What's the trick for making lolis look like lolis and not

Absolutely depraved. End yourself.

apply weeb to increase moeblob level

klling yourself

You have to study loli styles too

>>2751913
>Absolutely depraved
Funny enough, this is a good answer.
Lolis have to look absolutely depraved to stop looking like plain children.

File: La_bourrique_oil_on_canvas.jpg (104KB, 726x1000px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 726x1000px

practice

File: Paul_Peel_-_The_Little_Shepherdess_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg (157KB, 800x1125px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 800x1125px

whats wrong with them looking like a children?

>>2751914
My level of weeb is almost capped. That's covered.

>>2751918
What do yo mean?

>>2751930
Not really, some lolis look innocent and cute.

>>2751936
>>2751933
Because I don't want to draw children? Because children are disgusting? Also those pictures may be have high technique but they aren't impressive. If you're just gonna copy reality then take a fucking photo. The point of 2d is that it can convey thinks and looks that just doesn't work in 3d.

>>2751939
I really hope you're baiting right now.

>>2751943
Sorry if I called you out on your boring paintings, grandpa.

>>2751944
I mean for someone who's looking for a "trick" and having trouble drawing lolis calling a painting of a master unimpressive is hilarious. Go look at drawings of lolis you like and draw them, it's not hard if you know how to draw you thick cunt.

>>2751947
I'm not looking for a trick, just tips for achieving the specific look without resorting to copying other styles.

Look, I didn't mean to offend, I recognize the technique made into those paintings and from a technical standpoint, they are impressive. Otherwise, they bore me, there's nothing interesting about those paintings and I would go as far as say that they unpleasant to look at.

I know that this is very personal but I'll always prefer style over technique. I'll always pick an artist with unique and gorgeous style but little technique over one with almost nothing unique or pleasant to look at in his works but raw technique.

File: Range.Murata.full.362912.jpg (474KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

474KB, 1680x1050px

>>2751954
Why not just study artists that draw lolis the way you like and try to figure out how they do it ? I personally like the way Range Murata draws them.

File: 1479820428954.png (469KB, 672x815px) Image search: [Google]

469KB, 672x815px

>>2751958
How do I do that? I just look at it really hard? Copy it? Trace?

>>2751939
>>2751954
>unskilled pedo weeaboo #40671 calling skilled realism unimpressive
>if you're just gonna copy reality then take a fucking photo, he says of these artists who lived before high quality photography existed
>fails to understand that understanding of stylization is derived from understanding of the real forms stylization derives from

You're silly, you're a jackass. I say this sincerely, no memeing: you're never going to make it, stop wasting your time.

>>2751963
>do I fit in yet?

>>2751962
Look at it hard, and copy it freehand do not trace. Tracing is cheating imo, you won't learn anything that way.

Then without looking at it, try it on your own. Recall the subtle details and shit. It's pretty fun once you get down what makes loli/shota cute.

>>2751954
>I recognize the technique made into those paintings
>>2751962
>how do I study
you recognize shit, literally nothing you do at your level matters other than millage

>>2751971
>r-reddit!

go back to /tv/, this board's bad enough

>>2751982
>you need to be a master chef to tell if someone tastes good

>>2752041
You need to be a decent chef to tell another chef how to do it right.

>>2751912
>>2751939
>Also those pictures may be have high technique but they aren't impressive. If you're just gonna copy reality then take a fucking photo. The point of 2d is that it can convey thinks and looks that just doesn't work in 3d.


Literally kys.

>>2752042
But saying you find a picture unimpressive and boring is not telling someone how to do it right, it's just an opinion.

File: 432.png (84KB, 375x375px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 375x375px

>>2752044
Stay mad.

This picture is way better than >>2751936 or >>2751933 for me. Quantity of effort and technique doesn't mean quality. My picture has much more simple, symbolic lines, it doesn't even have colors, but is much more pleasant to look at than those ugly children in shades of muddy colors.

>>2752055
Just go back to whatever shit board you're from, not even the people in the weeb thread are this retarded.

File: 1479784652064.png (306KB, 593x540px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 593x540px

>>2752058
Nice argument

File: 59567202_p1.jpg (542KB, 600x792px) Image search: [Google]

542KB, 600x792px

>>2751912
They have adult-teen proportions and curves. Hourglass form. Real children are flat and have no curves.

>>2751963
Holy shit this post actually moved my ideology forward. Thanks Based faggot.

>>2751912
12 year old head on a 16 year old's body

>>2751912

>all those unskilled idiots ITT with no serious advice

OP, it's quite easy, you need to sexualize children by giving them attractive woman features. Most often you can see it by hips and ass, often lolis have quite big hips resembling adults and "dat ass".

Flat chest while notorious isn't like in children, perky breasts resemble A cup of teenage/young adult woman. Also lots of loli have big, developed breasts belonging to older women.

