Read the rules before proceeding!

Topic: What do you dislike/like in porn art?

Posted under Art Talk

I have had this question in my head for quite a while now, because sometimes when I go through the uploads here, I stumble upon artwork that sometimes has a lot of upvotes but I don't really like it, or see glaring flaws in it.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't hate on such art, if it has a significant amount of effort in it etc. I can still appreciate it, but when I see pictures that are very well made but have less upvotes and/or favourites in comparison to the mentoined art, I don't really understand it.

So, what do you like and dislike in porn artwork? Do you accept anything that is erotic/sexual, or do you look for higher quality art only? Do you pay attention to how well the artist did the anatomy or are you more like ''that's a hot pussy/tits/ass/dick I don't care if the anatomy or overall look is a bit off.''

And, this is the part I'm mostly interested in, what do you like/dislike in fan art? Do you prefer when the artist sticks to the original look of the character and style, maybe alters it very slightly so it looks a bit more attractive? Or do you like it when the artist just completely changes it, like making the character look like a human, not sticking to the original style of the game/show etc. Pokémon and Animal Crossing are probably the best examples that come into mind for this.

I know it's very subjective but I still thought I'd ask, to get a general opinion on the topic. And sorry if this was a bit too long to read through.

Updated by mrnotsosafeforwork

Besides some fetish stuff like piss/shit, I don't like different-colored cum. It just looks odd. The anatomy can be a little off as long as the overall image is good. And I don't care if fanart is on or off-model for the most part.

Updated by anonymous

If the anatomy is a bit off, I don't mind. I'm not got get peeved just because there's a human like dick on a character. If there's something that captures my eye, I'll like it.

I prefer variety. Scat? no. Piss? No. Hyper? In a comedic way sure but overall, No (macro is fine).

I prefer the artist to be a little adventurous and experimental with how a character looks. They can make a Pokémon anthrofied to be more attractive or alternate species of a character (human to humanoid or human to feral etc.). Characters like Giorno Giovanna turned feral canine are pretty cool. If the artist makes a character cutesy or in a way that is true to the original style, that's fine with me.

Updated by anonymous

Generally speaking small details don't get in the way of things like minor anatomy mishaps and the like. I'm not an artist so I don't have a trained eye for such things anyways.

For me some images just look a little silly or unbelievable; not necessarily the kinks involved (say, size). I get there's stylization but something like ahegao can really pull one out of a picture or a "fucked silly" face. Both just don't seem realistic. There's also anatomy; I like anatomy when it's more defined than a perfect contours smooth/curved body. Having bony hip portrusions or defined musculature or "flesh" (all within semblance of believability for most body types from skinny to thick and everything in between) contribute to a picture.

Updated by anonymous

BlackSparkx said:
I have had this question in my head for quite a while now, because sometimes when I go through the uploads here, I stumble upon artwork that sometimes has a lot of upvotes but I don't really like it, or see glaring flaws in it.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't hate on such art, if it has a significant amount of effort in it etc. I can still appreciate it, but when I see pictures that are very well made but have less upvotes and/or favourites in comparison to the mentoined art, I don't really understand it.

A lot of it is just down to artist popularity. An artist who was already popular is going to get more votes on their work than a less popular artist's work of the same quality. Colouring also counts for a lot. A lot of posts that are just sketches or lineart perform far below fully-coloured posts of moderately lower lineart/figure quality.

So, what do you like and dislike in porn artwork?

I'm still figuring this out.
I like some degree of curves on either sex, but I don't like pinched-in waists or sharply angled torso outlines in general (so large breasts and too-large waist-hip differences are out.) Non-human hands and feet are almost a requirement, but I can overlook those if they're not a focus and the body/head are done well. Head artstyles vary too much for me to comment much beyond there are styles I do/don't like. (I've taken notice of several artists who draw great heads but I hate everything else about their style.) I greatly prefer any genitalia to be in an accurate position, but if I couldn't overlook deviations from that I wouldn't be able to stand looking at most porn art.

what do you like/dislike in fan art?

I don't tend to seek out fanart purely for the property it's from, it's just a bonus when I'm going through an artist I like and some fanart happens to be there. The artstyle is more important than the property itself, though if positive style elements of the property are used by an artist I normally don't like, it's possible for me to enjoy such fanart while continuing to ignore the artist's other work.

There's other things I could say about art outside the contexts of porn but you seem to be focused on porn here.

Updated by anonymous

It's hard to describe in objective terms what I like, in a variety of ways. There are multiple-hundred-upvote works here that I find very blasé, there are single-digit upvote works here that I've faved.

I suppose, on the balance, I like visible power dynamics: when one character ordinarily has some form of authority or responsibility over another. It doesn't matter whether what's happening in the image obeys the social hierarchy, or inverts it, or equalizes it, or whatever.

And I like visible consent. Consent has never detracted from an image for me. I can't say the same about its opposite.

But I can tell you some of my major dislikes, very easily.

