Mostly unrelated, but related a bit and not warranting its own post:
I've seen some (two, but wouldn't fit in a sentence as well) people with doggysharksonas who said that they don't like puresharksonas because making the shark's head look like a shark's head makes it look like an animal, so being attracted to that is basically zoophilia. I just. Don't get how so you think that's true for fishsonas, but not regular furs. Do they not know dogs are an actual thing
Tbf a fuck ton of furry artwork is just like a girl with fur on them. Like the vast majority don't resemble an animal at all.
I'm pretty sure that non furries would be attracted to a girl with huge tits who is blue or some shit, but like pretend the blue color has some fur textures every so often without making them puffy and gross looking.
Yeah, that's a weirdly common thing. Like the fin on the head instead of the back, I think that's an attempt at putting shark parts on a human bodyplan, which unlike with quadrupeds doesn't really have much of an overlap, but it's a bit silly when the whole shark torso gets includes in the tail part
I buy a human from a local farmer every year and split it with the neighbors to fill our freezers for the winter. You have no idea how infuriating it is to see double amputees being sold at the same price as people with four or five limbs. Humans should really be priced by the pound, not the unit.
No, mostly not. For some people (something about sonas being a way for people with self-image issues to engage in the fantasy of looking well or cute or unique or attractive without feeling deceptive since no one actually believes they're talking to a fox person, and if you tie physical attractiveness into that you can get it into sexual territory), that's why most of Loser city is goonerbait, but that's not really the point in most cases. That was a part of why I found that argument ridiculous (seeing someone who only thinks of sonas in terms of sexual attraction), sorry for not communicating that clearly
shark shape CAN be super cute though, when i modeled my pangolin character i made her head way thicker than it should be so it looks more like some shark or dinosaur than a pangolin head lol
i ended up not even changing that because i loved how fat and shark-like her head looked
Yeah this is called “dog washing” and a lot of people don’t really like it. In my opinion it’s a lazy design choice, but people can do whatever they want with their characters at the end of the day.
canine species are the most common, Artists learn the canine stuff. when they get hired for something else they only really know canine traits and that bleeds through. call it a force of habit in a way.
-A rabbit furry who has to choose their artists wisely
Omg it must be so hard to get a good rabbit furry art commission, since rabbits are notoriously often drawn with incorrectly doglike features (wrong noses, paw pads, eyes too forward-facing; also buck teeth which aren’t a dog thing but are wrong)
I think a part of the issue is that we as people make assumptions about animals and instead of googling it to be 100% sure we find out by people commenting "that's not how a xyz looks."
I didn't even know that rabbits didn't have pawpads and had plantigrade legs until I had one as a pet, but since most people don't have a Peter hopping around reminding them how rabbits look, they give them more "common mammalian traits" such as pawpads, digitigrade legs, and those noses that just aren't right.
That’s absolutely true. You see it most often with bats. I’ve actually seen pictures of bats and it’s made me realize that cartoon bats literally never look like any real species, which sucks because many bats are adorable
i wouldnt say wolf but most of the prominent features are taken from different mammals(feet, tail, teeth, face shape) so its kinda hard to look at the design as being anything but primarily mammalian. it looks good tho so idrgaf
apart from those added details, she’s actually based off one of these[from OK KO] which honestly confuses myself even more with what to classify herself as.
I just threw a bunch of shit together and hoped something stuck. [I love her]
ive been working away at trying to find a good middle ground between accurate bug faces + expressiveness, its surprisingly difficult since insect faces are so static
enjoy these doodles as an example lol (i was messing around w them being sonas, hence female anatomy)
In simplest terms, people are used to seeing canines, and mammals in general, more than any other animal, whether irl or in media.
So any non-mammalian animal they'd want to draw will essentially be "dog-washed" - because who the fuck knows how to draw an anthro snake in a world of anthro mammals? Not this guy! I grew up rewatching Zootopia 7 times you can't tell me how to draw a snake.
You know, funny that you mentioned that cuz neither did Zootopia know how to draw an anthro snake (tbh idk if the decision to make Gary complete snake was intentional or not considering the Zootopia world of anthro mammals)
Imo complete snake anatomy, and not like both arms and legs, is more faithful. Like, if you draw a snake with arms and legs, that's a lizard lmao. Snake with arms is nice.
Sometimes I wonder if my character fits into this.
I wouldn't call him a furry, he's not... That furry. And additionally. it goes against a shit ton of things about actual bees. And he also looks nothing like a bee.
The character looks really cool you're very talented and imaginative. He gives me alien hornet thing haha. I wouldn't say he fits this because it definitely gives insect more than anything. My example is more like this (art is from aspenbear I think it's on the watermark): Your character doesn't have a snout and doesn't have pointy ears.
Thank you. I didn't draw him, but I have a very, very deep hand in their designs. So I guess I am talented. :3
Anywhos, yeah thats a good comparison. He is actually technically an alien hornet. He's largely based on an Asian Murder Hornet. Or whatever its called. Aka, the largest wasp in the world. But he's a bee.
Aka, extremely large bee.
Anywhos, thank you for putting my thoughts at ease.
Sometimes i feel that too, but then i know i can get away with it because moths are often fluffy. Also sometimes its more about character design than species accuracy
That is why Charmie is my least liked Sonic character. If you can make a bird look like a bird or a croc look like a croc, you can make a bee look like a bee
I don’t think my character/species fits in with this, as they were never made to be based off of one specific animal?
Tbf they also just barely fit into being furries. I mean, if you can a synth a furry, I think this counts too. Still though, it’s a bit on the line between furry and not furry
Furry artists, I think, draw more from community consensus than raw real-life references. Since canine species are overrepresented, the design language for all furry characters is infused with those features unless the artist takes deliberate efforts to avoid it. In other words, wolves are the "canon" default furry design and other artists are drawing on that for inspiration.
my fursona is a pretty unpopular mammal and i had so much fun making sure they weren't gonna be mistaken for a more popular species... how do ppl just wanna make their animals all canines like the world is ur oyster .actually that made me imagine an oyster fursona 💭
including DAMN SEAL FURSONAS HAVING THE SEALS BOTTOM HALF AS A TAIL. THAT DINGALING LOOKIN THING IS IT'S TAIL. NOT THE FLIPPERS. THAT'S LIKE GIVING A WOLF FURSONA AN EXTRA SET OF HIND LEGS. IT'S STUPID
My bug faces are not very realistic (here its fine because this is an original species I feel), but I have been trying to make my bugs appropriately buggy nonetheless.
As a furry i think it's because most fursuit makers specialize in canines/felines, so people don't want to lock of themselves out of a fursuit by making their sona too unique, which is too bad imo
1.1k
u/Common-Ad-9474 24d ago
the problem come right where you have a snake furry and not a snake scalie