This image has been resized. Click on the View larger version link in the sidebar for a high-quality version.
Hide this message.
« Previous Next » This post is #13 in the Megami #254 2021-07 pool.
|
Please log in. To create a new account, enter the name and password you want to use.
If you supplied an email address when you signed up or added a email later, you can have your password reset.
|
« Previous Next » This post is #13 in the Megami #254 2021-07 pool.
Arknovalisk
almost 4 years agoMarona762
almost 4 years agoArknovalisk
almost 4 years agoWhat's with the poorly filtered stuff that burns the eyes and stupid proportions? Also what are the girls on? A bed as large as the room itself? Because it's way too fluffy to be the floor, yet it looks as if it completely fills the room, and is cut off perfectly straight.
Oh yeah, and the ""girls"" look completely, utterly unattractive and drawn so poorly they are definitely not doing favors for them, disgusting if anything. I get that anime industry is basically waging war against lolicons, but this is just pointless.
Trit
almost 4 years agoBut I agree, these ones could be drawn better: the blue one’s heads is a bit too big.
Arknovalisk
almost 4 years agoBut compared to the magazine's illustrations from the past, now only braindead ecchi shows get lewd illustrations, which already have more than enough content like that, so meh.
omega8719
almost 4 years agoThe background here appear a bit blurry and bed appear large. This characteristic of long lens with at least F/4 aperture. Illustrator knew he want to draw the character as if taken photo with long lens.
Here some photos taken at different focal length. The table appear different between 24 mm and 70 mm.
https://expertphotography.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/focal-length-comparison.jpg
Another https://i.ytimg.com/vi/iSj5IQ_1gbc/maxresdefault.jpg
vendiu
almost 4 years agoIt doesn't take a genius to know how to push the "blur" button of a given image editor, you know...
Arknovalisk
almost 4 years agoomega8719
almost 4 years agoRadioactive
almost 4 years agoArknovalisk
almost 4 years agoomega8719
almost 4 years agoArknovalisk
almost 4 years agoI'm sorry for you if you can't see the difference in artistic value.
Radioactive
almost 4 years agoArknovalisk
almost 4 years agoThere's still huge difference between the one linked and this bottom of barrel one.
Radioactive
almost 4 years agovendiu
almost 4 years agoYou know, smallness can be an issue, but buying a big lens is not going to make it any bigger... ;)
Anyway, if you consider the general level of "quality" of this magazine, you'd know it is full of garbage most of the time.
The artist pay rates are likely around $1 a piece (at least they look such), so there's just no way there would be any real effort or skill behind most of them.