Bob 281's bust ya head open art thread!

[bob281]

Originally Posted by Charles

Nope. I never deserted you. You seemed more interested, a while back, in engaging in foolish antics, rather than in focusing upon your art. It's just not a good investment of my time to comment on art where the artist allows themself to be distracted so needlessly.

That aside, I wasn't able to free up any time to make it back here to comment further on your artwork, prior to now, due to competing demands upon my time. My apologies on that, Bob.

I'm going to utilize the posting numbers in this thread to refer back to particular pieces of art that I am commenting on. Just so that you will know which ones that I am referring to, in any particular instance.

POST # 1

My attention is drawn to the character's head. Not to all of those muscles, nor even to all of that shading, neither of which is either terrible or great. Rather, it's the head that has my attention, and which draws my eye away from everything else on this page that you rendered with artistic effort.

In particular, it is the way that the head is posed, with the face facing down. The dark eyes, in conjunction with that snarl (or whatever you prefer to call it), form the primary point of collective visual interest for me.

The thing on the forehead (not sure what that is supposed to be) draws my eye, but fails to retain my interest.

As far as visual interest goes, the big belt and belt buckle are more visually interesting than that mass of muscles. When all (or nearly so) of your characters are awash in muscles, it yields them all less individually unique and less visually impressive.

One of your great strengths, as a comic book superhero type of artist, Bob, is your willingness to craft many different characters from the wellspring of your imagination. The downside, unfortunately, is that you seem to display any real interest in sculpting any of them masterfully. It might slow you down, it seems, if you actually bothered to invest the time and effort to do that. In the process, your fore go crowning your characters with the artistic glory that you seem to want them to possess. The thief, Bob, is you - you're robbing your own self, and you characters, as well, in the process.

POST # 2

Ah, the Pimp Plate. Trademark the name (if it is available), and entertain the public masses with, of all things, disposable plates. I've never heard of parental guidance being suggested for plates, before, but perhaps this is where your artwork is heading.

The character's colorful language is part of the plate's appeal. The character, himself, is hardly memorable. I like his cigar and smoke (although I, myself, don't smoke). The Pimp Plate is very much in the would-be diner's face. It makes for a great conversation piece, and it can make eating a more fun experience.

It is a novelty, but how long its popularity might last, I have no idea.

POST # 3

Far from being one of your best pieces, this artwork is its own worst enemy. Nothing in it is mastered - not one single, solitary thing. The four small heads in the background are its saving grace. The swastika and the eye patch are nice visual touches, small flourishes for the eye to consume.

The shield is too small, and looks more like a toy than an actual shield that Captain America might use. Not much room to hide behind that trinket, for sure. I do like the costume on display in the good Captain's upper torso, but he looks as if he is made of Play-doh, anatomically speaking.

That glow special effect, or whatever it is supposed to be, is a nice touch, but for some inexplicable reason, you tend to not imbue your superheroes with any power of note - except for strength, as implied by your over-infatuation with muscles. The end result of this obsession with muscles is that your superheroes come across as imaginatively weak. The guy on that Pimp Plate needs to bitch slap you, for failing to take the concept of super powers serious, Bob. Your characters are B-movie material, if they are lucky. Yet, where your rendering of their powers in action is concerned, you reveal them as ordinary buffoons playing the role of superhero.

POST # 4

Just what in the Hell is this? Super small emblem on the chest doesn't help, since you opted to render the character visually gender neutral. I can't tell what it is, man or woman? And the cape - just what were you thinking there, Bob? It is the equivalent of visual nothing.

All of those squiggly lines on the belt ensure that the eye is scattered away, when trying to focus upon it. You even managed to make the belt visually uninteresting, Bob. Was this what you were after?

I like the pointed fingertips on one hand, and the clenched fist on the other. It's more visually interesting, that way, than if both hands had the same basic pose to them.

The ears on the cowl - again, what were you thinking? A midgetized cowl, while the gloves are exploding with over-sized tabs. This approach sends a mixed visual message, Bob. The character's garb doesn't glorify the character, visually speaking.

