The song of so many tragically untalented artists...

eqgz said:
The song of so many tragically untalented artists...

The truth.

Regardless of the... let's call it "imagination" ...of some furry artists out there, all art based on real life have an anatomical basis. If it fails to sufficiently adhere to that basis, it is bad art.

Look, dogs are real, humans are real, things eating other things is real, and inflation is real. There are ways to make a humanoid dog inflate itself by eating other humanoid dogs and have it be at least somewhat believable.

Some furries like staring at realistic horse vaginas and fuck dogs. Some don't. The ones who don't aren't stupid. But hell, that's just my opinion.

Thats true, but theres the part if said dog would survive. Yes, an anthro dog eating another anthro dog is very possible is very factual. But an anthro dog swallowing another anthro dog whole... Thats just impossible... And true, inflation can be very possible after a rather large and realistically portioned meal, or being exposed to something you are allergic to (Which you should seek medical attention immediately upon exposure.) But hooking up helium to your mouth, your ass, and your genitals and expect to inflate that way. That would be stupid.

But by all means, I really don't care too much about anatomy, its when artists and fans get so up tight about it that just really annoys me.

i think the point here is shit like this http://e621.net/post/show/85458/anatomy_fail-avoidable_anatomy_mistake-breasts-can look at the arms and legs, that's not some weird fetish, it's just lack of anatomy knowledge

Not exactly, the artist admitted that they rendered the anatomy incorrectly in that post.

KloH0und said:
all art based on real life have an anatomical basis. If it fails to sufficiently adhere to that basis, it is bad art.

- Picasso..

Just throwin' that out there. Though I do agree with this image macro.

Let me put it another way, from a blog I read earlier today: "It is fine to make the unreal real, but it is not alright to make the real unreal."

Picasso was at least a classically trained artist...and he still adhered to anatomy even in his cubist period.

FoxFourOhFour said:
- Picasso..

Just throwin' that out there. Though I do agree with this image macro.

jigmin said:
Picasso was at least a classically trained artist...and he still adhered to anatomy even in his cubist period.

Thanks. Picasso is a good example. He drew people in extremely abstract ways, but he used his manipulation of the human form to convey meaning in his artwork. If someone draws a leg too short only because they were too lazy to check their proportions then it does nothing for the art.

But again, the image in this post isn't about realism, it's about artists using "style" to compensate for their lack of technical knowledge.

Hell, if an artist makes a dozen technical mistakes in a drawing I won't hold it against them. But if they're too arrogant to admit to their errors and claim that their mistakes are just stylistic choices then it infuriates me.

less drama, moar porn. thanks.

KloH0und said:
But again, the image in this post isn't about realism, it's about artists using "style" to compensate for their lack of technical knowledge.

Hell, if an artist makes a dozen technical mistakes in a drawing I won't hold it against them. But if they're too arrogant to admit to their errors and claim that their mistakes are just stylistic choices then it infuriates me.

Correct you are.

"He who forces real life physics on characters and environmenth which does not meneth to reflect real life, shall thee declareth dumbshit" - Seith teh Lord and fapeth to sonic art. Chapter 43;0.

Sry niko, bad example there.

Lol you guys are remtards.

Furries are cartoons :V

CamKitty said:
Yes, let's cry about anotomy in a fandom full of ANTHROPOMORPHIC animals, some of which are into inflation and vore, amogst other unrealistic things. I'm sure those are valid complaints lol

Look, just because you cant' draw, doesn't mean we shouldn't mock. So we will, especially for poor art skills.

it's only bad anatomy if you can't get away with it;)

KloH0und said:
There are ways to make a humanoid dog inflate itself by eating other humanoid dogs and have it be at least somewhat believable.

Not without killing itself. There is no way physically possible a humanoid, canine or otherwise, could realistically eat something it's own size without dying in the process. Their stomach simply would not be able to handle it. Not to mention the teeth, claws, and bones that would tear it to pieces from the inside out.

Even theorizing that we put said humanoid dog into a blender first, it would take at LEAST several days for the other said humanoid dog to be able to safely ingest it...and therefore no inflation would occur.

....I am done.

seriously there are no people more mean then furry artists. those guys/girls really hate each other, especially if one is more popular then they are.

Captain_Jackal said:
Furries are cartoons :V

therabbidwanker said:
it's only bad anatomy if you can't get away with it;)

I'm glad to see a few people here are still remotely sane. xD

I think people have it wrong here. Yes, you have a lot of leeway with anthropomorphic anatomy. But there's no excuse for stomach vaginas, legs that don't line up with the hips, and arms of different lengths.

As a person with at best a freshman(high school) level of art understanding wouldn't the fandom that consist of Anthropomorphism, which consist of giving these animals or what ever sick things we come up with, human physiology and/or characteristics that at lest the art should abide by the same rules as such? I mean short limps, wrong proportions, ect should be held to basic art standards but DAMN not Picasso

Style only can account for so much, there still has to be a structure and logic to a drawing. also sparkledogs are fucking retarded, there are other ways to make your character unique, like... oh, I dunno, NOT USE A DOG.

I LOL"D.

nice picture but the creator of this is not as stated as in the comments.
It's from a random meme site: http://fuckyeahinsanitywolf.tumblr.com/page/2
probably the creator of this will be forever unknown but at least she did not just stole the image to put it up on furaffinity but she wrote she got that image from the suite ubove...

