HOME | DD
Hipster-Coyote β Commish - Asteroth
Published: 2010-05-17 13:28:51 +0000 UTC; Views: 832; Favourites: 16; Downloads: 15
Redirect to original
Description
OOOOOOOH MAN. This was fun. And took ages. But was fun.My first commission I feel so accomplished now!
Commission for of her character Capt. Asteroth. ...who looks nothing like this picture OTL
This guy: [link]
Hope you like it!
Commission info can be found here: [link]
Related content
Comments: 77
You did a great job on him c: I remember you showing me the drawing of him before. I looooooove this piece. I think you did him more than enough justice c:
π: 0 β©: 0
Awesome! Wow... Mixy you did excellent on this! I love the BG as well... Such a cool character 
π: 0 β©: 0
D8 WHOA where did this come from?! I didn't recognize it as your art at first! Really really well done on your first commission!
π: 0 β©: 1
I tried something new with the lines X'D Which isn't exactly the greatest thing to do ON A COMMISSION PFFFFFFFFFF
π: 0 β©: 0
WHERE'S ME BOOTY?!
-shot as well-
π: 0 β©: 0
The fuck designs this kinda crap?
They call is OCs, but God, what mental handicapped can't tell the sources?
Sure, art is made by its predecessors, but at least TRY to make it 'seem' original.
Bloody Monet bloke did it, why can't you, aahr!
This world has too many sheeps 'n too few herders nowadays!
π: 0 β©: 4
What's wrong with this character? It's very original. Or maybe you don't like it because it's not an anime human?
π: 0 β©: 1
I told you; its sources are clear and it doesn't sound original to me at all.
Anthro is okay, just, it doesn't give me any amazing feeling.
It's a replica of something done a lot.
What I'm mostly referring to is its clothes and sword. Then, of course, the character is a regular anthro. It is a mash-up of randomized parts, not so random at the end.
Let's not argue about it's beauty, but rather about it's originality and 'wow'-factor.
'n Let's both agree, as for originality, -which is rather subjective-, it has little.
π: 0 β©: 3
That's ridiculous. This character is not anthro at all and it doesn't have "random parts". It's an original species. Give me an example of something that looks similar if you say it's not original.
π: 0 β©: 1
Define anthro?
As far as I know/searched: 'An animal with human-like characteristics'
Can this not be called an animal then?
It has a tail, claws and clear animal-parts (ears, mouth, nose,...), n hey, it looks human too.
So aren't you just trying to 'something' to correct me on?
As for random parts 'n it being original:
Just google 'steampunk' and 'anthro' art.
If I make a painting of the Mona Lisa, Eiffel Tower and Einstein
on a bridge, somewhere on the moon, with cheese falling from the sky;
will you consider it original?
Perhaps. I wouldn't. Because it would just be the 100000th parody of famous characters in some
bizarre environment. Surely, it may have 'never' been done before; but it is merely a
collage of famous parts put into a famous context.
As an individual piece, it may be original. As art in general, it is not.
For other arguments, read my replies to the original author somewhere under this.
[link]
π: 0 β©: 1
Don't you think you're exaggerating? Just 'cause it has a steampunk style it doesn't make it unoriginal. As much as I can tell, nothing can please you. Nothing will ever seem original to you if you keep overreacting in such a rudely manner. And even if it's not 100% original, it doesn't mean it's as horrible as you described it in your first comment. And as I looked through your gallery, I didn't happen to find any original characters of your own, so you shouldn't try to be a critic for other people's art as long as you don't have any of your own. And no, I won't read any other replies, seeing how you insult someone else artwork. I prefer thinking, it couldn't get much worse than it already is.
π: 0 β©: 1
Okay, I thought we could rest this case now, but it seems you want to continue.
Be my guest.
But since you happened to be meddling with other affairs,
why not just 'check' those replies up there? Just out of interest?
Cause as you see; the original author and I did agree; and we're both in peace now.
It is your stubbornness that controls this now.
But as I said; fine. Let me break this apart this 'n reply.
"Don't you think you're exaggerating? Just 'cause it has a steampunk style it doesn't make it unoriginal."