So think more of creating little woman with childlike face and features that make her "cute". So a mix. Going children route will get you nowhere and probably make you into drawing dwarves.

>>2752075
You're unskilled idiot with so serious advice

File: You.jpg (83KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 500x500px

>>2752060
>>2752055
>Le smug anime grill
How typical
Fuck off back /a/ or wherever shithole you crawled from you absolute pedophile.
>My picture has much more simple, symbolic lines, it doesn't even have colors, but is much more pleasant to look at than those ugly children in shades of muddy colors.
This has to be bait, no ones this fucking stupid. Gtfo /ic/

File: 1473639986594.png (19KB, 595x577px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 595x577px

>>2752081
Neither of those Anons, but why are you mad?

File: 1479820428204.png (174KB, 416x396px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 416x396px

>>2752075
>>2752061
This makes sense. Thanks for the help

>>2752081
Did I trigger you by bad talking about your precious mud pictures of ugly people? Are you mad? How pathetic.

>Fuck off back /a/ or wherever shithole you crawled
Make me.

File: 1468250242064.gif (131KB, 600x337px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 600x337px

>>2752118
>y-you're just mad
>mud pictures of ugly people
I guess that's to be expected from some newfag whose only goal is to make shit drawings of lolis.

>>2752081
Guess what?

He's in his happy place.

Are you?

Don't judge. Asshole. That nbigga knows more about Anime than fuckin Hayao Miyazaki.

File: 1479801043141.jpg (18KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 600x450px

>>2752139
>>2752081
Typical retard who ruined /ic/.

>>2752139
>>2752081
>gif
>memes
We should ban /pol/tards

File: IMG-20161121-WA0002.jpg (156KB, 904x1279px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 904x1279px

I had never seen such disgusting samefagging in one thread

>>2752167
why not?

File: 1479801048647.png (176KB, 494x468px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 494x468px

>>2752167
>this damage control

It>>2751912
It's not rocket science, study realism

>>2752171
Where I can find nude kids for models?

/ic/ would be so much better if people were more humble and gave the most useful answer like >>2752075 , instead of the one that will make them look smarter. It's like on /a/ when you ask people their favorite anime and they answer with the most deep and "smart" shows instead of the ones they truly enjoyed, just to appear more intelligent.

>>2752175
Honestly i dcan't figure it out except some of anatomy book

>>2752078

>no u

Heh, go back to drawing boxes faggot.

>>2752178
It's your own post. Try harder.
>Everyone in this thread are trash except me
>>2752183
>study realism
>without life drawing
wew

>>2752188
If I quoted my own post here >>2752178 I request to be permabanned.

File: so kawai.jpg (48KB, 488x724px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 488x724px

>>2752152
>Some random weeb knows more about anime than an actual famed animator
Keep telling yourself that.
>>2752155
Newfag thinks he knows what's up with /ic/

>>2752202
he's autistic and he appreciates the culture. fuck you.

>calls someone newfag
>He's actually a newfag.

go hump a rock you cunt bag dick faggot.

weebs sucks cocks ITT

File: will 4.jpg (162KB, 680x1000px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 680x1000px

>>2752213
>Being this assblasted
>Actually, unironically, calling anime a "culture"
Yeah, a culture of retards. At least I'm not Op who for some ungodly reason, has determined paintings by William Bouguereau is nothing but mud on a canvas.

ill tell you what youre missing

T H E S P A R K

File: Yoba palm.png (122KB, 421x404px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 421x404px

>>2752243

Actually Bouguereau shitted a painting after painting, if he could he would make Warhol "Factory" or go full Kinkade. Wanking over his art that often has some trite and really banal subjects like bathing gals because he is "old master" is the most Ameriactually fattest thing I can think of.

If you like academic art - ok, but that doesn't make OP wrong. Academic art that Bouguereau represented is the epitome of "meh" and when I see its prints and wallpapers I cringe no less than when I see Klimt in the rooms of 15-year-old girls.

Goddamn, even plebs from "Burzum" took his "Elegy" for cover art. That should tell you how Sakimichan-tier he was and is as a painter.

File: c85_10.png (207KB, 836x1200px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 836x1200px

>>2751939
>>2752055
> Also those pictures may be have high technique but they aren't impressive.

No matter what style you prefer, you still should appreciate good technique.

You can't just compare realism/detailded work with an SD drawing.
This one >>2751936 has got wonderful colors, and the anatomy details looks amazing.
Meanwhile >>2752055 is simple and adapted for a 4koma format comedy.

I myself prefer Anime style, but don't reject realism. You're supposed to do the opposite, "accept" and translate it to improve your drawings. The best manga artists also have the most anatomical understandings.

>>2752061

>pubescent childrent dont have breasts and hips

Nice mental gymnastics there. Lolis are literally children drawn in a manga style. There is nothing more to it. There is no such thing as "loli figure".