Fauxgirl said:
I think people have it wrong here. Yes, you have a lot of leeway with anthropomorphic anatomy. But there's no excuse for stomach vaginas, legs that don't line up with the hips, and arms of different lengths.

Well to be fair, actually humans do have odd anatomy. For instance there are actually humans who have an arm longer then the other.

Ravenwolfe said:
Well to be fair, actually humans do have odd anatomy. For instance there are actually humans who have an arm longer then the other.

Actually, to be correct: no body part is equal to its opposit: your fingers aren't exactly the same lenght, so as your arms and your legs aren't. Actually it's only a few millimetres but it's never the same length, size or look...

Every time we draw a realistic, anatomically-correct dog dick and jerk off to it, the furry community takes one step towards bestiality.

KloH0und said:
Regardless of the... let's call it "imagination" ...of some furry artists out there, all art based on real life have an anatomical basis. If it fails to sufficiently adhere to that basis, it is bad art.

Look, dogs are real, humans are real, things eating other things is real, and inflation is real. There are ways to make a humanoid dog inflate itself by eating other humanoid dogs and have it be at least somewhat believable.

the important factor is believability.

xSionx said:
Some furries like staring at realistic horse vaginas and fuck dogs. Some don't. The ones who don't aren't stupid. But hell, that's just my opinion.

A-fucking-men

Entire thread said:
Bitch bitch anatomy bawwwwww

*ahem*

Gideon.

*cough*

made my day

Wait. But perhaps "good anatomy" doesn't mean "realistic"? You can draw good anatomy characters, but not realistic. Like pokemon, pony or still good ol' human-like furries. But if you draw bad anatomy like one hand bigger than another, crappy proportions body, static pose or just another bigFUCKINGboobs crap and tell "It's my style" so... you are a lazy-daisy-litlefuck. Go draw some balls, cubes and pyramids, make a skill, and then draw a something more serious and post on internet.

I see great art on this site every night. I see artists putting effort into their work. When there is no effort present, it really shows in the quality of the art. But if you guys out there can really look past the terrible art some people throw out there, then I envy you. I wish I could enjoy bad art.

But I cannot, and it's selfish of you to hold an artist back by telling them they don't need to bother with anatomy or other basic drawing skills. You are the few, we are the many, and we require good art to fap to!

I love how old this is. We live in a time where nobody believes in any set sort of 'anatomy'. I mean, we've already seen cocktongues, dicknipples, twatwaffles, and other 'anatomy errors', on top of some outrageous body shapes and sizes.

I've said it before and i'll say it again. Its all about how it looks. Good or bad is your opinion.

Likewise, i love the hair in this. Its so... trendy o3o

Minus said:
I see great art on this site every night.

You are the few, we are the many, and we require good art to fap to!

Every night?
I think i love you

Everyone here is arguing about art being unrealistic.
Do I really need to remind everyone that we are in fact on E621 right now?

TheDarkInfinity said:
Everyone here is arguing about art being unrealistic.
Do I really need to remind everyone that we are in fact on E621 right now?

Intellectual conversation that branches far from the original source material?
Welcome to e621 Would you like a mint?

I'm just gonna...leave my input here...on the subject...

When it comes to knowledge on anatomy I will say that, since we're drawing anthropomorphous animals (as well as some feral), that in itself, it isn't going to be 100% realistic.

I agree that realism would be nice to have in artwork that exists, but not all of the subject's anatomy HAS TO BE 100% CORRECT, but within the boundaries of sub-actual possibility and believability, depending on the species in question (as well as the difference in feral and anthropomorphous characters of the same/similar species).

There's some artistic liberties people take that I can fully understand. Maybe you don't like animal genitalia so you might use a human dick instead of like a horse cock on your equine character. I don't share this outlook, but I can understand. Maybe you would like this character's dick to be the size of their leg. Too big for my tastes, but more power to you. Maybe you like the thick, more explosive cumshots other animals have instead the less photogenic, thin, watery ejaculate canines have, and use the former with canine characters. I get it. Maybe you find the whole "6-8 nipples" thing felines have a bit too out of your comfort zone, and would rather just stick with how human breasts are. Totally with you. Everyone has their preferences.

But when it comes to genuinely bad anatomy, especially in regards to feral animals, that's what annoys me. If you're going to draw anything, try to get some perspective on what good anatomy is. I literally can't count the number of times where I've seen muscles that don't exist, limbs that are longer than the other, horse legs with the joint structure of a dog, dog legs with the joint structure of a human, spines bent like pretzels, etc in furry/erotic art. I could write a fucking dissertation on horse cocks alone about the innumerable ways people draw/animate them wrong.

One might think it's a fool's errand to criticize anatomy in porn, especially when it comes to furries, but that's patently false. Any artist worth their salt should know the basic fundamentals in art, and not knowing them will only serve to undermine you and any art you make. You have to know the rules before you break them. Even if you have a fetish that has no basis in anatomical reality at all (without extreme pain or injury anyways), like say, cum inflation, I guarantee you'll enjoy a picture of someone getting cum inflated more if they're proportioned correctly and look like they have all of their bones in the right place.

If your "style" looks like you made several gross anatomical errors, it's either a crappy style or you don't know what you're doing.

But what if badness can be art?