Professional Bad Anatomy

[GunZet]

Aren't you like a freak about anatomy, Linz?

[toast]

yeah its just my animu style!!!!!!!! I can crack the spine and make hot dog bodies if I want!!!!!!!!!!!!!! look picasso did cubism its not like the point in cubism is to show multiple points of views at once as opposed to anime which is supposed to be a more stylistic representation of the human body but still follows the same anatomical rules!!!!!!!!!! FUG!!!!!!!!!!^(dM/dt = rM)"

just to be admired from some people from a manga forum!! RIDICULOUS.

it's not about admiration, it's about being able to draw and not teaching people it's ok to draw deformed bodies. why do you think this is ok? I thought you were for learning anatomy?

[Demonfyre]

yeah its just my animu style!!!!!!!! I can crack the spine and make hot dog bodies if I want!!!!!!!!!!!!!! look picasso did cubism its not like the point in cubism is to show multiple points of views at once as opposed to anime which is supposed to be a more stylistic representation of the human body but still follows the same anatomical rules!!!!!!!!!! FUG!!!!!!!!!!^(dM/dt = rM)"

;_____;

[GunZet]

Ohey I saw that in art history last semester. Some other teacher brought in a cast replica taken of the real thing, was pretty cool.

But yea, back in that day art wasn't how we see it now. It was moreso a form of language, or for record-keeping. And this thing dates wayyyy back, so nobody gave a shit about accurate representation, as you can still tell what it is.
It's like Egyptian art and it being entirely 2D- not to mention point perspective didn't exist at the time, but they still would have done it anyway to give you the whole story they were trying to present.

[Linz]

yeah its just my animu style!!!!!!!! I can crack the spine and make hot dog bodies if I want!!!!!!!!!!!!!! look picasso did cubism its not like the point in cubism is to show multiple points of views at once as opposed to anime which is supposed to be a more stylistic representation of the human body but still follows the same anatomical rules!!!!!!!!!! FUG!!!!!!!!!!^(dM/dt = rM)"



it's not about admiration, it's about being able to draw and not teaching people it's ok to draw deformed bodies. why do you think this is ok? I thought you were for learning anatomy?

Last time I checked BOTH of us draw deformed bodies. On purpose.

[toast]

well it's not really that nobody gave a shit, you have to look at renaissance-romanticism which all required a perfect understanding of the human body

it's more after the realistic movement artists started to kind of branch out and experiment on different aspects like colors and mood, then we kind of went back to photo-realism. people can still make art from those various movements, but now when it comes to commercial cartoons that focus heavily on realistic but slightly exaggerated realistic proportions, you need to make sure it doesnt look too weird as fuck. exaggeration is fine in comics since that's the point but when the pose/anatomy doesn't make sense, that usually points towards the fact that the artist doesn't really understand anatomy, and so other artists look down on him. it also just looks ridiculous, because when you want to make something sexy it just looks hilarious if the body is all twisted and broken. look how sexy my backwards pelvis is! )

unless the artist's intentions were to make something distorted, it's not okay

Last time I checked BOTH of us draw deformed bodies. On purpose.

except that's our intentions, at least it's my intention to exaggerate and do random shit
besides, I only really do stuff like break the anatomy when I'm doodling just because it's fun and kind of an exercise for me. you exaggerate stuff like hips but you still manage to keep the structure and stuff

[Demonfyre]

Ohey I saw that in art history last semester. Some other teacher brought in a cast replica taken of the real thing, was pretty cool.

But yea, back in that day art wasn't how we see it now. It was moreso a form of language, or for record-keeping. And this thing dates wayyyy back, so nobody gave a shit about accurate representation, as you can still tell what it is.
It's like Egyptian art and it being entirely 2D- not to mention point perspective didn't exist at the time, but they still would have done it anyway to give you the whole story they were trying to present.

Oh nice, I would love to visit one of the museums that house these kinda statuettes of tribal goddesses and gods, well... their depictions of them at least ^^;

Hmm the egyptian art really fascinates me in how they can convey a whole message through an art form I guess even if they were all 2D pictograms, but then again, the symbols used in languages are an art in their own right. In particular the Asian and Arabic scripts.

[GunZet]

I'm talking waywaywayyyy back. Not that they didn't care, but it wasn't their prime focus. As for the Romanticism period, and Mannerism, that's when artistic freedom came to fruition and they started to do whatever they wanted. I only remember one prime example of this from the Mannerist period, and that's "The Madonna with A Long Neck"


But this is when art was in the artists hand. What I referred to earlier was THOUSANDS OF YEARS BAAAAAACK.

[toast]

ya, but I mean as you can see they exaggerated but still kept structure and knew what they were doing

I see what you're saying thousands of years back, I think art was more of a form of communication back then, that's why. hence all the symbols

[GunZet]

Yep