Results 1 to 8 of 8
April 8th, 2009 #1
Which is worse? Anime style art or anthro (aka 'furry') art?
I had just recently had a friend of mine ask me for my opinions on a topic I found most interesting. I was a little hesitant to repost it here to see what the artists of CA thought, for fear of being labeled an idiot. But you know... I'm going to end up building that reputation, regardless if I try or not. So why hold the question back?
Anyways, my main question derives from the original questions I was asked. And I ask you...
Which do you find to be the worse art style/genra? Do you find anime style to be bad, because of its increasingly cliche use in most wannabe artists? Or do you find anthro (aka 'furry') art to be worse, because most of the wannabe artists in this field will draw mostly pornographic images of anthros? Or do you think both, or neither, are bad? Or do you find that there is another style which is even worse? It's all up to personal opinion, really.
I don't know if this question was asked before. If it was, or if you feel that this didn't have to be asked, feel more than free to shoot me down for being curious.
Wait... What were we talking about?
Hide this ad by registering as a memberApril 8th, 2009 #2
How is Anthro art a style? Anime I can see because of BESM, but Anthro uses a whole collective range on style?
I mean can't you use anime style on an anthropomorphic creature? How do you use 'furry style' on something that isn't anthropomorphic?
Since when was anime devoid of hentai/sex/smut by the way? You ever seen the perversions in Japan? For a rather peaceful country, if they were persecuted on "thought crimes" they may be the first in line
April 8th, 2009 #3
i really do not know what sort of response you are expecting to get that will satisfy you as a viable answer.
this is entirely subjective. one person's opinion will not reflect any sort of standard or concensus. there are numerous threads discussing 'anime' as a style, and a lot of ideas and suggestions on the topic have already been discussed and beaten to death without any real resolve.
i don't see the need to compare the two, as it would require that i make generalizations of each genre as a whole. there are good anime artists and there are poor ones. does Art Spiegelman's Maus count as anthro art? anthro art doesn't have to be the generic run-of-the-mill stuff you see poorly done online.
both tend to get a bad wrap, but it doesn't mean there isn't anything worthwhile to be explored. and really the two can't really be compared on the same terms across the board, so there's no reason to attempt to degrade one over another. it's like asking "what's better animated gifs.. or the Law & Order SVU opening theme song." they simply do not relate on enough criteria to make a valid comparison.
Last edited by Grief; April 8th, 2009 at 10:04 PM.
April 8th, 2009 #4
90% of all things are crap so the answer for me is neither because every type of art have samples which are equally as bad as a lot of Anime and anthro. Anime and anthro just so happens to be more common on the internet than other styles (see: Sonic) which makes their sample much larger and their presence much easier to note.
April 8th, 2009 #5
Does "Pride of Baghdad" qualify as anthro? because that was pretty sweet and I much prefer that to badly drawn badger porn.
April 8th, 2009 #6
April 8th, 2009 #7
So, this thread is now officially about Badger porn?
Anime or otherwise?
April 8th, 2009 #8
Smothering this one in its cradle, thank you very much
**Finished Work Thread **Process Thread **Edges Tutorial
Crash Course for Artists, Illustrators, and Cartoonists, NYC, the 2013 Edition!
"Work is more fun than fun."
"Art is supposed to punch you in the brain, and it's supposed to stay punched."