# Rukis's Comics ARE NOT THAT GREAT, AND THIS IS WHY.



## RedSavage (Nov 13, 2011)

SO THAT WE DON'T DERAIL OTHER THREADS WITH CRITICISM OF RUKIS'S COMICS, HERE'S A THREAD DEDICATED TO debating arguing BITCHING OUR OPINIONS ON ALL OF THIS. 


Here is why I dislike Rukis's comics. (Keyword: _Comics._ Rukis, as an artist, is pretty damn good. Her comics, however, are substandard, in my opinion.)

The three main reasons:

*One)* The lack of expressive emotions and facial features give a sense of monotony throughout the story arcs. 
*Two)* The style of art and the choice for the sense of "pseudo-realism" give a borderline air of "uncanny valley". The artists choice to use live models for the art _does not help this_, and mixed with the fantasy element of anthros makes for awkward and often wonky posing. 
*Three)* The stories within the comics lack any real substance at all, and are completely unvaried in their plot. _In fact, it is in this reviewers opinion, that if it wasn't for the *gay sex* in these comics, they wouldn't even be that popular._

NOW for the counter arguments and why I think they're crock. 

Counter argument to lack of expression: "But that's her _style_, which is realistic. Realistic wolves don't _have_ a wide range of expressions, and she does the best she can."

*WELP*, the fact of the matter is, comics _need_ expression to portray ranges of emotion. Because the only text being used to tell the story is dialogue, the art must pick up the slack to exhibit said variety of emotion, reactions, etc. Without this, each character comes off with the emotionally visual equivalent of a robot voiced by a cheery optimist. It creates a sense of discord in the actions. 

Counter argument to art style: "The art style is very detailed and wonderfully colored! Fur and clothes are intricately drawn, as well as the characters themselves, and Rukis has some of the most realistic comic art out there."

*WELL*, this ties in a bit with the first point. The style doesn't fit the medium. It falls flat as a comic form and becomes boring. To reference uncanny valley, there's a fine line or portraying something that shows viable emotion and heart, and something that comes off as slightly unsettling. Rukis's art sometimes falls into this. In fact, if I had to pick the greatest downfall of this comic, it would _have_ to be the "Realist" style of art and the choice to stick to it.  (And just because something is part of the "style", it doesn't make it a viable argument against the critique.)

To make a hyperbolic comparison, try to imagine if Leonardo DaVinci tried making a comic. No doubt, he's a great artist, but his medium I daresay would be utterly boring in the comic form. 

Counter argument to the thin stories: .... I can't honestly think of one. All I hear is "No! Rukis's stories are great! I read it for the stories, not the sex!" 

**cough*bullshit*cough**​
I'd have to say, quite frankly, I consider most, of not all of the stories, to be B-actor style Soap Operas. Yeeeeah there's drama. Yeeeeeah there's a bit of plot. But it's kind of the same stuff over and over, and I have MORE than an inkling that without the sex, there would be nothing to sell or even be interested in reading. There's no real _hook_ to them. No catchy point or whatever. It's just run-of-the-mill comic drama with sex thrown in for fan service. 

And oh, what do I mean by that line? Simple. Take out the sex, merely allude to it, _and you have the exact same story as before._ Nothing is added by the sex scenes, nothing is taken away, at least as far as story is concerned. Does that mean it can't be there? Well, no, but I'm tired of hearing the sex be justified that it "goes with the story". It doesn't really. It's just sex! It's mean to be a sexy comic, and that's _perfectly alright._ There's just no point in justifying it, imho.


*So the final thoughts. *

Rukis's comics could be improved in THREE main areas. *One: *Let the characters show a little more emotion. Loosen the realistic style and give them more freedom so that they seem like _characters_ instead of detailed puppets that keep the same face. *Two:* Refine this "Realistic" sense of art. I'll say it more bluntly, _Realism is overrated._ However, if you're going to go mostly realistic, _learn realistic anatomy_. Learn about the human body, as well as the animal body, and learn how to draw them in a way that's appealing and less awkward. *And Three:* Work harder on your stories. Go _past_ superficial drama. Give the characters more depth through their dialogue and way of speaking. _Tell me a story I haven't heard before,_  and make it interesting. 

And that, I think, is why I dislike it when someone says "Rukis's comics and stories are amazing," because beyond the superficial layers of heavy art and faux-dramatic story, everything from the art style, characters, and story can be described in a single word: *UNINTERESTING.*


~cc

Ps: This is all my opinions, thoughts, and view points as far as comic art is concerned. I follow a subjective form of critique: Looking what the artist is trying to achieve through their work, and how effective it is. That said, am I saying Rukis is unskilled? No. She has skill. _Wonderful_ skill. It's just that she doesn't achieve much with it through her comics.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Nov 13, 2011)

Who is Rukis


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> Who is Rukis


Here: http://www.furaffinity.net/user/rukis


Hooray for passionate and detailed rants! 
Curiously, I actually tried to read "Cruelty" long-ago JUST because of the sex... *serious face with a blush* it wasn't that good because everyone looked wooden and stiff. Also the story was the same "dealing with being gay" of always ("if I recall correctly"). I also haven't read whatever she's publishing now precisely because of the lack of appeal in her art. I'd her for an animal anatomy book, not for a comic, or a movie.
Well, I haven't anything to complain about here and nothing to add... so I'll take my leave.
I still stand by Blotch being infinitely more succesful in drawing something "realistic".


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

I wonder if this thread is partially directed at me? :V

*LIST TIME!!!!! *

- Rukis is a good artist
- Her artistic "realist" style does* not* translate well into comics due to the lack of expressiveness in such a realistic style, as we established earlier.
- Seldom are the stories in furry comics ever any good. And complaining about this fact does not appear to have fixed the problem yet.
- Anatomy, while imperative and undeniably a key element to good art, seems to be over emphasized by the furry community. Not that I don't agree in   
  emphasizing it's importance, but it seems like it's the first thing we all complain about when judging art. So much so, that we begin to look at art more 
  scientifically than ascetically, and that can't be right.
- Blotch's art is better, we have already established that.
- Rukis wouldn't be popular irregardless of her drawing pr0n if not for the cub-related fiasco/mix-up that prompted an uproar years ago in the furry community.
- Way to rage! ;D


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> I still stand by Blotch being infinitely more succesful in drawing something "realistic". _that strikes a balance between realism and cartoonism, thus which appeals to the beholder._



Fixed. Again. Hehe


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> ^ trololololol
> 
> Irregardless
> 
> - Way to rage! ;D



Huh? Was it directed at me or Coyote?

Grammar Nazi nitpick: it's "regardles", without the "ir-". Sorry, but "regardless" is such a pretty word.

Yes indeed.

Anyway... I think this would've been better left to PM's.

Edit:
ryan: not to be picky, but "realistic"  is in quotes for a reason.


----------



## Smelge (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> - Seldom are the stories in furry comics ever any good. And complaining about this fact does not appear to have fixed the problem yet.



Oh hey, so furry stories are always shit, so why bother trying? Good point. Let's all just do deliberately bad stories from now on.



> - Anatomy, while imperative and undeniably a key element to good art, seems to be over emphasized by the furry community. Not that I don't agree in
> emphasizing it's importance, but it seems like it's the first thing we all complain about when judging art. So much so, that we begin to look at art more
> scientifically than ascetically, and that can't be right.



_So much stupid._


----------



## Antonin Scalia (Nov 13, 2011)

Smelge said:


> furry stories are always shit



Close thread


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Huh? Was it directed at me or Coyote?
> 
> Grammar Nazi nitpick: it's "regardles", without the "ir-". Sorry, but "regardless" is such a pretty word.
> 
> ...



-Trololol was to DD because I thought that was a joke.

-Thank you, those nits get itchy.

-"Way to rage" was directed at CC.

Sorry for the confusion, I got ninja'd.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

ryan: many thanks.



Smelge said:


> Oh hey, so furry stories are always shit, so why bother trying? Good point. Let's all just do deliberately bad stories from now on.
> 
> _So much stupid._



Might as well post your obligatory "quoted user is a raging fan of x thing and I put it in a sarcastic tone" that you've used so much? Just making an observation.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

Smelge said:


> Oh hey, so furry stories are always shit, so why bother trying? Good point. Let's all just do deliberately bad stories from now on.
> 
> 
> 
> _So much stupid._



-Smelge did you steal that avatar from that noob who had all his threads closed?
-When was the last time you ever complained to the author of a comic about his story and suddenly it got better? Why bitch and moan about it, when you can actually make a good story yourself, it happened with Lackadaisy, it could happen again. Maybe.
-Also, art is not meant to be looked at ONLY scientifically. /Argument

@Aristocrates: No problem!


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Nov 13, 2011)

Oh hey i actually watch that artist. Yikes. TBH I never read the comic, I just liked the picture with the armada boat thing, thought it was a Columbus tribute :/


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> -Smelge did you steal that avatar from that noob who had all his threads closed?
> -Also, art is not meant to be looked at ONLY scientifically. /Argument
> 
> @Aristocrates: No problem!



-In a way, you could say he did.
-Yes, but there's a line between believeability (suspension of disbelief et al.) and grossly innacurate. You can't just draw a giant moon shape with circles below and call it a cow in contexts like these, where surrealism isn't coming into play. Also, you claim that her art is realistic and praise her for it, yet her anatomy is not (from what Coyote says), so you fall into a contradiction there (which is what Smelge is getting at). 
Edit: actually, we could make that more general and say that you're forgiving something realsitic while it isn't in some ways and then claiming that anatomy is not a super important requirement for these things when we're in the context of something realistic.

Ugh, my brain is dizzy.


----------



## Smelge (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> --When was the last time you ever complained to the author of a comic about his story and suddenly it got better?



The current one might not improve, but other people are likely to see the comments and take note for their own attempts.


----------



## Fay V (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> -Smelge did you steal that avatar from that noob who had all his threads closed?
> -When was the last time you ever complained to the author of a comic about his story and suddenly it got better? Why bitch and moan about it, when you can actually make a good story yourself, it happened with Lackadaisy, it could happen again. Maybe.
> -Also, art is not meant to be looked at ONLY scientifically. /Argument
> 
> @Aristocrates: No problem!



Because complaining has never done shit for anything. You talk to an artist and bring up specific issues you had and possible fixes. Just plain bitching and complaining will do nothing, that's not something a person can work with. 

Also a lot of that issue is people don't know how to take criticism, and those that get popular are usually the ones writing shitty porn, so their commenters give shitty porn comments. 

Doesn't the writer for housepets often take advice from fans? The writing isn't fantastic, but it's not god awful either.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

Smelge said:


> The current one might not improve, but other people are likely to see the comments and take note for their own attempts.



http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/109285-Coming-soon 

^This link demonstrates that that is clearly not happening.


----------



## Fay V (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/109285-Coming-soon
> 
> ^This link demonstrates that that is clearly not happening.



You don't seem to understand the concept that, when publication is free and easy the available works are generally shit. This does not mean that genuine commentary and suggestions to improve a work are pointless. It just means that you can't recognize a helpful tool for the minority of discerning individuals. 

Essentially you're saying that people should not try to help young writers and give them feedback, because people write twilight fanfic. That doesn't really make sense.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/109285-Coming-soon
> 
> ^This link demonstrates that that is clearly not happening.



"Likely" was the key word there. Also, generalising is a no-no.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> -In a way, you could say he did.
> -Yes, but there's a line between believeability (suspension of disbelief et al.) and grossly innacurate. You can't just draw a giant moon shape with circles below and call it a cow in contexts like these, where surrealism isn't coming into play. Also, you claim that her art is realistic and praise her for it, yet her anatomy is not (from what Coyote says), so you fall into a contradiction there (which is what Smelge is getting at).
> Edit: actually, we could make that more general and say that you're forgiving something realsitic while it isn't in some ways and then claiming that anatomy is not a super important requirement for these things when we're in the context of something realistic.
> 
> Ugh, my brain is dizzy.



Ugh, this is a losing battle. And my laziness is not helping. 

I'm simply praising her on her more intricate and "photorealistic" (realistic textures, etc.) not "anatomically" realistic (anatomy, etc.) when compared to other artists. And before someone corrects me saying "Photorealistic would include anatomical realism." Just shuddup and let me replace the word "photorealistic" with "texture-realistic". Okay, there we go, that's about as specific as I can get when it come to praising rukis. Her textures are good, the end. If someone here argues the textures are not realistic I might pop a blood vessel. 

^Hehe joking of course


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

*FURRY STORIES, DUE TO FREE PUBLICATION AND "ANYONE CAN DO IT" TYPE ACCESSIBILITY, WILL MOSTLY BE SHIT, THIS IS A FACT AND WILL REMAIN A FACT UNTIL A LARGE NUMBER OF FURRY ARTISTS HIRE PROFESSIONAL NON-FURRY WRITERS TO DO THEIR STORYLINES. /ARGUMENT


*Phew. *Prepares to be ripped to shreds.*


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> "Likely" was the key word there. Also, generalising is a no-no.



Likely, implies the opposite of unlikely. While it may be likely for people to see the complaints, it is very unlikely they will heed to them and consider them when creating their own comic. Smelge implied that both scenarios are likely and given the second is wrong then likely is not the key word. It is *unlikely* furry comics will get better story lines for this exact reason.

PS. I love debates


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> *FURRY STORIES, DUE TO FREE PUBLICATION AND "ANYONE CAN DO IT" TYPE ACCESSIBILITY, WILL MOSTLY BE SHIT, THIS IS A FACT AND WILL REMAIN A FACT UNTIL A LARGE NUMBER OF FURRY ARTISTS HIRE PROFESSIONAL NON-FURRY WRITERS TO DO THEIR STORYLINES. /ARGUMENT
> 
> 
> *Phew. *Prepares to be ripped to shreds.*



Hey now, mine arnt shitty and dont contain much nudity :V


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> Likely, implies the opposite of unlikely. While it may be likely for people to see the complaints, it is very unlikely they will heed to them and consider them when creating their own comic. Smelge implied that both scenarios are likely and given the second is wrong then likely is not the key word. It is *unlikely* furry comics will get better story lines for this exact reason.
> 
> PS. I love debates



Uhhh... what I understood was that Smelge said other people who are not Rukis (or people who are young, not famous artists and eager to start a comic) may actually try to learn... oh wait, you understood that too.
I think you two just have different views on the phenomenon. Which doesn't mean either is wrong; I mean, porn is mainstream so that's what we get to see more. Just where could the lost gems be? Do they exist? We don't know, we just know there are a TON of furry porn comics and most (if not all) of them are terrible.


----------



## Fay V (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> *FURRY STORIES, DUE TO FREE PUBLICATION AND "ANYONE CAN DO IT" TYPE ACCESSIBILITY, WILL MOSTLY BE SHIT, THIS IS A FACT AND WILL REMAIN A FACT UNTIL A LARGE NUMBER OF FURRY ARTISTS HIRE PROFESSIONAL NON-FURRY WRITERS TO DO THEIR STORYLINES. /ARGUMENT
> 
> 
> 
> *Phew. *Prepares to be ripped to shreds.*



And? I don't see what this really matters? Just because they tend to be shit doesn't mean they have to be. Hence people discuss and bring up thoughtful critique about the subject. This allows a person to see how the comic is coming off and change. 
Just because most don't use it doesn't mean everyone will ignore good advice. 

