DAEDRIC FUN TIP:
Deliver fleeting happiness to a fellow mortal. Comment on their works.
5540: actual_underwear artist:Zargothrax casually_underdressed character:Rajirra
|
showing 10 of 11 comments
DOOMGUY11: @Zargothrax: damn you did well! I'm gonna use this pic for references since shading I barely touched and tried hope to see more :)
Zargothrax: @DOOMGUY11: Thanks! But I think you should use pictures from artists whose knowledge on the subject is more solid than mine as references. At the moment I don't really see oddities in my drawing, but that doesn't mean there are none, and if you learn from this picture, you will also unknowingly learn the mistakes as well.
On the other hand, do whatewer suits you, the most important "lesson" in drawing is to have fun, stuff get really difficult without that.
DOOMGUY11: @Zargothrax: yeah I meant references since I check out others aswell, I'll keep your tips in mind
Toryu-Mau: @Zargothrax: ... Yup, no matter how fancy a hat is, unless the base geometry that make up the overall shape is drawn accurately, it will end up being a crumpled hat, eh? >):^/
As the saying goes, "A monkey in fancy shoe is still a monkey.", after all. >):^]
Geravind: Wrong tail alignment at it's pin-point (compared to her spine position).
A bit weird shadowing here and there. The lower legs missed proportion in massiveness. The eyes/ears scale doesn't fit the skull size too well (we can leave it as artist's style ...but her eyes in size almost match her boobs =o_O= ). Snaky hair? Ok, it's quite difficult to picture it all smoother. The rest looks good.  Lady Rajirra is such a chic. :3
|
2907: character:Rajirra knock_off very_casually_underdressed
|
showing 10 of 44 comments
Tahrey:
no visible emphasis on Rajirra's feminine features AreYouFuckingKiddingMe.jpg Right, so, long hair being flicked backwards, stereotypical glamour pose including a strangely ecstatic expression, bare breasts, most of a flat crotch, pronounced hips, hourglass figure, petite shoulder shape, femme facial features (at least as much as you can point to in an anthropomorphic feline), nicely toned stomach... slender fingers and well defined collar, even. But no, as she's of average weight, isn't wearing underwear (or indeed anything at all), and hasn't had her gender-specific fat deposition exaggerated in a prehistoric-fertility-doll caricature fashion, we're not showing off or focussing any attention on her feminine features. This picture is ALL about the fur texture, the species-specific tuft of chest hair, and how the seawater is spraying through the air. Gimme strength. according to you, this pic is questionable because it shows nudity Not so much me, but more like "everyone else but". As in, that's more the generally held standard. If someone's got their clothes off and you can see the parts that would normally be concealed, then it gets a NSFW warning, because some people are picky about that stuff, in a way they tend not to be when it comes to the general body shape of someone who isn't in the buff. And this still applies whether or not it's "arty". Artistic porn is still porn. You'd be frowned at and possibly disciplined for hanging up reproductions of classical nude paintings around a primary school classroom, even though in a different context those same images count as tourist attractions. The medium in which it's conveyed doesn't change the audience rating. Legend Of The Overfiend being drawn in a decidedly toony style didn't save it from an 18 rating when it was released on video. Neither did the sumptuous arthouse stylings of Betty Blue. You can't make an argument for it escaping the "questionable" tag just because of what brushes the artist used in photoshop or how much effort they put in. Personally, I'm not at all bothered what I'm looking at, but I am sometimes bothered what other people might see me looking at, intentionally or otherwise. Is this genuinely an unfamiliar concept to you, or are you just shit-stirring? If the former, where do you live? Depending on the answer it might be interesting to come conduct an anthropological study. the other isn't because there's nothing inherently sexual about it I didn't say that. There is a slight suggestiveness. But there's nothing explicit, it's at the level of mild innuendo at best. The yellow cat is minimally clothed, but still clothed. The red cat is hitting on her, but in such a mild and cheesy way that a child might laugh at it and think it lame. There's no nudity, no sexual language, no definite touching of any areas other than neck and arm. I really can't figure out what you're complaining about other than possibly you have a dislike of cartoon characters shaped like fertility dolls, and you're jealous that the red cat might have a vague non-zero chance of getting some, which is still far better than your own. Also, sure, you may be able to get away with certain nude images without the tag, and enough non-nude ones that are highly suggestive, explicit, or otherwise rude and unsuitable for mixed company may still get tagged, but that doesn't work here, because each one is far enough inside or outside of the boundary line for there not to be any uncertainty over it. Hence why the mods tagged them that way. ... or we can simply leave them as they are Yeah, that seems like a good idea. Given that you're the one who was stirring it in the first place, I thank you for your reconsideration, but still note that all this was kinda needless. they aren't a big deal literally it's a tag on the sidebar, and a little overlay on the thumbnail. it doesn't restrict access or anything like that, it just allows people to decide what they do or don't look at based on a general idea of what might potentially get them in trouble in a workplace, overbearing family environment, or at school... why did it twist your buttons so hard, and in such a strange way?
