dragona joestar | art by me
Cosimo Galluzzi

Origami Around
wallacepolsom

Andulka
RMH

titsay

JBB: An Artblog!
Xuebing Du
noise dept.
No title available
taylor price

tannertan36
One Nice Bug Per Day
No title available
YOU ARE THE REASON
Stranger Things
KIROKAZE
Jules of Nature

blake kathryn

⁂

seen from Malaysia

seen from Malaysia
seen from Poland

seen from T1

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Armenia
seen from Poland

seen from T1

seen from Germany

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Italy
seen from Germany

seen from Canada

seen from Türkiye
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Poland
seen from Türkiye
@thegreendolphin
dragona joestar | art by me
laem chabang | art by me
JoJo's Bizarre Adventure Part 1: Phantom Blood | art and text by Hirohiko Araki (1987)
Vincent van Gogh - "Tree Trunks in the Grass" (1890)
Wonder Island #1 | art and text by Akira Toriyama, 1978
"So still are these hours I walk. My footfall sounds so soft. These things I see... ...what are these things I see?" from Doctor Strange: Fall Sunrise Chapter 2: Jennevieve The Forest Written and Drawn by Tradd Moore Colored by Heather Moore
One of those insidious little things I notice sometimes is how much the window of 'appropriate for children' content has shrunk within the past 20 years. The range of things it is socially acceptable to show a 10-year-old has never been more limited, and it's happened incredibly quickly.
Take, for instance, Star Trek: TNG. I grew up watching TNG. I was a little young for it as it was airing, but it got syndicated almost immediately and they would show an episode most weekday evenings on the Space Channel, and I'd watch it with my lifelong Trekkie mom. This was a very common thing. I was by no means unusual for watching Star Trek as a child.
Star Trek: TNG has lots of sex in it! It's never explicit (unless you have a particularly niche interpretation of some of the borg stuff) but on many an occasion you'll have a few characters doing a bit of making out followed by a closing door or fade to black, and then they wake up in bed together. If you know what sex is, you know that is what is being implied here. Even my 8-year-old self, whose understanding of the subject mostly came from books of ancient mythology that used words like 'ravish' and 'the pleasures of the couch' a whole bunch, could tell that what was happening was sex.
And I am not bringing this up as a 'see, I watched all this inappropriate stuff and I turned out just fine!'. I'm bringing it up to argue that TNG's level of sexual content is not inappropriate for children (I'm not using the legalese 'minors', because I think that lumping children and teenagers together in this conversation would make it nonsense. Star Trek is obviously appropriate for teenagers. Don't use 'minors' when you mean either children or teens, it just muddies the waters).
The point is that Star Trek: TNG was very obviously designed to be watched by children and teenagers. There's a whole character in the main cast whose role in the show is to be an audience insert for children and teenagers. The moral tone of TNG, its occasional dips into 'don't do drugs, kids' type messaging, and its general avoidance of graphic violence all scream 'we are designing this with an audience of children - but not just children - in mind'. It's a family show. It's supposed to be watched by the whole family.
Which means that, until at least the end of the 90s, this amount of sexual content was generally considered appropriate for kids to see. It's not pornographic - it's not even graphic. Maybe the very most conservative parents wouldn't let their kids watch TNG, but that might have had more to do with all the socialism and atheism.
So, why did that change? Why do we now have such a strong bullwark between 'things kids are allowed to know about' and 'things for GROWN UPS ONLY 18+ Minors DNI', and why have we relegated even the most discreet references to sex to the second category only?
And the next time you find yourself experiencing that knee-jerk 'think of the children' reaction, consider: would what you're looking at have been ok on Star Trek: TNG in the 90s?
When I wrote this post, I focused on sex, rather than violence. But now I want to talk a bit about violence.
I had a very unusual encounter recently in which I was talking about a video game that I played as a child (Tales of Symphonia (2003) for the Gamecube, eternal classic) with my siblings. I was 10, they were younger. We didn't have very many games, so we played this one into the absolute ground. It's a great game! It's a rare example of a JRPG with 4-person co-op multiplayer, which means it basically works as a shonen anime you can play together. The skill floor is pretty low, but the ceiling's reasonably high, so it's great for a mixed-age group. To this day, if I really needed to keep 3 children entertained for two weeks, it's probably the first place my mind would go.
