Hey /aco/ i'm not from here but i guess this is the board

>>482350
Bump for stop fapping and have an actual conversation.

I believe that on-model is only good for certain source material. For example, something like The Simposons or Archer looks terrible on-model (though for different reasons) whereas the picture in the OP or Disney cartoons look good on-model.

It really depends on the source material.

>>482779
Some Archer stuff has looked good.

>>482781
I think for me it's a bit too uncanny valley. But different strokes for different folks.

I agree with OP. If I'm going to go watch a comic or hentai with a certain character in it, I would prefer to actually see what I expected rather than a transformed version of it. Even if it the Simpsons, I think change should be limited because who wants to see the Simpsons fuck probably didn't care about how it looked anyways.

OP here, didn't think i would get replies.

>>482779
I think both the simpsons and Archer can look good,especially Archer, it really depends on the artist.
>>482804
Exactly, i don't really mind when they draw the characters with slightly different bodies (like making her breasts slightly bigger for example) but then theres shit like what ''The Fear'' draws thats just terrible and looks like ass.

Then again,there's exceptions, like for example South Park or Bob's Burgers, where the original art isn't fappable,that i don't mind having a different style, but i don't really fap to those particular shows.