The guy below that Batfreak thing, he's the more visually interesting of the two images on display in Post # 4.

Other than the star looking things, the background is virtually worthless. It doesn't really present much in the way of eye-candy for the viewer/reader to engage with.

The character's head looks smushed in, if I may take such liberties with the English language.

The real winner, visually, for this character lies in this pose. The hands accent the pose wonderfully. The character looks fluid in his motion. Too bad that you wasted him.

POST # 5

This character is female, obviously. Recognition of that fact is immediate, it's obvious. The viewer is not left to wonder, as is the case with the Batfreak in the posting above it.

Her face didn't warrant any investment of your time - and it show. So, why bother, I find myself wondering as I take this image in.

Her pose reminds me of that little ballerina that you find on some jewelry boxes. She looks hyper-stiff. Have you considered telling your comic botches to loose up, Bob, if I may borrow from your phraseology of choice?

Sure, she has a gun AND a knife, but the bitch can't move. She's stiff, as if she is frozen in place. That doesn't sell comic books. That doesn't sell art. That doesn't sell itself to the human eye.

And that gun of hers - it's smoking. I get that. But, the smoke looks like confetti, long confetti. Why destroy visual interest with such a cheap - and quick - drawing tactic, Bob?

I just hope that you find out who broke her legs. That backwards curve looks painful to me!

POST # 6

Is that Fist of Justice in Post # 6? Pray tell me it isn't so, Bob!

And to think, I donated to a Kickstarter for that guy, too. Your depiction of Fist of Justice has me rethinking that decision, Bob.

But, it's your own take on that character. I get that. Your version suffers from frizz head. His face can't make it;s mind up as to whether it is square or curved, either. This guy has some serious anatomical problems. You've decorated him up with jewelry or some other form of doodads, visual baubles of some kind. Armbands, I suppose that they are. His belt buckle, too, it looks like jewelry, more than anything else.

The logo is OK, that emblem on his chest. Was it the OK look that you were striving for, here, Bob?

I'm not sure what wind is blowing the tops of his boots off to the right, when his gloves seem impervious to that same cause. Thus, a strong display of visual inconsistency is what you end up with - and my eye doesn't like it, Bob.

What are those things in the background, anyway? It's bad enough that I have to ask, at all. They definitely aren't buildings, so, what are they?

Why is the guy holding into a piece of twine?

For some reason, I like the shorts. Then, a grotesque thigh comes out of them, and my eye scurries away looking for better visual fare.

POST # 7

Is that supposed to be Hawkgirl in this one? I like the mace. I like the big wings. Is that a gun that she's holding in her other hand, or a digital camera?

She looks very feminine, and she isn't saddled with Hulk muscles. I sort of like her costume, with the knees exposed (or maybe that's supposed to be a different color of material in that location on her costume).

You invested precious little time on her face, but fortunately for you, my eye keeps getting drawn back to those over-sized eyes on her helmet.

The pose isn't bad. Is she motionless or in motion? There's now way to tell, since you tend to be stingy as Hell in the special effects department, Bob.

And, the other woman depicted in that image?

She's a visual paradox. Her butt and legs indicate that she's been well fed, but her upper torso indicates heavy malnourishment. She could also do with a visit to a hair salon.

That big knife is there, doing noting - and accomplishing nothing, visually speaking. As such, it's more of an ornament than a threat.

I'm not sure what the deal is with the shredded paper, or whatever it is that is at the lower left. Overall, though, this famine-stricken character simply serves to mess up an otherwise decent attempt at drawing Hawkgirl.

POST # 8

This one speaks visual interest to me, right off the bat.

The cowboy hat, holstered guns, and pose with arm raised capture my eye. The revolver at the top is well proportioned to the hand. Nice.

The cape is a generic eye-sore, trying to photobomb this character's moment of visual glory.

The clothing looks partially tattered, but visually uninteresting, all things considered. Another wasted opportunity to close the visual sale on this one, Bob.

How did this character break its knee, anyway?

The eyes draw my attention. The mask does not.

