Can you draw nude children these days without becoming known

>>2743788
its not something most people want to delve into as a viewer

>>2743788
you can if you take the classical route. classical paintings are fine.

If you're doing digital paintings of kids, it wont be classy, no matter how good you are. You'll be seen as some freak, and the people who do enjoy what you draw, will probably enjoy it for the wrong reasons (im assuming you want to make innocent paintings)

On the other hand, if you wanted to "slum it" lots of porn artists can get away with drawing many taboo subjects as long as they keep a low profile, and avoid promotion on normalfag social media outlets, usually their artwork does the promotion for them. You'll still be seen as a freak.


If you want to be taken seriously, study painting traditionally, get the "credentials" that make you a fancy-pants guy, and people might maybe not think of you as a pervert.

final point; dont let other people dictate what you draw or paint. If thats the sort of thing you feel in your heart that you would most love to draw, then fucking do it.

>>2743788
how are you planing to find references OP?

>>2743796
What about illustrations of tribal life?

>>2743828
Google?

>>2743852
>What about illustrations of tribal life?

It's fine, although I think it would be a safe bet not put too much detail and focus into the naughty bits. If it looks like some national geographic shit it's probably ok. Just don't spend 10 hours doing a hyperrealistic Irakli rendering of a 5 year old hoo haa or pee pee and you should be good

I do, but I like them... aesthetically, the body between 13-18 is a pure work of art, after that point it's decay.

>>2743974
Not really. I suppose it depends on how well a person takes care of themselves.