Comments: 7
ShirraPikachu [2013-01-09 03:13:01 +0000 UTC]
I'm just going to point this out - because it is stylized, it doesn't follow very proper anatomy. So, please stop harassing people about their use of anatomy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakarovJAC In reply to ShirraPikachu [2013-01-09 03:21:28 +0000 UTC]
OH...dear...
I'm sorry to tell you this, but your argument lost all truthfullness in the moment you argued that stylization doesn't follow proper anatomy.
It's true strylization doesn't stickl to realism. But it doesn't mean it renounces to all conventions about natural knowledge. It's been confirmed by professionals, instructors, and even hobbyist that to reach "stylization", the person must be capable of properly understanding realism.
There's no shortcut way or "cheat" for stylization. If the person doesn't understands realism, their "stylizations" will be nothing but doodle.
Like it or not, it's how it works. Art has no shortcuts. It's fun, but it's not easy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShirraPikachu In reply to MakarovJAC [2013-04-04 19:29:16 +0000 UTC]
No, this is actually not true. I'm currently in an art class, and we just finished an abstract unit. Part of this was learning about stylization. While yes, it does lie closely with realism, it's alright to exaggerate the features -- a good example would be fashion drawings, the kind used to draw the clothing design on. Typically, they have short torsos, angular shoulders, and very long legs. You do not have to properly understand realism to achieve a stylized look. Depending on how stylized you wish it to look, though, an understanding of realism can help. Stylization is a branch of abstract, and because of this, there is no "right" or "wrong" way to create a stylized drawing. The only "rules" {so to speak, there are no 'rules' in art, really,} is that is has to remain recognizable. There are varying degrees, just as with realism, and all of them are correct. It can range from a simple distortion or exaggeration (large eyes, but the rest is mostly correct), to a more extreme version (almost no correct anatomy, with a hardly recognizable subject.) This also doesn't just apply to human anatomy, but also animals and other forms of life.
So long as it's not a complete departure from reality [abstract, and non-objective work] then it can be considered stylized or objective.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakarovJAC In reply to ShirraPikachu [2013-04-04 23:21:53 +0000 UTC]
"I'm currently in an art class"
Yeah, you little furry-child of Chernobyl supports your claims.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShirraPikachu In reply to MakarovJAC [2013-04-05 18:26:17 +0000 UTC]
I really am. Though it's mostly for high-school credits. I don't plan on putting my artistic skills toward a job. Because I know the further I go into the art field, the more pretentious assholes like you I'll meet.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0