First and foremost, what bothers me most when I see it is disrespect/dehumanization of a female. I mean, I can get into a lot of different genres of work, if it's the right piece. But it's a huge minus to me whenever it's clear that a (usually male) character is expressing the idea that a female is subhuman, or otherwise sub-whatever-you-want-to-call-it. This is most prominent in text and speech bubbles, I basically dislike any case of calling a woman "bitch", whether we're talking about puns for female anthromorphs or otherwise. I would probably feel the same way towards dehumanized male characters, except my real-life experience suggests the typical privilege level balances in men's favor so it doesn't resonate as harmful in nearly as many contexts.

I don't consider myself "woke" or anything, it's just that this one thing bothers me more than anything else. Even more than a lack of consent.

Somewhere after that is sadism and masochism. They're much shorter to explain, I just don't like seeing people hurt for pleasure, even if it's their own.

And after that, we get into the specific genres that I just don't like: Gore, the closely related guro, and then watersports and scat. They're just squicky to me, and the former two tend to blend into sadism to boot.

Updated by anonymous

I like dicks attached to dudes.

I am not a complicated man.

Updated by anonymous

I've been part of the furry community since the mid-nineties. That's given me a lot of time to observe changes not only in overall art styles, but also in the growth of digital media, and even in the way the furry community thinks.

One thing that really bothers me is not just the lack of realistic proportions, but the response one gets when pointing them out: "It's fantasy, I can do whatever I want!" Yes, that's true, but it doesn't mean there's no audience for critical thinking. Or that you shouldn't try to improve your work.

It seems to me that a higher percentage of furry artists and viewers used to put more conscious thought and effort into their work and into the community as a whole. Now it's just conventions and consumption. I also miss the old thought experiments about things like furgonomics.

So, where does this attach to porn? I think it's a general matter of thought, effort, and quality. It just doesn't seem as creative to me as it used to. So many artists bang something out, charge a hundred bucks for it, and move on to the next potboiler.

Stuff I do love? I don't think many artists beat the quality or creativity of Kenket, Black Teagan, or Kacey Miyagami.

Updated by anonymous

CCoyote said:
I've been part of the furry community since the mid-nineties. That's given me a lot of time to observe changes not only in overall art styles, but also in the growth of digital media, and even in the way the furry community thinks.

One thing that really bothers me is not just the lack of realistic proportions, but the response one gets when pointing them out: "It's fantasy, I can do whatever I want!" Yes, that's true, but it doesn't mean there's no audience for critical thinking. Or that you shouldn't try to improve your work.

It seems to me that a higher percentage of furry artists and viewers used to put more conscious thought and effort into their work and into the community as a whole. Now it's just conventions and consumption. I also miss the old thought experiments about things like furgonomics.

So, where does this attach to porn? I think it's a general matter of thought, effort, and quality. It just doesn't seem as creative to me as it used to. So many artists bang something out, charge a hundred bucks for it, and move on to the next potboiler.

Stuff I do love? I don't think many artists beat the quality or creativity of Kenket, Black Teagan, or Kacey Miyagami.

It's porn. If you're obsessing a lot over how creative a given piece of pornography is or how realistic it is you're probably looking for reasons to complain, especially since those two factors will fight with each other a lot.

Updated by anonymous

DownInFlames said:
It's porn. If you're obsessing a lot over how creative a given piece of pornography is or how realistic it is you're probably looking for reasons to complain, especially since those two factors will fight with each other a lot.

Thank you, you've demonstrated my point brilliantly.

Updated by anonymous

CCoyote said:
I've been part of the furry community since the mid-nineties. That's given me a lot of time to observe changes not only in overall art styles, but also in the growth of digital media, and even in the way the furry community thinks.
[...]lack of realistic proportions[...]
[...]It seems to me that a higher percentage of furry artists and viewers used to put more conscious thought and effort into their work and into the community as a whole. Now it's just conventions and consumption.[...]
Stuff I do love? I don't think many artists beat the quality or creativity of Kenket, Black Teagan, or Kacey Miyagami.

I broke in sometime around '06 or '07 when the creator pool was somewhat less-saturated and there was still some older stuff in circulation. I'm curious about precisely what you mean here by "realistic proportions", and whether there's a particular point you're aiming for when you're using past tense. The biggest thing I notice is that all your preferred examples are artists whose styles mostly developed in the mid-'00s.
I thought it was interesting because I associate '90s furry art with some pretty heavy anatomical stylisation, so I'm wondering if you have an "ideal point" in Furry Art History?

Updated by anonymous

CCoyote said:
Thank you, you've demonstrated my point brilliantly.

If your point is that you think way too highly of your dog-dick scribbles.

Updated by anonymous

BlackSparkx said:
I have had this question in my head for quite a while now, because sometimes when I go through the uploads here, I stumble upon artwork that sometimes has a lot of upvotes but I don't really like it, or see glaring flaws in it.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't hate on such art, if it has a significant amount of effort in it etc. I can still appreciate it, but when I see pictures that are very well made but have less upvotes and/or favourites in comparison to the mentoined art, I don't really understand it.

So, what do you like and dislike in porn artwork? Do you accept anything that is erotic/sexual, or do you look for higher quality art only? Do you pay attention to how well the artist did the anatomy or are you more like ''that's a hot pussy/tits/ass/dick I don't care if the anatomy or overall look is a bit off.''