This is also a bullshit excuse when discussing a particular comic. "everything is shit why bother" impedes progress.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Uhhh... what I understood was that Smelge said other people who are not Rukis (or people who are young, not famous artists and eager to start a comic) may actually try to learn... oh wait, you understood that too.
> I think you two just have different views on the phenomenon. Which doesn't mean either is wrong; I mean, porn is mainstream so that's what we get to see more. Just where could the lost gems be? Do they exist? We don't know, we just know there are a TON of furry porn comics and most (if not all) of them are terrible.



*YOU SIR, ARE GENIUS.* Finally someone who understands. ;D


----------



## Onnes (Nov 13, 2011)

I just realized that it would amusing to index furry comics by the dividing the number of panels that are sexually explicit by the total number of panels.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> *YOU SIR, ARE GENIUS.* Finally someone who understands. ;D



I'm just polite and open to considering the ignored and unexplored (which doesn't mean I actively do so).

Pride aside, I just noticed that message Fay quoted. Please, you're making a fool of yourself here.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

Fay V said:


> And? I don't see what this really matters? Just because they tend to be shit doesn't mean they have to be. Hence people discuss and bring up thoughtful critique about the subject. This allows a person to see how the comic is coming off and change.
> Just because most don't use it doesn't mean everyone will ignore good advice.
> 
> This is also a bullshit excuse when discussing a particular comic. "everything is shit why bother" impedes progress.



You seem to have been missing the point of the entire long argument. You believe I am saying that we should give up trying to make a good furry comic, but had you read the earlier posts more closely you would have understood that I am simply saying, "We should stop bitching to the authors about how bad their stories are in hopes of change, because they will not change, they have never changed. Rather, we should take it unto ourselves to create comics that don't suffer from the terrible plots that exist today. Stop trying to change what is beyond repair and start anew by yourself, conforming the suggestions that other authors ignore.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> I'm just polite and open to considering the ignored and unexplored (which doesn't mean I actively do so).



Yeah, there isn't much of that here, myself included, i need to work on that. :$ So it's great to know it still exists.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> You seem to have been missing the point of the entire long argument. You believe I am saying that we should give up trying to make a good furry comic, but had you read the earlier posts more closely you would have understood that I am simply saying, *"We should stop bitching to the authors about how bad their stories are in hopes of change, because they will not change, they have never changed. Rather, we should take it unto ourselves to create comics that don't suffer from the terrible plots that exist today. Stop trying to change what is beyond repair and start anew by yourself, conforming the suggestions that other authors ignore*.



That argument has been present and going on forever. As a literature student, it infuriates me.
-First, I have the right to give proper constructive criticism, which is not the same as "bitching".
-Second, some of us don't have the talent or the time or the motivation, but that doesn't mean we can't spot what we consider flaws in someone's work. What's more, like Smelge said, someone may actually read our criticism and take advice from it.
-Third (tying with the first), if I think it's a low-quality product but see potential in it, then it is my duty as an honest person to say what I think about it. Coyote's very rant is proof of this.

More later.

Edit: In other words, the fact I can't make something of real artistic value doesn't invalidate my knowledge of a tradition, the text's internal logic, a theorical part and even my taste. I can put my taste aside and focus on a few "objective" and formal aspects, if there's anything wrong with them, then I can give criticism to fix them.


----------



## Fay V (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> You seem to have been missing the point of the entire long argument. You believe I am saying that we should give up trying to make a good furry comic, but had you read the earlier posts more closely you would have understood that I am simply saying, "We should stop bitching to the authors about how bad their stories are in hopes of change, because they will not change, they have never changed. Rather, we should take it unto ourselves to create comics that don't suffer from the terrible plots that exist today. Stop trying to change what is beyond repair and start anew by yourself, conforming the suggestions that other authors ignore.



And again you don't seem to understand the power of solid critique. You're focusing on the negative and saying "well can't fix it" without even attempting to view more aspects of the positive. You also seem to be under the impression that everyone that can critique, can also do the work, which is a laughable concept. 
Furry is a hugbox, and there are those that will not change, but there are also those that do, and they tend to be the ones that rise to get better. You claimed no one ever changes. I mentioned that the author of housepets does a bit. I know the author of bearnuts does respond to critique. The author of lackadaisy certainly does change and respond to critiques. 
In the case of lackadaisy, there may not be extremely visible change in the comic, but you'll see she attempts to change minor things and before the comic took off there were changes. 
With the author of inverloch you can see major changes in storytelling over time. 

I'm not sure what you expect but change takes time. 

Now back to the "make your own thing" we're going to ignore the idea that anyone that sees a problem can make the masterpiece. I can eat a fine meal and comment on the taste, but that doesn't mean that if I think it had a bit too much salt I should just go into the kitchen and do it myself. 
So when people are making their own comics, how do you expect them to learn at all? People aren't going to give them critique because they'll just say "well no one ever changes" and there's no commentary on the present comics so they can learn what people like and dislike. 
So in the end you have what? Even more shitty works that won't be improved?


----------



## Evan of Phrygia (Nov 13, 2011)

i read a part of it to see how bad/good it was.

I'm going to go do something else now.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> That argument has been present and going on forever. As a literature student, it infuriates me.
> -First, I have the right to give proper constructive criticism, which is not the same as "bitching".



That was not meant to be taken personally. That was referring to the entire furry community, in which, there is undoubtedly a TON of useless bitching.



AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> -Second, some of us don't have the talent or the time or the motivation, but that doesn't mean we can't spot what we consider flaws in someone's work. What's more, like Smelge said, someone may actually read our criticism and take advice from it.



If authors ignore these pleas, due to their pride of having made a comic and thus not wanting it devalued through criticisms (constructive or otherwise), they why waste the effort. Like it or not, authors are too proud of their work to accept criticism. "It's part of human behaviour, a mental defence mechanism to prevent unwanted thoughts or emotions," as a psychologist would put it.



AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> -Third (tying with the first), if I think it's a low-quality product but see potential in it, then it is my duty as an honest person to say what I think about it. Coyote's very rant is proof of this.



I agree here. But to the extent of this only being helpful with new comic writers as they can still be influenced. The adage remains true though, "If you want something done right, you gotta do it yourself." Otherwise, the odds of a good product being produced, while not diminished completely, are greatly reduced. I can see where you are going, but you make it sound as though it's easy to change the minds of writers.

*Fay-V Please Also Read This So I Don't Have To Type Another Long Post For Your Argument As Well.*


----------



## Fay V (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> If authors ignore these pleas, due to their pride of having made a comic and thus not wanting it devalued through criticisms (constructive or otherwise), they why waste the effort. Like it or not, authors are too proud of their work to accept criticism. "It's part of human behaviour, a mental defence mechanism to prevent unwanted thoughts or emotions," as a psychologist would put it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I read it and you're still under the false impression that writers and artists will not change. You're still generalizing from those that are shit. You're still looking with a pinpoint rather than broadly. 
There are always shitty authors that don't listen, but you seem to refuse to acknowledge any author ever taking critique. 

Yes people bitch and they need to stop that. I can agree with that. Authors shouldn't take bitching seriously. I think you're confused in respect that "authors will not take constructive criticism. there is no point to critique an artist" 

Again I gave clear examples of artists that do take critique, that means your universal is invalid.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

Fay V said:


> Now back to the "make your own thing" we're going to ignore the idea that anyone that sees a problem can make the masterpiece. I can eat a fine meal and comment on the taste, but that doesn't mean that if I think it had a bit too much salt I should just go into the kitchen and do it myself.



This was and excellent and quite funny analogy btw. 

Yes not all of us can do such a thing, but some of us can. As was proven by the creator of lackadaisy, who defied common convention of furry comics and created a comic with no sex and a deep storyline with intricate character personalities, and that comic turned out great. I'm just saying, not all of us can make a masterpiece, but for all of us who can't, rather than yell constructive criticism at the stubborn artists who don't listen, why not encourage and constructively criticize artists with boundless potential that the stubborn artists no longer possess or can express. 

Upon reflection, I guess this whole argument comes down to whether or not you saw potential in Suicide for Hire, the comic that spawned this argument. Because while I did not see potential in that comic, others may have, and that led to this whole debate. My view became that of, "why bother," and I have spent this time digging that opinion deeper despite my real effort of altering it to, "Be selective of who you criticize as your time and energy could make a difference if you criticize those with actual potential for improvement."


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

Fay V said:


> You're still looking with a pinpoint rather than broadly.



I know this will sound blunt and you will further disagree but, BROADLY furry artists are poor at accepting criticism. Only BY PINPOINT examples are furry artists ever accepting of critique. Anyway be sure to read my above post because that is my true opinion.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

Tracy J. Butler is not a furry, by the way. Also, in case the old artist doesn't listen, that doesn't mean we can't give criticism at least _once_. It's cathartic, at least, and soemone else may take that criticism into account. So, by giving criticism to the old generations, we also give general advices for the new ones.

More later.

Edit:
Uh, I wouldn't say that started that argument; it was your comment on Rukis and Rafael's respective art-styles what triggered it. We just followed along.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Tracy J. Butler is not a furry, by the way. Also, in case the old artist doesn't listen, that doesn't mean we can't give criticism at least _once_. It's cathartic, at least, and soemone else may take that criticism into account. So, by giving advixe to the old generations, we also give general advices for the new ones.
> 
> More later.



Understandable, and clearly we will never come to an agreement, but I'm just saying it is a more effective use of time to give advice to the new artists DIRECTLY rather than hope that by chance they get the advice indirectly through the critique of stubborn artists. :/



AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Tracy J. Butler is not a furry, by the way.



Just goes to show you, it takes someone who is not a furry to produce something as different and refreshing from the furry norm as Lackadaisy. Just saying actual furries have a problem with sticking to the norm too much.


----------



## Fay V (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> This was and excellent and quite funny analogy btw.
> 
> Yes not all of us can do such a thing, but some of us can. As was proven by the creator of lackadaisy, who defied common convention of furry comics and created a comic with no sex and a deep storyline with intricate character personalities, and that comic turned out great. I'm just saying, not all of us can make a masterpiece, but for all of us who can't, rather than yell constructive criticism at the stubborn artists who don't listen, why not encourage and constructively criticize the new artists with boundless potential that the old artists no longer possess.
> 
> Upon reflection, I guess this whole argument comes down to whether or not you saw potential in Suicide for Hire, the comic that spawned this argument. Because while I did not see potential in that comic, others may have, and that led to this whole debate. My view became that of, "why bother," and I have spent this time digging that opinion deeper despite my real effort of altering it to, "Be selective of who you criticize as your time and energy could make a difference if you criticize those with actual potential for improvement."



I was not aware that lackadaisy was specifically a furry comic. I thought she decided to make it anthro because she finds it easier to be expressive with that. 
That comment bothers me to be honest. There are plenty of successful sex free comics with anthro characters. Bear nuts, sandra and woo, housepets, Ozy and Millie. In the professional market, sonic and tmnt! swat cats...lots of stuff. 
You're focusing on the crap of the fandom. Crappy writers making self insert porn. It's simple and so there is a lot of it. Those that are well written and better than shit have the ability to go outside the fandom in terms of audience. Furry is mostly shit because it's just the shit that will stay purely in furry. 

Anyway yes if someone isn't listening to reason then it's best to move on and help those that might listen. It just seems odd to make it a rule to argue. "writer's don't listen so it's pointless to try" If you don't think a writer is listening then just let it go, but you shouldn't generalize and attempt to make others generalize that as well.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> Understandable, and clearly we will never come to an agreement, but I'm just saying it is a more effective use of time to give advice to the new artists DIRECTLY rather than hope that by chance they get the advice indirectly through the critique of stubborn artists. :/
> 
> 
> 
> Just goes to show you, it takes someone who is not a furry to produce something as different and refreshing from the furry norm as Lackadaisy. Just saying.



To the last, yes indeedee.

Also, how can we know who are the new ones eager to make a comic? The newer they are, the harder it will be to gain access to them, and no one (except for editorials and art dealers) is actively looking for new voices, normally they approach someone first. Usually, it's not until they gain some recognition that we'll gain sight of them (something that also happens in the real world).

Fay: Lackadaisy is not a furry comic in the sense of "made by furries for furries".


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

Fay V said:


> Anyway yes if someone isn't listening to reason then it's best to move on and help those that might listen. It just seems odd to make it a rule to argue. "writer's don't listen so it's pointless to try" If you don't think a writer is listening then just let it go, but you shouldn't generalize and attempt to make others generalize that as well.



I'm not trying to generalize this, I'm just making the general rule that IF an artist does not listen, we should not continue to try and change them, but move on and be useful to someone with potential.

I hate it when I get in an argument and I have to pretty much 180 my way to the other side when I meant to begin there in the first place.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

Sorry for posting this...
No word as of yet, Coyote?


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Also, how can we know who are the new ones eager to make a comic? The newer they are, the harder it will be to gain access to them, and no one (except for editorials and art dealers) is actively looking for new voices, normally they approach someone first.



I'm just being optimistic, but why can't *WE* put the effort into finding new talent, you don't need credentials to scour the internet for artists with talent and potential. I mean we have FA, Deviant Art, etc. We clearly have the resources to find new artists, why not take the initiative?


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Sorry for posting this...
> No word as of yet, Coyote?



I think coyote just wanted to rant and leave it up to us. I'm sure CC has moved onto other things.

*EDIT: *Or as the users bar at the bottom of the page would indicate, CC is just here to enjoy the ride. Right?


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Sorry for posting this...
> No word as of yet, Coyote?



Currently at work, on my phone, facepalming at the idiocy and insinuation that writing reviews are useless because not all artists will take them to heart. 

Will be back later to beat people with the Larger Stick of Common Sense.


----------



## Fay V (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Fay: Lackadaisy is not a furry comic in the sense of "made by furries for furries".


Yeah that's what I thought. I was never sure if she was part of the fandom or not. She does a lot of anthro work, even pre lackadaisy, but I was always under the impression that she just did an anthro comic, rather than something because furry. 



ryanleblanc said:


> I'm just being optimistic, but why can't WE put the effort into finding new talent, you don't need credentials to scour the internet for artists with talent and potential. I meant we have FA, Deviant Art, etc. We clearly have the resources to find new artists, why not take the initiative?



And what makes you think that people aren't exactly?


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Currently at work, on my phone, facepalming at the idiocy and insinuation that writing reviews are useless because not all artists will take them to heart.
> 
> Will be back later to beat people with the Larger Stick of Common Sense.



^This was not funny because we have moved past that point as of post #38. 

CC you gotta keep up ;P


----------



## DJ-Fragon (Nov 13, 2011)

I liked this review. Hit on all the points that I would have made (and, most likely, would not have written down due to laziness) regarding her comics, especially about the awkward poses.  

Her art is good, though.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

Fay V said:


> And what makes you think that people aren't exactly?