- Reply
-Uzi_Man-: @Tahrey: You wrote a lot of vague / pointless text, so I'm only going to highlight your main points.
There's nothing at all in that picture to suggest that, whether or not it's happening is entirely down to your own imagination. They are very close to each other. It's impossible for their bodies to not have physical contact other than their arms. Just look at the size of Katia's butt and how close the red cat's front is to her back. Unless the pic has bad proportions, the only logical conclusion is that his crotch is, indeed, rubbing on her butt. Your photo example doesn't work, because the woman is completely clothed. If she was in a bikini (which in addition doesn't cover much more than her private parts), then it would be questionable. Bullshit. His left forearm crooks around her left collar and his wrist is at her right upper arm. There is still physical contact. It wouldn't be a big deal if Katia had clothes that cover up her chest, but she doesn't. holy shit, dude, really? Can you tell me what date is on your calendar at the moment? Does the year start with a 1? What's the third number in it? What are you even trying to say? That what's sexual or not is only determined by culture, which can change with the pass of time? Because you'd be wrong if you thought that: even if culture affects our sexual views / preferences, our human biology also makes us naturally sexually attracted to some things more than others. A woman with a big chest, thighs and overall body thickness are naturally attractive to most men. Taking this in consideration, you can establish an "objective" way to measure how sexual a picture is. If you want to doubt this, you're just being delusional. Hence the use of "normal". Is there emphasis on the size of Rajirra's chest, thighs and belly (or overall thickness) on this pic? No, they're average. Is there emphasis on Katia's on the other pic? Yup. My own contrasting opinion here is that they were trying for artistic and sexy. I never said that they couldn't be both, I only stated that the artist of this pic wanted to focus on giving this pic an artistic vibe rather than a sexual one, unlike the other pic. It can have both, but one can be more present than the other. Right, so, long hair being flicked backwards, stereotypical glamour pose including a strangely ecstatic expression, bare breasts, most of a flat crotch, pronounced hips, hourglass figure, petite shoulder shape, femme facial features (at least as much as you can point to in an anthropomorphic feline), nicely toned stomach... slender fingers and well defined collar, even. But no, as she's of average weight, isn't wearing underwear (or indeed anything at all), and hasn't had her gender-specific fat deposition exaggerated in a prehistoric-fertility-doll caricature fashion, we're not showing off or focussing any attention on her feminine features. There is no emphasis in any of those things, though. They're all average-sized. What there is emphasis on is in trying to show Rajirra's feminity as a whole, but there's no particular focus on any of her body parts, unlike the other pic. If someone's got their clothes off and you can see the parts that would normally be concealed, then it gets a NSFW warning By that logic, this picture should have a questionable tag as well, as it shows Katia naked. http://www.prequeladventure.com/fanartbooru/post/view/999#search=tutorial. Do you see anyone who cares about it? Also, sure, you may be able to get away with certain nude images without the tag, and enough non-nude ones that are highly suggestive, explicit, or otherwise rude and unsuitable for mixed company may still get tagged, but that doesn't work here, because each one is far enough inside or outside of the boundary line for there not to be any uncertainty over it. Hence why the mods tagged them that way. To tag both pictures as "questionable" would be exaggerated. This one because there is nothing inherently "rude" on it: it's something you see in a french commercial, and even then it's pretty soft compared to what they often produce. The other pic because the sexual innuendos are just details. Hence why I'm proposing to leave them both untagged. Man, you really need to calm down and stop using derogatory sarcasm. It doesn't contribute anything to the discussion, nor it adds strength to your arguments. The only reason I can think of why you're taking such an aggressive stance is that you have weight problems and my remarks make you feel attacked.
Grape: At the end of the day a questionable tag doesn't really change much, just if it has an overlay or not. That being said, this image doesn't contain anything necessarily sexual in nature, being neither revealing nor provocative. No worse than painted underwear. On that basis, it's staying unquestionable, and the tags are being locked.
bluedraggy: And this is why I swear I will never again be a moderator of anything! I wish you all much luck in your hopeless quest to define edge cases. But be aware that hopeless quest is hopeless.
Tahrey: Jesus, he still tried coming back after that?
