What aspects do you think makes a simple art style good or bad? Which ones do you like/dislike and what makes them work/not work?
>>2740883
Poor value, poor compositional work, poor general concept being badly articulated.
In the picture you've posted, the silhouette isn't enforced by the value at all and the focal work is spotty as hell, relies on typical noodly arm poor dynamism to carry picture.
As for the art style itself, it's simplifying in ugly directions. The circle head doesn't do much for me at all, reminds me of that funko pop shit.
>>2740883
if that was rendered enough to look like a dreamworks movie I'd like it
>>2740883
I made a similiar thread a while ago OP and would like to know the objective answer as well.
Having an art style that is simple/attractive is good because its something you don't have to put a lot of time and effort in to get lots of people to like it.
I really love pic related sketches, for me its the black+colurs aesthetics if it makes sense..
First thing people should understand about simple artstyle is that they shouldn't dump fundamentals to make it.
Everything else could be experimented with and still reach a somewhat enjoyable style
Even retarded cartoony stuff have to work with a small measure of proportions.
Pic somewhat related on dos and don'ts.
>>2741033
You do have to put the time to learn what is appealing though, that takes a while
I have a question along these lines. Are there any tricks or particularly useful shortcuts comic artists use to save them a bit of trouble?
I'm thinking about taking the doxy approach and making some very basic 3D models then using them for gesture and construction so I only have to worry about design, but feel things could get a little rigid like that.
>>2741112
A lot of comic artists "cheat" to save time.
Some professional comic book artists even go to the lenghts of tracing stock photos to save time.
The 3D model approach could be very well done if you did a 3D model for a recurring character and under your own visual style.