fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2119 ]

[ SECRET POST #2119 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2119 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

16.

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 85 secrets from Secret Submission Post #303.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

WELP, time to be even more paranoid about the details in the fanart I make!

If it's an important detail like HOW BALLET SHOES LOOK when drawing fanart of a BALLET ANIME then yeah, be paranoid. I mean, how can you miss something like that anyway unless the anime is crappy at drawing ballet poses?

The small details though? I don't give a fuck.

Hate to tell you, but ballet shoes DO LOOK LIKE THAT. I don't even know what this fandom is, but yes, not every single shoe/pose is done en pointe.

The more you know!

Yeah that what was I was thinking.

This was what I was thinking, too. Like, maybe the tip is a bit too pointed, but that could be the angle. If the OP means that it's not en pointe and it should be, then OP needs to learn more about ballet.

Well, the shoe looks like a toe shoe, which no, shouldn't be able to do that.

Actually, yes, pointe shoes should be able to do that. In fact, you can't dance in them unless they do.

Pointe shoes have a box that somehow flattens and also bends backwards? And it seems to have no shank. Huh, that's something I never knew before. How fascinating.

(no subject)

oftheark - 2012-10-22 02:57 (UTC) - Expand

Tutu's left shoe looks as if it has a heel, though -- maybe that's what the OP is referring to? The pose is a little awkward, too, though of course I'm no ballet expert.

I don't see a heel, but the shading is hard to tell from the small size. The right one definitely doesn't and it wouldn't make sense for one shoe to have a heel and the other not. I take issue with many, many other things, including the pose, but since the OP specifically pointed (HA!) out the shoes that's all I'm going to focus on as well. :)

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-22 00:57 (UTC) - Expand

It's not that she's on demi-pointe, it's that the shape of the shoe is weird looking - the part around her toe is flat and wedged in a way that the box of a pointe shoe wouldn't be, and there's no shank showing (the back is flat and uniformly pink. What shoe, pointe or techique, looks like that?)

But that wouldn't be a big deal if the pose weren't so incorrect. It's more the combination of the weird-looking shoe and the bad technique in the pose combined that just make me feel "ug, this was drawn by someone who doesn't know about ballet and didn't do the research to make up for it."

Still gorgeous art, though, honestly I like it. But I would like it more if it were correct.

AYRT

I don't really know how you'd miss it, but then again I also see a lot of artwork where some detail essential to the character always gets fucked up and NO1CURR except me, it seemed. Like, you know, you're drawing an archer, maybe you ought to draw accurate bows, arrows, and poses. But while I'm spending hours researching and finding reference, other artists are just DRAWING and putting stuff out there that people love, so I kind of had to go "OKAY STOP THIS IS GOOD ENOUGH" after a while. Perfectionism = low output = "who are you, again?"

I kind of WANT to be all "yuss, those faster less accurate artists are secretly not all that loved!" But the secret isn't specifically "well-loved artist who don't give a shit", so EEP HAULING OUT THE REFERENCE AGAIN

+1 Drawing a lot can often be just as important as drawing accurately. I sometimes miss details in my drawings or forget them, but then get lost in the hundreds of drawings I'm doing every week.

There is a reason animation companies have entire research departments, it's so the artists don't have to spend their time researching every little detail to the point that they aren't getting the drawings done. Research is TIME CONSUMING, since I'm freelance I have to do it for every project I get, and at a certain point I just have to stop and realize I'm not going to have all the knowledge I could have, and it won't be perfect, but if I don't start drawing then I'll start losing money.

AYRT

YES, EXACTLY.

This is so, so, so true. There have been a number of times I've had to just settle for the best I could do even knowing it wasn't as "accurate" as it could or should be according to my standards, because I had a deadline to meet.

I can only remember being called out for it maybe once. And it DOES annoy me when I have to just "settle" for something like the angle of a hand or a face or the creases in clothing or something... and this is especially true when it has to do with something technical like playing a violin or shooting a gun. (Confession: I have occasionally had to resort to "interpretive tracing" for things like guns and other things I've never held or played myself.)

But in the case of freelance work, I find that it's generally sufficient to do just the amount of research you need to get it right ENOUGH without being FLAWLESS.

This oddly ties in with a rather timely discovery I made just before reading FS tonight, involving a hat I commissioned from Organic Armor about 3 years ago or so. Part of my concept description included an idea to include "alchemical symbols".... which the artist certainly did, but somehow until tonight it never occurred to me to look up whether there even WAS such a thing as "alchemical symbols." I thought he'd just made some shit up that looked... y'know... symboly. But it turns out nope... the symbols on my hat are REAL alchemical symbols that DO relate to the design concept being based on a character from a book who is able to create golems.

The symbols aren't "perfect" in that some of them are clearly artistic interpretations of real symbols and I'm only MOSTLY sure what they were actually supposed to be, but the fact that the guy went out of his way to look up real alchemical symbols and stick onto my hat ones that specifically seem to be elements likely to be used in the creation of any sort of automaton or robot or golem is one hell of a brilliant touch, and I sure as hell CANNOT complain if some of them are "artistic interpretations" rather than technically accurate symbols. Because it looks DAMN good and it gets the idea across perfectly.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-24 21:45 (UTC) - Expand

Well, the secret did say "Important detail." I'd say getting ballet shoes/poses/outfits right in fanart for a show about ballet is a pretty damn important detail.

weh weh spending a little extra time to reference stuff is hard

Sic tempus fugit esperanto hiccup estrogen. Glorious baklava ex librus hup hey ad infinitum.

...and the translation in english is?

"Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum, þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon, hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon. Oft Scyld Scefing sceaþena þreatum, monegum mægþum, meodosetla ofteah, egsode eorlas."

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-21 23:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-21 23:50 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-22 00:49 (UTC) - Expand

Meaningless, anon! Anyway I lol'd at the Old English response.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-22 02:19 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-22 02:44 (UTC) - Expand

LMAO

Bacon ipsum dolor sit amet tenderloin flank ribeye filet mignon strip steak, beef ribs ground round drumstick. Sirloin pork cow turkey corned beef t-bone jerky ball tip ribeye leberkas pastrami chuck pig pork loin.

Bichir elephant fish, sea lamprey Owens pupfish tetra channel catfish. Vendace beluga sturgeon northern pearleye Russian sturgeon gianttail armored gurnard spearfish elasmobranch!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only