Looking to use this as a reaction image to post when people complain about colored noses

Looking to use this as a reaction image to post when people complain about colored noses.

But I just can't pin point a good text to stick on it. Anyone feel inspired?

Tumblr: Est. 1937?

heard you talkin shit
about red noise

But they don't look angry enough for that.

>2016
>not drawing your comics like animation frames from old disney films
>Ishygddt

What a good idea. You should probably also include Snow White, the Queen and the Prince's colored noses too though. Otherwise it might seem that it is a specific character design element that served a specific purpose in a specific context, and not something to apply to every drawing the way tumblr does, which would totally undermine your attempted justification.

>You should probably also include Snow White, the Queen and the Prince's colored noses too though.
Look better, user, they don't have colored noses.

Disney has this weird way of drawing normal characters and weirdly cartoony ones too and yet can blend them pretty well together.

If only Snow White was as cartoony as the dwarves.

>that served a specific purpose in a specific context,
There was no purpose, nor context. it was jut how they were drawn. That other characters didn't have red noses doesn't change anything.
You don't need a reason to give red nose to a character, it's just a choice from the artist.

>the Queen
There.

>There was no purpose, nor context.
Ah, right, that's how character design works. You make a bunch of arbitrary desicions without thinking about what that may or may not communicate to an audience, and then the job is done.

>it's either everything applied to all
>or nothing applied to none
that's not how it work, bru
some part of a desing have their reasons, othere are just there because that's howthe artist like it and there is nothing wrong with this.

People complaining about red noses just don't get this.

Not everything is there to communicate something. sometimes it's just there. No need to be absolute.

youre wasting red ink on unnecessary bullshit

While we're here, here's one for noodle arms.

If you remove Aladdin's patch from his pants, you remove a crucial bit of information the audience can receive about his status in life. If you added another his design is needlessly cluttered.

Especially in animation, but more generally also in general character design, if you are adding things "just because" you are doing both the character and the audience a disservice. Why not add patches to Jafar's outfit too, "just because"? Why not add one to Hercules' cape? Why do you think has a giant red nose but the regular form of the Queen does not?

the point
-
-
-
your head

Doing something you like is never a waste.

but why do you like it? I seriously dont understand what the appeal of a cold is.

You are aware that there are such a thing as optional, right?
>if you are adding things "just because" you are doing both the character and the audience a disservice
Not necessary. if it fit the character and you like what it look like then there is zero reason to not go for it.

Unless I am mistaken, but it look like your argument is based on either "it is a necessity and thus IT HAS TO BE INCLUDED" or "it is not necessary, therefore IT MOST BE FORBIDDEN".

This is not how it work.

Unlike the patch you mentioned, a different shade of nose often fall in neither of the "necessary" nor "forbidden" and is simply up to the artist appreciation.

The reply was that he wasn't actually doing any pint.

I'm glad you can admit that you're wrong

1. It's not a cold, just an artistic choice.
2. I do not especially like it, I am indifferent to it.

People throwing a tantrum at it is what make no sense to me.

Silly user, that's not a queen. That's a friendly old apple peddler.

The red noses complaint was fine when it was aimed at the homogenized style brewing on Tumblr. But of course there's idiots that took it the wrong way and get triggered when red noses are used anywhere.

"Well it's optional" is an incredibly stupid non-counterpoint. If you're slapping things on to a character just because, or 'it fits', you clearly don't have any idea how to draw a character. If you're drawing fanart or an original character donut steel, why not slap a fedora and katana on to the character as well, since 'it's optional' and both of those things can 'look good'.

lazy stylistic choices for no particular reason except perhaps to fit in with a common denominator are bad and should be discouraged.

>"Well it's optional" is an incredibly stupid non-counterpoint.
It's perfectly valid.

> If you're drawing fanart or an original character donut steel, why not slap a fedora and katana on to the character as well, since 'it's optional' and both of those things can 'look good'.
You are once again trying to deal in absolute what is a mater of relative. the things that can be optional to some characters or general style of a piece of work are not always the same things that are optional in other works.

If it works, it works, if it's pleasing there is not reason to not do it.

>if it fit the character and you like what it look like then there is zero reason to not go for it.
Adding extra patches to Aladdin's clothes would be an entirely reasonable way of further communicating his status in life. It fit the character, so why not do it? There was zero reason not to, like you said, so why didn't it happen? Why doesn't Aladdin have a giant red nose?