- I just did a whole comment of explaining 'n now you try to get me on this? I never mentioned it was unoriginal cause it was steampunk. I told you; it's about the popular parts that randomly get put in there.
(I feel like repeating myself; the comment to the author really explains it better)
In a way; exaggerating is just your opinion. Mine is I don't. Again, just look at the parts. They may not seem familiar to you; aright. But to me, they do. 'n The author seems to agree to that; isn't that ironical?
"As much as I can tell, nothing can please you. Nothing will ever seem original to you if you keep overreacting in such a rudely manner."
- Now hold on, matey; it didn't please me on originality. But there are many ways to rate art. I, for one, already said I liked the colouring and now, honestly, it's not a shabby design at all. Just because I provided, -I'll agree to this-, rude critics, doesn't make me not pleased with it.
Also, you're mixing things up here. Overreacting is doing something in front of someone. If I see art and no one is around, I can still dislike it, though not overreact. I've overreacted due to a bad mood; but my critics remain solid 'n perfectly fine.
If it doesn't please me, I criticize it. It's not cause I criticize that it doesn't please me.
"And even if it's not 100% original..."
- Which it isn't.
"it doesn't mean it's as horrible as you described it in your first comment.""
- Aye, that's my way of going about 'n swearing. At any rate, I take back it is crap. But again, it doesn't do for originality.
"And as I looked through your gallery, I didn't happen to find any original characters of your own, so you shouldn't try to be a critic for other people's art as long as you don't have any of your own."
- You've had decent replies; up to this one, that is.
Okay, first, mind rephrasing that a bit better? I might misunderstand; but as I understand it, you meant:
"Don't criticize art if you don't have any art."
Aright, argument 1: Did you ever listen to a song 'n thought: 'I don't really like it; maybe they should include a bit more..." Or if your friend made you listen to his own songs, wouldn't you give him advice? Or would you hold back, cause 'you don't make music yourself'?
Second argument: I have never criticized his ways of swaying the brush. Never did I mention his technique. Of course, I'll admit, I have too little experience to critiseze him on that; BUT, I have all right to mention the originality. After all; originality is NOT a kind of art. It is a general attribute.
Third; isn't it ignorant to assume I haven't got OC, due to just not having them here? Will you assume a person has no car, if you don't see one in his garage? It is the same train of thought you have. But he migh have just parked it elsewhere.
Fourthly, well, I just find it odd that you go diggin' in all possible places to find a decent argument. That's all.
"And no, I won't read any other replies, seeing how you insult someone else artwork. I prefer thinking, it couldn't get much worse than it already is."
- Oh, playing Lady Ignorance now? I can only suggest you do it; but if you wish to remain having such stubborn attitude; you may do so. Though, you might wanna open your eyes 'n acknowledge that a man has many masks.
π: 0 β©: 2
Oh boy. It's better if I don't continue this, you're just gonna come up with a long nonsense like that. O_o Just think whatever you want to think no matter if you're right or wrong. I'm not continuing this discussion with you.
π: 0 β©: 1
That is taking the coward's way out.
('n Nonsense? If it's like that; why don't you break it apart?
Nonsense is easily beaten then, no?)
If you plan to discuss something, at least provide arguments
and be prepared to prove yourself.
Indeed, I have rude critics, however; I had arguments supporting it.
And look at how irony played this out: your opinion has been lost.
If you stop fuelling it with arguments, then it is of no interest to me.
Therefore yes, we can just stop this.
Thanks for giving a bit of resistance tough; pity we didn't continue.
π: 0 β©: 1
You don't have arguments either. You say the character looks familiar to you but you don't have something to prove it? What kinda argument is that, Mr.Critic? -_-
π: 0 β©: 1
Did you not just read the whole thing through?
Cause it seems you're ignoring the whole post I made;
I have provided you with arguments and carefully-constructed sentences arguing your ways of criticizing me.
At least make an attempt to read it through, even to you, it may just seem nonsense.
'n If you did, then try to understand; as right now, you have not.
As for evidence, you fail to see the point I'm trying to make here.