And, this is the part I'm mostly interested in, what do you like/dislike in fan art? Do you prefer when the artist sticks to the original look of the character and style, maybe alters it very slightly so it looks a bit more attractive? Or do you like it when the artist just completely changes it, like making the character look like a human, not sticking to the original style of the game/show etc. Pokémon and Animal Crossing are probably the best examples that come into mind for this.

I know it's very subjective but I still thought I'd ask, to get a general opinion on the topic. And sorry if this was a bit too long to read through.

Hyper detail is disgusting. Part of why I look at drawn porn is because I *don't* want to see every single hair on some dude's hairy ass.

Updated by anonymous

MagnusEffect said:
I broke in sometime around '06 or '07 when the creator pool was somewhat less-saturated and there was still some older stuff in circulation. I'm curious about precisely what you mean here by "realistic proportions", and whether there's a particular point you're aiming for when you're using past tense. The biggest thing I notice is that all your preferred examples are artists whose styles mostly developed in the mid-'00s.
I thought it was interesting because I associate '90s furry art with some pretty heavy anatomical stylisation, so I'm wondering if you have an "ideal point" in Furry Art History?

Interesting questions, @MagnusEffect! I hadn't really given a whole lot of thought to them before now.

I agree that a lot of the early stuff wasn't great. I may have appreciated it more then because it was new to me, but a lot of it was indeed quite cartoonish.

That said, I do recall enjoying the artwork of Wookie/Nakira in the mid-nineties. Their work, even if it was cartoonish (and digital) was creative. It was developing new ideas, new poses, new content, rather than repeating the same old poses over and over.

If there's an ideal point in time for me, I'd say it's before doing furry art became so easy that people stopped trying as hard, maybe? Before the marketplace got so flooded? I acknowledge there's a lot of bias in that statement, but there's also a lot that can be pinned down objectively, too:

  • Many of the artists I named as favorites took their work seriously enough to get actual art training. They took classes, got degrees, became professionals.
  • Their work represented a lot more than just "dog-dick scribbles," as the uninformed and thoughtless stated.
  • They mastered multiple media and went beyond digital into pencil, pen and ink, markers, gouache, watercolor, acrylics, and even oil and others.
  • They explored ideas, and some of them developed universes. Again, the notion of furgonomics comes to mind, but they also thought about things like furry anatomy instead of faux pas like sticking a knot on a cat or a dragon just because it's all fantasy and they can do whatever they want.

I admit a certain level of wistfulness, but I think what I'm wistful for are thoughtfulness, mastery, and community rather than endless wank fodder of questionable proficiency.

Updated by anonymous

DownInFlames said:
If your point is that you think way too highly of your dog-dick scribbles.

CCoyote said:
Interesting questions, @MagnusEffect! I hadn't really given a whole lot of thought to them before now.

I agree that a lot of the early stuff wasn't great. I may have appreciated it more then because it was new to me, but a lot of it was indeed quite cartoonish.

That said, I do recall enjoying the artwork of Wookie/Nakira in the mid-nineties. Their work, even if it was cartoonish (and digital) was creative. It was developing new ideas, new poses, new content, rather than repeating the same old poses over and over.

If there's an ideal point in time for me, I'd say it's before doing furry art became so easy that people stopped trying as hard, maybe? Before the marketplace got so flooded? I acknowledge there's a lot of bias in that statement, but there's also a lot that can be pinned down objectively, too:

  • Many of the artists I named as favorites took their work seriously enough to get actual art training. They took classes, got degrees, became professionals.
  • Their work represented a lot more than just "dog-dick scribbles," as the uninformed and thoughtless stated.
  • They mastered multiple media and went beyond digital into pencil, pen and ink, markers, gouache, watercolor, acrylics, and even oil and others.
  • They explored ideas, and some of them developed universes. Again, the notion of furgonomics comes to mind, but they also thought about things like furry anatomy instead of faux pas like sticking a knot on a cat or a dragon just because it's all fantasy and they can do whatever they want.

I admit a certain level of wistfulness, but I think what I'm wistful for are thoughtfulness, mastery, and community rather than endless wank fodder of questionable proficiency.

Why not both?

Updated by anonymous

Songbird

Contributor

I'm surprised that quality of writing hasn't been brought up yet.

One of the most jarring aspects of comics is when the dialogue between characters is stilted or riddled with typos to the point of comedy. I can empathize with the difficulties faced by someone who is not a native English speaker, but it's harder to sympathize with established artists who've lived in predominantly English-speaking countries for the majority of their lives. I would not under any circumstance poke fun at or deride them for it, nor advocate anyone else do, but it's difficult to suppress my disappointment when that critical final step is missed.

To elaborate, the time investiture involved in reviewing text before posting pages is minimal relative to the effort and skill required to create the art itself. If there was an oversight, several sites allow creators to replace images after they've already been uploaded, making the process of issuing corrections more or less trivial. Moreover, there are troves of individuals out there who would be willing to spend time and effort discussing, reviewing, and editing dialogue between characters either pro bono or for negligible pay. Last but not least, sites like e621 consider these corrections to constitute a superior version, allowing fixes post-upload to propagate downstream as well.