Character design, and art in general, is about communication. Not necessarily a "message" in the traditional sense, but information. The giant red nose in animation lends a certain look to a character that communicates something about them. In the Dwarves' case, or with Smee, they have bulbous red noses that makes them seem comedic and lovable. With the crone, she has a much more angular nose that the red emphasizes, which makes her slightly but not overtly sinister. These were not accidents that artists came up with "just because." Why should the artists emulating them put less care into their work?

>lazy stylistic choices for no particular reason except perhaps to fit in with a common denominator
Or maybe, please try to follow me on those one, just maybe, this what the artist want to do? Just saying.

If this is the overall design they want to give to their work, I don't really have an issue either.

Why does the artist want to do it? Is it because everyone else does it? Is it because it adds that extra bit of "detail"? Why not go further and yellow the forehead and blue the jawline? Why is it only the nose?

>There was zero reason not to, like you said, so why didn't it happen? Why doesn't Aladdin have a giant red nose?
Because this is not what the artist wanted. Once again, you are stuck with you broken logic of "if it can be done THEN IT HAS TO".

And you are again trying to equal some nescessity factor such as production cost with what the artist is actually free to do.

Certain thing can be optional or can just be a chosen stylistic choice. there is no reason to be angry at this.

>Why does the artist want to do it?
Because he like it and like how it look.

>Why not go further and yellow the forehead and blue the jawline? Why is it only the nose?
Because that's what the artist wanted.

>It's valid
how is it valid? You're saying that you can add whatever you please without rhyme or reason and that's A-OK because the artist can do whatever they want - Why not make the character in an abstract expressionist style, then? Why don't we have any of those characters? Maybe, just maybe, and try and follow me here, because I think you're going to get hopelessly lost, character design should be thought out and have cohesion rather than anything goes because it's an option. Slapping a stylistic choice on 'just because' is a lazy, stupid thing to do.

So the artist is a moron and needs their hand held in order to not jump on the latest meme train to nowhere?

>Because this is not what the artist wanted.
So do you think if the artist had done all the work on Aladdin, and at the last minute decided that what the character really needed was a giant bulbous red nose, that the character design would have benefited from that?

>production cost
It has nothing to do with production cost and everything to do with the fundamentals of art. A DeviantArt poster can't get around ignoring the fundamentals of anatomy by saying "it's my style!", so why should tumblr get a free pass when they try something similar? Red noses on every single character are the modern equivalent of spikey-chinned baseball plate faces.

>e saying that you can add whatever you please without rhyme or reason
I never said without rhyme or reason. actually, I have mentionned the reson several time: It gives a look that the artist appreciate. It's as simple as this.
>because the artist can do whatever they want
I never said that.
>Why not make the character in an abstract expressionist style
You are aware that this is perfectly legit, right?

>character design should be thought out and have cohesion rather than anything goes because it's an option.
I never said "anything goes". I said, an art style is not limited to "HAVE TO" and "CAN NOT", there is a ballpark anyone can work around, and shade of nose has often been in that.

You are once again making the error of thinking in absolute, that "it's everything or nothing" without considering there is a spectrum in which an artist can work in which his creation still remain legit.

Also, giving everyone a shaded nose IS giving a cohesion to the work.

>So do you think if the artist had done all the work on Aladdin, and at the last minute decided that what the character really needed was a giant bulbous red nose, that the character design would have benefited from that?
See >there is a ballpark anyone can work around, and shade of nose has often been in that.
You are once again thinking in absolute. Also, cartoon are a collective work It has to be satisfying to everyone involved.

> so why should tumblr get a free pass
It's not getting a pass, Colored noses, in a lot of case, simply doesn't break any rule.

You are aware that every art trends is a meme.

And just because there is a trend that you don't like doesn't mean it is wrong.

Yes, there is a ballpark. For example, as already stated, the giant red nose serves two opposite purposes in Snow White, to make the dwarves friendly and make the crone sinister. That's a pretty big ballpark. But putting it onto every character isn't just a ballpark, it's a planet, and goes against the whole principle of communication. Which isn't a "rule" in the same way anatomy isn't a "rule."