POST # 11

Ah, a group shot.Multiple characters increase the opportunity to create visual interest - and visual contrast.

The characters look sufficiently different from one another to obtain the visual element known as individuality. That's a good one to win with the viewer, Bob.

So many lines, though! They draw my eye off into the nether void. I do like the Hulkguy, but not the woman with her ass facing the viewer. Why does she have a keyhole on her back? Or is that a tiger's nose? Visual confusion has set in, Bob.

The shield on the arm looks OK, but shouldn't it mold more to the pise of the wrist? Is it connected at the elbow, but not near the wrist? That looks odd.

The Thor guy on the left is sad. I always liked Thor, too - until I saw your version of him. Thor's hammer is an object of visual interest - which is why I don't understand why it's mostly not there. Is there no end to missed opportunities, where visual interest elements are concerned, Bob?

POST # 12

Robin in action! The image succeeds at implying motion. But, what happened to Robin's foot? Is that Ben Grimm's foot, or Robin's? At least Robin has some action going on, even if the image lacks any context for it.

What's that on Robin's back? Ninja swords? What the Hell?!

The belt is a visual mess. The emblem on his shirt is visually fleeting. I look at it, and then I quickly pass on. The end result is visual failure.

The cape is another generic depiction of a cape at full flutter. Visually worthless!

I've got to pause, Bob, to put some chicken on to cook. I'll try to comment more, on other pieces in this thread, a bit later.

Thank you for your comments and crits.I'll keep on plungin I should have some new drawings up this weekend I just bought my first scanner will be playing with it and experimenting to get the best scans of my work.

[bob281]

[Charles]

Originally Posted by bob281

Post # 100

I like the hand in Post # 100. It's actually one of your better artistic renderings, in my considered opinion. Not because you're particularly adept at drawing hands, but because of the visual created by the combination of the hand and the energy around it.

When I sit and just look at your art, Bob, and go back and forth over it, it always seems like you're in such a rush to go nowhere. Not your art, over all, per se, but with any given piece at any given time. Not sure if you get what I am trying to say with that, but it's how your art makes me feel.

Some of your more recent pieces denote a moderate refining of your depiction of human anatomy, but your obsession with doing pin-up style art is a damper upon your progression as an artist.

You're willing to tackle the imaginative. That's one of your strong points. You also seek to bring superheroes back down to Earth, via your choice of colorful language. That's not an inherently bad thing. Your heroes are bold. They're brash. They have moxie.

But, you shackle them with standalone shots. You're making Johnny One Shots out of them. I want to see them in sequentials. How consistently can you render them in visually rapid succession?

How are your skills with panels?

Your superheroes are colorful. No doubt about it. But, the environments in which you situate them are lackluster, to say the least. In the process, you undermine what it is that you seek the characters to accomplish, visually.

I am curious, Bob. How long, on average, does it take you to do a drawing?

[bob281]

Originally Posted by Charles

Post # 100

I like the hand in Post # 100. It's actually one of your better artistic renderings, in my considered opinion. Not because you're particularly adept at drawing hands, but because of the visual created by the combination of the hand and the energy around it.

When I sit and just look at your art, Bob, and go back and forth over it, it always seems like you're in such a rush to go nowhere. Not your art, over all, per se, but with any given piece at any given time. Not sure if you get what I am trying to say with that, but it's how your art makes me feel.

Some of your more recent pieces denote a moderate refining of your depiction of human anatomy, but your obsession with doing pin-up style art is a damper upon your progression as an artist.

You're willing to tackle the imaginative. That's one of your strong points. You also seek to bring superheroes back down to Earth, via your choice of colorful language. That's not an inherently bad thing. Your heroes are bold. They're brash. They have moxie.

But, you shackle them with standalone shots. You're making Johnny One Shots out of them. I want to see them in sequentials. How consistently can you render them in visually rapid succession?

How are your skills with panels?

Your superheroes are colorful. No doubt about it. But, the environments in which you situate them are lackluster, to say the least. In the process, you undermine what it is that you seek the characters to accomplish, visually.

