NinjaPirate

It amuses me for some reason that Korra just from the one picture appears to have better muscle tone than any of the core Gaang from the first series.



-np

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBfLxgvT-w0




-np

Some folks have adopted small dry sausages as styli.




-np

Direct link to the YouTube video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiT68Y9lUZg

"This is how it all ends... Pond flirting with herself, true love at last. Oh, sorry Rory."






-np

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK6TXMsvgQg


-np

Asgardians as gods: Immensely powerful, not of this planet.

Asgardians as aliens: Immensely powerful, not of this planet.

Hmm...




-np

I wonder if Voidaccount ever fixed his Supercomputer problem?




-k

Foam rubber costumes can look great, but it melts and burns something horrible if it gets exposed to even a little flame. And while burning produces highly toxic fumes.

Just sayin.




-np

People don't want "new and innovative".

Oh, they THINK they do. They think they want original stories and plots, but deep down that's not really true, even if they can't admit it to themselves.

People want more of the same. Seriously. More of the same, with just enough tweaking that is SEEMS like it's new, but with that comfortable core that they're used to and remember.

This applies to pretty much anything, not just television.



-k

Given the name "Phoenix", readers really should have figured out from the start that dying and coming back over and over would kinda be her schtick.






-k

Oldman! You are needed!





-np

That SJ picture has a little hatching around the edges of the shadows. The shadows themselves are solid blacks, and there's some solid greys scattered among the blacks. Very little hatching at all, really.

All the rest of the vertical lines? Rain.

As I said, since you can't see the differences presented, I think there's little I can say that will change your mind.

I'll just leave it with this: Pretty much any given character from those shows, even ones I've never seen or heard of, I can generally immediately peg which show they're from just seeing the artwork. PowerPuff Girls is (as intended) a parody of Anime. Samurai Jack takes a riff from Japanese brush and wood-cut block art. Clone Wars has a slightly Greek look to the art.

But I'm starting to repeat myself, so I'm out.



-np

You realize that hatching in the Samurai Jack pic is rain, right? Not shadows, like Liefeld uses them for?

Hell, even Liefeld can produce decent work - or at least he used to. Take a look at his very early stuff when he was still a junior up and comer, compare it with his later "star" work. You might swear they were by different artists - his early work was downright "normal" and "decent".

One other thing that comes to mind - one of the big differences between a "good" artist and a "bad" artist is how MANY styles they can do.

Take ten different Tartakovsky characters, and while they all will be wildly exaggerated and stylized, and you can generally tell it's his work, they're mostly exaggerated in different ways.

Samurai Jack does not look like Clone Wars, which does not look like PowerPuff Girls. They all are distinctly different, even if they're all visibly Tartakovsky. And they're all internally consistent within their respective series. Samurai Jack characters all have a certain look, Clone Wars characters have a distinctly different look but are easily identified as being Clone Wars, and so on.

Contrast with a lot of bad artists - many derive their "style" by imitating another artist's style without understanding the structural underpinnings of that other artist's work. And this copied "style" is ALL they can do.



-np

First off, I'm not a big fan of Tartakovsky's style, even if I can see it's skill.

However, if you honestly cannot see the differences in artistic ability between the two examples you posted, I'm not sure anything I can say will change your mind. But here goes.

The first pic you posted is stylized but technically proficient. The second sucks.

The first is wildly exaggerated. As are most of the characters in PowerPuff Girls. However, it still retains a level of stylistic elegance that the second simply does not. The form and structure flows, for lack of a better term. He understands the use of heavy and light line weights, and the linework itself is smooth and controlled. His proportions, which distorted, are consistent from piece to piece.

I have to imagine that you're not a big fan of John Kricfalusi's work either. That's okay. You're entitled to your opinion.

I'm just pointing out my take on the dividing line between "stylized" art and "bad" art.


-np

Well, everyone's got an opinion, I guess.

The difference between a good artist with a particular style and a bad artist, though - the good artist can generally also do more "conventional" style art, the bad artist... cannot.

Yes, Tartakovsky's art in his cartoons tends to be extremely stylized and minimalist. However, if you really look at it, you realize that he does, in fact, have an understanding of anatomy and composition. His "human" figures have generally correct ratios, spacing, placement, joint structure.

In short, his style is a CHOICE he made, not an expression of his limitations.

I mean, I look at the cubist movement back in the day, and I really can't stand it. At all. But I never say it "sucks". Just that it doesn't appeal to me. If you look at the work of the masters, nonetheless, you can see they actually understand the structure of the things they are drawing or painting - they just present it in a different style.

On the other hand, I will cheerfully tell folks if their art sucks because their skill sucks. And I have, in previous employment as a graphic artist doing hiring.



-np

Do we know if it really IS the symbiote anymore?

Or might it be a lie, he's wearing just be a costume now, the name taken to inspire fear?





-np