So anyway, I was talking about how great this game is for kids, and the reaction I got was... horror. I was told, repeatedly, that this game is not appropriate for children on account of its violence and heavy themes. Because this game's story is, in large part, about racism. Specifically it is about how racism is bad and stupid. And in the story of the game, the kinds of things that people do out of racism do occur. People are driven from their homes, used as expendable test subjects, and put in prison camps to work themselves to death, amongst other things. The game isn't afraid to really let those heavy themes sit, either. The characters discuss these things with each other often, and the way that their fucked up world affects their perspective on these events is a big part of each character's journey.
But, like, there's no blood in this game. At all. The graphics look like this:
These character models barely have fingers, let alone intestines.
And this isn't a situation where the cutesy character models are then used for shock horror. All depictions of violence are all either in-engine combat (with people shouting out their shonen battle special attack names left and right) or just, like, a janky animation of someone swinging a sword, a slash noise, and the recipient going 'Argh' and falling over. The engine just can't render it. Discussions of violence within the game are similarly non-explicit. People will talk about, say, the death of a loved one, but it's never and more detailed than 'and so-and-so killed them and I have all these feelings about it'. The focus is squarely on how the characters feel about the violence, not the violence itself.
So, any argument that this game is too violent for, say, an 8-year-old is really an argument that the discussion of violence is too much for an 8-year-old. And that represents a real and troubling change from how we talked about violence and media for children when I was a kid.
The concern with violence on screen when I was a kid was twofold: first, that violence is scary and could give kids nightmares; and second, that seeing too much violence - especially gun violence post-Columbine - would inspire a child to do violence. Both those concerns really only applied to the imagery of violence, though. Violence that happens off-screen isn't a concern. That's the whole point of the Disney Death - if a character falls off a cliff, we don't actually see them die, but we can still talk about their death in the rest of the story. An adult brain can wonder if Mufasa died from the impact of the fall before being brutally crushed by the stampede, but a kid isn't going to worry about that and it's not going to give them nightmares. And I've yet to hear anyone even claim that Mufasa's death would be likely to inspire kids to push their schoolmates off cliffs. People sometimes joke about being 'traumatized' by Mufasa's death, but nobody actually was. We know that, right?
Any concern about the appropriate levels of violence for children that implicates Tales of Symphonia (2003) can't be relying on either of those arguments. None of the imagery onscreen in that game could give anyone nightmares (unless they were unusually frightened of model clipping) and there's none of the glorification of violence that would lead one to have Columbine-y worries. Hell, there aren't even any guns except for one guy with a laser arm cannon.
No, the concern here is not about violent imagery. It's about discussions of violent subject matter. About a story that talks allegorically about racism, death, trauma, and how we come to terms with living in a world where these things exist. And not even in a particularly novel way! Honestly, I think it's a bit both-sides-y about the whole subject but that's a matter for a different day. The only way you can argue that this game's subject matter is inappropriate for 8-10-year-olds is if you argue that 8-10-year-olds shouldn't know that racism exists. That violence exists. That bad stuff happens sometimes.
And I promise you. A lot of children already know all that.
If anything, this is a more concerning cultural shift than the stuff about sex I mentioned earlier. Because the idea that talking about racism and violence at all would be inappropriate for children - that it would somehow compromise their innocence - is genuinely fascistic. There's only one kind of 8-year-old who doesn't know that racist violence exists. And it's one who should know, lest they grow up to participate in it.
little study for myself when I forgor how to hands
There's always a joke like "Harry Potter is just British Naruto" or "Doctor Who is like British One Piece" but honestly, if the UK needs an equivalent to Shounen or moreso Seinen, it should be like 2000AD and certain comics.
Imagine a world where Judge Dredd, Strontium Dog, ABC Warriors, Slaine etc got animated series with good animation, action, soundtrack etc.
Specially since in terms of Western animation, a lot of action focused stuff is usually superhero stuff besides the likes of Ben 10 for example.
Because Invincible is neither Marvel or DC but is still a superhero related series.
Whereas something based on Judge Dredd but animated could've been a bit more novel.
Shit, if the West needs an equivalent to Akira (Very good animation and details included, even if it takes 20 years to make), you have a comic series perfect for it.
This Statue By Marco D’agrate Depicts Saint Bartholomew, An Early Christian Martyr Who Was Skinned Alive
Say hello to my Gorillaz os!!! In general, I wanted to do all its phases, and perhaps I will do it, but separately, so please support me if you like it 🫂🫂🫂