Plot and worldbuilding are more difficult aspects to nail down. I don't fault artists for taking a low-effort approach here given that these may require creating more non-sex pages, increasing workload for minimal to no gain given the interests and impatience of their audience. That's not to say a good world can't be appreciated, but it's generally not as worthwhile an approach from a fiscal standpoint as allowing viewers to infer world details by omitting everything not relevant to immediate interpersonal interactions.

Updated by anonymous

There's some stuff that I rather like that is extremely simple in terms of style, with what would generally be considered lots of mistakes, and there's stuff that is very well done technically that just doesn't manage to pique my interest.

Now, to be clear, the opposite is also true. There's some stuff I like that's much more detailed. I'm not saying that I necessarily prefer simpler stuff, but rather whether something is detailed or simplified isn't a deciding factor in whether or not I'll like it.

Often though, I will skip over more realistic things because the more realistic something is, the more errors stand out. Often whether or not I like something comes down to whether or not there's some particular aspect of the art that seems "wrong" in some way. Sometimes this is broken anatomy, sometimes it is something simple like posture or expression, or sometimes it's just that some aspect of the drawing isn't in line with the rest.

A example of the latter commonly happens with art involving a canine_pussy where the art is generally fine but the vulva seems extremely flat - an error like that can keep me from enjoying the art even if it is otherwise well done.

It's complicated, because I can like different things in different contexts, but the gist is, (1) does this have content that I'm interested in, then (2) is there anything about the image that interferes with my enjoyment?

Updated by anonymous

Strongbird said:
I'm surprised that quality of writing hasn't been brought up yet.

One of the most jarring aspects of comics is when the dialogue between characters is stilted or riddled with typos to the point of comedy. I can empathize with the difficulties faced by someone who is not a native English speaker, but it's harder to sympathize with established artists who've lived in predominantly English-speaking countries for the majority of their lives. I would not under any circumstance poke fun at or deride them for it, nor advocate anyone else do, but it's difficult to suppress my disappointment when that critical final step is missed.

To elaborate, the time investiture involved in reviewing text before posting pages is minimal relative to the effort and skill required to create the art itself. If there was an oversight, several sites allow creators to replace images after they've already been uploaded, making the process of issuing corrections more or less trivial. Moreover, there are troves of individuals out there who would be willing to spend time and effort discussing, reviewing, and editing dialogue between characters either pro bono or for negligible pay. Last but not least, sites like e621 consider these corrections to constitute a superior version, allowing fixes post-upload to propagate downstream as well.

Plot and worldbuilding are more difficult aspects to nail down. I don't fault artists for taking a low-effort approach here given that these may require creating more non-sex pages, increasing workload for minimal to no gain given the interests and impatience of their audience. That's not to say a good world can't be appreciated, but it's generally not as worthwhile an approach from a fiscal standpoint as allowing viewers to infer world details by omitting everything not relevant to immediate interpersonal interactions.

Right!? Like there would be some really good character designs and then the writing could leave the reader wanting or in some cases rub them the wrong way (a la Borba)

The occasional typo here and there by someone whose native language isn't English is pretty much fine with me. I can live with it. Luckily we can put notes in the image to help others understand what the author meant. Any translations or typo corrections help.

Updated by anonymous

vex714 said:
Right!? Like there would be some really good character designs and then the writing could leave the reader wanting or in some cases rub them the wrong way (a la Borba)

I'm pretty sure Borba's Zootopia scripts are deliberately written to stir drama. There's a difference between that and unintentional bad writing, so I'm not sure Borba is a good example.
If you're after a big-name controversial furry comic writer that isn't trying to be controversial you'd probably want to aim more for Zaush or JasonAfex. Though I'd say there's a difference between those in that Zaush intentionally uses elements that appeal to a core portion of his fanbase but alienate others, while Jason just isn't great at building plots.

Updated by anonymous

TheHuskyK9

Former Staff

Porn dialogue that is bad but not bad enough to be hilarious.

Updated by anonymous

Strongbird said:
I'm surprised that quality of writing hasn't been brought up yet.

I tend to evaluate art and writing separately, so writing doesn't really come straight to mind when I see "porn art."
That's not to say I fall into the "porn doesn't need good writing" pit you see a lot of in insert controversial porn comic's comment sections. If I wanted porn-for-porn's-sake I'd just look at standalone images.

But I do notice a lot of artists tend to dive into comics without being equipped to deliver compelling writing. My guess is it happens so often because artists see it as a way to keep their audience engaged, and when so many people are fine with it as long as the art's still good it just keeps coming.

Updated by anonymous

I dislike certain fetishes or art styles but generally i don't have a problem since i just skip what i dislike.

I have bigger beef with hentai tho, specificaly characters that are of vague age (looking around 18 but no definitive statement of legal age).

Updated by anonymous

GRFurryStuff said:
I hate and despise everyone who is into zoophilia.

GRFurryStuff said:
I can't deny that my favourite types of furry porn are human-on-anthro artworks, in which the human character is penetrating the anthro character, who must be a female for me.

Sounds kinda ironic to me.