File: 2438553.png (18KB, 300x400px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 300x400px

>>2752394
> There is no such thing as "loli figure".

You're retarded, nobody have hips like that in real life.

Besides, the fact they have Anime faces and not realistic kid faces kind of count a fuck ton don't you think?

File: denno coil.jpg (2MB, 1779x1379px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1779x1379px

>>2752394

NOPE.jpg, be less of a retard in the future.

File: NotSoSmug.png (132KB, 511x545px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 511x545px

>>2752394
Spoken like a close minded pleb.

File: B7jr82iCEAQT6Zx.jpg (186KB, 1250x1400px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1250x1400px

>>2752394
> Lolis are literally children drawn in a manga style

And Anime women are "women drawn in a manga style', yet are still totally different looking from actual women depending on the style.

>>2752400
>>2752402

Those look like depictions of well developed 12 year olds or so. Yeah, pubescent kids with anime heads. Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp?

>>2752408
>Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp?

That loli are totally unrealistic? Dunno, ask yourself why you can't seems to understand.

>>2752410

No they aren't. They are drawn specifically to be attractive to pedos and hebephiles that are attracted to pubescent and pre-pubescent girls. Their body types and proportions aren't made up from nothing, they are stylized depictions of a very specific set of traits.

>>2752406

A stylized depiction of a woman is still a depiction of a woman. They are exaggregated yes, but the attributes that are exaggregated are in not random but very specific. Learn how stylization works.

File: Cardcaptor.Sakura.full.296988.jpg (2MB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1200px

>>2752410
Are you trolling or are you legitimately retarded ?

Pic related is 12, but has the body of an adult.

This is troll or idiot with psychological problems, he likes to spam his troll post with smug weeb pictures. He spammed them at different sites and subboards, probaly is here now because he got his ass handed over on /k/ and just looking for new fishing grounds. He did the exact same thing and posting style on /k/ too. If that one guy on /k/ is correct he is a russian with psychological problems who gets panic attacks easily e.g. when someone from his family comes to visit, he also has some whine thread on a russian board, where he cries about his problems all day.
>>2752060
>>2752118
>>2752169

>>2752348
Jesus that's the most hipster post I've ever seen.
>It's popular by enthusiasts so it must be sakimichichan tier bad
That's not the point. You need to learn the fundamentals before doing stylized work. William was a master of realism, and his popularity shows. That's like saying anyone who likes Leonardo Da Vinci is merely "wanking over his art" because he "shitted drawings after drawings" and his work is filled with nothing but "trite and banal subjects"
Op is a colossal faggot that has no desire to get gud. Instead, he wants to shitpost smug anime faces and bitch about drawing loli

Drawn pedophilia is a legal loophole to allow you to remain on the outside and not locked up.

You are still a pedophile for drawing or being aroused by depictions of obviously under aged girls. There is no denying this. There is no other definition.

"a person who is sexually attracted to children."

That is the definition. You are. You have just not yet acted out.

File: Deepest Lore.jpg (106KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 640x360px

>>2752462
THIS
H
I
S
Do you think Trump will ban lolis like they do in Australia?

File: yoba3.jpg (481KB, 800x636px) Image search: [Google]

481KB, 800x636px

>>2752454

Sakimi also has very strong fundamentals. Bouguereau is a master of catering to plebs like Sakimi, he was criticized and ridiculed heavily for that even when he lived. Hell, he himself admitted that he oriented himself to crowds and american millionaires who liked his banal and derivative subject matter at the time.

Oh and

>master of realism
>iblying

Degas himself critized for his artificial textures. If you want to see good realism, go for Ingres, at least there's a feeling in his paintings, not figures made of wax and nymph #242521.

File: 57446572_p9.jpg (54KB, 538x778px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 538x778px

>>2752394
Malaysia baiting ITT or something?

>>2752454
>replying to bait

>>2752513

>implying that was a bait
>unironically loving Bouguereau shit

ISHYGDDT

File: 1467991740507.jpg (164KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1280x720px

>>2752523
I know it's bait, because I used that bait

>>2752462
anybody who draws loli needs to be locked up in a mental asylum, fucking degenerates

File: 1419057065188.png (148KB, 2500x1645px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 2500x1645px

>>2752500
>>2752523
There is literally nothing wrong with liking Williams art. It's professionally made pieces of work.
>He catered to rich people
So? It's a job. You're what's wrong with the industry. Who cares if Saki makes 100s grand a year. If anything that should encourage hipsters like you, knowing art can be made into a living.

>implying Michelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel ceiling for free
all keks

>>2752526

But I don't use bait in my posts, I express pretty standard opinion that is shared by lots of art critics, historians as well as famous painters in the past (like mentioned Degas or Gauguin).

