Just some of my terrible art. If you've seen my userpage you'll probably recognize a few of these.

thats pretty horrible, no offense but there is no clear picture visible, u could have at least colored it.

At 4/15/08 08:57 PM, doubleone wrote: Just some of my terrible art

you've got that right. but uhh...what is it?

also, you're in the "ART" forum. you see all the descriptive titles for the threads? try to emulate that.

At 4/15/08 09:16 PM, kernalphage wrote:

At 4/15/08 08:57 PM, doubleone wrote: Just some of my terrible art

you've got that right. but uhh...what is it?

also, you're in the "ART" forum. you see all the descriptive titles for the threads? try to emulate that.

Why don't you eat my asshole, honey?
Just kidding, I love you and I have no idea what it is.

At 4/16/08 04:38 PM, doubleone wrote:

Also

That's awfull! It's just some random lines. Are you still going to post some real 'ART'?

At 4/16/08 04:40 PM, doubleone wrote:

At 4/16/08 04:38 PM, doubleone wrote:

Also

Seriously... Before you post your images you should finish them. This looks far from finished. It's all liny and unclear. In your first picture I saw the head of a chicken in the middle.. I think..

Art doesn't need to be anything other than whats expressed assholes, jeez, if this person didn't want color, no need for it! The breifing did say, "not much effort". So like they always say,

READ BEFORE POSTING

There, keep it in your head.

PS. Kewl pics, if you wanted kewler lookin pics try using layers of sumthin.

it isn't too terrible, better than some of the poor excuses you'll find tacked up in the forums---it has some sense of style, just can't say what you were aiming for...

At 4/16/08 04:40 PM, doubleone wrote:

At 4/16/08 04:38 PM, doubleone wrote:

Also

It's ABSTRACT ZAPDOS!!!

I don't know what to make of this. I tried staring at the negative space, trying to make something out from the shapes. It's easy to call this non-objective because it's too nonsensical to be abstract.

At 4/16/08 07:32 PM, P-51 wrote: I don't know what to make of this. I tried staring at the negative space, trying to make something out from the shapes. It's easy to call this non-objective because it's too nonsensical to be abstract.

To tell you the truth, I wasn't really going for anything. I know these are messed up, but I'm now going to try more simplistic pictures before going into the abstract stuff.

Still kinda cool and has a cool effect i guess.

At 4/16/08 05:16 PM, toxicmania7 wrote: Art doesn't need to be anything other than whats expressed assholes

ok i agree, art is expression so whats he expressing? also no one is really going to understand what ur trying to express if whatever u draw is bad.

I guess i'll try something different, since my last ones seemed to cause so much confusion.
Also, please give critisism.

At 4/17/08 09:19 PM, MuffDiver102 wrote:

At 4/17/08 04:34 PM, doubleone wrote:

What is that? It's like some piano notes with a mustache. I'm not a big fan of abstract, it doesn't make any sense to me.

I don't like it

I'm afraid that it is the point of abstract. it is what it is.

At 4/17/08 09:19 PM, MuffDiver102 wrote:

At 4/17/08 04:34 PM, doubleone wrote: I guess i'll try something different, since my last ones seemed to cause so much confusion.
Also, please give critisism.

What is that? It's like some piano notes with a mustache. I'm not a big fan of abstract, it doesn't make any sense to me.

I don't like it

It's a mustach with legs. I don't see how you could mistake it for something like that.

A dragon.

Go buy this now.

At 4/21/08 05:15 PM, DarkSytze wrote:

At 4/17/08 09:19 PM, MuffDiver102 wrote: What is that? It's like some piano notes with a mustache. I'm not a big fan of abstract, it doesn't make any sense to me.

i think it represents some abstract half 2d/3d figure with a mustache, a monocle and a top hat.

the 3d doesn't look good, mainly because it goes from 3d to 2d (at the legs it goes wrong.) it's not bad, it's just bland and mediocre, colouring it could make it look better.

I was wondering how I could add 3d to it (besides the legs) but had trouble doing it.

the rest of your drawings look very abstract, so abstract it just looks like gibberish and you aren't able to tell what it's trying to look like when you look at it the first minute.

As I said earlier, I wasn't really trying to make anything but a strange design, but as you can see with the dragon and mustache thing I was trying to make my pictures clear.

for as long the dragon goes, it's decent. but still bland, you've got the base of the dragon's head thru already, though i don't spy an eye on the right (on picture.) and the neck looks restrangled and manifolded, like it's broken.

The left eye was covered by the side of its head. And as for color, I'll try that, but my pictures will probably come out uglier. Thanks.

At 4/21/08 05:16 PM, powerman-x wrote: Go buy this now.

harsh, but useful.

i like the mustache, it's a good mix of abstract and real. the dragon's not too detailed, so it looks... awkward instead of cartoony, if that's the style you're going for. and of course, WTF is the rest of the stuff?

oh, you guys have it all wrong! this is obviously abstract high art!

note t3h sarcasm.

I think I saw a chicken.
Is it a chicken?
I bet its a chicken.

An old man. I had some trouble drawing the arm. I was wondering if anyone could help me with that.

At 4/15/08 08:57 PM, doubleone wrote: Just some of my terrible art. If you've seen my userpage you'll probably recognize a few of these.

This is actually pretty good, if you were going for a truly abstract piece. A little bit of a balance issue at the top though. I suggest researching more art theory, and doing more of these. Don't worry about everyone else, they are pretty good with representational art, but they wouldn't know abstract art if it bit them in the ass (No offense guys.)

At 4/25/08 08:27 PM, Vousielle wrote:

At 4/15/08 08:57 PM, doubleone wrote: Just some of my terrible art. If you've seen my userpage you'll probably recognize a few of these.

This is actually pretty good, if you were going for a truly abstract piece. A little bit of a balance issue at the top though. I suggest researching more art theory, and doing more of these. Don't worry about everyone else, they are pretty good with representational art, but they wouldn't know abstract art if it bit them in the ass (No offense guys.)

Lol, I need to start reading the whole thread. Ignore my post, P-51 is holding down the fort. Also apparently I messed up calling it abstract, P-51 is correct in that this is 'Non-objective'. My bad.

A bag-headed cyclops. I'll attempt to add color to make it abit clearer.

Colored version. It looks a little different, because I had to redraw some lines.

Lol, I need to start reading the whole thread. Ignore my post, P-51 is holding down the fort. Also apparently I messed up calling it abstract, P-51 is correct in that this is 'Non-objective'. My bad.

It's too simplistic to be non-objective. Non-objective drawings are made to reveal the process of the piece. These are lazy.

At 5/11/08 09:55 PM, insomniacspecial wrote:

Lol, I need to start reading the whole thread. Ignore my post, P-51 is holding down the fort. Also apparently I messed up calling it abstract, P-51 is correct in that this is 'Non-objective'. My bad.

It's too simplistic to be non-objective. Non-objective drawings are made to reveal the process of the piece. These are lazy.

Really only the first few pieces are lazy. The rest of them are good lines, and they show plenty of potential.

Also, that mustache shit wasn't abstract. The first post was sorta abstract, but it was poorly done and boring.

Art isn't what you want it to be; it's what everyone else likes, so think outside the box but don't expect to be able to scream "BASE!" and call everything "art" when you hit criticism.

But yeah, good stuff. Keep it up, and maybe try some pencil stuff if you only have Paint on your computer.