Updated by anonymous

fox_whisper85 said:
How? Anthro is anthro, feral is feral, there's a difference

Human-on-anthro is a bit closer on the spectrum to zoophilia compared to something like anthro-on-anthro or just solo anthro. His "favorite types of furry porn" being human-on-anthro, while at the same time saying "I hate and despise everyone who is into zoophilia" made me do a bit of a double-take too. No, it's not technically zoophilia, but that's only because anthros aren't real. Many non-furries do look at furry porn itself as being in the same ballpark as zoophilia though, since it is specifically adding elements of real-world animals to a human.

Updated by anonymous

cerberusmod_3 said:
they are still animals.

I too like to think only in binary, BEEP BOOP

I want to point out human-on-anthro is a self-insert thing for a lot of people though. I'll let this comment speak for itself.

GRFurryStuff said:
Easy prey for me. A beautiful anthro chipmunk princess who is disappointed in love so she only likes humans now and a simple-minded individual like me who shares the same sufferings and became a furry because of the pain previous failed love interests have reflected on me.

But I also am a freelancer in the topic of girls because I regularly change pussies that I physically contact with.

Overall, this is a good and deep philosophic question. Love vs. sexual pleasure... Long-term happiness or short-term yet intense gratification.

Huh, philosophy on a website dedicated to pornography about human-animal hybrids? Sounds weird, but at least I tried it out.

Updated by anonymous

I enjoy anatomical realism more than anything. Some stylization is okay, but there is a limit. I am especially bothered by oversized sexual parts. Good, well-fleshed out, well-proportioned bodies are best, and I don't like glowing or super colorful furs (except for MLP haha). If they are drawn well I can enjoy more chunky or voluptuous bodies too, though I prefer toned, somewhat muscular builds.

For most species I prefer or only like anthro except for equids where I like both, and dogs where male feral is okay. In anthro I like a nice blend of bipedalism and feral anatomical features unique to the species. I think Chunie/Hun hits that perfectly. Even his equids have good, shapely faces that are neither too rounded out nor too elongated and "horsey" to be awkward in a realistic food-eating, language-using furry world. I like both plantigrade and digitigrade, but digitigrade has to be done properly or it looks silly/unpractical.

As for the sexual parts, being on the large side of human possibility is okay, but much more really makes it less exciting. Equids have a tiny bit more leeway, but I think that's just because I've given up haha. They are usually so oversized, with dicks up to their chins. Oh! And few things are worse than human dongs on horses. I do like human parts on most anthros except horses though. Dog anthros can be either, but cat prickle sticks are not very pleasant to look at and cow spears look deadly, so human for them, though hybrid penises can be a lot of fun. For example, instead of spines, give a cat a human cock with little pleasure nubbies haha. One good example of a cow with a partly feral cock is that picture of Apollo done by Wiredhooves.

Really, I think the size thing is my biggest beef. Oh, and dickgirls :P

I'm kind of bi in my tastes, but F/F art, fanfiction, etc is very boring to me.

Also, I almost exclusively view furry and MLP media and generally try to avoid real human stuff. In a way it's more fake than furry art and the industry is awful.

Updated by anonymous

Aster_Viridian said:
cow spears look deadly

I don't think I've seen more than a couple of artists who don't just slap horsecock onto bovids tbh
It's like how everything gets dog dick now regardless of what they are. (Unless they're hooved. Then they get horsecock.)

Updated by anonymous

GRFurryStuff said:
My needs in a nutshell:

-The picture must have at least one female in it, the only gay thing allowed for me is lesbianism because as a heterosexual young man, I don't like the GTQ and bisexual male parts of the LGBTQ community. Only heterosexual, lesbian or bisexual females are allowed in my pornographic content consumption.

-I keep everything strictly anthropomorphic. I hate and despise everyone who is into zoophilia and in my opinion, the only furries I like are genetically balanced hybrids of humans and animals (the character I masturbate to must be at least 55-60% human, humanlike is the way to go).

-Females of the canid, felid, cervid and the rabbit type of animal humanoids are my preferred types of women in furry porn, but I'm open to all types of quality furry porn (in the scale of furry porn which can be considered heterosexual for a young man, of course).

-I don't like most of the fetishes developing in others on top of furry fetishism: latex fetish, feet fetish, vore, obesity fetish, step-fantasy, anthro-on-anthro, etc. But I can't deny that my favourite types of furry porn are human-on-anthro artworks, in which the human character is penetrating the anthro character, who must be a female for me, and artworks in which the female character (aka. the anthro character in case of a solo image) has cum inside her vagina.

-I hate intersex stuff (andromorph/gynomorph) from the bottom of my heart because of the first paragraph.

-I especially like pictures of females who are sexy and cute at the same time (just take a look at my avatar). Why? Because these are also my standards towards real women.

-I don't only like furry porn. It's a 60/40 for me (60% furry, 40% normal).

-I often visit Tsampikos', FluffKevlar's and Nuzzo's art page. They seriously have the talent.

-I don't want to see Rule 34 stuff of the TV shows, movies and video games that were the core experiences of my childhood: Brother Bear, The Kangoos, almost all of the Fox Kids/Jetix and Cartoon Network shows, Arthur, Sonic the Hedgehog (except for Sally Acorn and Mina Mongoose, the quality of their pornographic fanart is consistently good and they are glimmering exceptions in the sea of terrible Sonic fanarts), Undertale, Deltarune and now, OneShot. These shows, movies and video games made me into the person that I am now, and if I see one single instance of Rule 34 of them on the Featured page, I get really crazy.

your profile literally is of a femboi

Updated by anonymous

MagnusEffect said:
I don't think I've seen more than a couple of artists who don't just slap horsecock onto bovids tbh
It's like how everything gets dog dick now regardless of what they are. (Unless they're hooved. Then they get horsecock.)