Do I have to dig up every single drawing on the internet to match the parts to this?
I'll tell you one more time:
It is NOT about the whole thing; but HOW it is put together.
Okay, picture this: you have a doll broken up in 5 parts.
You try to make a new doll by assembling those parts in a different order.
You get a very weird doll; but nonetheless, everyone can distinguish the arms, head, legs, ...
Is it creative? Yes!
Is it original? No! ;]
It'll take me ages to find a doll (read: picture) to match the exact thing.
At the end, -and I'll prove this to you in a second-, you'll just argue it looks nothing like it,
or I'm just exaggerating.
That is called ignorance 'n failing to see the main point of my argument.
It is not that I don't provide arguments; but rather you cannot see the ones I've provided already.
Nonetheless, I'll do my best to explain my ways here.
So here are some pictures:
[link]
[link]
[link]
[link]
I'm sure you can agree the axe, claws 'n sword are common, no?
So, I'm doing my best to convince you; will you now, please, try to understand this?
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, right...
Writing looooong texts usually makes things worse you know. Not to mention your speech pattern is rather confusing.
Anyways. As long as you don't have original characters of your own and you can't create your own characters and so on, you shouldn't be out here trying to give people a lesson of originality. In all this discussion you sounded so arrogant. And you know what? Look, we two are so not original. God created the human already.
Sorry. But you're really wasting your time. So stop acting like a critic. Try to critic yourself before you critic other people. And even if it's not original, you just make everything worse. Usually, critics have to help, not make things worse. And you insulted the creator by calling her a "retarded sheep". I can clearly see how your education pays for itself. NOT. >:[
π: 0 β©: 1
I don't know why you're referring to my education;
yet at any rate, do you not think it requires a little
bit of education to write this kind of "looooong" text?
Writing long texts is not making things worse, chap; it's,
in contrary, making your point more clear. The more arguments you provide,
the easier it will be to understand.
Because you don't share my opinion 'n fail to read proper English,
does not make any of my speech confusing nor bad. It only makes you read 'n understand.
'n Quite frankly, that's exactly what I wished to do; to make you all think.
So now you did 'n you still disagree, alas, that is fine.
Nonetheless, you disagree by heart, not by mind.
That's the mayor difference 'n reason I am right here.
"As long as you don't have original characters of your own and you can't create your own characters and so on, you shouldn't be out here trying to give people a lesson of originality."
Are you still pursuing that argument?
Have you not read my comment to you regarding it? The car-garage example?
Is it still so unclear to you?
Sure, I may sound arrogant. Wouldn't you, if someone said something completely contradicting towards your beliefs, 'n you'd have to urge to correct him?
What you need to do, is not dramatize it all that much 'n live with the solid fact that arrogance is part of a discussion. I tried to make my point in a human manner by using proper etiquette.
I may as well go as low as saying you may not talk to me, as your etiquette is lacking.
But I won't; that would be ridiculous, I'm sure you agree.
So is telling me, once again, -even after haven been proved wrong-, that I may not write critics because I have no OC's uploaded to DA at this very moment.
Fyi, I had 'n deleted most drawn art.
I have original writings which can, of course, be analysed 'n rejected as copies.
But at the very best, you must understand artwork is much easier to compare than writings.
Therefore, I still have more right in calling this unoriginal, than you have calling my writings.
As for my other digital art; I never said it was original. I'll admit it's just fanart.
But does that make my incapable of making original art? I think not.
At the end, I haven't wasted a second. You believe so too; else you would've stopped this far earlier already. So we both are just trying to make our points here. 'n As for you, you argue well 'n I'll thank you for it; but you lack arguments to prove me wrong. I have them, however.
Again, I did not try to critize this person at first. Do not bring things out of their context; you very well understand what I wrote was a piece of crap surrounding a proper critique. It's a joke 'n I could've written it much better; if I had, we probably would've avoided this argument altogether, but then that's just not how things works :]
Just on a side-note here: I've never called her a 'retarded sheep'. Check your sources.
Again, refer to the previous paragraph for the swearing.
So instead of going all personal here, 'n talking about my education, why don't you provide arguments as-is, and try not to judge people by texts.
If you'd like to end this, as you believe this is a waste of time; you may do so at any time.
Heh, y'know, we both known neither of us will give in.
All we can do is continue throwing arguments, flaming them 'n spitting them out against each other.
I believe I've won, you believe you did.
A pity it is, however, that nobody won today.
As no knowledge was won on either sides.
By all means; do continue.
Yet you know the result, just as I do.
π: 0 β©: 0
Well. sorry i reply again. But I didn`t agree to you. Cause you didn`t show me anything via links what exactly looks familiar to you. I just wanted to stop this conversation and left the things here in peace. Man dude. Leave the people. It's not your problem.
π: 0 β©: 1
Are you referring to me when you say: "Man dude. Leave the people. It's not your problem."?
'n Wait, you don't agree cause I didn't show any links?
After all valid points I've made here, -you even agreeing to me!-, you now go at it again?
I thought we had left this; now for some reason, you're wanting to bring it back up?
Is that not contradicting your 'Leave the people'-thing; or is that not directed to me after all?
π: 0 β©: 1
Maaaan. don`t act childsih please. i don`t want to bring up anything. if I want to use your critique I need to know what exactly remids you of something. When you say random body parts or what ever I canb`t work with it. I'm just asking for help.
π: 0 β©: 1
Is childish bringing up valid arguments and talking normally?
If so, by all means, write a letter to get the definition changed.
At any rate; I mentioned you should just give it a search.
What would it matter if I found something completely matching to your drawing?
Would you suddently realize: "Oh, yes, you're right; I won't ever do it again!"
No. You'd just argue that: 'Everything can be similar"
And we'd be back to zero.
Do I seriously have to go 'n dig every single artwork up out of my memory; to justify this?
Is this the only, single way you're going to realize it's just a collab of parts?
I'll just repeat what I said to Simina-Cindy here:
"It is NOT about the whole thing; but HOW it is put together.
Okay, picture this: you have a doll broken up in 5 parts.
You try to make a new doll by assembling those parts in a different order.
You get a very weird doll; but nonetheless, everyone can distinguish the arms, head, legs, ...
Is it creative? Yes!
Is it original? No! ;]
It'll take me ages to find a doll (read: picture) to match the exact thing.
At the end, -and I'll prove this to you in a second-, you'll just argue it looks nothing like it,
or I'm just exaggerating."
If you, however, still insist on it; well, then I'll do my best to give you some examples:
(But please, I know how you're going to argue; just 'try' to look at it from my perspective, of how I just explained to you, okay? And recall our last conversation where it ended well? Reread that one too; you'll realize I have no bad intentions and, -if I recall-, you did agree to me)
[link]
[link]
[link]
[link]
I'm trying my best to make a point here; not to influence directly.
But just, please; try to understand me, aright?
π: 0 β©: 1
The googles are funny. XD
But honestly. YOU HAVE A PROBLEM! Do you think I didn`t understand? Do you think I look for parts in the internet just to create MY OC? what a suprise these parts look really similar. But well. i didn`t know them. Realise that! Well. the referencers help me a lot and I can work with it NOW. and now an advice to you my freind. Learn how to give useful critique. Criticue should be there to work with. and not something like "It renminds me of" or what ever. Well. I argue, cause I have the right like you. You also argue. that`s what a discussion is about.
You remind me of a religion extrimist who wants to share his thoughts withe veryone and nothing else. That`S poor. (no offense)
Well. Like it or not. I can`t share your opinion for 100 %. Let`s quit this and rest in peace. thanks for your help but I hope I mustn`t talk to you again.
π: 0 β©: 1
No, I never said you did.
I told you how it was, you failed to understand;
that is all there is.
I have never intended to give useful critics in the first place.
You had to pursue your point; I just joined in seriously.
A stupid joke turned into an argument.
One which I've won; as you'd like to quit it.
As for an extremist; I am not.
Ever heard of "Your opinion doesn't interest me. Only your argument."?
In this case; whatever you think, can be neglected for me.
Think of me as you like; your point of me being an extremist, is lacking
arguments and proper language (what would you have to share then? Money? Food? Love?)
I like it; I love it you don't share my opinion.
That's exactly what makes these conversations interesting.
Just imagine how boring the world would be if everyone agreed.
Now or then, you need a bit of chaos to bring peace.
'n In this case, I was just the antithesis.
If you don't wish to talk again, then I'll comply to that.
Let us end this; cheers :]
π: 0 β©: 0
Lol. And the stuff in your gallery is orinΒ΄ginal with non detailed clothinga nad big boobs manga chics? Dude. respect the taste of artists. Sure it is anthro, but well, did you invent humans? I could say the same about your gallery. If you don`t like it, it's ok. But don`t tell something unoriginal if you can`t find an exact example of something that looks like this. Send me a link.
π: 0 β©: 1
Don't blow shit at me without proper arguments.
Read my comment directed to you, and you only, and learn to respect the ways of how comments function.
If I reply to someone else, it is, clearly, NOT directed to you.
I won't start breaking this down until you've read 'n understood my comment.
Again, no offence; but have no offence yourself either.
π: 0 β©: 1
let me rephrase that: it is objective.*
π: 0 β©: 0
ehm well. tell me what exactly it is what this caharcter doesn`t maike original and maybe I can understand you. But an nonsense comment like this is really not necessarry.
π: 0 β©: 1
No comment will make sense to you if you just storm in and read a random one.
It was not directed towards you; though I can see why you'd think it was.
I mean no disrespect to you; merely to the piece of art. I'll never criticize the artist nor his pencils, only his ways of swaying them.
To me, it's a mash-up of random parts; common parts. It brings up too many associations with other characters, and thus to me, is not quite original.
You may call it my opinion 'n being subjective, even paranoia, but I think not. It's an anthro placed into a steampunk-like environment with little to offer than its unique hands 'n face, though I may just fail to see the clear source of that.
In other words; I question only the originality 'n thought brought into it. It's a perfectly acceptable character, just not innovation.
Does it have to be? Probably not... But that's its weak point 'n exactly what I chose to criticize it on.
As for my rudeness; excuse me, I haven't had that of a g'day today, I'm afraid. Indeed, the swearing was uncalled for. But that's all I'll apologize for; the critique, nonetheless, it perfectly fine.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeh, swearingw asn`t really necessary. I felt insulted in teh first time.
I dunno which body parts you mean, but I guess you can show me some stuff. Yeah, it's a steampunk anthro. But I won`t call it unoriginal, cause I don't like it, or it's not my taste. I respect your opinion, but you know it's hard to invent something new that doesn`t already exist. there were too much great minds out there which already invented everything. 
π: 0 β©: 1
Arighty; that's okay then :]
Glad we understand each other!
'n Heh, never say it's already invented; it's really all about
what you're aiming for: you want something original? Keep trying!
Of course, most of it will already exist or will be a part of something,
BUT, never say never.
As an inventor, that's the key to eventually winning 'n inventing something.
Let me give you a word of advice I once got from a professional artist:
"You'll draw 1000 bad drawings before you'll draw one good.'
Same can applied for inventing something new: "You'll invent 1000 bad things, before you'll invent 1 good'
'n Heh, maybe you're just not aiming for originality but rather for art itself.
Then hey, by all means, tell the critics that. They'll understand.
After all, not everyone is supposed to be a 'herder'/inventor.
Just do whatever suits you; practice 'n invent things as you wish.
Don't let my bollocks stop you! ;]
π: 0 β©: 0
Btw; I like your colouring.
π: 0 β©: 0
Hehe, very cool! 
π: 0 β©: 1
not a problem lil bro
π: 0 β©: 0
The colours sure are vibrant too!
π: 0 β©: 1
x3 Those are his colors, haha...I forgot his ears though D8
π: 0 β©: 1
Take a look at the character ref...I missed em D:
π: 0 β©: 1
...ehehehe....eheheehee...HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!XD
Can't say I've never blundered in my commissions...
π: 0 β©: 1
XD She said it was okay though.
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>