I am curious, Bob. How long, on average, does it take you to do a drawing?

I'm pretty fast I guess because I draw alot with my pen.Backgrounds I feel are pretty close to being redundant because I feel they can pretty much can be done with technology.I've never admired an artist because of his backgrounds.It has always been about the characters so that is what I concentrate on.I've never timed myself drawing.I draw a bit stop draw a bit stop.I would say its depending on the amount detail about a couple of hours from light sketch to finished inks.

[bob281]

Cyber!

[Charles]

Originally Posted by bob281

I'm pretty fast I guess because I draw alot with my pen.Backgrounds I feel are pretty close to being redundant because I feel they can pretty much can be done with technology.I've never admired an artist because of his backgrounds.It has always been about the characters so that is what I concentrate on.I've never timed myself drawing.I draw a bit stop draw a bit stop.I would say its depending on the amount detail about a couple of hours from light sketch to finished inks.

Then why draw the partial background for this Cyber character in Post # 125 in this thread?

What is that in the background? Trees? Volcanoes? If you want to draw pin-ups, with just characters in various poses, then why bother with squiggly lined backgrounds, at all, and partial ones, at that? It's only detracting from your characters, that way.

Also, since your characters are usually wearing costumes, how is it that so many muscles are visible in the legs, especially?

I'm not a fan of Cyber, simply because there's nothing that really sets him apart, visually. That said, compared to many other characters that you have drawn, previously, you have reined-in the muscle excess a tad, but you still go overboard far too often, when depicting muscles on your characters. Your characters have far less visual variety, that way.

Overall, you do a better job of depicting arms than you do of depicting legs. You're really stingy, though, when it comes to depicting superheroes with the exercise of their powers on full display. You go muscles to the max, to the wall, even, but you offer up a visual pittance, when it comes to letting the reader/viewer see what they've really got going on in the power department.

It's interesting to look at your art, because it makes me wonder about various things. For example, why do you do a better job at drawing hands and fingers, than you do at drawing arms and legs? Typically, it's the other way around, when I view people's work, of those individuals who have not mastered human anatomy in their drawing.

[bob281]

Originally Posted by Charles

Then why draw the partial background for this Cyber character in Post # 125 in this thread?

What is that in the background? Trees? Volcanoes? If you want to draw pin-ups, with just characters in various poses, then why bother with squiggly lined backgrounds, at all, and partial ones, at that? It's only detracting from your characters, that way.

Also, since your characters are usually wearing costumes, how is it that so many muscles are visible in the legs, especially?

I'm not a fan of Cyber, simply because there's nothing that really sets him apart, visually. That said, compared to many other characters that you have drawn, previously, you have reined-in the muscle excess a tad, but you still go overboard far too often, when depicting muscles on your characters. Your characters have far less visual variety, that way.

Overall, you do a better job of depicting arms than you do of depicting legs. You're really stingy, though, when it comes to depicting superheroes with the exercise of their powers on full display. You go muscles to the max, to the wall, even, but you offer up a visual pittance, when it comes to letting the reader/viewer see what they've really got going on in the power department.

It's interesting to look at your art, because it makes me wonder about various things. For example, why do you do a better job at drawing hands and fingers, than you do at drawing arms and legs? Typically, it's the other way around, when I view people's work, of those individuals who have not mastered human anatomy in their drawing.

What part of the arms do you feel that I am not drawing right.Because I really wonder.Could you please be specific.Because I feel I'm not missing anything.I feel it's exageration but that is comics.I don't care for backgrounds but I still need to draw them to know where they should be if I use tech to put them in one day or have another artist draw them one day or just to switch shit up.I love Cyber he was the character that I discovered Sam Keith's artwork on.Power is in the form of the character the way you shade and do muscles is just style.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by bob281

Man up and take a crit dude.You are not at Marvel or DC you have things to work on.

Post # 14

This is one of your better pieces, for the very simple reason that actual super powers are visually depicted.