Yeah I hate how horsecock gets slapped on everything, though for bulls it's sometimes okay? Kinda? Honestly, the best dick I've seen on a cow is this one: https://e621.net/post/show/891122

And yes, my feelings are the same for dog dick.

Updated by anonymous

I hate it when I find a porn artist with a drawing style I love, but only draws fetishes I don't like.

And I really hate it when I find a porn artist who draws rare fetishes, but have a drawing style I don't like.

Aster_Viridian and MagnusEffect said:
Things about horse cocks and dog dicks

knotted_equine_penis

Updated by anonymous

cerberusmod_3 said:
Sounds kinda ironic to me.

There's a noticeable difference. Talking animals and human-like anthros are two completely different beings on the Furry Scale. Talking animals (which I don't like) literally look like animals from real life, but they can talk. I don't like porn about them, this is borderline zoophilia. Animal humanoids (aka. human-like anthros) are a lot more like humans, therefore it cannot be considered zoophilia, at least for me.

Know the difference between literal talking animals and animal humanoids, please.

Updated

It's always kinda irked me when people draw stylized anthros (animal crossing) and bipedal feral characters as just humans with an animal head. But then again I can't really stand "human with an animal head" much either, especially when it's done as a sorta "L-look, I'm not actually into animals, it's a human body!" guilt deflection/criticism barrier. Who cares? Like what you like.
>"But other people might think-"
So what? You know what it is you like, and what you are/aren't into, safe to say highschool ended for all of us years ago, stop caring about gossip or trying to appease said gossipers to "fit in".

Updated by anonymous

GRFurryStuff said:
To avoid confusion, I've changed my avatar to something more generic. Now it shows off my taste in girls a little bit better.

Update: I've changed it again to a hot picture of Minerva Mink from Animaniacs to show off that I'm heterosexual, I don't like intersex stuff and I don't like human-on-feral (literal zoophilia) things, I'm more into human-on-anthro stuff.

You don't have to keep telling us you're straight, Dude. We see you.

Updated by anonymous

GRFurryStuff said:
To avoid confusion, I've changed my avatar to something more generic. Now it shows off my taste in girls a little bit better.

Update: I've changed it again to a hot picture of Minerva Mink from Animaniacs to show off that I'm heterosexual, I don't like intersex stuff and I don't like human-on-feral (literal zoophilia) things, I'm more into human-on-anthro stuff.

Dude what.

Updated by anonymous

Okay, back to my original point, this is what happens when an artist gives up the notion that "it's just porn and doggy dicks" and keeps pushing the boundaries of their talent. Damn!!

Artistically, you have phenomenal use of line, shape, form, texture, color, value, space. This is the kind of thing I love to see.

post #1990860

Updated by anonymous

CCoyote said:
furgonomics

Do you have any particular opinions on tail placement? Mid-back tails bother me, but even the more-acceptable lower-back tails cause a lot of artists to put the anus/genitals in.. weird places.

texture, color, value, space.

I'm going to assume these parts are why you seem to prefer pieces with a lot of background detail.

Updated by anonymous

MagnusEffect said:
Do you have any particular opinions on tail placement? Mid-back tails bother me, but even the more-acceptable lower-back tails cause a lot of artists to put the anus/genitals in.. weird places.

Not beyond the common notion that the tail is an extension of the spine and should be placed as such. The misplacement of other parts is just a matter of practicing until you get it right, I think. That pursuit of perfection I keep referring to.

I'm going to assume these parts are why you seem to prefer pieces with a lot of background detail.

Not exactly, though I do appreciate the effort that goes into a nice background.

People say that the enjoyment of art is subjective, but that's not entirely true. There are elements of design that artists can employ that are very effective tools for transforming art from potboiler porn into genuine art. Having a background gives artists more opportunities to use those, but there are other ways to go about it, as well.

Updated by anonymous

Normal proportions. Anything too exaggerated just ruins my immersion.

Updated by anonymous

MagnusEffect said:
Do you have any particular opinions on tail placement? Mid-back tails bother me, but even the more-acceptable lower-back tails cause a lot of artists to put the anus/genitals in.. weird places.
I'm going to assume these parts are why you seem to prefer pieces with a lot of background detail.

The tail goes on the forehead just above the eyes, and the 4th arm and 4th
Eg go above the ears on the head. The ear on the back directly opposite the belly button must be a right ear. Each scaled creature must have 3 penises and no balls other than on the chin, all furred creatures must have only be a single vagina and literally nothing else, and avians should just have another arm and 3 knees instead of a penis and 3 balls.

Edit: to be fair it was very late and I’m bad at jokes

Updated by anonymous

I tend to not have a problem with most art styles and levels of quality (as long as it's not really bad), most of my dislikes are content based.

