/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6264458
>no matter what you say artists have been, and will always be useless pieces of garbage that plague our society, and earn too much for doing literally nothing of worth (good thing this is starting to change with ai art, as artists are now coders).
after work and even during work people listen to music, watch movies, check out their favorite artists on social media, buy figurines to play with their board games, go to concerts, visit theaters etc. I mean you're seething right now and the seething is clouding your mind, but you're definitely self aware that you're full of shit lmao. that's very funny to me, and what's funnier is that nothing will fundamentally change and you'll forever seethe that you're destined to be an uninteresting faggot til you die

>>5090738
>CG drawing is cheating btw.
Oh no! Anonymous shitter thinks I'm cheating!

>>5039032
>tits shouldn't touch without bra
hugless virgin detected.

>>5029011

>>4912597
see you on page 10, OP

>>4811042
>Enjoy your compressed images and shit cropping
Cropping hasn't been an issue in years, and image compression is negligible. These are not good reasons to avoid IG.

>>4812003
>Why do so many of you have Twitter but not IG ;-;
Because most of /ic/ is delusional and out of touch, and think they know more than they actually do. People will try and 'tell it like it is', and say something ridiculous that is based on nothing. For example:

>>4812008
>Also engagement is better
Blatant lie that is based on nothing. Twitter has the lowest engagement rates among the top social media sites. To suggest that Instagram has a worse engagement rate is absolutely retarded. Instagram currently has the highest average engagement rate. Look it up.

>>4812027
>Instagram is know to have an extremely bad art reposting problem.
Funny how the other anon says that you can't "retweet" on Instagram (they're right), and you immediately contradict them by saying it has an "extremely bad art reposting problem". This is a dumb criticism that is, again, based on nothing.
>Also, that place demographic is mainly pre-teens
Again, another blatant lie based on nothing. Are you really going to tell us that Instagram is "mainly pre-teens", who are 12 and under? Does that actually sound reasonable to you? 70% of Instagram is 25+. Look it up.

>>4812110
Vague and extremely subjective. Here I can do it too: It's easier to make it on Instagram.

>>3795733
>>3795758
>cultural marxism
Take your meds

>>3078967

(you)

>>2666905
>file:///C:/Users/Hugo/Downloads/George%20Bridgman%20%20-%20Th%20e%20Human%20Machine.pdf

Thanks, Hugo. I had a really loud kek.

>>2650165