angela, barbra, and earl created by juvira
Description
Blacklisted
  • Comments
  • watsit said:
    Shouldn't that be double grounds for deletion? One for being a trace of someone else's work/video, and two for being from real-life porn? Photomanips of real people who are in a suggestive or pornographic pose and traced/drawn over as their character get deleted, so this kind of rotoscoping seems like it should as well.

    Uhh, no, lol. There is a tag for 'irl trace' with over 500 images, each one being traced from real life. 'Tracing someone else's work/video' is to prevent tracing over someone's art, which is like steaing, but rotoscoping is transformative. And I'm pretty sure the reason 'real life porn' isn't allowed because this is an art website, not because the mods do not like the existence of real life porn, this is art, so it's allowed?

    Also I looked it up and it seems that mostly the reason photomanips aren't allowed is because of a lot of low effort/low quality posts were made... I don't think this is low effort or low quality.

    Additionally, this could be rotoscoped off of 3d animation or maybe filmed by the artist themself.

    Updated

  • Reply
  • |
  • 23
  • Even in safe for work cartoons rotoscopy was somehow controversial (well, as I heard in the Nostalgia critic about Heavy Metal).

    I don't know if the artist made a 3D SFM animation for it but using a reference or a mannequin for drawing poses shouldn't be forbidden.

    Or ultimately if the artist filmed their own "activities" for it.

  • Reply
  • |
  • 0
  • Roto or traced, you gotta admit that this line-work is absolute God-tier, the fluidity is on point, and it matches up with everything else this artist has done.

    I've seen plenty pieces of art on this site that have been traced before, and didn't hear nothing about them. Why all of a sudden this dude above got an unsexy stick up his ass when someone with actual talent uses it to save time, or more likely just a point of reference?

  • Reply
  • |
  • 3
  • i_messed_up said:
    Why all of a sudden this dude above got an unsexy stick up his ass when someone with actual talent uses it to save time, or more likely just a point of reference?

    Are you talking about me?

  • Reply
  • |
  • 2
  • watsit said:
    Motion and fluidity is one of the hallmarks of rotoscoping, because you're tracing over real people in motion, duplicating that realistic motion. That's the point of the technique, to achieve a level of quality that you couldn't when working off of references alone.

    There are plenty of pieces deleted for being traces, regardless of the amount of work that was put into it and the quality of the result, and even if the original was properly credited. I can't say why you didn't hear nothing about them, but it's right in the rules:
    And before you say "this isn't real-life porn, it's drawn characters", I'll point back to photomorph status:deleted, where images have been deleted for being "real-life porn" when it was drawn/painted characters modeled over a real person, just like this.

    Whether they meant to or not, this was passed off as they're own original work, which after it was pointed out to being traced/rotoscoped, lead some people to even try claiming the artist made their own video, instead of acknowledging the work someone else did that the artist directly copied. Secondly, these are real people having sex it was copied from, people whom we know nothing about. What kind of liability is that exposing to not only the artist, but to this site and us?

    https://youtu.be/RAA1xgTTw9w

  • Reply
  • |
  • 1
  • Wait if she was fucking the bull guy, then why was she mad at her BF(???) fucking the unicorn girl?

  • Reply
  • |
  • 0