Cringe

It is astounding that the redraw thinks their art is superior. I’d compare it to the woman who ruined the classical painting of Jesus, but she wasn’t arrogant enough to think she improved it.

Need to be tagged with the artist of the original as well.

@_-_  
well then…
 
Apparently the DS audio guide at the Louvre lied to me…

There’s a right way to do a red-lining of someone else’s pic, and there’s a wrong way.
 
This is the wrong way.
 
What’s the right way? Here.
 
That redlining I linked to 1) was a critique of a guy who is a professional artist, 2) contains a critical third step where the anatomy problems are corrected but retains the original style (the final step is a complete overhaul, but it’s still fairly close to the spirit of the original), and 3) is a genuine improvement over the original.
 
This is not a proper red-lining. This is some pretentious dick saying “My drawing is better.” Does the original have problems? Certainly. Is the redraw better? Not really.
 
In fact, the very first “redraw” of this I saw (too lazy to find link; it was a gif) really was an improvement.

I like them both for completely different reasons. The second version stands just fine on its own, but sucks as a “Redraw” of the first one. Calling it one is an insult to both images, and to the personal taste of the artist of the first one.

The guy drew a human version of a fictional pony, why do you care if it’s not 100% anatomically accurate?
 
It wasn’t made to be anatomically accurate, it was made because a lot of people like boobs.
 
So he drew boobs.

@ze:  
Wow… I got you just in time:  
This piece doesn’t use the arc of the spine, the misplaced shoulder blade, or many of the other errors pointed out for effect.
 
In the specific case you refer to, the rest of the body remains as it should and it is only distorted in very specific fashions which can be attributed to style rather than he just having drawn the piece and then going “oh fuck, I need to fix this shit”, which is entirely possible.
 
I can’t comment on it because I don’t have the necessary art history schooling, but your counter-example does nothing to negate the errors.

What about the Grande Odalisque ?
 
Anatomy of that was skewed on that painting for a stylistic reason.
 
 
Stylistic reason for skewed anatomy on this pic: boobs.

You guys need to calm down. Did you consider that he was trying to be funny? Not superior?

hmm, the redraw’s head is a bit eggish, hat’s also off (perspective-wise)
 
that vest is also somehow skin-tight, despite being above her loose shirt. . .

Nowhere in this critique does the artist resort to ad hominem. It looks entirely at individual components of the piece of art’s structure.
 
Half of any piece of art is the viewer’s perspective, so even if you don’t agree with the viewer’s perspective, it is useful to know how they see.

If you’re gonna make a big stink about how an artist is bad and you have the balls to claim you can draw their picture better than they can, then you better be damn sure that it’s actually better.
 
It isn’t, by the way.

Uh, the redraw is of much lower quality than the original. Sure, the original has oddities, but the artist has some obvious skill. The redraw artist is just arrogant.

WHAT’S THIS? REASONABLY DRAWN BOOBS? WHAT BLASPHEMY IS THIS?

@RIG:  
Overinflated needs not have anatomy errors and this one has them aplenty. I hadn’t even noticed the “Destructive Tits” part until you mentioned that he draws oversized for fun.
 
No matter how oversized, that back is very wrong and does nothing to enhance the visibility of the breast (so that’s an anatomy error), the collar bone is kind of needed for the boobs to even exists (another one), her arms are at odds with themselves and each other (again), and I’m still working on it, but I think the boobs might be significantly different in size depending on how you analyze the position of the shoulders in reference to the back.
 
All in all, sure, draw for fun, but that doesn’t stop the criticism from being right.

There is a distinct difference between having someone give you a critique and having them implant electrodes in your brain to force you to do what they want. It seems silly to expect critiques to be helpful 100% of the time. Get as much feedback as you can and figure out which of it makes sense to you.

^the artist draw in this way for fun.

For some people, imitation is a form of flattery. For anyone who is serious about their art, getting constructive critiques is a godsend. I don’t see what is wrong with this at all.

if you check the artist DA you will notice that he can draw “anatomically” correct, which means he draws this oversize pics just for fun.

I will remind everyone that, holy crap, this is what artist do and should do because you can have a style but you can’t just say “fuck it, I draw shit because I want to draw shit”.
 
The criticisms are valid, the points are best expressed through redlines, and if you suddenly think that it is bad, well, shows how much you fucking know.
 
It bears repeating: IF YOU ARE AN ARTIST, THIS SORT OF SHIT IS WHAT YOU NEED TO IMPROVE.
 
That said, the second drawing ain’t much of an improvement in the mechanics, while the stylistics remain equally valid in both cases.

@TenchiFreak5
 
Yeah I suppose that’s true. Sorry if my original comment came off a bit douchey. It was not my intent.

@ Yorec: I think the idea that people aren’t allowed to have an opinion probably comes from the first page of comments being multiple people implying that you aren’t allowed to criticize the original picture because that’s the artist’s style. Up to and including when the tags for the image were changed to push that sentiment and when it was claimed that this wasn’t a critique of the original, which it absolutely is.
 
 
Now, if that was simply because the artist redrew it (and the air of superiority that brings) then I agree entirely. That was self-defeating and pretentious. But that doesn’t seem to be the issue here based on most of the comments.

^  
Glad to hear I wasn’t the only one to notice.

Random observation–Applejack’s chest in the first pic forms an upside-down heart.