Masashi Kishimoto

File: naruto-image-wallpapers-wallpaper.jpg (587KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

587KB, 1920x1080px

>>2942330
Some examples...

File: 68992-1631.jpg (190KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1024x768px

>>2942332

File: naruto___cover_for_chp__453_by_archangel_pt.jpg (511KB, 1494x1100px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 1494x1100px

>>2942333

File: Illustration.Collection-.Uzumaki.Naruto.full.1837852.jpg (2MB, 2500x3660px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2500x3660px

>>2942335

File: Naruto_Art_Book_02_Page_46.jpg (755KB, 3084x2200px) Image search: [Google]

755KB, 3084x2200px

>>2942336

His style can be pretty decent but to reach that level from say a beginner then it would take some time but i suggest learning anatomy and actualy figure drawing before mangaka style. It will help you make less anatomically incorrect drawings. If you really want harsh advice make this thread in /ic/

>>2942403
>i suggest learning anatomy and actualy figure drawing before mangaka style
This is what I wanna know, do mangaka's master realistic figure drawing before starting their careers or do they just get better through time. It's hard to tell how good they're when most of their drawings are simple stuff.

>>2943034
They do both. They do manga while applying their knowledge from figure drawing. If you just do figure drawing you'll just end up as a proko, if you just do manga you'll end up as deviantart tier, the secret is balancing both.

>>2942330
>fisheye perspective forest environments
>giant ninja weapons and even giant-er collars
>ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD eyes

he's a few trick pony, and his linework is waaaaaay too plain for my liking.


that being said he established (debatably) the most successful manganime franchise to date. So what the fuck could we tell you?

>>2942335
It looks like his color blending got a lot better as the series went on but regarding the actual manga pages I preferred his style towards the beginning.

>>2943060
>that being said he established (debatably) the most successful manganime franchise to date
There's nothing debatable about it, it's factually wrong.

File: naruto-illustrations-uzumaki-naruto-art-book-28.jpg (535KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

535KB, 600x800px

>>2943130
Naruto is the most popular anime/manga series WW and helped a lot to make the culture mainstream outside Japan.

>>2943146
>Naruto is the most popular anime/manga series WW
No, it isn't. It didn't even outsell Dragon Ball.
One piece has like 50% more sales in manga alone, not to mention the movies.

>>2943146
spongbob squarepants is pretty popular

>>2943034
Though he's mediocre in practically all other categories, Kishimoto is fairly good at perspective. This means, yes, he did study fundamentals to some degree. For someone to draw perspective this well, they have to be studied to some degree. You don't learn perspective by "winging it". Majority of mangaka and animators have studied to some degree. Their backstories usually involve going to some sort of art school for a period of time, if they ever talk about themselves. If they didn't go to an art school, they self-studied (or continue to self-study) to become very good and push their skill level higher and higher and spent a vast amount of time on getting technically better. The best cartoonists always talk about how they're trying to constantly push their technical skill level. Publishing magazines themselves, for manga, also have a quality standard, and if you're too shit, they'll tell you to improve your art and try again.

Frankly, I don't even know why this is a question. If your art is shit and you know it, you take the time to improve it however you can. That means studying what makes art good. That means studying the fundamentals. All the fundamentals are is a simple means to explain why something may look more aesthetic than another by applying simple rules. You apply the rules to cartooning. I don't know why everyone has this stupid idea in their head that cartooning means you don't have to study or improve. You want to make good art? Then study.

Obviously someone that has drawn hundreds of chapters of a comic for a professional magazin will have some solid skills.

>>2943146
>helped a lot to make the culture mainstream
What, fictional ninja culture? One Piece and DBZ have had far more attention outside of Japan. Even Ghibli would be debatable.

>>2943130
>>2943171
You won that argument, but you are losing at life.

>>2943527
Naruto is more popular than OP internationally, it's a fact. You may be right about DBZ, though.

>>2943195
Well, most manga-styled art seem to get looked down upon as there's not much detailed anatomy, shading, coloring etc. Like it's something for the people of lesser talent but looking at their stuff it seems pretty complex to me.

>>2943248
I don't think that's Kishimoto's art. It's probably from that Boruto manga which is drawn by one of his former assistants.

File: 1.png (765KB, 607x524px) Image search: [Google]

765KB, 607x524px

How do you think he gives that texture to the black marker on the hair?

>>2943660
Probably with a felt pen.

I think he's hit or miss. His inking lacks depth at times due to lack of variation in his line weights, but the coloured stuff saves this. Sometimes he outright half-asses the work, but then again it's retarded Nippon deadlines so...

>>2943660
Drybrush by the looks of it

>>2943533
Heh

Nothin personnel kid

>>2942330
His new manga is pretty neat, don't you think?

>>2942330

His "style" is pretty much a low-grade attempt at copying Katsuhiro Otomo's "style", especially on Akira.

This is a fact, he said it so, he is inspired greatly by Otomo's works.

So instead of aspiring to be a shitty artist cloning a shitty copycat artist, why don't you just learn from Otomo instead
Or Moebius?

Even better, learn classical fundamentals, and develop and add your own manga style twist to it.

Maybe someday you'll become someone along the likes of Hirohiko Araki, the mangaka of JoJo, etc, instead of being another Narutard copycat.

This is Kishimoto's best work.
That screams "Akira" all over.

What made Otomo a god-tier mangaka is he values the classical art and fundamentals, and 'manga' styles only comes next. He strives to be the best as he could as an artist.

What defines 'manga' style?
>Clean, simple lines
>Simplified forms
>Contrasting strokes, which is messy but effective

Examples?
>the background art in Yotsubato!
>or much more detailed background in Death Note
>forms; every manga figures ever; the nose, eyes are not fully fleshed out / drawn
>strokes; manga 'effect' lines

Of course, nowadays when we try to describe what 'manga' or anime is
>exaggerated 'Moe' face or kawaii deformed figures

Which brings us back to Kishimoto, this is the very circle he comes from, like /i/ or /ic/, people who pursues 'style' or quick solution to getting "good looking" results over 'slow, boring' proper fundamentals.

On the lower end we have cartoonish / amateurish "style" the likes of Shinchan or Maruko.

Now if you add fundamentals to that "style" we get something like Yotsubato!
The persective is spot on, the overall art is much nicer.

Step up above that are the likes of One Piece, Fairy Tail etc. Both Masashi Kishimoto and Kubo Tite was at this tier. Their early works looks similar.

Somewhere afterwards they worked on their fundamentals and we get Naruto and Bleach. They went up a level.

Kishimoto relied on Otomo's work mostly.
Kubo Tits' art literally looked like every figure fundamental tutorial memebook art, except with manga eyes and such.

So what you got to do OP, is stick on all those boring fundamentals till you git gud, and eventually you will develop your own style, naturally, be it manga or whatever.

Don't copy off something that's not even good in the first place.

File: fmario-4105781.jpg (51KB, 600x414px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x414px

>>2946992

>>2943034
Pretty obvious that everyone's different.
Take a look at Berserk's mangaka (Kentaro Miura)
The anatomy in the early chapters of Berserk weren't that good. The art in the latest chapters are miles better than what he used to be capable of.

>>2947013

his penmanship and inking is always top rate

>Don't copy off something that's not even good in the first place.
I agree with the rest of your post but how is Kishimoto not good? His style may not be so original but the is still good or above avarage at least. How many people here can draw as good as him?