>It gives a look that the artist appreciate
that's not a reason though, that's a feeling. feelings != reasons. I know tumblrtards don't understand that, but no matter how much you plug your ears and shut your eyes, it's true. You have yet to give me a reason.
>I never said that.
That's exactly what you said, albeit with a hell of a lot of prancing around the point. "If the artist appreciates it they can do whatever they want with no rhyme or reason"
>You are aware that this is perfectly legit, right?
If you meant for your image to be an example, you failed horribly. surrealism is not abstract expressionism.
>I never said "anything goes".
you did, actually, multiple times.
>I said, an art style is not limited to "HAVE TO" and "CAN NOT",
But it is limited to reason, cohesion, and purpose. If something has no purpose, it should not be part of a character. Shade of nose is no exception. If you're not going for realism, don't slap a realistic element on just because everyone else does it or I """""appreciate""""" it.
>You are once again making the error of thinking in absolute, that "it's everything or nothing"
No, I'm saying it has to have a logical thought process. If it has a reason to be there, then it's fine. If it has no reason to be there and was put there "just cuz", then it was a mistake or flaw.
>without considering there is a spectrum
more like autism spectrum, because people that slap a red nose on things for no reason all fall on it.
>giving everyone a shaded nose IS giving a cohesion
No, it's not, it's turning a nonsensical stylistic choice into an epidemic of influenza. Unless it's an earth/etc. where infuenza has become impervious to drugs, then you have no reason to do so.

>You are aware that every art trends is a meme.
yes, it's why Pollock is a thing.
>just because there is a trend that you don't like doesn't mean it is wrong.
just because lazy copycatting is a trend doesn't make it right.

>just because lazy copycatting is a trend doesn't make it right.
A tred being popular doens't mean lazy copycatting.

It simply mean it inspire more people.

>Yes, there is a ballpark. For example, as already stated, the giant red nose serves two opposite purposes in Snow White, to make the dwarves friendly and make the crone sinister.
that is not being in a ballpark, once again, the only reason you allow it is because it serve a purpose.

Not everything has to and if the final reason is coherent and pleasing then it's all it need to do.

I take it English isn't your first language - the popular trend IS lazy copycatting, not the trend being popular means lazy copycatting. Two completely different meanings there, Sergei.

If it doesn't serve a purpose, it's not coherent.

>that's not a reason though, that's a feeling. feelings != reasons
And once again, I am telling you, a drawing doesn't not SOLLELY rely on reason. it actually rely on feel too, and it's just as valid.
>You have yet to give me a reason.
The only reason it need is precisely that it FEEL good. If it feel right then you don't need more justifications.
>"If the artist appreciates it they can do whatever they want with no rhyme or reason"
that there is sucha condition as "If the artist appreciates it" is what make it it is not "with no rhyme or reason"
> surrealism is not abstract expressionism.
But it can rely on it.
"you did, actually, multiple times."
Mutlitple time I have said that the determining key was the perception of the artist.
>But it is limited to reason, cohesion, and purpose.
No, the limit is the perception of the artist and the look he desire to achieve.
>. If something has no purpose, it should not be part of a character.
If it actually fit the character, then it can be.
>o, I'm saying it has to have a logical thought process. If it has a reason to be there
And you are wrong. Sometimes that "it feel just right" is a perefectly valid reason.
>No, it's not, it's turning a nonsensical stylistic choice into an epidemic of influenza. Unless it's an earth/etc. where infuenza has become impervious to drugs, then you have no reason to do so.
Yet it isn't forbidden either to be part of the general character look. Certain things can be optional and it's up to the artist to decide what he want it to be.

> the popular trend IS lazy copycatting
Not forcibly.

also, coloring nose is actually extra work.

Also, sombody else thinking I am Russian. English isn't my first langage, but I am not Russian either. yet people called me that often here. Strange.

>and it's just as valid.
No, it's not. It's a hallmark of bad design, nothing more.
>if it feels right
if it has no rhyme or reason it should go back to the drawing board. Might as well use RNG to design your character at that point.
> there is sucha condition as "If the artist appreciates it"
which means nothing. An artist can appreciate a character covered in spikes, that doesn't mean it's good design.
>the perception of the artist.
again, means nothing if there's no thought process behind the character.
>If it actually fit the character, then it can be.
but it won't fit the character unless there's reason behind it.
>"it feel just right" is a perefectly valid reason.
Not on this planet. It just feels right to vivisect people, that doesn't make it any less mental.
>Yet it isn't forbidden either
it is if you want to make a good character.
>Certain things can be optional
not if there's no purpose to them.

lazy in the sense "I can't be assed to do something I thought of myself, I'll just do what everyone else does!". And of course it's not forcibly, people will opt for the easy way when they can.

