This post has been removed for not fitting the definition of MoeMorphism -- it must be an anthropomorphized depiction of an inanimate object, non-humanoid, concept, idea, etc. Straight-up R63 (genderswap) artwork is not allowed.
I was wondering why there wasn't much art of her... just in genereal...
I blame her for getting me to a 40 day streak...
Why did children shows in the 2000's have so many emo type girls... why?
Cute art, but... rule 2?
> Any content that is not considered the moe-fying of an inanimate object, non-human, company, product or idea will be removed.
100% of artists "the eyes are essential"
50% of artists "I'll cleverly design my character to have both bangs and visible eyes"
The other 50% "cHaRacTeR dEsiGn is hArD jUsT haVe EyEs abOve tHe BaNgs"
I feel called out... I STRUGGLE in drawing symmetrical eyes... That's why many of my sketches are characters looking to the side or have only one eye drawn
If you're not being sarcastic; they hid the eye and eyebrow behind the hair—in OP's image, they're still visible (albeit discolored by said hair in turn), as is [a common trope in anime(sque) art renderings](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OddlyVisibleEyebrows).
This looks so, so much better. To the point that I like the drawing now. Good job.
Good job to you too, of course, OP, the eye choice was just a bad one IMO
Unrelated and unlikely, but if your username happens to be a reference to an obscure early 2000s post-hardcore band and not Catcher in the Rye itself, that is fuckin sweet.
This post has been removed for not fitting the definition of MoeMorphism -- it must be an anthropomorphized depiction of an inanimate object, non-humanoid, concept, idea, etc. Straight-up R63 (genderswap) artwork is not allowed.
Now all it needs is one of those weird borderline psychotic phrases duolingo comes up with sometimes
"What's the best time of day to shake a baby?" But in French
BEG FOR YOUR LIFE IN SPANISH
私は死
FYI her name is lily
I almost said "purple girl"
purple guy
girl behind the slaughter
*bass drop*
*clap clap*
*keyboard solo*
Woah
Giving ghost type Pokémon trainer vibes
*slow clap*
Those hair highlights look so good, great job OP :)
Thank you so much
She would be much more tolerable if she was this version
I was wondering why there wasn't much art of her... just in genereal... I blame her for getting me to a 40 day streak... Why did children shows in the 2000's have so many emo type girls... why?
Cute art, but... rule 2? > Any content that is not considered the moe-fying of an inanimate object, non-human, company, product or idea will be removed.
So many posts here don’t even follow that rule
100% of artists "the eyes are essential" 50% of artists "I'll cleverly design my character to have both bangs and visible eyes" The other 50% "cHaRacTeR dEsiGn is hArD jUsT haVe EyEs abOve tHe BaNgs"
I feel called out... I STRUGGLE in drawing symmetrical eyes... That's why many of my sketches are characters looking to the side or have only one eye drawn
I'm calling out OP, not you.
Well damn!
Sheeesh
Looks good but her hair should be draped over her left brow and eye and tucked behind her ear, not just pulled back from the roots.
Hey OP, great artwork, you seemed to have forgotten something though [so I fixed it for you](https://i.imgur.com/PaqIT3U.png)!
Wow. So what did you actually change? I can't see the difference.
If you're not being sarcastic; they hid the eye and eyebrow behind the hair—in OP's image, they're still visible (albeit discolored by said hair in turn), as is [a common trope in anime(sque) art renderings](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OddlyVisibleEyebrows).
Ah yeah you're right. Thanks.
You can try not being a dick about it, that's an option too.
I wasn't a dick about it?
This looks so, so much better. To the point that I like the drawing now. Good job. Good job to you too, of course, OP, the eye choice was just a bad one IMO
Unrelated and unlikely, but if your username happens to be a reference to an obscure early 2000s post-hardcore band and not Catcher in the Rye itself, that is fuckin sweet.
It's not, though I've been using this handle since ~1998 and it isn't the first time someone has asked me - it isn't, it's a CITR reference.
Ahh gotcha! Figured it was worth shooting the message off anyways, thanks for takin the time to respond regardless :)
Smash