The Basics: F/M, F/M/F(+) and solo-F (usually not only sexual though, but nude and suggestive. including spread, laid out etc.) are always at the top of my list. I don't have a problem with F/F but.. to be truthful, if i get anything out of it, it's for the girls themselves. Being girl on girl doesn't really do much for me itself. I have no real pref for whether its normal hentai/porn or furry, i'm down with anything in that regard. Solo-M, M/M, dickgirls, cuntboys, herms, trans etc. are 'kill it with fire' generally for me. (from a sexual interest POV at the very least) Not usually a fan of M/F/M(+) either. Love just plain female nudes and stuff like that though. (real or fiction) I'm also a huge anime/hentai fan as well. Probably more so than anything else actually.

The details: Again, i'm pretty much good with most avg stuff. Don't really get into some of the more out there fetishes. (feet, latex, BDSM-lite, and stuff like that) Not a fan of rape/forced usually. Fucking NOPE on most of the more extreme fetishes. (scat, blood, gore, vore, pain, BDSM, death, NTR, cheating and other dark shit) I love high intensity/reaction stuff a whole lot. Nothing hotter than seeing her really... getting 'into' it... or fucked out of it.. lol

As I said up higher ^ i'm fine with anthro/anthro (not just furry but aliens, mythic and fictional/fantasy beings, monsters etc.) or human/human. Plus I do really enjoy anthro/human a lot too. (both ways. MH/FA or FH/MA) For some reason I find human/feral (FH/MF only) less.. 'uninteresting' than anthro/feral. Never could stand male human/female feral though.

And now for the part i'm likely going to get killed over... A few of the bigger things I really really dislike. Mood killers and work ruiners: I extremely dislike anal, and especially loathe it's increasing ubiquity in adult... well.. EVERYTHING! It's made even worse by the fact that it seemingly so often pops up in human/anthro works and really great high Q and or high "intensity" works. (which are all too rare as it is) Male and female characters with the 'wrong parts' is also a non-starter. Especially since it again seems to pop up so many higher Q/intensity/rarity works. I generally do not like most western mainstream/porn style works. (both art and content) Particularly with current style trends today. And I'm just about as close as you could get to not being able to care any less about current actual porn (esp western) and that goes double for hardcore.

Haljkljavahlibrz said:
I have bigger beef with hentai tho, specificaly characters that are of vague age (looking around 18 but no definitive statement of legal age).

Why just hentai? Plus.. 18?! Why 18? I could see if we were talking about pre/early/mid-pubescent or maybe even early teens but looking too close to 18.. in fiction?!

Updated by anonymous

GRFurryStuff said:
Because I don't wanna be like THEM... You probably know all of these edgy, sick, mentally ill furries.

I can't tell whether you're joking or being incredibly judgmental.

Updated by anonymous

I know I'm late to the topic. But 1 month isn't so bad right?
Anyway. Right off the top of my head:
Dislike:
- Pregnancy that might as well be left out or is nothing but a bloated gut.
- Just too sappy.
- Xrays unless there's something special or note worthy about it. Sometimes showing everything just does not add to the picture.
- Impregnation panals, especially if it's obvious that we'll never see the pregnancy beyond that point. Maybe people like seeing an egg get mobbed but I'm not one of them. I think it's just pointless, unless there's something special about it.
- Farts, scat and piss and vomit for the sake of farts, scat and piss and vomit itself. NOT for some purging fetish or some other underline cause. Frankly most if not half the scat stuff disgusts me.
- Outright filth. Totally does not take care of self at all.
- Getting too into a bad thing. Like getting ripped apart or getting off on an alien bursting out.
- Hyper detailed gore, pussy lips, innards, and pubes among other things. At some point, enough's enough.
- If violence to the body had to be done, then keep it tasteful. This goes with the hyper detailed crap, but this needs saying as its own point.
- Surrounded by walls of text. A very distracting if not boner killer when the picture/comic has paragraphs upon paragraphs of text explaining or adding to what is often a very simple thing.
- Same goes to dialogue/story that makes no sense. Bonus points if it's edgy.
- Dialogue that's too childish. "Ow my tummy hurts"
- Furries who are too human. I mean those who are clearly a color palette and a muzzle away from being that of man-kind. Often times with a twiggy bodytype. It's even worse if the animal they're "based" on is something large like a tiger, lion, or elephant. Not saying they all have to be roided out or fat. People come in many shapes, but this? I've seen metal albums coverart put more effort into that. I came here for animal-people and monsters fucking each other or hot women, not people with striped on muzzles and ears and/or paint skin.
- A stereotype of big buff men. Large chin cause BARA. Tiny eyes cause BARA. Seems stubby when alone case BARA. Tacked on body hair over fur cause BARA. Same haircut cause BARA. I'm not saying I don't like big and buff, just not this particular stereotype.
- Everybody looks like they wanna be Nathan Drake but came out of a cartoon that's trying to look like Avatar or that new Voltron.
- Making it too obvious that person is gay, often through looks alone.
- Women who look too much like men. Buff? MUST BE MANNISH! Got a little extra body hair? JACK THAT UP TO 20! MAKE HER A RUG AND ALSO REALLY MANNISH! Gay? ULTRA BUTCH! Square jaw or short hair? TOTALLY GOTTA MAKE HER MANNISH!
- BACK TO FETISHES! Cosmic levels of whatever. No. Just no.
- Vore but the victim(s) is the size of a pill and hard vore.
- Hyper lips, especially with a complete disregard to how it fits on the mouth.
- Too busy in action or a flood of cum. The flood is not the issue. The issue is when you can't tell what is happening or if that thing in the lady's snatch is a dick going in or a baby coming out.
- The weird is too normal/understated. Especially if it is obvious that whomever did it is being safe.
- The absolute worst that will make me unwatch and block an artist: Fetishizing garbage.