“Twitter/X Image Size Guide Template”
Source: mystiena_ on Twitter
hot artists don't gatekeep
I've been resource gathering for YEARS so now I am going to share my dragons hoard
Floorplanner. Design and furnish a house for you to use for having a consistent background in your comic or anything! Free, you need an account, easy to use, and you can save multiple houses.
Comparing Heights. Input the heights of characters to see what the different is between them. Great for keeping consistency. Free.
Magma. Draw online with friends in real time. Great for practice or hanging out. Free, paid plan available, account preferred.
Smithsonian Open Access. Loads of free images. Free.
SketchDaily. Lots of pose references, massive library, is set on a timer so you can practice quick figure drawing. Free.
SculptGL. A sculpting tool which I am yet to master, but you should be able to make whatever 3d object you like with it. free.
Pexels. Free stock images. And the search engine is actually pretty good at pulling up what you want.
Figurosity. Great pose references, diverse body types, lots of "how to draw" videos directly on the site, the models are 3d and you can rotate the angle, but you can't make custom poses or edit body proportions. Free, account option, paid plans available.
Line of Action. More drawing references, this one also has a focus on expressions, hands/feet, animals, landscapes. Free.
Animal Photo. You pose a 3d skull model and select an animal species, and they give you a bunch of photo references for that animal at that angle. Super handy. Free.
Height Weight Chart. You ever see an OC listed as having a certain weight but then they look Wildly different than the number suggests? Well here's a site to avoid that! It shows real people at different weights and heights to give you a better idea of what these abstract numbers all look like. Free to use.
Giove Toppi (1888-1942)
sometimes i just think about Overwatch and just get sad
Like, you drop the most inescapably popular and influential shooter of an entire generation, with a cast overflowing with some of the most instantly iconic characters we've ever seen, that captures a fanbase which is so eager to learn about any aspect of these characters that they start willfully lapping up character trailers and ARGs as though those are good forms of storytelling for games in order to get just the vaguest taste of what this world offers,
And then proceed to single-handedly fumble the bag so bad that the primary legacy the game can claim to have is using that promise of a story to bait-and-switch it's fans into buying an incomplete sequel that was rushed into production because you punished a Hearthstone player for being pro-democracy, being the final needle to pop the e-sports speculator bubble there by financially draining nearly every competitive gaming scene to the brink of bankruptcy (at best), and having indirectly lead to advancements in 3D animation because your game effectively has it's own category on pornhub. Oh, also, you alienated the director of the game so hard that he leaves the company and seemingly retires from the entire gaming industry.
Only a room full of the most cynical and dollar horny suits imaginable could fuck this up so bad. I'm not even mad at this point. Just saddened on behalf of everyone on the dev team who actually gave a shit and embarrassed on behalf of the lootbox blinded execs who didn't.
Skip Google for Research
As Google has worked to overtake the internet, its search algorithm has not just gotten worse. It has been designed to prioritize advertisers and popular pages often times excluding pages and content that better matches your search terms
As a writer in need of information for my stories, I find this unacceptable. As a proponent of availability of information so the populace can actually educate itself, it is unforgivable.
Below is a concise list of useful research sites compiled by Edward Clark over on Facebook. I was familiar with some, but not all of these.
⁂
Google is so powerful that it “hides” other search systems from us. We just don’t know the existence of most of them. Meanwhile, there are still a huge number of excellent searchers in the world who specialize in books, science, other smart information. Keep a list of sites you never heard of.
www.refseek.com - Academic Resource Search. More than a billion sources: encyclopedia, monographies, magazines.
www.worldcat.org - a search for the contents of 20 thousand worldwide libraries. Find out where lies the nearest rare book you need.
https://link.springer.com - access to more than 10 million scientific documents: books, articles, research protocols.
www.bioline.org.br is a library of scientific bioscience journals published in developing countries.
http://repec.org - volunteers from 102 countries have collected almost 4 million publications on economics and related science.
www.science.gov is an American state search engine on 2200+ scientific sites. More than 200 million articles are indexed.
www.pdfdrive.com is the largest website for free download of books in PDF format. Claiming over 225 million names.
www.base-search.net is one of the most powerful researches on academic studies texts. More than 100 million scientific documents, 70% of them are free