The vessel, maybe, for the hard thrusting shaft of defeat-rape. Your comeuppance looms, T. Bo. It looms.
But srsly Tauhid I didn't even know you could make funny comics! I don't even really know what to think!
The vessel, maybe, for the hard thrusting shaft of defeat-rape. Your comeuppance looms, T. Bo. It looms.
But srsly Tauhid I didn't even know you could make funny comics! I don't even really know what to think!
He's got him on the ropes and now he's working the body. In a totally not gay way though.
Hey don't look so smug this isn't over.
Also I'm not sure I get that one. I guess he is crazy or something. (?)
Also, draw worse.
Yea I was on my bad joke game but it's difficult to suppress my artistic virility with such consistency success as you. The pen is like an extension of myself. And not my hand either.
This whole affair seems a little imbalanced. Like a blackbelt Jujitsu tournament against toddlers. These kind of comics are basically all I do. So in order to abide by the limiting theme of the contest, I am faced with the challenge of drawing a comic that I would typically draw and post on my website on the order of hundreds or perhaps thousands. Why am I putting all this shit in italics.
Dirty secret: girls like horses so much because they remind them of huge muscular cocks.
I'm not sure I get this one. Is the horse crazy?
Also how come The Suck Off doesn't show up as a topic on the main page?
The horse just has very strong principles.
It ain't on the main page cause I didn't put it there.
Both his parents are alive and well and he doesn't even give a fuck.
I think your bad art is actually improving. As in sucking less. You've got to stop that.
Naw dude it's too funny to be a shitty comic.
PS - lol again at "BIKE STUNTS"
hehehehehehehehehe
Man that was great.
I won this.
More shit please.
But you can't intentionally ram your drawings down the uncanny valley just for the hell of it. Well you can, but it achieves a different effect.
It's like the difference between an art director who deliberately designs clowns to be scary in a horror film, versus an honest to God street performer who innocently dresses as a clown hoping for the best, but achieves a disturbing look. And latter instances, through incompetence and naivete, tend to produce imagery more disturbing than even a veteran hand at design.
The goal here is to produce a facsimile of that naivete, and the work it yields. This is done through careful modification and restraint of artistic instincts (if you have them in the first place). "Figure B" in my graph wasn't even a very good example. It was just something vaguely illustrative of "weird and ugly!"
In summary: it can't just be "whoa dude be making ugly shit on purpose!"
In truth, the blackest crevices of the uncanny valley are extremely difficult to plunder, and are mostly inaccessible even to my malleable pen.
I have to admit that when I first issued the challenge I just thought it would be you and me making stupid looking comics and talking shit. You took it to a whole 'nother level though and i did take me a minute to catch up to what you were doing. However, at the time I was not invested enough to put that much effort into sucking.
That last pic was an example of exactly what you describe if you'll examine it. All the classic amateur artist mistakes are represented. But the beauty is not that they are not mistakes from the perspective of the amateur. In fact many of them have been painstakingly crafted and practiced tirelessly as improvements to his/her artistic style.
-All texture is rendered in hard lines rather than implied with shadow.
-A lack of skill is compensated for by more detail which drags the piece further down as that detail is badly executed.
-Young artists popularly focus too much on the head and body as separate elements rather than as a whole resulting is a gross discrepancy in proportion.
-Limbs are also treated with the same disregard causing them be forced into to piece without proper consideration for position often at the further detriment to anatomy.
-Hair is often the last thing an artist masters choosing instead to draw hats or worse render each hair with a stoke of the pencil in the hopes of emulating the texture of actual hair. When this fails they will often draw a contour line around their scribbles to define head shape.
-Fingers are all the same length
-Lines that should appear to connect lose continuity when they pass behind objects in the foreground.
-Each individual tooth is drawn in a smile
-Eyes often set too closely together.
Ears often set too high on the head.
-Lines from the corners of the nose to the corners of the mouth and bridge of the nose to the upper lip are given far too much emphasis.
-Females are often distinguishable only by obvious (though misshapen) breast that protrude so, regardless of the garment they wear, obligatory jewelry, long hair, and eye lashes. They are devoid of any femininity otherwise.
The list goes on but you get the point.
I see that you were mostly successful in capturing the things you describe, but on the whole when I look at that drawing I still see a skilled artist at its helm, deliberately downgrading through a series of calculated stylistic methods.
Can you honestly say you could craft a work of art like this? Or this? Or this? What is the worst Batman you can bring to the table?
The drawings I linked represent a heavy gauntlet, because they are to anyone's eye indisputably 100% earnest. There is no question they were drawn by someone with every intention of making them look as "awesome" as their ability could muster. That's precisely what makes them so dreadful, and what makes that artist such a Goliath in this arena of combat. As skilled artists, neither of us have a prayer against that dude.
He totally looks like a god damn chicken in that last one...
The worst thing about those images is the familiarity. I can tell you precisely where that guy is in his artistic development and it is a precarious place. I've been there. And you are right. I could never match that. I've taken a few mistakes that young artists make and implemented them. This guy is at a point where his artistic ability is clearly better than the average person who views it and has become convinced that it's time for him to practice more advanced techniques. He's moved onto toying with color and light without first mastering anatomy and proportion. He's diving into perspective with no attention to detail. He attempting to render detailed backgrounds without ever having drawn from nature. And all frankly because he feels, mistakenly, that he's overcome those hurdles. Once again, he's probably the best artist he knows. Can't you just hear his friends telling him how awesome these drawings are? He's deluded himself into thinking he is mere steps behind his favorite comic book artists and each hamfisted technique he adds to his repertoire convinces him further.
This guy thinks he's awesome and is not. That's something I cannot emulate but I'll be damned if I don't try. There goes my fucking weekend.
You're right, we've all been where he is, and once you're past it, it's impossible to regress deliberately. I've been there too. (there are better [i.e. worse] examples than that, but that's all I have.)
In fact, I could copy one of his drawings line for line, and it still wouldn't be convincing somehow. Much like he could copy line for line something drawn by Jim Lee (and he probably has) and it would still look like shit.
Also, I bought one of that guy's paintings for $400.
These last couple of comments and examples have forever convinced me that I should never, ever try to accomplish anywhere near that much detail in an image.
Each stroke of the ARTISTIC SUPPLIES drags the image deeper and deeper into the pit of failure. At least if it had been left less refined, it would be passable as a doodle or sketch or W.I.P.
Perhaps. Though, I don't think the strength of the parallel between us trying to draw like him and him trying to draw like Jim Lee is a coincidence. After all Jim Lee was once in the same place that this guy is. As you said we've all been there. so does it stand to reason that an artist could with great practice train themselves to sincerely suck that way again? It may be premature to say it's impossible. a more interesting question might be why the hell would someone do that? Imagine an artist with such mastery over his own talent that he or she can work from any stage in his or her own development at will. Couldn't such an artist also completely unshackle themselves from the confines of "style" that we as artists work so hard to yolk ourselves to? I can recognize your work from a mile away, Andrew as I'm sure you can recognize mine. But such an artist as I've describes would be an artisan confined only by the subject and context of a given piece. Such would be the extent of his mastery of his gift. I don't mean something as simple as an artistic chameleon. I mean an artist who adheres only to the basic principle of art able to render near if not actual perfection without the arrogance normal people inflict on their work when they take up the mantle "creator".Originally Posted by Andrew
Like some kind of drawing machine.
Originally Posted by Tauhid
heh.