#like I'm used to people saying they can identify my art because of stylistic things

[ghcstcd]

What am I known for in this fandom? What do you think when you see my type of art?

[captainbobbin]

Hi- I have somehow survived the depths of completing a whole game in one sitting, grinding for the talents of a character in another game, and completing one of 3 endings for undertale as well as attempting to art. So how are you? <3

Also would love to make you aware your Saix/isa, Xemnas, and Terra are the reasons I question if I'm truly AroAce because of the FOUL, down right HEINOUS things I want them to do to me.

Also, I was going to ask this on Retrospring but I have no idea if the ask button was either tricking me by looking like it was doing nothing or if it just wasn’t up to doing its job, but, I scroll through the Saix tags often and there was this one post that pointed out that he has a hourglass figure and I could not for the life of me tell if you draw him with one too or not so, are you aware of this? If I’m wrong about him having that figure or if you do actually draw him with one then you can just ignore this.

Also, finally looked at your twitter since I don’t usually use it and there was this one thing you said and while I can’t exactly pinpoint what it was I know it was enough to make me audibly gasp and then mentally agree. Anyways that’s all, have a good night or morning I’m still trying to figure out time differences. (Also if I ramble too much feel free to tell me I’ll gladly shut up a bit….maybe- I can’t even trust myself to remember to breathe actually so- nvm)

long response so -

ayyy I'm glad that you've been doing okay lately bud - its always satisfying to complete a game that you've been sucked into, and I hope you had a fun time with it!

You know. You'd be surprised how many aro and/or ace people have said such things to me/are actively in my chat encouraging me to make more nsfw content regarding my blorbos lmaoooo I actually had a message on retrospring the other day regarding my portrayals of certain characters making people question their orientation and I'll put what I responded to them here - 'there's a post that I love and its like. If you are really into something and are passionate about it, you will accidentally convert others to enjoying it. By making content where you genuinely show how much you love a certain thing and you project your headcanons onto it and display the depths of your inner love about a certain concept, character, body type, topic, etc, that people will see it and connect with it whether you mean for it to be convincing or not hahaha. Sometimes just really loving something inspires others to love it and see it your way too.'

Saix undoubtedly has a pretty curvy silhouette, yes lmao there is no way I wouldn't realise that hahaha - Its harder to see it in his KH3/Unreal Engine model due to the stylistic overhaul but his original (and superior imo) model has notably wide shoulders and hips compared to a small waist, yeah. All of the original Org members had really distinct shapes so you can tell who is who, even with the hoods up. I do tend to draw Saix with fairly muscular thighs and broader shoulders, but in general my artstyle is what I would say is 'not very anime proportioned' in that I try to have a decent amount of realism in my anatomy/shape rather than super lean or angular bodies. I don't ever want my blorbos to appear emaciated or for them to have the 'ideal standard' body, if you know what I mean, I really enjoy drawing my faves to look like real people that have folds and bulk and 'imperfections'. I do typically try to draw Saix as fairly broad, with a balance between topheavy upper arms and chest and a more rounded hip area compared to his waist. (some examples below, including a super super old sketch I did to visualise lfotr isa and terra's size difference). I do try and make all of my usual blorbos have identifiable yet still human proportions; I tend to draw Xemnas slightly softer and chubbier around his middle but he is still broad and powerful. Saix is curvy but still noticeably strong and while not entirely lean he has a sleekness to him. I draw Hendrik with a lot of padding, hair and with much more unique facial features. Sylvando is probably the only character I draw that has a body close to the canon source - he is lean and muscular and tbh the only character I really draw with pronounced ab muscles, the same way that in canon he is shown to be very cut - but in all fairness he's a gymnast/acrobat/performer/contortionist/dancing clown so drawing him as noticeably and suprisingly ripped tracks imo. Plus I sprinkle on so many of my own headcanoned features regarding his hair, skin tone, freckles, etc that it doesn't feel too weird to me haha. so tl;dr yes I do draw Saix with somewhat of a curvy shape (when I do fullbody draws of him, its been a little while) however I think my version is pretty masculine and doesn't read as disproportionate or exaggerated.

Anatomy and stylization are things I always want to push myself on and develop more - my biggest fear is having 'same face syndrome' or for my work to feel like my love for the characters don't come through haha - though by the sounds of it, the way I portray my blorbos is definitely doing something for you, so I must be going in the right direction haha

oh I yap about all kinds of bullshit on twitter lmao I use it as a place to talk about my blorbo thoughts often :p for those who don't follow me on twitter, you can find me here, although I'll warn you that I do most some n/s/f/w stuff there that I do not post here. Let me know if you find out which post I made that vibed with you, I'd love to hear which thing I said resonated with you and why haha! I am somewhat more active on twitter than on here/I tend to share more of others work and do general updates on twitter just because its easier, but I think interacting long form with others is a lot easier on tumblr for sure. Long asks and chats like this area always nice!