>>2752546

No, ofc Sakimi is good at what she does, I always defended her on /ic/. She is Bouguereau of XXI century though, lots of technique, but totally shit subjects, artificial, deviant-art tier basic art with no feeling. You can get sick of Sakimi's highlights and sparkles as fast as Bouguereau figures.

If you want to be Sakimi or Bouguereau ok, but don't be surprised if people will call that art mud on canvas or deviantart-tier. Because while for some (basic pleb) it will be the next best thing to breathing, for others it will suck huge balls and have less feeling/appeal than drawing porno for pedophiles.

>Saki makes 100s grand a year.

Heh, she makes 100 grand a month. Still would never want to be her.

File: 432536547657657575.jpg (287KB, 1698x622px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 1698x622px

>>2752569
>I express pretty standard opinion that is shared by lots of art critics, historians as well as famous painters in the past (like mentioned Degas or Gauguin).
>opinion
Now read your own posts. Try harder next time with your baits

>>2752573

What is the problem? That wikipedia would tell you the same you can find in art history book or guide to the exhibition? Are you that desperate to defend Bouguereau that you are now checking wiki for some proof of his greatness?

>>2752569
>It's ok to like something, but don't be surprised if people will call that art mud on canvas or deviantart-tier
And that's completely fine. I have no beef with you, my problem lies with op. Some weeb newfag shits up the board with "how do I draw x", is given an answer but wants to bitch about not learning the fundamentals because it "looks like real children".
Bouguereau was just used as an example, a goal to reach. Op needs to learn the fundamentals before doing stylized work. But we all know op's too busy sucking massive amounts of cock to learn anything.
Which begs the question, why did you even bother arguing in the first place?

File: 4325436546464.jpg (44KB, 1447x120px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 1447x120px

>>2752582
This is last (You)

File: 952.gif (2MB, 540x304px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 540x304px

>>2752462
What if you're only attracted to hentai loli and not actual children?

File: tehehe.jpg (91KB, 469x424px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 469x424px

>>2752583

Because you are fucking wrong. You don't need to know how to draw children to draw loli. As pointed out, lolis don't have qualities and proportions children have. They have propotions of teenage girls and young women with hip area that is stylized more.

You would get closer if you would overlay young 19-20something model as a reference on loli figure than with children.

It would be good to learn proportions of children for other stuff - toddlercon, but I'm not sure for that also because that work is usually low quality and also very heavily stylized, so simple guidelines of babyheads and Loomis/Anatomy for Artist/whatever book proportions would be 100% ENOUGH.

What you just said is very, very shit advice for anyone who would want to draw loli in the future. You just gave a "fuck you, go study anatomy" generic answer and then threw butthurt fit.

This is why we argue.

>>2752595

?

File: Middle.png (71KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 300x300px

>>2752606
I'm not the one who originally posted the Bouguereau images you fucking faggot.
Again, Williams work is just an example of learning the fundamentals.
>You would get closer if you would overlay young 19-20something model as a reference on loli figure than with children.
That STILL requires studies of real humans, I don't know why it's so hard for you to comprehend this. Yes, fuck you, go study anatomy. Or you can stick to your deviantart symbol drawing anime girl #716234 like the degenerate pedo you are

>>2752175
Twitter

File: Drawing_Moe_Basic_and_Advance_-Techniques(24).png (2MB, 2122x3030px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2122x3030px

It's all in proportions. Like any other subject, study what appeals to you out of the styles and interpretations you like, then recognize patterns inherent in them.

Don't copy those patterns outright. Think of the phrase "Put it in your own words" and do that visually.

>>2752061
>>2752400
I would like to prove you wrong with proof, but I don't want to get v&.

>>2752729
you know stuff is fucked up when even the proofs are illegal

>>2751912
>I just don't get what I'm missing.
then post your work dipshit

>>2751912
You just have to nail the /beg/ step.

4 heads tall, 6-7 head body proportions. At least that's how it works for shota.

File: time to die.jpg (43KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 450x600px

>>2751954
>Otherwise, they bore me, there's nothing interesting about those paintings and I would go as far as say that they unpleasant to look at.

I was going to report the shitpoting in this thread. But seeing how stupid you are justifies this thread.

Fucking weebs.

I think you want to make sure that the necks arent too short. Short necks and general stubbiness is for anime kids, lolis do have more adult proportions just with a bigger head and softer angles. No wasp waists or big chest.

>>2755973
and with bigger head I mean smaller body, sorry

>>2752462
>You are still a zoophile for drawing or being aroused by depictions of obvious animals. There is no denying this. There is no other definition.

>"a person who is sexually attracted to animals."

>That is the definition. You are. You have just not yet acted out.

>>2752394
not sure if mentally challenged or cp bait

this thread LMAO

>>2755994
Depictions of animals fucking.