I think that's enough. I would put down likes but this comment is going on for too long.

Updated by anonymous

BlackSparkx said:
I have had this question in my head for quite a while now, because sometimes when I go through the uploads here, I stumble upon artwork that sometimes has a lot of upvotes but I don't really like it, or see glaring flaws in it.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't hate on such art, if it has a significant amount of effort in it etc. I can still appreciate it, but when I see pictures that are very well made but have less upvotes and/or favourites in comparison to the mentoined art, I don't really understand it.

So, what do you like and dislike in porn artwork? Do you accept anything that is erotic/sexual, or do you look for higher quality art only? Do you pay attention to how well the artist did the anatomy or are you more like ''that's a hot pussy/tits/ass/dick I don't care if the anatomy or overall look is a bit off.''

And, this is the part I'm mostly interested in, what do you like/dislike in fan art? Do you prefer when the artist sticks to the original look of the character and style, maybe alters it very slightly so it looks a bit more attractive? Or do you like it when the artist just completely changes it, like making the character look like a human, not sticking to the original style of the game/show etc. Pokémon and Animal Crossing are probably the best examples that come into mind for this.

I know it's very subjective but I still thought I'd ask, to get a general opinion on the topic. And sorry if this was a bit too long to read through.

I’m ok with this: https://e621.net/post/show/1630862
This: https://e621.net/post/show/967427
And I absolutely LOVE this: https://e621.net/post/show/1741785

But THIS: https://e621.net/post/show/2025125
And THIS: https://e621.net/post/show/1408682
Sliiightly pisses me off.

Apologies to those of u who like it. Just staying on topic.

Though people like Kodardragon, and Cannibalistic_Tendencies... Damn, their art is fucking fantastic! Can’t beat it!

Updated by anonymous

J M

Member

CCoyote said:
I've been part of the furry community since the mid-nineties. That's given me a lot of time to observe changes not only in overall art styles, but also in the growth of digital media, and even in the way the furry community thinks.

Pleasure to see someone with same thoughts.
I've been in furry community since late '10-'12. Only around '15-'16 i invested huge anount of time exploring different creators.

From my obeservation there's still two camps of different styles, modern and old-schoolish.
Exactly old-school creators attracts me more, because of style, colours and design that makes it more unique. I calling them "gold-author" because mostly, their work quite rare and you can't find them on top, there's always hiding such author with around 30-40 upvotes.

Clear example of modern stuff like: Jay Naylor, Nuzzo or Fluffy-Kevlar
And Old-School: Oouna, ECMajor or tanutanuki

Updated by anonymous

More accurate to hentai, but with women, it's either of age with DDDD cow tits, or loli. There's almost zero in between, which is unfortunate as someone who prefers smaller chests. Not a fan of hyper on either gender either, which is most definitely a thing with men on hentai. Also, super detailed is also a turn off, especially with monochrome images. Makes it too busy.

Updated by anonymous

The lack of anatomically correct genitalia in most art of underused species (elephant, skunk, tapir, etc.). IMO the anatomy has to match the actual animal, and I often dismiss anything feral with human junk.

Also, I believe that female anthros should have animal vaginas, as opposed to the humanoid pussies commonly drawn on these characters. In contrast, most male anthros have animal penises, which is inconsistent when comparing the humanoid/animal genitalia per anthro character ratio.

If I'm not incorrect, the male anthros had: ~70-85% animal cocks (as opposed to ~15-30% humanoid), whereas the female anthros had ~10-20% animal pussies (as opposed to ~80-90% humanoid). There really is an inconsistent gap between these figures, and even those estimates are likely inaccurate to some degree. Like I said earlier, those numbers are simply my guesses (which is subject to change if more information comes out).

The only images I inherently don't care for are ones that treat body fluids as something edible.

For example, the art can be fantastic, but if the image contains someone eating cum like it's whipped cream, I'm probably not going to give it a rating or even favorite it, since that's not something I'm into.

Stuff I don't like:

-Having one character's genitalia be anatomically correct, yet the other isn't.

-Hyper.

-Cub.

-Excessive semen.

-Equines.

-Messed up genitalia proportions (too big)

-Blood and guts and crap.

-Hybrid penises (Who the hell thought this was a good idea?).

-Ferals with the wrong genitalia.

-Monologue (sometimes).

-Fecal matter.

-People who downvote my comments (it doesn't hurt my feelings, but it does give me a small tingle of annoyance because some infidel decided to get butthurt)

-When I'm not in the mood to see anything, EVERYTHING.

Yeah, I am pretty much as picky as a spoiled 5 year old in a vegan restaurant.

Updated

  • 1