The character in the foreground, other than his legs and feet, he's not a visual abomination. The wide sleeves of his costume look good, as does that high collar of his cape. I like the look on the character's face, and his empty eyes.

You have a lot of work to do, when it comes to mastering the art of Kirby krackle, but at least in this image, the white area inside the blackness of the Kirby krackle creates a visual sense of power. It's the sharp contrast and the space between the finger outlines and the krackle that does it. The thin lines of the fingers on that one hand visually work, as does that sharp contrast between a mass of black and a concentration of white.

The Kirby krackle, itself, in this image is a good example of how more krackle does not necessarily equate to better krackle, and by extension, a better depiction of power through the Kirby krackle artistic mechanism.

The key to utilizing Kirby krackle lies not in the sheer volume of how much krackle that you slap down onto paper, but rather, HOW you slap down the krackle that you do slap down.

This character's cape also looks good, overall, and it is miles ahead of when you utilize a generic, full-blown effect for your characters' capes. Here, you did a cape right. Not perfectly, but more than sufficiently, visually speaking. Because you did so, it adds to the overall net positive visual for this particular character. Many times, Bob, your capes are visual distractions or visual eyesores.

I like the way that this guy's waist narrows. Just above his waste, the upper torso begins to look deformed, as if someone is blowing up his skin with air just below his armpits.

The thing on his forehead looks unfinished. Is that a strap for it, on one side? You draw so many lines, that it's often difficult to figure out what's actually your character and what's not.

The other character, the one in the background coming flying at the main guy, I like his pose. His upper torso is half deformed, with the area at his waist and just above his waist looking much better than that deformation that takes over around his chest area.

But, I like the fact that you have power emanating from his hands - and it's a different kind of power compared to what the main guy in front is emanating. Now, that's the way to do it, Bob. You often slap a colorful name on your characters, but the only real power that they seem to all possess is the ability to talk shit. The deficiency is not their articulations of choice, but rather, the fact that the artist isn't willing to allow the reader/viewer to behold them in all of their super powered glory. In other words, Bob, while your super powered heroes and villains talk the talk (and better than most, I might add), they mostly do not walk the walk. Or, as one of your characters might describe it, Bob, you keep pussifying them. You're keeping them down, Bob! What's up with that?

[bob281]

Originally Posted by Charles

Post # 14

This is one of your better pieces, for the very simple reason that actual super powers are visually depicted.

The character in the foreground, other than his legs and feet, he's not a visual abomination. The wide sleeves of his costume look good, as does that high collar of his cape. I like the look on the character's face, and his empty eyes.

You have a lot of work to do, when it comes to mastering the art of Kirby krackle, but at least in this image, the white area inside the blackness of the Kirby krackle creates a visual sense of power. It's the sharp contrast and the space between the finger outlines and the krackle that does it. The thin lines of the fingers on that one hand visually work, as does that sharp contrast between a mass of black and a concentration of white.

The Kirby krackle, itself, in this image is a good example of how more krackle does not necessarily equate to better krackle, and by extension, a better depiction of power through the Kirby krackle artistic mechanism.

The key to utilizing Kirby krackle lies not in the sheer volume of how much krackle that you slap down onto paper, but rather, HOW you slap down the krackle that you do slap down.

This character's cape also looks good, overall, and it is miles ahead of when you utilize a generic, full-blown effect for your characters' capes. Here, you did a cape right. Not perfectly, but more than sufficiently, visually speaking. Because you did so, it adds to the overall net positive visual for this particular character. Many times, Bob, your capes are visual distractions or visual eyesores.

I like the way that this guy's waist narrows. Just above his waste, the upper torso begins to look deformed, as if someone is blowing up his skin with air just below his armpits.

The thing on his forehead looks unfinished. Is that a strap for it, on one side? You draw so many lines, that it's often difficult to figure out what's actually your character and what's not.

The other character, the one in the background coming flying at the main guy, I like his pose. His upper torso is half deformed, with the area at his waist and just above his waist looking much better than that deformation that takes over around his chest area.