Some may be, but others are busy critiquing established artists who couldn't give less of a crap about others opinions. (This is referring broadly to the various established artists in the fandom, not to the specific artist of SFH)

This argument appears redundant as we have successfully made a 360 and are back where we started. And where we started was does Suicide for hire have potential, or are we critiquing it for no reason wasting effort that could be put towards finding new talent. :/


----------



## Fay V (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> Some may be, but others are busy critiquing established artists who couldn't give less of a crap about others opinions. (This is referring broadly to the various established artists in the fandom, not to the specific artist of SFH)
> 
> This argument appears redundant as we have successfully made a 360 and are back where we started. And where we started was does Suicide for hire have potential, or are we critiquing it for no reason wasting effort that could be put towards finding new talent. :/



Critique doesn't take that much effort. No one is writing their PhD on this. It would take an hour tops to come up with a systematic overview of a comic and lay out solid critique. One can give a critique to an established artist and still look for new blood. Honestly if you think you're being ignored move on, but it's a bad idea to try and convince others not to take time to critique something.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> does Suicide for hire have potential, or are we critiquing it for no reason wasting effort that could be put towards finding new talent. :/



I'm going to go with maybe. This particular comic cannot be saved from it's horrible plot, but the creator could possibly give it another go and create something of quality. The art is mediocre but acceptable so if the author could create a better story for there next comic, we might have something worth reading.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

Fay V said:


> Honestly if you think you're being ignored move on



Please clarify? I don't understand what context you are putting this in. As I do not feel ignored, nor do I know what I could be ignored about. I am not a fledgling artist looking for attention so I don't see how this applies.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> Please clarify? I don't understand what context you are putting this in. As I do not feel ignored, nor do I know what I could be ignored about. I am not a fledgling artist looking for attention so I don't see how this applies.



It's rhethorical, that "you" is general, despite what it may seem.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> It's rhethorical, that "you" is general, despite what it may seem.



Ahhh, thank you.


----------



## Fay V (Nov 13, 2011)

More in the context of "If you give and artist a critique and feel ignored then move one, but you shouldn't say "we need to move on because I feel ignored" make sense. People can critique if they please.


----------



## Larry (Nov 13, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> *Three)* The stories within the comics lack any real substance at all, and are completely unvaried in their plot. _In fact, it is in this reviewers opinion, that if it wasn't for the *gay sex* in these comics, they wouldn't even be that popular._


Rukis's art is something to look at. Unfortunately I'll admit, the only reason why I enjoyed Cruelty was because "Marcus and Reis are like the cutest couple evur, OH MAH GOSSSH~~<33" So I guess I was baited by the gay sex, and CC has a point. Fuck, his prediction about Red Lantern involving gay sex came true:


CoyoteCaliente said:


> Oh! Right. Umm...
> 
> There's a slave? And then... sex. Gay sex. Or there WILL be at least... And then certainly some drama about it... Because someone 'loves' someone...
> 
> ...



Do I still like Rukis as an artist? Yes. Do I still read her comics? No, because CC made me feel bad for reading it. :C


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 13, 2011)

@Fay-V Free will to all! I guess all I meant was we can use our time more effectively, but really, we have plenty of time, so what does it matter?


----------



## Deo (Nov 13, 2011)

Everything Rukis draws is some generic dog. Even when it is a dog, the bone structure is not of that specific breed, but of some generic dog thing.

Snow leopard Dog
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5064329/

Tiger Dog
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5128892/


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

Deo said:


> Everything Rukis draws is some generic dog. Even when it is a dog, the bone structure is not of that specific breed, but of some generic dog thing.
> 
> Snow leopard Dog
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5064329/
> ...



Holy crap, it's true. A tiger's muzzle isn't that long, is it?

Edit: and the shadow highlights that perfectly.


----------



## Deo (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Holy crap, it's true. A tiger's muzzle isn't that long, is it?


It is not. She does the same thing with all species, it's just more noticeable when she does cats. Like the hyenas, they look nothing like hyenas. they look like generic dogs with rounder ears and spots.


----------



## Bliss (Nov 13, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> _*gay sex* in these comics_


Where!?

PS. You are a fool. Coming here with your big posts and fancy words and paragraphs! D:<


----------



## Deo (Nov 13, 2011)

Also I was pretty peeved when she drew that two page comic of her as a storm-goddess smiting people who critiqued "her style".


----------



## Larry (Nov 13, 2011)

Deo said:


> Tiger Dog
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5128892/



HOLY SHIT I SEE IT!

Good eye you got there.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 13, 2011)

Deo said:


> Also I was pretty peeved when she drew that two page comic of her as a storm-goddess smiting people who critiqued "her style".



Which one? Just out of curiosity.


----------



## Deo (Nov 13, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Which one? Just out of curiosity.


It was two pages and was quickly BAWWWleted. Let me look around for it, Clayton might have a copy. Even after she deleted the comic she kept her avatar as a crop from it for a while there.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 13, 2011)

Deo said:


> It was two pages and was quickly BAWWWleted. Let me look around for it, Clayton might have a copy. Even after she deleted the comic she kept her avatar as a crop from it for a while there.



I should send this link to her with the message, "SMITE ME, OH MIGHTY SMITER."


----------



## Evan of Phrygia (Nov 13, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> I should send this link to her with the message, "SMITE ME, OH MIGHTY SMITER."


 (sans link) i am gonna do that


----------



## Bliss (Nov 13, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> I should send this link to her with the message, "SMITE ME, OH MIGHTY SMITER."


She does not have the power.

Does this mean you turned from constructive criticism to trolling? :V


----------



## Aden (Nov 13, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> Oh hey i actually watch that artist. Yikes. TBH I never read the comic, I just liked the picture with the armada boat thing, thought it was a Columbus tribute :/



That piece was actually the work of the vastly more talented AlectorFencer. She does all the background work for the collab comic. Not sure why she agreed to it, but eh.


----------



## Bliss (Nov 13, 2011)

Oh, look! She posted something new!


----------



## Fay V (Nov 13, 2011)

I watch her for the art. I didn't ever bother to read the comic...hmm didn't know about the shit attitude. 
Also that fire is gorgeous.


----------



## Aden (Nov 13, 2011)

Lizzie said:


> Oh, look! She posted something new!



You raised my hopes; I thought it was going to be some delicious drama-mongering
how boring



Fay V said:


> Also that fire is gorgeous.


 


Aden said:


> AlectorFencer



.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 14, 2011)

Okay, off the phone, on a computer, and now for some real responses.

But first off, Ryan, STOP USING GIANT BOLDED LETTERS FOR WHAT YOU THINK ARE "BIG IDEAS" AND QUIT YER FUGGIN' DOUBLE POSTING. Just edit your previous post for chrissakes. 

Now, it looks like over the course of three pages, Fay and AristÃ³crates (whose name I refuse to spell from memory) pretty much argued you on the idea that doing reviews for certain comics is pointless pretty damn well. 

NOW, LET ME TELL YOU WHAT. I review any comic I want to _not_ because I want the artist to see and praise my very feet and change their art style utterly. In fact, I highly doubt that _any_ comic artist I've review has given two shits about what I've had to say, much less make progress. And you know what? It's not expected! Roger Egbert I daresay doesn't expect every director, actor, or producer to go back and edit/change/fix every movie he's slammed, and he doesn't particularly care if they change their art style in the future. 

So why review?

Two very short, simple reasons. First, to inform others about the pros/cons of said movie/book/comic/etc being reviewed. 

Second, _because I damn well can._ I enjoy critiquing comics and offering a differing view point. I even take a _particular_ glee in pointing out the glaring errors and inconsistencies in the art of "popular" comics that die hard fans insist on ignoring. 

Analyzing and reviewing, in short, can be a hobby if one were so inclined.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 14, 2011)

1st: 

You're very, very, late. The debate was over ages ago. You must not have read the ending because it has already been resolved. ;D

2nd:





*SO *


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 14, 2011)

Coyote: mind explaining what you mean by "typing [my] name from memory"?

ryan: think of a better rebuttal, finish this properly.


----------



## Bliss (Nov 14, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> stuff





ryanleblanc said:


> more stuff


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 14, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> 1st:
> 
> You're very, very, late. The debate was over ages ago. You must not have read the ending because it has already been resolved. ;D



No no, I read it, but I don't care. I'm telling you why *I* review, and why the 38 posts of your arguing was utterly redundant. 



ryanleblanc said:


> 2nd:



Again no, just putting my two cents in before this thread dies into obscurity.

*edit*



AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Coyote: mind explaining what you mean by "typing [my] name from memory"?



I cannot spell your name without copying and pasting, it escapes me every time. XD



Lizzie said:


>



Goddamit Lizzie. I lol'd.


----------



## Ley (Nov 14, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> *FURRY STORIES, DUE TO FREE PUBLICATION AND "ANYONE CAN DO IT" TYPE ACCESSIBILITY, WILL MOSTLY BE SHIT, THIS IS A FACT AND WILL REMAIN A FACT UNTIL A LARGE NUMBER OF FURRY ARTISTS HIRE PROFESSIONAL NON-FURRY WRITERS TO DO THEIR STORYLINES. /ARGUMENT
> 
> 
> *Phew. *Prepares to be ripped to shreds.*



This makes me feel slightly ill.

Also- uhm, explain something to me, I get the general idea, but what does liking animal people have to do with a person's story telling capability? Maybe, your argument would make more sense that webcomics are out there because anyone can do 'em, and it's not just the furry ones?

I say this only because I enjoy doing comics here and there and I'd hope characters of years would have more depth to them, but considering I like drawing fuzzy people, it's considered bad? 

Or will you care to unleash more capslock into this?


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 14, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> ryan: think of a better rebuttal, finish this properly.



Finish what, this is all over already.

@CoyoteCaliente - You may now keep the sense of accomplishment given to you when you successfully destroy my last futile sensation of caring. :V


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 14, 2011)

Locking, then?


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 14, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> Finish what, this is all over already.



It's not over until the thread gets closed or marked for necro, and I think I'm allowed to have my say in my own thread.

And second all, something's been bugging me. Something you said about all furry comics being shit unless they are written by "professional non-furries". Speaking as someone who's currently collabbing on an anthro themed comic, allow me to extend a big *screw you*.

Not everyone wants rampant sex in their comics. Not everyone is in it for the page views or money or the fame. In fact, most artists just want to tell a good story. The good artists won't always have the best art, but they show a willingness to change and adapt.


----------



## Bliss (Nov 14, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> I think I'm allowed to have my say in my own thread.








:V


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 14, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> It's not over until the thread gets closed or marked for necro, and I think I'm allowed to have my say in my own thread.
> 
> And second all, something's been bugging me. Something you said about all furry comics being shit unless they are written by "professional non-furries". Speaking as someone who's currently collabbing on an anthro themed comic, allow me to extend a big *screw you*.
> 
> Not everyone wants rampant sex in their comics. Not everyone is in it for the page views or money or the fame. In fact, most artists just want to tell a good story. The good artists won't always have the best art, but they show a willingness to change and adapt.








:V No, but seriously, it's actually great one of us is following the "if you want it done right, do it yourself" slogan I've been preaching. Please prove me wrong and show that a furry can write a good story.


----------



## Ley (Nov 14, 2011)

I want my question answered, damn it. Enough with the bullshit image linking shit.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 14, 2011)

Hush, ryan. Yes, I'm telling you "hush", you're reading well. 
Let's just agree to disagree, okay?

Edit: you should've typed that before. If so, let it be.


----------



## Bliss (Nov 14, 2011)

Ffffff- I should have waited for a while. :C


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 14, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> Doesn't give a shit.



Jeeze you're an ass, and to be honest this is rather unexpected. Honestly, I hadn't taken you for a person who was unwilling to back up and defend your points. For a moment, I'd actually admired your tenacity for describing your reasoning and thought processes behind your previous points. 

Welp, all gone now. Guess there's nothing left to say. 

Cave Johnson, we're done here.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 14, 2011)

Ley said:


> This makes me feel slightly ill.
> 
> Also- uhm, explain something to me, I get the general idea, but what does liking animal people have to do with a person's story telling capability? Maybe, your argument would make more sense that webcomics are out there because anyone can do 'em, and it's not just the furry ones?
> 
> ...



I wonder if you could have taken the worst quote out of the argument, but anyway, to answer your question. I was not implying that furries cannot write good stories simply because they are furry. It's just usually it seems as though furry comics cannot have a good story as most furries who make comics want to include sex, and then the whole plot spirals downward from there. Case and point the creator of "Lackadaisy" is not a furry, but look at what a great story that anthropomorphic comic has!


----------



## Ley (Nov 14, 2011)

AGAIN, 

What does being a 'furry' have ANYTHING to do with a person's writing talent?! Why can't a person just be both a shit writer AND a furry? I consider myself a mediocre-at-best artist that ASPIRES do do a cute little comic thing, so I wanna know why you're BLINDLY telling me I can't do something just because I happen to draw animal head people!

Question got answered. :>

Aand I was just skimming the argument. That was the quote that was short, sweet and to the point.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 14, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Jeeze you're an ass, and to be honest this is rather unexpected. Honestly, I hadn't taken you for a person who was unwilling to back up and defend your points. For a moment, I'd actually admired your tenacity for describing your reasoning and thought processes behind your previous points.
> 
> Welp, all gone now. Guess there's nothing left to say.
> 
> Cave Johnson, we're done here.



I'm sorry I defended my points, I defended them clearly, despite all the CAPS and *bold *and underlining. If you wanted to join in on the conversation you should have joined when it was still running. We had already come to a clean and proper resolution. Why do you insist on digging it up. If you want to see my points and how I back them up, you will have to reread them. I have already come to an understanding with the opposing side if the argument so there is nothing left to add. You reiterating the same stuff does not make me inclined to start all over again.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 14, 2011)

Oh my gosh we excapes Ley-raeg by _thiiiiiiiis_ much. *holds up fingers with an infinitesimally small gap*



ryanleblanc said:


> I'm sorry I defended my points, I defended them clearly, despite all the CAPS and *bold *and underlining. If you wanted to join in on the conversation you should have joined when it was still running. We had already come to a clean and proper resolution. Why do you insist on digging it up. If you want to see my points and how I back them up, you will have to reread them. I have already come to an understanding with the opposing side if the argument so there is nothing left to add. You reiterating the same stuff does not make me inclined to start all over again.



No no, I _compliment_ you for defending your points. That's serious. I'm not being sarcastic.

And for why I wanted to dig it up, I just wanted to throw in my view. Yes, a little late, but my view is somewhat different, even if you consider it to be one in the same.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 14, 2011)

Ley said:


> Question got answered. :>



No problem! 

@CoyoteCaliente

I used to think you were an alright member. Keen to participate and all. But this raging of yours has left a sour taste in my mouth. I will probably continue to think of you as an alright member by tomorrow morning after I brush my teeth. Time heals all y'know. :/

I may have been more willing to continue the discussion with you had you not flicked the rage switch before typing. None the less, no harm done on my side, I will have forgotten it by tomorrow! Cherio!


----------



## Ley (Nov 14, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Oh my gosh we excapes Ley-raeg by _thiiiiiiiis_ much. *holds up fingers with an infinitesimally small gap*



I doubt me raging is ever that biggahdeal.