That's it, I'm totally done feeding the troll. Whatever, dude. You win. Enjoy your hollow internet victory.
Tahrey: However ---
Grape: The painted underwear is at least *something* (for one thing, putting paint on thin-ish fur has a rather more concealing effect on what lies beneath than either the fur itself, or doing similar on bare skin; and IRL at least, animal fur tends to be thinner around these, ah, problem areas). As per the self-arrived conclusion in my post in on the Civil War pic, painted underwear is shown uncensored in the comic, but nudity not concealed by such efforts is pixelated out for all three of smooth-skinned (Orc ... & human?), scaly-skinned (Argonian) and furry (Khajiit) characters, so in Prequel context at least it would seem that nudity = "explicit", painted undies on furry character = "not explicit" (with paint on skin or scale being as yet undefined). Even if it was done, as is most likely, either for comedy purposes or to comply with MSPAF rules, it still makes for a consistent rendering if we follow that. Oh, and the argument may seem petty and all, but a line has to be drawn *somewhere* for clarity in future cases. And I may not have been quite so mind-boggled if the argument was either "they're both explicit!" (ok, a bit extreme, but maybe you come from a culture where undressing to/beyond the point where your knees and elbows are visible is considered unseemly), or "both are clean" (arguable given the fur and lack of nips/clefts, though errs on the side of fail-deadly rather than fail-safe from the censure-vulnerable user's perspective). The crazy-ass thing from where I'm standing was trying to claim that the clean/explicit classification needed to be reversed such that Pepe Le Pew got an NC17, but a front-lit, effectively-naked version of this: 
...gets a U. (note, artist could have given her a painted or fabric (or chainmail) bikini, but didn't) FWIW I could probably have found the classic pin-up version of that which is what I have in my mind's eye, to put behind a NSFW'd link, but the problem is that I am myself at a workplace PC (it's a quiet week...) and adding even the mildest of suggestive terms as a modifier to what was needed to produce that pic results in just ALL OF THE PORN. Which I'd skim through for the desired pic with no issues at home, but it's rather too obvious even in thumbnail form on your monitor in an open plan office and forces a rapid, instinctive Ctrl+F4.
Tahrey: Also, my own weight is not the issue here; in the interest of disclosure, I'm one category above "normal/healthy" and recognise I need to lose a few pounds, but have no self image issues over it as neither am I dragging around an enormous spare tyre. My family background on both sides tends towards the heavy-set even amongst the lean-going-on-anorexic members, so the BMI is a touch biased, and compared to three particular close relatives (one each from my generation and the two preceding gens, the oldest of whom being long deceased) I'm a goddamn featherweight.
But we were discussing the images, and the only thing I could positively identify as a complaint that would stand up to the most rudimentary scrutiny was that Katia was kinda well-funded in the booty department on the cartoonish pic. Which itself seemed to have had some kind of heated discussion over People's Firmly-Held Opinions Over Whether They Should Be Allowed To Freely Click On Images Depicting Overweight Characters And Look At Them Long Enough To Become Disgusted By It... whose participants are unknown to me because the moderators deleted it all. But I do have a sneaking suspicion that at least one of the contributors to this particular thread may have been involved... Seriously, it's the interweb, if you don't like the picture, add the tag to a blocklist (if we have that system here), or just close the tab / hit back / shut your eyes, stumble out into the street and pay the nearest person who'll accept your money to go into your house and destroy your computer. |
5552: Katia's_wizard_robe adorable character:Katia_Managan lined_paper_club
|
showing 10 of 12 comments
Toryu-Mau: APayne1776: ... Wecome~ to the Booru~♪ ( Sprinkles confetti from the balcony ) >):^D
Toryu-Mau: APayne1776: ... Would you believe if I told you I got to this level from having Zero art skills before in just Three month? >):^?
Guess what, that's exactly what happened, and this Booru and its people are what made that happen. >):^D So stick around, and absorb all this artistic growth hormone in the air, eh? >);^]
DOOMGUY11: @Toryu-Mau: @APayne1776: I can say the same dude just expose yourself to new techniques and examples and try them yourself like me I experiment alot. you can try a different approach and here's the biggest tip I can give you from my teacher, "it's just lines, nothing more. so draw the lines" which makes since if you think about it :)
APayne1776: I'm not really an artist I just draw this because I was bored
APayne1776: @DOOMGUY11: that's ok I might draw something again
I have some ideas that I like to draw
Toryu-Mau: @APayne1776: ... Neither was I, M8.