But, I like the fact that you have power emanating from his hands - and it's a different kind of power compared to what the main guy in front is emanating. Now, that's the way to do it, Bob. You often slap a colorful name on your characters, but the only real power that they seem to all possess is the ability to talk shit. The deficiency is not their articulations of choice, but rather, the fact that the artist isn't willing to allow the reader/viewer to behold them in all of their super powered glory. In other words, Bob, while your super powered heroes and villains talk the talk (and better than most, I might add), they mostly do not walk the walk. Or, as one of your characters might describe it, Bob, you keep pussifying them. You're keeping them down, Bob! What's up with that?

No friend I am not holding them down I'm like any other artist finding my way.You are now criting me on four year old work.I also think you are somewhat the mouthpiece for Rob Norton.Who I originally gave that crit to.He could not take it and behaved like a child until other board members told him the same.Tell Rob to drop art stop whining and letting others get his artistic vengeance.He has not posted a pic since the picture I used that phrase on.So I know his feelings are hurt.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by bob281

What part of the arms do you feel that I am not drawing right.Because I really wonder.Could you please be specific.Because I feel I'm not missing anything.I feel it's exageration but that is comics.I don't care for backgrounds but I still need to draw them to know where they should be if I use tech to put them in one day or have another artist draw them one day or just to switch shit up.I love Cyber he was the character that I discovered Sam Keith's artwork on.Power is in the form of the character the way you shade and do muscles is just style.

I agree that exaggeration is a part of comics - and quite a big part, at that. The Hulk is a prime example of that.

But, even exaggeration is an artform, in and of itself. And, like all art forms, discipline matters. You allow exaggeration to run rampant - nearly all the time!

You don't hesitate to slap down the muscles. You go wild with them, Bob. Your characters have a dreadful tendency to all look as if they are on super steroids. If it was a character here or there, that might become a visual plus. Instead, you've made that exaggeration in excess the norm for your super heroes.

Yes, you can do it. After all, you do do it. But, you need to understand that contrast, in art, is not merely a matter of dark versus light. Rather, it is a multifaceted thing. When your characters all look the same, or nearly so, muscle-wise, there's no real visual contrast for the reader/viewer. So, the end effect is a dulling of the visual senses, and in the process, your handiwork comes across as less visually appealing, which sort of defeats the purpose of injecting all of that energy into your artwork in the first place. It becomes wasted energy.

Not that you feel that it is a waste to inject energy, and it isn't. But, the waste comes about when you not only fail to capitalize upon all of that energy, you go to the extreme of injecting into your artwork elements that are counter-productive to the reader/viewer being able to absorb your characters in all of their potential visual glory.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by bob281

No friend I am not holding them down I'm like any other artist finding my way.You are now criting me on four year old work.I also think you are somewhat the mouthpiece for Rob Norton.Who I originally gave that crit to.He could not take it and behaved like a child until other board members told him the same.Tell Rob to drop art stop whining and letting others get his artistic vengeance.He has not posted a pic since the picture I used that phrase on.So I know his feelings are hurt.

::sigh::

I'm critiquing you on artwork that you posted in this thread this year, art which you described as, and I quote, "Here's my shit in all it's glory every piece a gadamn story."

As far as being a mouthpiece for Rob Norton, I wonder how successful that you will be at persuading anybody other than yourself that such is the case. The art that I am commenting on in this thread is yours, not Rob Norton. You brought him up and injected him into this conversation, not me. My opinion doesn't gravitate around what Rob Norton thinks or doesn't think. Furthermore, I have posted on the artwork of many who post artwork in this forum. Yet, you're the only one who seems to think, for some inexplicable reason, that I am somewhat of a mouthpiece for Rob Norton. What is somewhat of a mouthpiece, anyway?

I have no reason of substance to tell Rob Norton to quit whining. I can think of better examples than Rob Norton, where whining is the issue.

It appears that you remain obsessed with distractions, rather than focused upon your artwork. Accordingly, I am going to spend my Saturday in a more productive manner than squandering it playing argumentative tiddlywinks with an artist who allows themself to become so easily and needlessly distracted.

[bob281]

Originally Posted by Charles

::sigh::

I'm critiquing you on artwork that you posted in this thread this year, art which you described as, and I quote, "Here's my shit in all it's glory every piece a gadamn story."

As far as being a mouthpiece for Rob Norton, I wonder how successful that you will be at persuading anybody other than yourself that such is the case. The art that I am commenting on in this thread is yours, not Rob Norton. You brought him up and injected him into this conversation, not me. My opinion doesn't gravitate around what Rob Norton thinks or doesn't think. Furthermore, I have posted on the artwork of many who post artwork in this forum. Yet, you're the only one who seems to think, for some inexplicable reason, that I am somewhat of a mouthpiece for Rob Norton. What is somewhat of a mouthpiece, anyway?

I have no reason of substance to tell Rob Norton to quit whining. I can think of better examples than Rob Norton, where whining is the issue.

It appears that you remain obsessed with distractions, rather than focused upon your artwork. Accordingly, I am going to spend my Saturday in a more productive manner than squandering it playing argumentative tiddlywinks with an artist who allows themself to become so easily and needlessly distracted.

Just because the art is in this thread does not mean it is not old I have said that this is all my art some of it is old and you know this because you have commented on it in the past.Don't play dumb Charles I have delt with you and Rob before and I know you work in leauge with each other.Im not distracted I'm a drawing fool.Probaly the most prolific artist in this thread even though you have called me lazy. I don't yap a lot like some I post art.If you go back through these threads you will see creativity and art not stupid arguments.If you don't have anything to add please leave me alone you're wasting my time.

[Rob Norton]

Originally Posted by bob281

.I also think you are somewhat the mouthpiece for Rob Norton.Who I originally gave that crit to.He could not take it and behaved like a child until other board members told him the same.Tell Rob to drop art stop whining and letting others get his artistic vengeance.He has not posted a pic since the picture I used that phrase on.So I know his feelings are hurt.

what in the holy fuck?!? dude, fuck you. I thought we moved WAY past that nonsense. I even DEFEND you and your art(did you not see what I wrote?!?) and this is what you say? you have some grand idea that you have scared me away cause you called me out on...something? and THATS why I haven't posted art? cause YOU shut me down? you are completely delusional. completely self involved. completely convinced of your own superiority. you haven't affected ME in the least, you ass. I post art when I damn well feel like it.

I know nothing of CHARLES except that he takes the time to talk at length to people about their art. you can drop that nonsense.

dude, I was totally on your side. defending you and your unique voice and skill. and this is what I get? YOU got your feeling hurt and came back and attacked 10 fold and are now convinced of how kickass you are.

you are so full of it. not worth anyones time anymore.

Rob

[bob281]

Originally Posted by Rob Norton

what in the holy fuck?!? dude, fuck you. I thought we moved WAY past that nonsense. I even DEFEND you and your art(did you not see what I wrote?!?) and this is what you say? you have some grand idea that you have scared me away cause you called me out on...something? and THATS why I haven't posted art? cause YOU shut me down? you are completely delusional. completely self involved. completely convinced of your own superiority. you haven't affected ME in the least, you ass. I post art when I damn well feel like it.

I know nothing of CHARLES except that he takes the time to talk at length to people about their art. you can drop that nonsense.

dude, I was totally on your side. defending you and your unique voice and skill. and this is what I get? YOU got your feeling hurt and came back and attacked 10 fold and are now convinced of how kickass you are.

you are so full of it. not worth anyones time anymore.

Rob

You don't defend me you give backhanded compliments just like Charles.You like my art but you shit on it saying I will never be capable of being professional.I kinow when I am being shit on.You and ten bastards like you could'nt fuck with me.Charles says he loves my work but he likes nothing about it from reading his overdone crits.I know you work in concert I know you're still pissed about those crits I gave you so you fuck off. You will never need to defend me because I can do that my gadamn self!

[Bishop]

Bob,
Maybe when you post an image you could give an estimated year that you drew it. That would help the guys with their critiques and show how you have progressed.