[themakeupbrush]

Is there any like, historical relevance behind Salma Hayek's outfit? Is it based on anything Karl made? I'm not really interested in fashion and only really pay attention to like, costume things (met gala made me very sad this year) and Alexander McQueen (his work is literally art you can WEAR. like I know technically all fashion is this but I'm a peasant who finds most of it boring.) So I'm just very uninformed about all this. Thank you so much if you answer and I understand if you don't / if it takes awhile because I did see you say, you're waiting for the designers to post about the looks.

Off the top of my head, and based on what I could find online, not really. It has some basic design elements that Lagerfeld used often, like bows, pearls, and what I assume were meant to be camellias (fabric flowers all end up looking the same).

Meanings behind Met Gala looks can be an absolute pain to figure out because you have some people who's stylist really put the look together so you don't get an answer until their team posts, and you have other people who are lazy and their explanation is so basic you swear there must be another. The group that sufficiently explains their inspiration is sadly very small. I also, unfortunately, have a terrible memory so being able to quickly identify inspiration isn't my strong suit even if I've seen it before.

I absolutely loved this look, but it did feel like she decided what she wanted to wear first and then fit it to the theme afterwards. Not saying that as a negative though, if I looked like Salma Hayek and my husband was a multi-billionaire luxury conglomerate owner, I'd wear whatever the hell I felt like.

[eregyrn-falls]

I just finished doing a bit of a "study" of an art piece from over a century ago, in a style that I really like the look of. I like how my finished thing looks, even though it's nowhere near as pretty as the original, and I'm hoping that if I do enough of these, I'll gain a better understanding both of producing art, and art nouveau. Have you done "art studies" yourself, or whatever the term is? Taking a picture by a master, and trying to draw from that.

Oh, absolutely!  That’s a GREAT way to learn! 

(And it’s a method that has been used for teaching art students since at least the Renaissance.  Probably before!  Although it’s hard to say whether, before that, art students would learn the basics of *contemporary* styles from  masters, or whether they would have also studied *earlier* styles.  Like, in the Renaissance, they were looking at Greek and Roman art as well as contemporary styles.  Whereas, someone learning the basics of medieval manuscript illumination would likely have been studying / copying works by others doing the same kind of art at that time. That’s why you see some “mistakes” of anatomy and stuff perpetuate itself through medieval illuminations and paintings, because they were only looking at each other’s work, and not at live nude models or even things like Greek sculpture.)

I definitely started this way!  My earliest “serious” stuff (like, back in college) was partly based on trying out the styles of anime (I had a limited amount of refs available at the time, mostly Robotech) and Western comics (mostly Marvel and ElfQuest), but also Art Nouveau stuff, especially Alphonse Mucha. 

So yeah, it’s absolutely a great way of learning.  And particularly, if you’re going to study and try to copy the work of an existing artist, you might also try searching to see if there are any articles available that break down the style (how the artist/s produced it, methods, tricks, etc.), which might help you figure out better what you’re looking at, and how that artist achieved that style.  (I have a book that has a lot of photographs that Mucha created of models to be the references he based his pieces on, for example, and it’s super interesting looking at those photos next to the finished pieces.) 

As with any kind of copying -- if you want to post the results publicly, that’s cool!  It’s always a good idea to just indicate what it is.  (Anything from “I did this looking at various examples of art nouveau artwork” to “this is my attempt to do a copy of this particular piece”.)  Although, at this point, things like “art nouveau style” is well known enough that if you’re just doing a piece in that style, you don’t usually need to specifically indicate it; unless, again, it’s an homage to a particular artist’s work.

(Even then, a lot of people don’t, probably assuming that viewers will recognize the style and realize it’s an homage, particularly when it’s about historical artistic styles.  I always figure that if it’s a fairly close copy of one work, err on the side of identifying the inspiration, since you never know whether your audience will actually recognize it.  But once you get to a point where you can do an independent piece that is just using familiar elements of art nouveau stylistic vernacular, it’s less necessary.  And here I’m using “art nouveau” as an overall example, but this of course goes for other recognizable styles -- whether it’s like, Egyptian bas relief carvings or tomb paintings, or Attic Red Figure style, or medieval manuscript “style”, or whatever.)