----------



## Ley (Nov 14, 2011)

ryanleblanc said:


> No problem!



Thanks, didn't feel like picking apart a battle on a forum tonight. :> I don't like dragging shit longer than it needs to.


----------



## Fay V (Nov 14, 2011)

What the hell. Guys cut out that terrible macro shit. If you wanna be a douchebag use your words. For having the RULES in giant letters in a sig apparently you all forgot that one. 
Cut it out


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 14, 2011)

Ley said:


> I doubt me raging is ever that biggahdeal.



No, maybe not. But there _may_ be a day, when you just suddenly EXPLODE, and all of FAF cowers under a computer desk as a nuclear cloud rises up from the South Texas landscape. :V



Ley said:


> Thanks, didn't feel like picking apart a battle on a forum tonight. :> I don't like dragging shit longer than it needs to.



And probably something I need to emulate. 

Ryan, I'm honestly not trying to start shit. I really just wanted to throw in my two-cents so it didn't seem like I was making a thread and running. Yanno? Yeah there was some things that annoyed me and that I had to point out, but whatevs~ It's small shit I guess and I'm just tired and cranky from work and I need a nap but got to write a paper and blah blah blah. 

So yeah, so, like whatever. No biggie and sorry if I made it a biggie.



AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> This is... one of the most curious threads in which I've participated and I still don't know why.



It... it was a strange thread that somehow stayed relevant at the same time. 

And did I just quote your post ABOVE your own post? Why yes. Yes I did. :V


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 14, 2011)

This is... one of the most curious threads in which I've participated and I still don't know why.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 14, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> And for why I wanted to dig it up, I just wanted to throw in my view. Yes, a little late, but my view is somewhat different, even if you consider it to be one in the same.



TBH I would have accepted and discussed your view had you submitted it a little less "_loudly_".


----------



## Bliss (Nov 14, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> No, maybe not. But there _may_ be a day, when you just suddenly EXPLODE, and all of FAF cowers under a computer desk as a nuclear cloud rises up from the South Texas landscape. :V


I don't think I'm going to feel it unless it's, like, Tsar Bomba or something. :V


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 14, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Ryan, I'm honestly not trying to start shit. I really just wanted to throw in my two-cents so it didn't seem like I was making a thread and running. Yanno? Yeah there was some things that annoyed me and that I had to point out, but whatevs~ It's small shit I guess and I'm just tired and cranky from work and I need a nap but got to write a paper and blah blah blah.
> 
> So yeah, so, like whatever. No biggie and sorry if I made it a biggie.



I said it before and I'll say it again! No harm done.  Everyone needs to release pent up stress and humans have a funny way of releasing it on the smallest of things, I do it all the time. Anyway, I don't think I'll even have to wait till morning, you have regained my respect, and I sincerely hope you don't suddenly despise me. All hope is not lost, although I do have work I should be doing and this has distracted me. I should probably get back to that, I'm a terrible procrastinator.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 14, 2011)

Yeah so... umm... anyhow. 

Rukis's art is kinda wonky when you really look at it, and apparently she has a bit of an attitude when you point it out.

Critiquing comics is not always about changing the artist's mind. 

Not all furry comics suck, 'cause not ever one is fixiated on sex. 

Umm.... 

Yeah. :V


----------



## ryanleblanc (Nov 14, 2011)

^ /Thread


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 14, 2011)

Did.. y'all just argue about Rukis's artwork for 5 straight pages?


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 14, 2011)

Ak-Nolij said:


> Did.. y'all just argue about Rukis's artwork for 5 straight pages?



Nope. The argument never really touched her art again aside from a few posts here and there.


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 14, 2011)

I saw this shit pop-up last night and didn't bother to contribute to beating this dead horse. But five pages of all this brainfuckery just told me that I just now HAVE to say something, no matter how fucking late it is.

[EDIT-BITCHES]

Allow me to reiterate something. 

Rukis is a terrible comic author. She always has been, and only she can work that out. I use the word 'author' and not 'artist' because she falls short of both elements that makes the medium. The goal for everyone involved in comics is to tell a story. Story. Comes. First. But also, entertain the fucking audience in the process. Sure, I'll say she entertained you miserable furries with gay sex, so atleast she got one thing right. 

However, that doesn't exclude her faults. She paints detailed things, whoop-de-fucking-do. She paints sexy furries, whoop-de-fucking-do. Too bad none of that translates into a decent comic. Remember when I said story comes first? It still applies for the visual element. That means knowing how to compose a shot, light the scene, act out your character, make the entire page flow without a problem, etc., etc. There is a FUCKTON of things to keep in mind when making comics. Each panel has to visually contribute to telling the story.

See me, I trained myself with animation in mind. That means body language is what entertains the audience. It's the stuff of visual storytelling through characters, anatomy doesn't have to apply here. Do I know how to draw somebody pulling a rope? Do I know how to draw a surfer surfing? Do I know how to draw a clown slipping on a banana peel? Sure, why not. Does Rukis? If she can't reiterate any of those cases with only a few pencil scribbles, then gentlemen, we have ourselves a fucking problem.

If she'd taken the time to train herself with Scott McCloud's exercises in his book or even study Marcos's methods to composing the right shot in Framed Ink, we wouldn't be having this discussion. If she would've researched screenwriting and pitching a story, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I'm gonna assume ryanlefuck represents Rukis's rabid fanbase, so I'll make this brief. 



ryanleblanc said:


> *FURRY STORIES, DUE TO FREE PUBLICATION AND "ANYONE CAN DO IT" TYPE ACCESSIBILITY, WILL MOSTLY BE SHIT, THIS IS A FACT AND WILL REMAIN A FACT UNTIL A LARGE NUMBER OF FURRY ARTISTS HIRE PROFESSIONAL NON-FURRY WRITERS TO DO THEIR STORYLINES. /ARGUMENT
> 
> 
> *Phew. *Prepares to be ripped to shreds.*



Shut up. Shut up. Shut the goddamn up. You. ALL of you, stop using this fucking sad excuse for an argument to apply to furry related SHIT. It's not about anyone can do it, it's about do you take this seriously enough to contribute YOUR FUCKING TIME to painstakingly piece together a myriad of comic pages with the hope of telling a meaningful story. That means taking some fucking initiative to learn your trade, either as a penciler, a writer, an inker, a colorer, hell, EVEN AS A FUCKING LETTERER if that interests you enough. The problem, is that the majority of all these wannabe comic fucks decide to fly before they're ready. Meaning, they're fucking lazy. Rukis, is fucking lazy. Ergo, because they're fucking lazy, they enjoy Rukis being fucking lazy. She relies on sex as a crutch. She relies on details as a crutch.

Call me mad all you want, I can shit better comics than her, all day, everyday.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 14, 2011)

^ Daaaaaamn.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 14, 2011)

Now that this has been revived, here's what Deo meant about Ruki's hyenas not looking like hyenas: really, this is a hyena?


----------



## Fay V (Nov 14, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Now that this has been revived, here's what Deo meant about Ruki's hyenas not looking like hyenas: really, this is a hyena?



I started out like "yeah I can see th-nope...spotted doggy" 

The comic page made me sad, where's the action when she stands up to him face to face? it's just stand...head head, stand. I can see why everyone is complaining about expression. Is the guy supposed to be worried when she's glaring at him?


----------



## DJ-Fragon (Nov 14, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Now that this has been revived, here's what Deo meant about Ruki's hyenas not looking like hyenas: really, this is a hyena?



If you look at the hyena-dog on the upper-right panel...

DAT.NOSE


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 14, 2011)

Also, the tiger's muzzle is both too long and too horizontal. Normal tigers barely even a slope in their muzzles

EDIT: Also, references for hyenas. Even the ears look like a generic wolf/dog's.


----------



## Deo (Nov 14, 2011)

I always hear that Rukis's anatomy is *awesome*. But it isn't. That's the problem. For instance, I finally figured out what species the character Amon is supposed to be, only took 38 pages until some other character calls him a jackal. Only the problem is that Amon's coat color and markings are not of a side-striped jackal, nor a golden jackal, nor a black-backed jackal. And not only is his color distinctly non-jackal-like, the anatomy is blown. Jackals have very pointy muzzles and generally flat heads, a distinctive wedge shape. However, Amon the jackal has the headshape of a generic dog. There's a pronounced stop on the muzzle, a large lower jaw, the muzzle itself is long and too thick. In short, he looks nothing like a jackal. It's the exact same headshape she gives to *every *single somewhat doglike character, hyenas included.






Oh and tigers.






Blurring equals motion, right guys? (upper right panel)
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/6142740/

I think another thing I detest about the comic is the great lengths she  goes to avoid drawing the whole body. (The excessive heads only panels).  I can see why, because when she does she often has it misproportioned.  Just look at these big-body-little-head pages:
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5835633/
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/5916627 (the middle right panel, you know, the only panel on this page not meant as fan-service).


----------



## Deo (Nov 14, 2011)

hurrr


----------



## Deo (Nov 14, 2011)

derp derp doubles holy fuck shoot me it's triples. sorry all.


----------



## Vella C Raptor (Nov 14, 2011)

Oh man those pages.
Those characters need some expression too. I mean animals do have limited facial expression compared to a human, but they ARE anthro so they could do with a bit more human influence. Like that page with the flowers...I assume the tigerdog thing is supposed to be wincing? but it looks like it's happy winking. o_o


----------



## Tiger In A Tie (Nov 14, 2011)

Vella C Raptor said:


> Oh man those pages.
> Those characters need some expression too. I mean animals do have *limited facial expression* compared to a human, but they ARE anthro so they could do with a bit more human influence. Like that page with the flowers...I assume the tigerdog thing is supposed to be wincing? but it looks like it's happy winking. o_o



I have to disagree there. Animal faces can be VERY expressive. There's the shape of eyes, the detail of the eyes, where they're looking, the slant/size/ height of the eyebrows, their muzzles are excellent for angry faces, they can have nice smiles, they can look cunning, tears could show crying, eyelids can show exhaustion, etc.

So from my experience, animals can be just as expressive (if not more so) than humans.


----------



## Vella C Raptor (Nov 14, 2011)

Tiger In A Tie said:


> I have to disagree there. Animal faces can be VERY expressive. There's the shape of eyes, the detail of the eyes, where they're looking, the slant/size/ height of the eyebrows, their muzzles are excellent for angry faces, they can have nice smiles, they can look cunning, tears could show crying, eyelids can show exhaustion, etc.
> 
> So from my experience, animals can be just as expressive (if no more so) than humans.



They can be, though they don't share the emotional range of humans, so when drawing their faces and trying to express something to an audience you have to apply human emotions to an animal face that still makes it look natural. You can manipulate animal faces to do this well, but the artist in this comic isn't doing it. xD


----------



## Tiger In A Tie (Nov 14, 2011)

Vella C Raptor said:


> They can be, though they don't share the emotional range of humans, so when drawing their faces and trying to express something to an audience you have to apply human emotions to an animal face that still makes it look natural. You can manipulate animal faces to do this well, but the artist in this comic isn't doing it. xD



That's when different styles come in. It may be difficult to take a real animal and make a human-like expression on it, but with "cartoon" animal styles, they can be very, very animated (both figuratively and literally!).


----------



## Vella C Raptor (Nov 14, 2011)

Tiger In A Tie said:


> That's when different styles come in. It may be difficult to take a real animal and make a human-like expression on it, but with "cartoon" animal styles, they can be very, very animated (both figuratively and literally!).



Very true! xD


----------



## Aden (Nov 14, 2011)

Ak-Nolij said:


> Shut up. Shut up. Shut the goddamn up. You. ALL of you, stop using this fucking sad excuse for an argument to apply to furry related SHIT.



You. I like you.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 14, 2011)

Aden said:


> You. I like you.



His raeg is admirable.


----------



## DarrylWolf (Nov 15, 2011)

I guess you could say that when comparing Furry comics, making the characters have sex just proves that you are shallow-minded and perverted to have to titillate the readers with a bunch of bedroom scenes. I could understand why people have such mixed reactions to "Cruelty"- the gay sex was unnecessary but it did move copies of that book. When it comes to sex scenes, perhaps maybe comic writers should "tell, don't show" or just not mention sex at all but how would they make any profit without taking advantage of the Fur-verts? So that must mean writers like Tiffany Ross ("Akaelae") get a free pass on things like plot or art style because their stories are non-sexual, though not without sexual tension.

Also, if I remember correctly, there were some Furry stories that had truly interesting plots- or maybe "Thousand Leaves" and "The Seventh Chakra" are benefitting more from nostalgia than anything else. I wonder if the same argument could be made for conbadges being boring- though there would be nothing like them in the world.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 15, 2011)

my biggest pet peeve about her art is the no-eyebrows and constant-backwards-ears

Dogs do not hold their ears back all the time. Their ears are one of their only ways of communicating, to pin the ears back is akin to putting duct-tape over a humans mouth

EDIT: couldnt have said it better than Deo.
brb for a bit guys, im gonna conjure up examples of dog expressions vs Rukis expressions.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 15, 2011)

Here we go

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/7379/rukis.png


EDIT: Look at Lackadaisy.
http://www.lackadaisycats.com/gallery/1316568447.jpg
Emotion is portrayed very well through the cats faces, ears, tails and *eyebrows* throughout the whole comic. The artist of Lackadaisy understands cat body language.
I once asked Rukis why she doesn't draw eyebrows on her characters and her reply [which I forget] was quite unsatisfactory, IIRC.
Anyways, in before someone says "maybe she doesn't want to draw eyebrows on her realistic animal characters!"... look at this image.
http://www.lackadaisycats.com/gallery/1279608742.jpg
Her characters do not have pasted-on eyebrows [like my manly-ass eyebrows on Clayton]. Their eyebrows are actually their fur markings in the shape of eyebrows! Take away the eyebrows and the comic looks uncanny valley as shit. I wish Rukis would catch on to this.

Then again I don't read her comics either way so whatever.

EDIT #2 [reading back in thread..]


Deo said:


> It was two pages and was quickly BAWWWleted. Let me look around for it, Clayton might have a copy. Even after she deleted the comic she kept her avatar as a crop from it for a while there.


 OHHH
No, that was silverone. its okay though, i confuse the two a lot though too
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/3830985/

EDIT: After I sleep, I may try my hand at portraying emotion with the comic characters so I can avoid the inevitable "I'D LIKE TO SEE YOU DO BETTER" someone will eventually post in this thread.
and I can guarantee I can portray anger better than the sad excuses in my examples. And if I can't, then I will cut out one of my balls


----------



## Yoshiya (Nov 15, 2011)

I DON'T LIKE A THING ON THE INTERNET

...get a LiveJournal, dude.


----------



## Aden (Nov 15, 2011)

Clayton said:


> No, that was silverone. its okay though, i confuse the two a lot though too
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/3830985/



So how 'bout that size limit workaround


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 15, 2011)

Clayton said:


> eyebrows and emotion



I cannot THIS this enough. Hell, I've seen stick figure comics more entertaining than a good amount of comics because they can portray simple and _interesting_ emotions and reaction. 



Yoshiya said:


> I DON'T LIKE A THING ON THE INTERNET
> 
> ...get a LiveJournal, dude.



