3 ms·
>It doesn't look like a living animal that way. Did you think that before you learned about this pinning convention? I didn't, and don't.
by jojobas 3y ago
>It doesn't look like a living animal that way.
Did you think that before you learned about this pinning convention? I didn't, and don't.
- Jensson 3y agoYou do feel the difference even if you don't think about it. Art is all about details we don't think about but it really feels much better when the details are there. Did I think about the lack of shading details in graphics 15 years ago? No, not at all really. But if I look at graphics today it looks so much better, our brains really notices all those unnatural details even if you can't point them out. I never felt butterfly images looked particularly good, just looked like pasted in stills. Until I read this article several years ago I didn't know why all the butterfly images looked bad, but now I do. When I look at videos of butterflies they do look like animals that move around, they don't have perfect angles and wings flaps around in different directions so you don't always have symmetry etc, it is a massive difference. Note, the difference isn't that the particular pose is "dead pose" or whatever they say in the article. The problem is that they use the exact same pose for every butterfly all the time with a perfect angle, that makes your brain identify them as fake stills. You don't need any particular skills for your brain to see that, you just aren't really aware of it. When I see drawings of other animals and insects I don't see the same thing, they are drawn in all sorts of poses and positions and the artists make sure the angles aren't perfect to make them feel natural, but apparently artists don't treat butterflies like they treat other animals instead they seem to be drawn and animated like falling leaves.