>English isn't my first langage, but I am not Russian either. yet people called me that often here.
You make the same mistakes Russians do when they're typing in English, just like chinks misuse or forget the fuck out of conjunctions. You a slav or what?

It doesn't need text, the image speaks for itself.

>No, it's not. It's a hallmark of bad design, nothing more.
It's not bad design if the whole look good
>if it has no rhyme or reason it should go back to the drawing board. Might as well use RNG to design your character at that point.
Once again goign withthe absolute. How hard is to understand that there is an allowed spectrum within which artists are allowed to play.
>which means nothing
It means a lot. it is eessential to the act of creation
> if there's no thought process behind the character.
Shade of of color on nose doesn't equal lack of process. Artist going with his personal tate doesn't mean lack of thought.
>but it won't fit the character unless there's reason behind it.
wrong. it will not fit the character if the rer is a reason AGAINST it.

You are stuck in the thought process that there is only "IT MUST BE PART OF IT" and "IT MUST BE FORBIDDEN" and you simply think unable to grasp that there also exist possibility between those two limits.
>Not on this planet. It just feels right to vivisect people, that doesn't make it any less mental.
That this a terrible equivalence. We are talking about work of fiction. It's wrong to vivsect, bu there is nothing wrong with drawing a scene of of a vivisection.
>it is if you want to make a good character.
A character with colored nose isn't forcibly bad.
>not if there's no purpose to them.
if it has a purpose, then is not optional any more, it become necessary. Something that something isn't necessary does forcibly means it is forbidden.

> "I can't be assed to do something I thought of myself, I'll just do what everyone else does!".
No creation is trully original. complaining about shade of color on nose is like complaining that someone used a crayon. It' basic of thing to be labelled such

>people will opt for the easy way when they can.
There is nothing "easy or "uneasy" about coloring nose, you do it or you don't. Fuck, the main trend is actually not colored nose. shouldn't the sheep who follow that trend be the one called lazy, by your logic?
>You a slav or what?
French talking Belgian who tend to make more fault when typing really fast when trying to keep up with the conversation.

good is subjective. bad design is not.
>muh spectrum
if there's no rhyme or reason, then they're not in the spectrum, they have exited the field.
>eessential to the act of creation
Creation is with purpose. Genesis 10:12
>Shade of of color on nose doesn't equal lack of process
it does, actually, unless it's thematically appropriate. 99.9% of the time, it's not.
> it will not fit the character if the rer is a reason AGAINST it.
AND if there is no reason behind it either. It's not black and white like you're making it out to be, stop speaking in absolutes. You are stuck in the thought process that if an artist doesn't put thought into it that is is ALWAYS ok, when it's not.
>That this a terrible equivalence
No it's not, we're talking about feelings. That's all you have, remember? an artist FEELS, so it's ok. I feel vivisection is pleasant, so therefore it's ok. WRONG.
>A character with colored nose isn't forcibly bad.
but it is the hallmark of poor design, which means a bad character.
>if it has a purpose, then is not optional any more, it become necessary.
Not true, clothing has a purpose, that doesn't mean it's necessary in the slightest. Nice false equivalency, though.
>complaining about shade of color on nose is like complaining that someone used a crayon
No, it's complaining an artist just copied a far too widely used gimmick that has no rhyme, reason, or purpose being on a character for the sole reason of fitting in. Again, nice false equivalency, a drawing utensil is not the same as a copycat stylistic choice. Not to mention the very use of the style means the artist is in all likelihood creatively bankrupt.

>Fuck, the main trend is actually not colored nose.
not on Cred Forumsmblr.
>shouldn't the sheep who follow that trend
but it's not a trend, non-colored noses are the norm in non-realistic styles, much like lighter tones are the norm in pastel styles. If a pastel artist started using glow in the dark neon green to accentuate his characters' features, and it gained popularity, it wouldn't be trend-following to continue to use lighter tones.
>French talking Belgian
Belgium is still a country? Didn't you get annexed by the Krauts?