... who are you?


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 15, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> ... who are you?



Someone who doesn't understand the meaning of "Rant", "Discussion" and "Criticism" :V

Seriously, though, answering with a "who are you?" sounds kind of... wait, he/she wasn't in this debate to begin with.
Edit: That meaning, his irruption is too random.


----------



## Fay V (Nov 15, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Here we go
> 
> http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/7379/rukis.png
> 
> ...



the funny thing is, even my dog has eyebrows, the fur is the same color but it patterns into a swirl where the eyebrows should be so you can clearly get emotive expression from him. 

Also this might help. http://tracyjb.deviantart.com/gallery/#/d37hme5


----------



## rukis (Nov 15, 2011)

Just wanted to pop in and say thank you!  Your 'critique' here has spiked my watchers tremendously today, and gotten a lot more people reading Red Lantern, if my favs list is any indication.  I appreciate it!


----------



## Antonin Scalia (Nov 15, 2011)

rukis said:


> Just wanted to pop in and say thank you!  Your 'critique' here has spiked my watchers tremendously today, and gotten a lot more people reading Red Lantern, if my favs list is any indication.  I appreciate it!



wowzers


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 15, 2011)

rukis said:


> Just wanted to pop in and say thank you!  Your 'critique' here has spiked my watchers tremendously today, and gotten a lot more people reading Red Lantern, if my favs list is any indication.  I appreciate it!


Are you going to listen to any of the critique? Or are you going to stay passive-aggressive about it


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 15, 2011)

rukis said:


> Just wanted to pop in and say thank you!  Your 'critique' here has spiked my watchers tremendously today, and gotten a lot more people reading Red Lantern, if my favs list is any indication.  I appreciate it!


 
Cocaine is a helluva drug.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 15, 2011)

Fay V said:


> the funny thing is, even my dog has eyebrows, the fur is the same color but it patterns into a swirl where the eyebrows should be so you can clearly get emotive expression from him.
> 
> Also this might help. http://tracyjb.deviantart.com/gallery/#/d37hme5


Yep I know exactly what things you're talking about. I believe it's easier to say "this dog is focusing" when referring to RL dogs because they are a 3-D object, and we can concentrate on little things like their brow furrowing, their ears forward, the whites of their eyes, their mouth scrunched up.
Think "Border Collie" http://www.dreamstime.com/border-collie-focus-thumb9608069.jpg

and then we can say "this dog is sad" when referring to a RL dog because we can see their head way down low below their shoulders, we can see the whites of their eyes and see them avoiding eye contact [humans do this too, same with cats], we can see their "eyebrows" pointing up like <:[ "Y ME"
It doesn't carry through too art too well if you are trying to draw these "dog-brows" instead of real human-like eyebrows.
These are some dogs that we can see the emotion/mood they are showing simply because of the way their mouths, ears and eyes are.

This dog looks like he's focusing on a ball you're about to throw: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/Aidi.jpg
This dog looks like he's focusing on a treat: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped.../553px-American_Pit_Bull_Terrier_-_Seated.jpg
This dog looks curious: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ac/Brandlbracke.JPG/464px-Brandlbracke.JPG
This dog looks unsure, like he doesn't know if he wants another dog to come close: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Buldogue_Campeiro.jpg
This dog looks like he's focusing on playing with a bug or a toy: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...rt_of.jpg/800px-Paying_attention,_sort_of.jpg
This dog sees something way off in the distance: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Braque_du_Bourbonnais.jpg
This dog looks casual, like he's just chillin after playing with a toy: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Gera062005sed.jpg/450px-Gera062005sed.jpg
Even dogs with wrinkly faces can look sad: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/__m8hIho0jnw/SrdhbMNgvcI/AAAAAAAADnQ/-8bCti53WtA/s400/bulldog.jpg
Or happy: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...bórz_2007_082.jpg/800px-Racibórz_2007_082.jpg

Say whaaat
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2a/Dogo1.jpg/450px-Dogo1.jpg


----------



## rukis (Nov 15, 2011)

When your opinions are backed by your own art, or a comic, I will listen to you.  I have a nice big ol' circle of artistic contacts, who actually DO this for a living.  Swapping secrets, trading techniques and critiquing one another's work is how a professional improves.  Not by listening to internet rants.  I like the way I draw, I like the way I write, and apparently, so do a lot of other people.  Why should I change that for you? 

Oh, and I really *did* get a huge boost in watchers today   So. . . rant on.


----------



## Azure (Nov 15, 2011)

A man who takes a shit in the street gets lots of watchers, too.

Does that make him awesome?


----------



## Larry (Nov 15, 2011)

This thread is getting interesting.

$10 bucks says it isn't her.


----------



## DJ-Fragon (Nov 15, 2011)

rukis said:


> Just wanted to pop in and say thank you!  Your 'critique' here has spiked my watchers tremendously today, and gotten a lot more people reading Red Lantern, if my favs list is any indication.  I appreciate it!



Rukis, if that is you and not some troll posing as you, please don't be so arrogant. Many of the points made by CC and some others in this thread regarding your comics are actually good ones, especially the critiques regarding your characters' lack of facial expressions as well as the awkward anatomy. If you take in the critiques and use them to improve the flaws in your comics, then that's fine. If you don't agree with the points made by CC and others, or feel that they are unfair, then that's also fine as long as you don't write posts like the one you made above. You don't have to listen to the critiques made by the folks in this thread. Nobody is forcing you to improve your comics.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Nov 15, 2011)

rukis said:


> When your opinions are backed by your own art, or a comic, I will listen to you.  I have a nice big ol' circle of artistic contacts, who actually DO this for a living.  Swapping secrets, trading techniques and critiquing one another's work is how a professional improves.  Not by listening to internet rants.  I like the way I draw, I like the way I write, and apparently, so do a lot of other people.  Why should I change that for you?
> 
> Oh, and I really *did* get a huge boost in watchers today   So. . . rant on.



I guess if you never want to improve then go right ahead and never change your art style and act like a stuck up douche bag with a holier than thou personality. Honestly that post makes me not even want to watch you anymore. You lost my respect. Not only as an artist but as a person.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 15, 2011)

rukis said:


> When your opinions are backed by your own art, or a comic, I will listen to you.  I have a nice big ol' circle of artistic contacts, who actually DO this for a living.  Swapping secrets, trading techniques and critiquing one another's work is how a professional improves.  Not by listening to internet rants.  I like the way I draw, I like the way I write, and apparently, so do a lot of other people.  Why should I change that for you?
> 
> Oh, and I really *did* get a huge boost in watchers today   So. . . rant on.


My "opinions" will be backed by my own art. I am going to draw realistic emotions on dogs.
All we are doing is offering you helpful critique and you're acting like a condescending little bitch. It's not gonna look good or turn out good when your fans see this shit.

Anybody who claims they do this shit and calls themselves a "professional" is not a professional, because a professional strives to improve and tries new things when offered critique. You're just being a snotty little girl, drawing on a chalk board.



Larry said:


> This thread is getting interesting.
> 
> $10 bucks says it isn't her.


 I hope it is, maybe acting like this will be a big slap in the face


----------



## Fay V (Nov 15, 2011)

What a terrible attitude. 

Having watchers is nice, and I don't really think anyone believes you deserve no watchers, but a "good enough" attitude is poison. All critique good and bad should be taken with a grain of salt. Friends will not rip you apart, and strangers can be needlessly harsh. It's important to find a middle ground. 
It's not a good idea to just say "well you can't do better so I don't have to listen." I referenced cooking in terms of this. A customer in a restaurant may not be able to cook a fine meal, but they can certainly tell that something is undercooked or overseasoned and if a cook says "well they don't know, so fuck those guys" then their business stagnates. 
You don't need to talk all internet criticisms seriously, but there were a lot of excellent points brought up, particularly about expression and the use of eyebrows. Incorporating markings and furry patterns to make an eyebrow appearance could solve this issue and give a lot more readership than you're getting now. 
Why settle for 100 fans when you could have 1000


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 15, 2011)

So you came all the way here just to say you've got buckets of contempt for whatever we've got to say?
*Sigh* Fay already brought her example back, so I haven't anything else to say other than your attitude won't bring any kind of progress. "Agreeing with all you do" is not real criticism, just so you know.


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 15, 2011)

inb4 said artist makes a journal about this thread. :V

I've read it. At most, the scenery is pretty decent, but the character design is...ehh..."off" to say in the least. To me, it reads out as a project between an ABC and HBO sitcom with a dash of some dry CW repetitive content. In all retrospect, it's a pretty comic. That's all it is artwise....a pretty comic. The story's bland and need some work...more than just going back and forth in and out of a port-brothel.





Ak-Nolij said:


> I saw this shit pop-up last night and didn't bother to contribute to beating this dead horse. But five pages of all this brainfuckery just told me that I just now HAVE to say something, no matter how fucking late it is.
> 
> [EDIT-BITCHES]
> 
> ...




I love you sir. ;3

Also to note, Alector Fencer does the scenery backgrounds. Rukis does the characters and story.




Fay V said:


> more relevant stuff



In order to cater a massive audience, you need to water everything else down and cater to just one main ingredient...in this case, it is sex. You get more fans if you cater to the most popular thing in the fandom. Story be damned.


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 15, 2011)

rukis said:


> When your opinions are backed by your own art, or a comic, I will listen to you.



'sup chick

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/6862374/


----------



## Ley (Nov 15, 2011)

Ak-Nolij said:


> 'sup chick
> 
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/6862374/



:O aaay~


----------



## Fay V (Nov 15, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> In order to cater a massive audience, you need to water everything else down and cater to just one main ingredient...in this case, it is sex. You get more fans if you cater to the most popular thing in the fandom. Story be damned.


Eh yeah I can agree with that in the short term anyway. I mentioned earlier that I think there are a lot of anthro works that are in the mainstream, and can be mainstream because it goes for what is common for a broader audience, rather than turning to sex. So using our tired old friend Lackadaisy. It is very anthro centric, it's obviously popular in the fandom, but it is also popular outside the fandom because it focuses on characters. Honestly a lot of it is just the characters and atmosphere, the delays between pages are so long that I don't believe plot is what is getting people. 
Now one of the big reasons that Tracy B is being brought up is to address emotion. Body language and facial expression are so important to people that it's difficult to have a likeable character in a visible media without it. 

I think sex makes people easily popular within the fandom. I don't think sex is an instant poison so it makes all stories bad. I think many people just sell out for the quick cash with sex but keep themselves from that broad audience later on.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 15, 2011)

Larry said:


> This thread is getting interesting.
> 
> $10 bucks says it isn't her.



I raise your bet to 15 dollars.

And oh, 'rukis', I sent you a message on FA. So I'll be finding out _real_ quick who is who, and who's being an immature whiteknighter.


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 15, 2011)

Fay V said:


> I think sex makes people easily popular within the fandom. I don't think sex is an instant poison so it makes all stories bad. I think many people just sell out for the quick cash with sex but keep themselves from that broad audience later on.




Too easy it seems. But if you want to please everyone, select something that others will "get off" on.

With the sex, it depends. There's the steamy bits along with a decent arc that keeps a reader hooked and then there's just a comic that only show sex with a bland arc. It's not always bad, but it depends on how the storyteller portrays it.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Nov 15, 2011)

Gonna go with it is them cause I left a shout on their page and its now removed.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 15, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Too easy it seems. But if you want to please everyone, select something that others will "get off" on.
> 
> With the sex, it depends. There's the steamy bits along with a decent arc that keeps a reader hooked and then there's just a comic that only show sex with a bland arc. It's not always bad, but it depends on how the storyteller portrays it.



I wanted to believe _Red Lantern_ merely existed as a story, sex and all, and wasn't just around to make money or popularity. 

But oh, wait: http://www.rukiscroax.com/redlantern/RL-page-39-40censored.htm


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 15, 2011)

I am already workin on dog expressions, but alas...
my addiction will not feed itself, so I will be back soon.. and then I will continue dog expressions

EDIT: Will someone please tell me what the plot to Red Lantern is? Cause AFAIK it's just "oh these guys are in a whore house"


----------



## Fay V (Nov 15, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Too easy it seems. But if you want to please everyone, select something that others will "get off" on.
> 
> With the sex, it depends. There's the steamy bits along with a decent arc that keeps a reader hooked and then there's just a comic that only show sex with a bland arc. It's not always bad, but it depends on how the storyteller portrays it.



If we're talking sex in terms of romantic or sexual tension, then I 100% agree. I think that goes a long way to keeping people's interest in a story and it does a lot depending on how it is handled. Relationships are interesting and that tension builds till something snaps. It's the porn comics that bother me, sex scenes where the plot exists only to string scenes together. 
I think relationship tension (whether it ends in sex or not) is a ticket to a popular work, and can be used for a general audience. 
I think sex scenes are a gimmick specifically to get the attention of those particular fetishists.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 15, 2011)

Fay V said:


> If we're talking sex in terms of romantic or sexual tension, then I 100% agree. I think that goes a long way to keeping people's interest in a story and it does a lot depending on how it is handled.



Exactly, it also adds a layer of realism to the relationship, considering none is completely devoid of a "lustful" component.
Personally, I don't like stories that end when the sex happens. Sex, in my opinion, is not a culminating point, just another proof of affection (in the context of a romantic relationship), and it makes one feel like the point was getting to the sex, inspite of the previous build-up (but hey, at least they bothered with a build-up).

Edit: you know, I've always been interested in the way chemistry works. So far, I haven't seen a relationship in a book that actually stayed with me. But that probably has more to do with the material I choose.


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 15, 2011)

Fay V said:


> If we're talking sex in terms of romantic or sexual tension, then I 100% agree. I think that goes a long way to keeping people's interest in a story and it does a lot depending on how it is handled. Relationships are interesting and that tension builds till something snaps. It's the porn comics that bother me, sex scenes where the plot exists only to string scenes together.
> I think relationship tension (whether it ends in sex or not) is a ticket to a popular work, and can be used for a general audience.
> I think sex scenes are a gimmick specifically to get the attention of those particular fetishists.




I agree. It's like icing on a cinnamon bun. A little generously spread here and there is good, but too much of it can make your teeth hurt. 

For me, I like tension that builds a relationship later...not automatically "jump into the bedsheets and roll around" type...but tension that comes with mutual dislike, toleration, like, then romance at the end of the road. Mind you, all of it doesn't happen in a span of a month. It may take time depending on the character's personallity.


----------



## Smelge (Nov 15, 2011)

Well, if we're talking about how making a story with sex is fine, but making sex with a little intersecting plot, then look no further than the Anita Blake series.

It starts out relatively good, interesting and so on, and manages to do so for a good few books. Then suddenly story starts getting shoved to the side to throw in more sex scenes. By the time you hit the later books, the sex scenes are literally happening every other page. You get through one scene, think "hooray! plot!" get a page of her driving somewhere, then another sex scene. It gets so bad that you forget what the fucking story was about, because there is so little of it. I think I counted about 30 pages of a 550 page with story. The rest was just Anita Blake fucking everything that moves.

That series is a good example. Story with occasional adult stuff is ok, it's not the defining feature. Adult with a tiny plot to link dickings is just plain bad.