An Artist is not Born, they are Grown. >):^D Most of us had "That one class was so boring it made me create an entire world inside of my head to escape it." moment. Wouldn't it be wonderful to be able to show it to others? I know I thought so. c^:(< |
5553: character:Katia_Managan character:your_weird_OC lined_paper_club text
|
showing 10 of 11 comments
Toryu-Mau: @APayne1776: ... Don't let it get ya down, M8. >):^<
People who slander others like that generally never begin with the intention nor diligence to try and understand from a different perspective. Sure, they have the freedom to have different opinion, but opinion by it self has no value if there is no action behind it to back that up and make a difference. >):^o For me, that action is ART. >):^] It's one of the few things even people who aren't willing to communicate their differences in a civil manner can look at, and understand the message embedded in the image to bridge across differences and connect with others in that moment of "Oh, that looks cool." >):^D
Sashimi: @Toryu-Mau: Well said TM. It's so easy for others to disparage the views of another without considering the effect it will have. It's unfortunate that people aren't more tolerant and understanding. I mean, so what if someone likes the furrydom, how does that hurt those who disapprove? Don't worry, we got your back. @APayne1776:
APayne1776: Everyone here is pretty nice
DOOMGUY11: I'm not sure if you are serious or you friends tease each other like that for fun so dont take my last comment seriously it was meant as a joke :)@APayne1776:
APayne1776: Me and my friend tease each other
he actually is a furry He just calls me a closet furry because I like katia
Toryu-Mau: @APayne1776: ... As long as the humorous sentiment is shared and both of ya have fun and laugh about it, that's nice. c^:(<
|
5545: artist:DOOMGUY11 character:Rajirra character:bartender questionable
showing 10 of 11 comments
Toryu-Mau: @DOOMGUY11: ... Which brings the age old question - "Does a Fish from the River make Sea Food?" >):^?
Toryu-Mau: @DOOMGUY11: ... "River Food" doesn't sound right, and "Fish Food" is something else entirely... I'm at a loss with this one. >):^?
Toryu-Mau: @DOOMGUY11: ... Sometimes, I wish we had Pip-boys to magically tell us what stuff and things are called... wait, how does the Pip-boy know what everything is called, anyway? >):^?
DOOMGUY11: @Toryu-Mau: idk it's just weird what to call things that are mutated aswell. It predicts the future technically
|
5465: artist:Bluedraggy audio character:Rajirra crossover knock_off
From Elsweyr With Love 1 
|
bluedraggy: Part 1. Experimental. I've only got 3 of 12 done so far, but at least we've got a new format on the booru! Yay! Had to compress the hell out of it, but it's certainly still listen-able.
bluedraggy: Dunno! It must be easy. I learned it before I was 4 years old. :)
bluedraggy: Just added when I asked for it. Ask and ye shall receive!
|
5544: Marvel artist:Nicros_Man character:Katia_Managan character:Sigrid comic crossover magic_fire
|
showing 10 of 21 comments
Rick2tails: a very unusual crossover
TrashPanda545: Can't wait for the the next movie poster you do, I really like them!
DOOMGUY11: @TrashPanda545: Right? It makes me speculate what would happen if they were real :)
DOOMGUY11: @scoopski: top ten 15 characters who can defeat thanks even with the infinity gauntlet
Number 15: Katia Managan
Toryu-Mau: @Queenish: ... I'd say it's due to the complimentary color choices and the campy comic style scene composition that makes it fun to look at. >):^]
Nicros_Man: @Queenish: Batman did a crossover with the TMNT, so its not so weard in my opinion.
DOOMGUY11: Anything can happen! like a crossover I want to see is doomslayer v kratos or predator v Rambo
|
5534: Marvel artist:Nicros_Man character:Katia_Managan comic crossover text
|
Nicros_Man: @DOOMGUY11: And even if it is, I'm pretty sure he's gonna come back in the next movies.
Kazerad: @Nicros_Man: We all know that they're gonna, since they have future Spider-Man movies planned, but it would be so amazing if they just threw us all for a loop and switched him out for Miles.
Nicros_Man: @Kazerad: But hey, I modified the spider on the front. Now it looks more like a wolf spider. Did it?
Nicros_Man: The classic pose of the Amazing Spider-Man!
|
5550: Kvatch_arena_armor character:Katia_Managan monochrome sketch text
|
DOOMGUY11: Tip:you shouldn't:)
I just came back and worked on her armor a bit took away the large logo and such hope you guys enjoy!
APayne1776: @DOOMGUY11 np
|
903: artist:KillerfishSG blushing booze character:Katia_Managan drunk hoodie_katia modern_clothing pineapple questionable
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply