learnt the basics. They make the most obvious mistakes, stylised or not, a thing will look wonky and generally just bad. 

-Vark

[f-nodragonart]

A dinosaur artist? Look at Fabio Pastori's work, he is an AWESOME artist!

For Lishadra, who asked about this!

There's also a neat blog called Lostbeasts. The owner tends to blog paleoart next to other cool stuff. Mostly of 'accurate' feathered dragons. They draw paleoart themselves, too. It's worth a look. -Vark

[f-nodragonart]

yo is the queue dead or has this blog just been abandon?

The queue /is/ running low. Submit bad art and fill it up!

Personally I’m a bit occupied with work. I work full days and I just sort-of go into hibernation in the weekend. I’ll slip in some more crits and stuff during work as sometimes I need to wait for a few tests to finish. It’s just that critiques take time and I usually need a drawing program as well, which I do have at work, but without a tablet— haha.

We’re definitely not dead though. I’m sure that Spiral is also very busy at the moment. 

-Vark

~~~~~

aha, yeah, I’m basically in the same boat. if I’m not doing schoolwork, I’m either sleeping, or trying to de-stress

BUT it’s spring break now, so hopefully I’ll be able to get to some crits and asks as well

-Mod Spiral

[f-nodragonart]

What kind of birth defects or diseases would effect the usage of wings? Specifically if you want the wings to still moveable, but unable to hold their weight at all in the air, like if they're not strong enough

Excessive tearing comes to mind. So much tearing wing would hinder the air flow required for flight. Not a disease per sé.

Angel wing is a disease that affects feathered wings, but could possibly work with webbed wings as well, if executed right.

Fungal infections can also ruin wings pretty good. Many bats suffer from fungal infections that cause their wings to form holes eventually. Rendering flight impossible depending on the severity. 

Lastly, birth defects come in all shapes and sizes. Simple underdeveloped wings can also do the trick. - Vark

[f-nodragonart]

Have you done anything maleficents wing anatomy from the recent movie? IDK but they just looked really awkward to me, especially those big spikes at the top

Recent movie? The Jolie one?

I recently watched it because hell, why not. It was on the Netflix front page.

But damn I didn’t like those wings at all! The main issue is that they weren’t consistent. I’m pretty sure they used different presets for the wings at different times as sometimes the model would display scales which would fade into feathers, whereas in another scene, they’d be completely feathered. The size also kept changing, sometimes they were big-ish and at other times they’d be way too small. I think it has to do with the angle & CGI artists wanting the character to be visible in a shot where the wings would also be prominent- eh.

Those spikes are definitely awkward. What are they there for? Are they supposed to be thumbs? Maleficent has bird wings. Those spikes have no business being there. 

I also had the feeling that each time she would fly, her wings would collapse because of her weight. Those wings are too thin and too small to be able to keep her airborne. They’re also connected to her back very awkwardly. It wasn’t very clear in the movie, but it seems like the wings are connected to the body just a bit above the shoulderblades. I know that there’s no ‘correct’ way to put wings on humans while the human retains its ‘original anatomy’ but come on, aauuuggh. At least try and make it look like you tried. Y’know?

Aaand for the general construction-

I’ll say… what the fuck. is it bird? is bat? hwat??Maybe it’s their take on ‘an original thing’ or some sort of hybrid but it just looks really awkward and questionable to me. 

Thing is, it's okay if it doesn't make sense but you can clearly see that they wanted it to come over as realistic. They did a terrible job at it. 

But hey, the entire movie made no sense anyway. Why are her horns on her hair? What is happen? Who knows. It was a bad movie anyway.

-Vark