----------



## Fay V (Nov 15, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> I agree. It's like icing on a cinnamon bun. A little generously spread here and there is good, but too much of it can make your teeth hurt.
> 
> For me, I like tension that builds a relationship later...not automatically "jump into the bedsheets and roll around" type...but tension that comes with mutual dislike, toleration, like, then romance at the end of the road. Mind you, all of it doesn't happen in a span of a month. It may take time depending on the character's personallity.



Yeah I get what you mean. Basically like Bones, or House. But that's the thing, at that point it isn't really a gimmick or a quick sell, relationship tension is a legitimate tool in writing and needs to be done correctly. Having sex in a story is not bad, it's just a good story doesn't require it. You can skip the sex scene and fade to black and the story is still interesting. That is the way to get a general audience to get into the story. 
In the real sell out, the story can't live without the sex. People just want fap material, so if you skip the scenes and fade to black then you've got nothing.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 15, 2011)

An awesome comic maker is Pac. Her comic "Calling" is about two gay dudes but.. GASP. There hasn't been any real sex!! Probably because Pac knows she can keep people viewing solely on the way she portrays scenes, story and characters.
"two guys - one reaching the pinnacle of his success in the music industry, the other just trying to do right by his family - living two lives. however, a game of phone tag is about to change all of it.. "

Another awesome comic maker is Vivisection Bob whose comic is basically about a bunch of teenagers growing up, experimenting in drugs, pregnancy, etc.
There are some sex scenes, but again.. Vivisection Bob doesn't need to rely on those [they aren't graphic at all, maybe just a boob or something] to keep her viewers reading because she builds such strong storylines up and portrays tons of emotion in each reaction. I have actually seen people get into massive fights about the characters in the submission comics, that's how dynamic her characters are to her fans.

Then there's HyenaKay who doesn't draw comics, but instead draws some really rad Hyenas. I'm mentioning HyenaKay because people were critiquing Rukis's hyenas and this user draws em perfectly.
Should check all these artists out, you won't be disappointed.


----------



## Antonin Scalia (Nov 15, 2011)

Clayton said:


> stuff



Nice post {for reals}

edit: now my entire evening is going to be sidetracked


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 15, 2011)

Fay V said:


> Yeah I get what you mean. Basically like Bones, or House. But that's the thing, at that point it isn't really a gimmick or a quick sell, relationship tension is a legitimate tool in writing and needs to be done correctly. Having sex in a story is not bad, it's just a good story doesn't require it. You can skip the sex scene and fade to black and the story is still interesting. That is the way to get a general audience to get into the story.
> In the real sell out, the story can't live without the sex. People just want fap material, so if you skip the scenes and fade to black then you've got nothing.



Since we've settled on an agreement, let's talk CINNAMON BUNS!


----------



## Fay V (Nov 15, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Since we've settled on an agreement, let's talk CINNAMON BUNS!


cinnamon buns are delicious! That is all! (read in the voice of Morbo) 

Honestly I think characterization is everyone's fatal flaw in writing. There's a balance between drawing things out slowly and jumping the gun. I think many people make the mistake with comics, it's not quite like movies and other visual stuff, but it's not quite like writing either, but you need a knowledge of both and how to blend them. That is hard and too many people jump the gun trying to be interesting and get those awesome scenes out.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 15, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Since we've settled on an agreement, let's talk CINNAMON BUNS!



I like them because I love sweets in general. They're also quite cheap in my college. I also prefer to eat them with forks and knives.
Anyway... is there anything left to do with this thread? I think Coyote's response on whether that was the real Rukis or not is the only thing... for now. 
Really, so many threads that have survived these days... weird.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 15, 2011)

Haha okay. So that really is Rukis jumping me up there. In fact, in regards to a comment I left on her comic page, I received this response from the artist herself.

_"Something clearly kept you reading until page 59. Generally when I dislike a comic, I figure it out within the first few pages. If you really stuck it out all this time just to write a scathing review and inflate your crumbling self esteem, that's sad. If you kept reading for any other reason. . . odds are, something interested you.

But I'm used to my shit being a target for folks who need to tear something apart to feel better about themselves, so hey. . . whatever keeps the razor blade at bay. All the fucks I give are listed below."__Rukis

So okay, all respect for this artist has been lost for me.


----------



## Fay V (Nov 15, 2011)

I wanted to believe it was a troll


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 15, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> _"Something clearly kept you reading until page 59. Generally when I dislike a comic, I figure it out within the first few pages. If you really stuck it out all this time just to write a scathing review and inflate your crumbling self esteem, that's sad. If you kept reading for any other reason. . . odds are, something interested you.
> 
> But I'm used to my shit being a target for folks who need to tear something apart to feel better about themselves, so hey. . . whatever keeps the razor blade at bay. All the fucks I give are listed below."__Rukis



I've finally been exposed to the so-called self-absorbed artists from the fandom. What an inmature gal... I can't wait until  ryan sees this.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 15, 2011)

Here are three faces I drew out real quick.
They are all the exact same dog head base, but there are small changes to each one that end up in an entirely different mood.

http://i44.tinypic.com/2r53v2d.png
I'm working on more, going to go into different breeds, too. Making this not just for this thread, but for practice and FA as well.


The first and 3rd head are the exact same head with only *one change* and the mood/emotion is different. I believe a lot of it is contributed to the eyebrows. His eyebrows look "psh, whatever" to me.
If I were to take the eyebrows down and relaxed in those, the emotions may change to Relaxed and Happy/Grinning. You can't fucking make those expressions believable on a character with no goddamn eyebrows.



CoyoteCaliente said:


> Haha okay. So that really is Rukis jumping me up there. In fact, in regards to a comment I left on her comic page, I received this response from the artist herself.
> 
> _"Something clearly kept you reading until page 59. Generally when I dislike a comic, I figure it out within the first few pages. If you really stuck it out all this time just to write a scathing review and inflate your crumbling self esteem, that's sad. If you kept reading for any other reason. . . odds are, something interested you.
> 
> ...



Ehh I dunno, that doesn't really say "yes, that was me posting in the thread"


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 15, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Here are three faces I drew out real quick.
> They are all the exact same dog head base, but there are small changes to each one that end up in an entirely different mood.
> 
> http://i44.tinypic.com/2r53v2d.png
> ...



I noticed Clayton, great job and great example *Thumbs up*.

Also, that doesn't change the fact that response was contemptuous as well.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 15, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Ehh I dunno, that doesn't really say "yes, that was me posting in the thread"



Same voice and condescending tone to me. Also, I informed her on her shouts page that she had someone here in the forum using her name. Either it's her or she doesn't care, because she deleted said shout without a response.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 15, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> I noticed Clayton, great job and great example *Thumbs up*.
> 
> Also, that doesn't change the fact that response was contemptuous as well.


Thank you  



CoyoteCaliente said:


> Same voice and condescending tone to me. Also, I informed her on her shouts page that she had someone here in the forum using her name. Either it's her or she doesn't care, because she deleted said shout without a response.



Yeha I getcha and I see it too.


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 15, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Same voice and condescending tone to me. Also, I informed her on her shouts page that she had someone here in the forum using her name. Either it's her or she doesn't care, because she deleted said shout without a response.



It goes to show what the fame monster can do to a person as a whole.


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 15, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Haha okay. So that really is Rukis jumping me up there. In fact, in regards to a comment I left on her comic page, I received this response from the artist herself.
> 
> _"Something clearly kept you reading until page 59. Generally when I dislike a comic, I figure it out within the first few pages. If you really stuck it out all this time just to write a scathing review and inflate your crumbling self esteem, that's sad. If you kept reading for any other reason. . . odds are, something interested you.
> 
> ...



I also got screencaps of your shout getting trashed. 2 hour difference or not, that chick's got issues. 

gimme a sec to get em online

[EDIT-BITCHES]

http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee393/Pimp-Nuttz/just-in-case.png  <=Before
http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee393/Pimp-Nuttz/just-in-case02.png  <=After


----------



## Fay V (Nov 15, 2011)

It's not like you read the available material to give it a fair shake or anything. Nope people only critique a full work cause they're losers that want to feel better.


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 15, 2011)

Fay V said:


> It's not like you read the available material to give it a fair shake or anything. Nope people only critique a full work cause they're losers that want to feel better.



Is it just me, or can that be translated to "cocksucking"? :V


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 15, 2011)

Fay V said:


> It's not like you read the available material to give it a fair shake or anything. Nope people only critique a full work cause they're losers that want to feel better.



It's like the fantard comments in RottenTomatoes: "You're an idiot critic! Learn to do your job properly! *yfuyrbvihregbirhgbrehugruey*".

Truth hurts, I guess :V (I kinda mean that too, actually).

Bueno, cualquier otra cosa es dar mÃ¡s vueltas que el asunto no necesita.

I want to see those screencaps.

Edit: Okay, there they are!...

Editedit: ... let the gal live in her deluded world where criticism means patting on the head permanently and giving unabashed appraisal against all odds.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 15, 2011)

Ak-Nolij said:


> http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee393/Pimp-Nuttz/just-in-case.png  <=Before



I love how you have BITCHES GET SMACKED opened up in another tab.


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 15, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> I love how you have BITCHES GET SMACKED opened up in another tab.



Well I did shit that comic out for kicks. :>

And to be totally honest, I tried to give her work a chance. Really, I _tried._ But my RAEG still stands.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 15, 2011)

yeah, she's definitely lost any respect from me. That was sour as fuck


----------



## Ley (Nov 15, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Here are three faces I drew out real quick.
> They are all the exact same dog head base, but there are small changes to each one that end up in an entirely different mood.
> 
> http://i44.tinypic.com/2r53v2d.png
> ...



I love eyebrows. :3 It's awesome what a little difference makes, especially with the height.


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 15, 2011)

All these comparisons Clayton is putting up is giving me an urge to critique Rukis' pages just to get my brain jumping. But I can't do too many, I gotta get up for work tomorrow. Maybe I can slip one in for the night.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 15, 2011)

Ak-Nolij said:


> All these comparisons Clayton is putting up is giving me an urge to critique Rukis' pages just to get my brain jumping. But I can't do too many, I gotta get up for work tomorrow. Maybe I can slip one in for the night.


should try re-drawing em
I'm re-drawing the emotions of one scene right now


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 15, 2011)

Clayton said:


> should try re-drawing em
> I'm re-drawing the emotions of one scene right now



Oh that would be DEVIOUS


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 15, 2011)

Clayton said:


> should try re-drawing em
> I'm re-drawing the emotions of one scene right now



Do it Clayton! *Takes male cheerleading equipment*


----------



## Deo (Nov 16, 2011)

rukis said:


> When your opinions are backed by your own art, or a comic, I will listen to you.


Does it count if I am accepted into an internationally acclaimed Biological Pre-Medical Illustration program (there are only 40 of us in the program at a school of 30,000 students) at a great university for art? Or does my opinion still not count?


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 16, 2011)

I made a scene involving the hyena bitch and the main dog guy

Can we guess their emotions?






It's such a shame all of this has to be done because an artist treats their watchers like a number instead of fans, people who enjoy their work and maybe even a source of critique.
After all, I bet she makes a bunch of $$ from her watchers who buy her comic. Then again, when she considers her watchers an amount, or a #, it's a bit degrading to buy into that yknow?


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 16, 2011)

Right: Intimidated, worried, feels like being sucked by the ground.
Left: Pure rage, not even disappointment, just rage.

That's capitalist mentality and kitsch for you, Clayton.


----------



## Deo (Nov 16, 2011)

If I get the time sometime I'll try re-drawing some of her pages. Fuck I know I can draw better goddamn tigers than that. Aren't you supposed to like, study the anatomy of main characters? Since all the focus is on them don't you, as a comic artist, desire to draw them correctly? The same mistakes keep getting made and I'm wondering if being deformed and disfigured is _*supposed *_to be part of his character.


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 16, 2011)

Clayton said:


> It's such a shame all of this has to be done because an artist treats their watchers like a number instead of fans, people who enjoy their work and maybe even a source of critique.
> After all, I bet she makes a bunch of $$ from her watchers who buy her comic. Then again, when she considers her watchers an amount, or a #, it's a bit degrading to buy into that yknow?



What makes the whole thing funny is that she thinks claiming our rantings caused a flood of watchers would be a great comeback, when in reality 4 out of 5 of her watchers don't bother to check her work.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 16, 2011)

This thread turned out good, _real_ good. 

If I'm a bit quiet here, however, I apologize. I'm currently dealing with every damn Rukis-whiteknight in the comments section on the latest page of Red Lantern. http://www.rukiscroax.com/redlantern/RL-page-59.htm


----------



## Fay V (Nov 16, 2011)

Deo said:


> If I get the time sometime I'll try re-drawing some of her pages. Fuck I know I can draw better goddamn tigers than that. Aren't you supposed to like, study the anatomy of main characters? Since all the focus is on them don't you, as a comic artist, desire to draw them correctly? The same mistakes keep getting made and I'm wondering if being deformed and disfigured is _*supposed *_to be part of his character.


you should draw for me instead. then we could have awesome art and average writing!


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 16, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> This thread turned out good, _real_ good.
> 
> If I'm a bit quiet here, however, I apologize. I'm currently dealing with every damn Rukis-whiteknight in the comments section on the latest page of Red Lantern. http://www.rukiscroax.com/redlantern/RL-page-59.htm



hhhoooo boy, even the website is an eye-sore. All dem whiteknights be blowing shit outta proportion, I think I'ma try out Clayton's idea and combine it with some fresh critique tomorrow or sumthin


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 16, 2011)

Deo said:


> If I get the time sometime I'll try re-drawing some of her pages. Fuck I know I can draw better goddamn tigers than that. Aren't you supposed to like, study the anatomy of main characters? Since all the focus is on them don't you, as a comic artist, desire to draw them correctly? The same mistakes keep getting made and I'm wondering if being deformed and disfigured is _*supposed *_to be part of his character.



I guess since she doesn't notice them. :/

There is also no difference with her canines, just colors. Canines have different types of muzzles shapes.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 16, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> This thread turned out good, _real_ good.
> 
> If I'm a bit quiet here, however, I apologize. I'm currently dealing with every damn Rukis-whiteknight in the comments section on the latest page of Red Lantern. http://www.rukiscroax.com/redlantern/RL-page-59.htm



I see and "Adventures of FAF" mini-comic: Coyote vs Rukis and her white-knighters...
Anyway, this tread is now the second result on google if you search "rukis furaffinity". Curious, huh?


----------



## Deo (Nov 16, 2011)

Also, the legs on the wolf are two different lengths.


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 16, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> I see and "Adventures of FAF" mini-comic: Coyote vs Rukis and her white-knighters...
> Anyway, this tread is now the second result on google if you search "rukis furaffinity". Curious, huh?



Holy shit I almost died laughing when I checked, that is just epic to me now


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 16, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> This thread turned out good, _real_ good.
> 
> If I'm a bit quiet here, however, I apologize. I'm currently dealing with every damn Rukis-whiteknight in the comments section on the latest page of Red Lantern. http://www.rukiscroax.com/redlantern/RL-page-59.htm



Is it just me? Or is anybody else not seeing any comments in these links?
I dunno if my noscript is blocking them or somethin

EDIT: yep it was my noscript. nvermind, dudes


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 16, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Is it just me? Or is anybody else not seeing any comments in these links?
> I dunno if my noscript is blocking them or somethin
> 
> EDIT: yep it was my noscript. nvermind, dudes



Yeah, and oh btw I used your examples in the comments. In fact, I used Deo's too. You all had the most valid points.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 16, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Yeah, and oh btw I used your examples in the comments. In fact, I used Deo's too. You all had the most valid points.


I'm readin through the comments right now. That guy you're talking with is just oblivious to errors.

This is one of the things I forgot in my example.
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/6543504/
The rat's nose.
http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs50/i/2009/257/2/3/Rat_Nose_II_by_Sian44.jpg


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 16, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Yeah, and oh btw I used your examples in the comments. In fact, I used Deo's too. You all had the most valid points.



It's a shame. This reminds me too much of people's constructive critique of Twilight. People will throw fallacies at you in order to devalue your opinion.




Clayton said:


> I'm readin through the comments right now. That guy you're talking with is just oblivious to errors.
> 
> This is one of the things I forgot in my example.
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/6543504/
> ...




The canines need to be refined a bit...atleast their faces to identify what type of canine they are. So far, they are all generic dogs.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 16, 2011)

Yep, agree, Zeke.
CC, I'm still reading through the comments & I love how the dude you linked the dog photos to didn't bother to udnerstand that I wasn't just referring to the dog's face, but the body posture in total.
He states that a "happy" dog could be a dog with it's tongue lolling out.
Not entirely true, stressed dogs will hang their tongue out as well. Ears back, eyes averted, tongue hanging out, head down.. that's what a stressed dog looks like. Again, miniscule changes in body/eyes/ears makes a world of difference!


----------



## Fay V (Nov 16, 2011)

looking at more of these pictures...alf the expressions have a 100 yard stare. It's disconcerting.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 16, 2011)

I am receiving info that this is not the first time Rukis has flipped out on people for critiquing.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 16, 2011)

Clayton said:


> I am receiving info that this is not the first time Rukis has flipped out on people for critiquing.



Really? 0:


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 16, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Really? 0:


yeppersss
im very slightly remembering it myself
it was on FD_2  i believe


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 16, 2011)

I should upload my expression sheet. I did Dragon Age Characters as anthros as a pet project...and to also practice expressions. Sten would be the exception. :V
So far I've finished Alistair (lion), Zevran (fox), and Oghren (Warthog). I am working on Varric (Wolverine) and Fenris (wolf).



Clayton said:


> I am receiving info that this is not the first time Rukis has flipped out on people for critiquing.



Nope. You can also find a journal I believe of another user's thread when the FAF residents claimed that Cruelty and Red Lantern was just another gilded colon. You'd have to look through the artist's journals.


----------



## Aden (Nov 16, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> This thread turned out good, _real_ good.
> 
> If I'm a bit quiet here, however, I apologize. I'm currently dealing with every damn Rukis-whiteknight in the comments section on the latest page of Red Lantern. http://www.rukiscroax.com/redlantern/RL-page-59.htm



Whyyyy was that saved as a 1.7MB PNG24?


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 16, 2011)

Aden said:


> Whyyyy was that saved as a 1.7MB PNG24?


 
Wait

wut


----------



## Antonin Scalia (Nov 16, 2011)

Clayton I demand you post more cool stuff right this second


----------



## Aden (Nov 16, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Wait
> 
> wut



The comic page is a 1.7MB PNG. Completely unnecessary. Artist needs to learn2compression.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 16, 2011)

Aden said:


> The comic page is a 1.7MB PNG. Completely unnecessary. Artist needs to learn2compression.



BUT BIGGER FILE SIZES MEAN BETTER QUALITY, AMIRITE?


----------



## Onnes (Nov 16, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> BUT BIGGER FILE SIZES MEAN BETTER QUALITY, AMIRITE?



If you're planning to eventually sell such a comic, one might think you'd want to limit the quality of the freely available pages.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 16, 2011)

Onnes said:


> If you're planning to eventually sell such a comic, one might think you'd want to limit the quality of the freely available pages.



Oh, but she's just limiting the "quantity" part of the comic. Read: The adult pages will only be available in print form.


----------



## Onnes (Nov 16, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Oh, but she's just limiting the "quantity" part of the comic. Read: The adult pages will only be available in print form.



Somehow I doubt there's any real plot or character development on the excluded pages. It would be interesting to know what the final profitability of such a project is relative to the time expenditure of both artists.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 16, 2011)

Onnes said:


> Somehow I doubt there's any real plot or character development on the excluded pages. It would be interesting to know what the final profitability of such a project is relative to the time expenditure of both artists.



The final profitability of the comic will be dependent on the fact that the missing pages are _porn._ Therefor, it's bound to be praised as the best fap material since Cruelty.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 16, 2011)

Antonin Scalia said:


> Clayton I demand you post more cool stuff right this second


I was sleepin!! but I will try my hand at more today


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Nov 16, 2011)

I wish people could get banned for being stuck up self righteous ass holes. You are never too good to get a critique and you are never going to do something perfect. If you refuse to change well good luck having that stick shoved 9 feet up your ass and thinking you are gods gift, cuz you aint.


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 16, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> I wish people could get banned for being stuck up self righteous ass holes. You are never too good to get a critique and you are never going to do something perfect. If you refuse to change well good luck having that stick shoved 9 feet up your ass and thinking you are gods gift, cuz you aint.



Sad thing is they won't care as long as a significant (sometimes not even that) number of people like and support them (read: as long as they pander to the lowest common denominator). Even sadder is, perhaps, that some people actually defend those stuck-up artists and make fools of themselves in the process.


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 16, 2011)

Working on a full page critique on the latest page 59, because fuck reading the other 58 pages. And I don't think I'll cover the anatomy, Clayton's got it down.


----------



## Smelge (Nov 16, 2011)

I think this thread needs some alteration. For example, the first post is no longer required. You could just replace the critique with Rukis' responses in this thread, and it would still work.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 16, 2011)

I'm in the mood for drawing and I'm trying to find a good page to re-draw the expressions for

One thing that I have a question about though is.. what happened to the dragons in the beginning? They were mentioned only there adn then now the rest is just "a dude came in, go fuck him"

Ah well..


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 16, 2011)

Here we go:

http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee393/Pimp-Nuttz/rukis_rl-page-59_crit.png

I just couldn't stand looking at this page any longer, so forgive me if it looks half-assed.
And yeah, I'll prolly shit out a mirror comic to page 59 just to show how it could've been handled better.

brb, getting some pizza


----------



## Ariosto (Nov 16, 2011)

Ak-Nolij said:


> Here we go:
> 
> http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee393/Pimp-Nuttz/rukis_rl-page-59_crit.png
> 
> ...



Surprisingly nicer than I thought it would be, now that's good criticism (being honest, I mean). Also, I'm glad someone else thought the angles were overall bland.


----------



## Volkodav (Nov 16, 2011)

Ak-Nolij said:


> Here we go:
> 
> http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee393/Pimp-Nuttz/rukis_rl-page-59_crit.png
> 
> ...


oh fuck, i didnt even realize panel 2 + 4 until you mentioned it.


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 17, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> Sad thing is they won't care as long as a significant (sometimes not even that) number of people like and support them (read: as long as they pander to the lowest common denominator). Even sadder is, perhaps, that some people actually defend those stuck-up artists and make fools of themselves in the process.



I think that if they defend the stuck-up artist, they may get free art from them. :V

Some artists that are popular only care about numbers and that's the reality of it.


----------



## Kinuki (Nov 18, 2011)

Due to her anatomical choices and postures her chars look like dogs put into clothes rather than anthros. That's pretty distracting on its own, but if they start fucking...


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 18, 2011)

Kinuki said:


> Due to her anatomical choices and postures her chars look like dogs put into clothes rather than anthros. That's pretty distracting on its own, but if they start fucking...



Oh murr. :V


----------



## Yoshiya (Nov 21, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> ... who are you?


Oh sorry
I keep forgetting that my joindate invalidates my opinions
But feel free to have an intelligent response like WHENEVER


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 21, 2011)

Yoshiya said:


> Oh sorry
> I keep forgetting that my joindate invalidates my opinions
> But feel free to have an intelligent response like WHENEVER



No, I mean you _literally_ jumped in mid-conversation and left a comment that was utterly useless. I believe the point you were trying to make that my comic review was more apt for a Livejournal rather than here in the comics section of the forum?

Do elaborate why I comic review would not belong here in the comics section of the forum.


----------



## Yoshiya (Nov 21, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> No, I mean you _literally_ jumped in mid-conversation and left a comment that was utterly useless. I believe the point you were trying to make that my comic review was more apt for a Livejournal rather than here in the comics section of the forum?
> 
> Do elaborate why I comic review would not belong here in the comics section of the forum.


Points 1 through 3, a bullshit review that would be more at home in an LJ/blog than a public forum for their sheer subjective and nonsensical nature.
Counter-arguments and why they're crock: NOBODY CAN DISAGREE WITH ME, I MAKE THREADS (see formatting [align=center and bold] for added whinging)
So the final thoughts: Points I could not be bothered bringing up with the artist in a vaguely coherent way, could someone handle that for me?
 Plzthxk.
                   More detail:
                           - Please change your style as your style presenting expressions gets under my skin SPERGSPERG
                           - Point 2: I ran out of things to say so reread point 1
                           - WRITE MORE PORN

And that's why I found something so uninteresting I made a thread about it on a well-known furry forum.


----------



## RedSavage (Nov 21, 2011)

Okay then. Sorry my review was not up to standard in your obviously superior comic review sense. 

Allow me to make sacrificial offering to Thor to atone for this sin.


----------



## Ak-Nolij (Nov 21, 2011)

Yoshiya said:


> Points 1 through 3, a bullshit review that would be more at home in an LJ/blog than a public forum for their sheer subjective and nonsensical nature.
> Counter-arguments and why they're crock: NOBODY CAN DISAGREE WITH ME, I MAKE THREADS (see formatting [align=center and bold] for added whinging)
> So the final thoughts: Points I could not be bothered bringing up with the artist in a vaguely coherent way, could someone handle that for me?
> Plzthxk.
> ...



You are one sad, little man.


----------



## Ozriel (Nov 21, 2011)

Yoshiya said:


> Points 1 through 3, a bullshit review that would be more at home in an LJ/blog than a public forum for their sheer subjective and nonsensical nature.



Protip: All reviews are subjective and do not reflect the opinions of what others or the artist. Reviews are mostly a guideline for those looking to read it but too lazy to actually read it and look up what other people think of it. 
CC has a right to his opinion like you have a right to come in here and bitch about his. No one is above criticism, not even a well-known artist that can throw a tizzy. :V


----------



## ryanleblanc (Dec 5, 2011)

AristÃ³crates Carranza said:


> I've finally been exposed to the so-called self-absorbed artists from the fandom. What an inmature gal... I can't wait until  ryan sees this.



Haha, while it could very possibly be a troll, it wouldn't be too hard for me to believe it's the real rukis. I never denied the fact that she is an immature toddler who is absorbed by the fact that she has so many watches. In fact I completely agree. 

Look, I like rukis's art, it's not the best art; all the characters bear a resemblance to "dog template no.1" even the felines, yes the anatomy is far from perfect, and yes there is no expression whatsoever. But I still like her art in a way, I guess it's just personal preference. There are several artists I like more than rukis, but that doesn't mean I can only like one artist and hate everyone else, rukis included. 

Anyway, like her art or not, there is no denying she is a headstrong, overconfident, close minded, self absorbed biatch. Now THAT I will agree with.


----------



## mapdark (Dec 8, 2011)

Ak-Nolij said:


> Here we go:
> 
> http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee393/Pimp-Nuttz/rukis_rl-page-59_crit.png
> 
> ...



First this action should have taken place on TWO pages. 
Second , so many of these panels could have been replaced by one single panel.

The last two for example could have just been one megapanel (on the right end of a second page) of that dude smirking WHILE putting his money down on the table.

I wont talk about the anatomy because I freakin suck myself , however , I'll agree with Clayton that eyebrows or SIMULATED eyebrows would help so much!

And while I'm not saying Rukis shoukd go super cartoony , A LITTLE stylisation would help a LOT.


----------



## Volkodav (Dec 8, 2011)

mapdark said:


> I'll agree with Clayton that eyebrows or SIMULATED eyebrows would help so much!
> 
> And while I'm not saying Rukis shoukd go super cartoony , A LITTLE stylisation would help a LOT.



Rukis is anti-eyebrow and ne time I read her diary and it said that she doesn't like men with eyebrows and she forces every guy she dates to shave off his eyebrows


kidding
but the other day I realized a character that doesn't have eyebrows
Deadpool
He has no eyebrows OR MOUTH, but what he DOES have to convey emotion is white eyes contrasted by black shapes around them. The black shapes and whites of his eyes move to change his expression

There, now Rukis can have her no-brows but can make her characters look less emotionless.


----------



## ryanleblanc (Dec 8, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Rukis is anti-eyebrow and ne time I read her diary and it said that she doesn't like men with eyebrows and she forces every guy she dates to shave off his eyebrows



For a second there, I genuinely believed that.


----------



## Deo (Dec 8, 2011)

Yoshiya said:


> Points 1 through 3, a bullshit review that would be more at home in an LJ/blog than a public forum for their sheer subjective and nonsensical nature.
> Counter-arguments and why they're crock: NOBODY CAN DISAGREE WITH ME, I MAKE THREADS (see formatting [align=center and bold] for added whinging)


Yes, those were opinions. However they were backed up with evidence from the comic itself, and stated in a clear and concise manner. This is also a subforum based on discussing comics. If we did not share our opinions on comics, there'd be no use of this subforum at all. The whole purpose of this subforum is to discuss comics, ergo this thread is suited to be here and not on LJ.

As for saying that you cannot disagree with us, oh no, we fully encourage you to defend your opinions and ideas against our own. What you are typing out right now does not qualify at all as a defense of your own claims. It's a hack'n'jab at other forum goers and gives the appearance that you do not defend your opinons because you are incapable of either wording them in a somewhat intelligible manner or that your opinions are so embarrassing that you wish to not tell us them and instead throw petty insults.



Yoshiya said:


> So the final thoughts: Points I could not be bothered bringing up with the artist in a vaguely coherent way, could someone handle that for me?


No we will not put together articulated arguement on your behalf to defend your opinions because you are too lazy to do so.



mapdark said:


> The last two for example could have just been one megapanel (on the right end of a second page) of that dude smirking WHILE putting his money down on the table.


But that would mean that Rukis would have to draw more full bodied figures! And that's haaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrd. :v



mapdark said:


> I wont talk about the anatomy because I freakin suck myself , however , I'll agree with Clayton that eyebrows or SIMULATED eyebrows would help so much!
> 
> And while I'm not saying Rukis shoukd go super cartoony , A LITTLE stylisation would help a LOT.


You know I've thought about this some more too. But I think she could keep her realism if only she studied actual animals. Real animals do have expressive faces, it's just that those expressions are more difficult to draw than her usual "fill-in-the-blank-apathy-dog-face" that she draws onto everything.
Take for example the comic "Off White", the wolf characters are drawn with a great amount of attention paid to their anatomy and are not drawn in a "toony style". The comic itself doesn't have as much detail or rendering in it's color, but the anatomy of it's main cast is far better and the expressions on it's realistically drawn animals is far more accurate. The comic also makes a great attempt to draw the characters from dynamic angles to enhance the movement, sometimes this works and sometimes it does not, but at least they tried more than the standard profile shot that Rukis does again and again and again. I swear it looks like she's just copied and pasted the heads from previous pages.
OFF WHITE


----------



## Ozriel (Dec 8, 2011)

That's what I also noticed within the comic. Even though they are typical generic characters, they do not have define body features...most of them are the same, but that's just me noticing it.. :/


----------



## Deo (Dec 8, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> That's what I also noticed within the comic. Even though they are typical generic characters, they do not have define body features...most of them are the same, but that's just me noticing it.. :/



Generally it's the same body/head shapes posed at the same angles (straight on front, side/profile, and a 3/4), the expression 90% of the time is a deadpan, generally the camera height remains exactly the same (no upshots, looking down, or birds eye), and the lighting is mostly the same. All in all it's repetitive and makes it look like she traces her own stuff to reuse in later panels. Hell, do a few overlays and you'll agree with me. (Except for that tiger character, it's nose is going through some sort of Pinocchio thing where it gets shorter and longer indiscriminately at random).


----------



## Ozriel (Dec 8, 2011)

Deo said:


> Generally it's the same body/head shapes posed at the same angles (straight on front, side/profile, and a 3/4), the expression 90% of the time is a deadpan, generally the camera height remains exactly the same (no upshots, looking down, or birds eye), and the lighting is mostly the same. All in all it's repetitive and makes it look like she traces her own stuff to reuse in later panels. Hell, do a few overlays and you'll agree with me. (Except for that tiger character, it's nose is going through some sort of Pinocchio thing where it gets shorter and longer indiscriminately at random).



I can believe that she's tracing over her models with a lightbox to be lazy. With the tiger character, she may be drawing some of the head's features freehand and copying the same body model for it.  
In comics, there's always some dimorphism with body shapes and/or species. A Tiger should have more muscle than a leopard, a cheetah should have that Kenyan body type (lolol running like a Kenyan), a wolf shold have more mass than a husky...etc..


----------



## Ilse (Dec 9, 2011)

Late comment is laaate, but damn, this thread = excellent... and I am honestly, seriously disappointed in Rukis' attitude towards some of the most helpful critique and reviews displayed here I've seen yet. A friend of mine is a huge fan of hers, met her at a con and bought her comics and everything, and I'd reaallly like to not tell her how Rukis actually acts when confronted because finding that out about the people you admire fuckin' sucks. Seriously Rukis that was a big heaping pile of wtf.

  I know I have a stupidly ridiculous time trying to differentiate between dog breeds myself (my Akita Inus uuhhh look like weird wolf mixes or something), and I can SEE that, and every time I draw a new picture I need to challenge myself with that, Google the shit out of the subject before drawing it because every slope of the muzzle and curving of the ear counts... I want my audience to see a friggin' Akita and not a weird dog mutt thing. 

Honestly if it comes to people going "Your _*tiger *_looks like a *dog*" I think it's time to step back and re-evaluate your artwork and style... reviews such as Clayton's and Deo's are amazing and I think Rukis can learn a lot from them and others if that horse just _wasn't_ so high up on stilts.


----------



## Zydala (Dec 9, 2011)

Tried to read the comic once a long time ago. Got maybe six pages in and I was like yaaaaawn

Art's pretty nice other than the aforementioned "everything's a dog" ...not my cup of tea really but I won't knock it. But the pacing and dialogue are snoozetown imo. It's way too straight-forward in its shots and doesn't take advantage of changing color or lighting or panel composition to really drive emotions, which the comic could excel with, since the expressions and dialogue and pacing are being fought. Maybe this changed after the first few pages? But meh, that's my opinion.

Granted what I just said's a pretty advanced crit... the comic is OK honestly, and has tons of potential (seeing as they have a good grasp on the fundamentals and are  but it's not top-notch compared to a lot of other comics out there in webcomicku-land), but nothing wrong with challenging the material a bit to see it get even better.


----------



## Deo (Dec 9, 2011)

Punjab said:


> A friend of mine is a huge fan of hers, met her at a con and bought her comics and everything, and I'd reaallly like to not tell her how Rukis actually acts when confronted because finding that out about the people you admire fuckin' sucks. Seriously Rukis that was a big heaping pile of wtf.


I met her at MFF, she's got the same vitriolic personality in real life as well. I had hoped she'd be nicer offline, like maybe this is just a put on personality like my facetious "raegmode" on FAF, but nope. This just seems to be who she is, at least from what I gathered in my small time talking with her.


----------



## Volkodav (Dec 9, 2011)

Deo said:


> Take for example the comic "Off White", the wolf characters are drawn with a great amount of attention paid to their anatomy


That's because the artist traces a lot of the pics from photos of real wolves/coyotes lmfao
I called her out on it once and she blocked me

EDIT: Oh shit, I actually stll have one of the overlays saved
http://i.imgur.com/6qeT9.gif


EDIT: Y'all want some cat/big cat references? I also have one for expressions, too. All are drawn by CedarSeed on DA
Expressions: http://www.deviantart.com/download/47118559/emotions_and_facial_expression_by_cedarseed-ds1wwv.jpg
Guide to Big Cats: http://www.deviantart.com/download/167000754/guide_to_big_cats_by_cedarseed-d2rfelu.jpg
Guide to Little Cats: http://www.deviantart.com/download/87746460/guide_to_little_cats_by_cedarseed-d1g8plo.jpg
Guide to Housecat Breeds [fuck yeah Orientals!!!]: http://www.deviantart.com/download/167328669/guide_to_housecat_breeds_1_by_cedarseed-d2rmfml.jpg
Guide to Housecat Breeds 2: http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2011/197/7/2/guide_to_housecat_breeds_2_by_cedarseed-d3tzxf1.jpg
Guide to Housecat Colours and Patterns: http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2...cat_colors__patterns_by_cedarseed-d1iivd0.jpg

What not to do with speech bubbles [by Akeli]: http://akeli.deviantart.com/art/What-Not-to-Do-with-Bubbles-263797502?q=gallery:akeli/11954306&qo=0
Cat anatomy [Akeli]: http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs50/i/2009/317/8/b/Animal_Anatomy___Cats_Part_1_by_akeli.jpg


----------



## Deo (Dec 9, 2011)

Clayton said:


> That's because the artist traces a lot of the pics from photos of real wolves/coyotes lmfao
> I called her out on it once and she blocked me


...seriously?
fml. I was so excited about starting to read it. The story was sort of "meh+wolfaboo", but the art I thought made it worth it. But if it's traced? FUCK THAT SHIT.


----------



## Onnes (Dec 9, 2011)

Deo said:


> I met her at MFF, she's got the same vitriolic personality in real life as well. I had hoped she'd be nicer offline, like maybe this is just a put on personality like my facetious "raegmode" on FAF, but nope. This just seems to be who she is, at least from what I gathered in my small time talking with her.



I saw a rumor that she was pissed at MFF for putting the dealer's den behind the artists' alley and wouldn't be returning because of it.


----------



## Deo (Dec 9, 2011)

Onnes said:


> I saw a rumor that she was pissed at MFF for putting the dealer's den behind the artists' alley and wouldn't be returning because of it.


Yeah she was in a pissy mood. Not that I went out of my way to try to make her mood better though.


----------



## Volkodav (Dec 9, 2011)

Deo said:


> ...seriously?
> fml. I was so excited about starting to read it. The story was sort of "meh+wolfaboo", but the art I thought made it worth it. But if it's traced? FUCK THAT SHIT.


Yep, I edited my post with one fo the overlays and a bunch of cool references for artists

The comic is cool, I like the art [aside from the traced bits] but the story [like almost all wolf stories from DA] follow the same storyline as the novel The Sight.
[White wolf has powers, wolf pack is being killed, etc etc yadda yadda whatever wolf wars, dark evil wolf trying to kill white wolf]

I know there are so many more wolves that were traced in that comic but I just CBA going through and re-finding all the traces. I saw that one [in the overlay] and knewexactly what wolf/coyote pic it was from.
I bet there's even traces of that extremely-popular snarling black wolf one in the comic lmfao. That one seems to get traced a hell of a lot


----------



## RedSavage (Dec 9, 2011)

Deo said:


> ...seriously?
> fml. I was so excited about starting to read it. The story was sort of "meh+wolfaboo", but the art I thought made it worth it. But if it's traced? FUCK THAT SHIT.



Deo if you want an awesome wolf comic that totally goes against that wolfaboo shit and uses awesome anatomy combined with an incredible comic style, read this: http://wolfpearl.deviantart.com/art/Wurr-page-1-60747954

The first few pages seem typical, but then it does a complete 180 and truly ends up being something unique.

Umm... all I can think of to wrap this up are two last words: Mutant wolves.

That is all.


----------



## Volkodav (Dec 10, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> Deo if you want an awesome wolf comic that totally goes against that wolfaboo shit and uses awesome anatomy combined with an incredible comic style, read this: http://wolfpearl.deviantart.com/art/Wurr-page-1-60747954
> 
> The first few pages seem typical, but then it does a complete 180 and truly ends up being something unique.
> 
> ...



i tried reading it but couldnt continue
i dont understand wtf is up with the gimp-dogs


----------



## RedSavage (Dec 10, 2011)

Clayton said:


> i tried reading it but couldnt continue
> i dont understand wtf is up with the gimp-dogs



the crater is like a disease pit. all the wolves that have the misfortune to live there become mutated, and are more or less shunned from the topside, unable to chance it without being killed. 

but i dunno not everyone's pie, i like it


----------



## Volkodav (Dec 10, 2011)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> the crater is like a disease pit. all the wolves that have the misfortune to live there become mutated, and are more or less shunned from the topside, unable to chance it without being killed.
> 
> but i dunno not everyone's pie, i like it



hmm interestin
maybe ill give it another try


----------



## Ilse (Dec 10, 2011)

Deo said:


> I met her at MFF, she's got the same vitriolic personality in real life as well. I had hoped she'd be nicer offline, like maybe this is just a put on personality like my facetious "raegmode" on FAF, but nope. This just seems to be who she is, at least from what I gathered in my small time talking with her.



Whoa, seriously? My friend said that when she met Rukis she was super sweet, buuut that's maybe 'cause she was hardcore fangirling over Ruk haha. What'd you two talk about?

Off-White is kind of incredibly boring imo, whilst we're on the topic of that... 8D I remember being pretty confused and not being able to figure out _why _it exactly bored me or why I wasn't going crazy over it until Droemar on dA posted a review about it, and then it all just kinda fell into place from there haha. 
Seriously pretty much nothing happens for the 160+ pages there are... the characters themselves are pretty bland, I seriously have no idea who is who because their designs all look the same and they've got the typical cookiecutter personality: main character is a jokester kid, one wolf is an angry spitfire momma and everyone else... is, uh, just there? I guess?

UGH sorry CC for derailing the topic even more derp, but since we're already on the topic of OW I just wanted to throw my 2c in haha.

WURR IS ADORABLE and Clayton thanks a ton for the cat references, omg. I love this person, I knew about their human anatomy stuff but didn't know they made one for cats too, goddamned magical. Are there any maybe laying around for dogs?


----------



## Volkodav (Dec 11, 2011)

Punjab said:


> Are there any maybe laying around for dogs?



not sure. i knw there are "mammal anatomy" which includes a muscle guide for wolves, but idk beyonjd that


----------



## Ozriel (Dec 11, 2011)

http://redlantern-comic.deviantart.com/gallery/#/d4ioj4r

I just had to post this since I am LFMAO. :V


----------



## Kinuki (Dec 11, 2011)

http://comments.deviantart.com/4/20137999/2317586852

pffffhahahaha


----------



## Volkodav (Dec 11, 2011)

Kinuki said:


> http://comments.deviantart.com/4/20137999/2317586852
> 
> pffffhahahaha


haha oh fuck that bottom comment


----------



## Human (Dec 12, 2011)

Not a fan of the comics either and the main reason has been the constant lack of facial expression. The characters are either in a neutral mode or in a bedroom-eyes mode. This _is _related to the style being more realistic but distortion is needed, even in non furry comics, to get emotion through to the reader. Every time I see she's updated I get bummed because I see something that should have been amazing but just isn't.
And yeah, I'm not gay and I don't like furry porn so there very little about the comics that even relate to me beyond " it's well drawn".

  Also, on a less art-related note Rukis is always talking about how explicit sex can be used to progress a story, which is just hilariously wrong. When you can go through Red Lantern, edit and censor the sex parts and the story is still exactly the same how can you claim that the dog cocks were used as story telling devices?


----------



## Smelge (Dec 12, 2011)

Human said:


> Also, on a less art-related note Rukis is always talking about how explicit sex can be used to progress a story, which is just hilariously wrong. When you can go through Red Lantern, edit and censor the sex parts and the story is still exactly the same how can you claim that the dog cocks were used as story telling devices?



Progress the story into print, out the door, and progress her bank balance.

I seem to recall that Cruelty thing she did. Put the comic itself (cliche bullshit) on FA, make sure everyone knows there's a porn section, ad that it's only going to be in the print version, then watch the money roll in for 3 extra pages of dogdick.


----------



## Volkodav (Dec 12, 2011)

i was surprised to see that she's moving from the backwards-ears on her FA in like 3 pics


----------



## DJ-Fragon (Dec 12, 2011)

Smelge said:


> Progress the story into print, out the door, and progress her bank balance.
> 
> I seem to recall that Cruelty thing she did. Put the comic itself (cliche bullshit) on FA, make sure everyone knows there's a porn section, ad that it's only going to be in the print version, then watch the money roll in for 3 extra pages of dogdick.



Rukis' Comics:

1st Act: Bland characters are introduced and talk to each other with bland facial expressions while making awkward poses, each with some cliche or boring problem(s).
2nd Act: The bland main character has sex with a bland supporting character.* 
3rd Act: Bland characters go back to talking to each other with bland facial expressions while continuing to make awkward poses, then try to solve the cliche or boring problem(s). 

*This can only be seen in the extended versions of Rukis' comic, which are $10 more expensive!


----------



## Abbi Normal (Jan 25, 2012)

It doesn't matter how terrible it is, some people will like it.
It doesn't matter how great it is, some people will hate it.
It doesn't prove, disprove, or improve anything, or change anybody's mind getting your panties in a bunch.
No exceptions. 

I'm seeing some seriously bunched panties here, and it's not a good look on anyone.


----------



## Fay V (Jan 25, 2012)

Abbi Normal said:


> It doesn't matter how terrible it is, some people will like it.
> It doesn't matter how great it is, some people will hate it.
> It doesn't prove, disprove, or improve anything, or change anybody's mind getting your panties in a bunch.
> No exceptions.
> ...



Necro.


----------

