Are you comfortable calling yourself a better artist? (+poll)

[DokiDokiTsuna]

• Yes, sometimes
• No, never
• Better than who?
• I'm better than I used to be, at least...

Show results

I just mean, like, in any given art situation. Are you comfortable saying you can do better than something you're shown; do you believe you have that level of skill in any medium? And, whether you do or you don't, do you believe you get to say so?

I was just looking through some old discourse about 'art fixing' and character redesigns in general...and the general consensus there seems to be no, you don't get to say so, and if you do then people are justified in calling you 'pretentious' and shaming you for it.
This Duchess Celestia video gives a very interesting and detailed take on the main subject; I agree with the majority of the arguments she makes (especially the last segment about scale vs. product identity as solicitation of critique...she's a really good art essayist).

But when she talks about it being wrong to judge a character redesign video because "you shouldn't automatically assume that the creator thinks their work is superior", I kept asking myself...what's wrong with thinking your work is superior...? ^^; Like...what's actually wrong with that being the intention?

She does address this a little, just making the point that it's not possible for one design to be objectively better than another, so you shouldn't say that it is. And I understand that argument, but I don't think it actually works. ^^; You can say that about literally anything concerning art...a common argument against the whole practice of art critique, in any context, is that everything is subjective-- you shouldn't be allowed to suggest improvements because that's "just your opinion", not an objective fact, so it shouldn't matter.

And people are usually very quick to shut ^that down, so I don't see why this gets a pass when it's essentially saying the same thing. Character design is just another form of art; it doesn't get some special exemption from critique that doesn't apply to the rest. I get that people tend to bond with characters more and feel protective of them (that is the point of the art form) but that doesn't make them special. Badly designed characters exist, and they can be improved upon...maybe not objectively, but as with all art, it doesn't have to be objectively better to be considered better. And in that case, there should be nothing wrong with thinking or saying that it is.

Now, disclaimer: obviously I'm biased in this argument, because I am a character redesigner. ^^; Of course, I don't trawl social media looking for amateur artists to dunk on for internet points...like the video says, I find it much more appropriate to stick with characters from commercial art projects by large companies and publishers (mostly video games~).

And yeah, I do think my redesigns are better. '_' I feel no shame in admitting that. If I didn't think my work was any better than the stuff I was critiquing, I wouldn't put it in the videos. ^^;
Not all my videos are about improving designs, some are about making alt designs "just for fun" (i.e. the only 'appropriate' reason to do this kind of work, according to some people...) but the vast majority of them are about taking dull and lackluster designs and improving them. Even if my titles aren't inflammatory or mean in that way, all you have to do is watch my videos and listen to me talk to understand that my intent IS to "fix" designs. I 100% DO claim superiority; I'd be lying if I said I didn't; that is * literally * the whole point of me saying anything at all.

...And to be honest, most people don't seem to mind. ^^;

Probably my most well-received redesign video was the one where I redesigned the main cast of characters in Pikmin 4...no, I did not expect it to do well, but people really seemed to like it. No one went "how dare you claim you're FIXING designs; who do you think you are??" They just...commented on what they liked or didn't like about my suggestions, same as they do on all my other videos. Normal fans of media seem very open to this kind of content, despite what the comment section under the Celestia video might have you believe. ^^;

Which I guess leads me to my conclusions:

1. Art commentary fans are different from...actual art fans. ^^; Or to put it more generally, discourse is often its own beast separate from the behavior it's criticizing, as counterintuitive as that may seem, because the point for many isn't to examine their beliefs and improve as people, it's just to obtain the correct opinion and win the internet argument of the week.
   I'd bet half of those people saying "the issue is when they use words like 'fixing'; I just don't like their self-righteous attitudes" will happily slurp up videos rewriting bad Disney movies, because that's """different""", so their outrage instincts don't kick in. Even though it's the same concept and same behavior.
   I've already heard plenty of this kind of talk from the RWBY fandom; I can't take it seriously anymore, so I am not going to.

2. Normal fans, on the contrary, are often starved for good critique of the media that disappoints them, even mildly. It's cathartic to hear someone explain the problems you couldn't articulate, and suggest solutions that actually excite and interest you. In hindsight, I assume that's why my Pikmin video got so many more views than I expected-- more niche fandoms don't get a lot of artists willing to do that. As far as I know, I'm the only person who actually looked at the goofy little cartoon people and said "I think this could be better". ^^;
   And yeah, not everyone's suggestions will actually be 'better', but...you can just ignore them, then? Or explain why you think they're wrong, instead of implying that they shouldn't be allowed to think highly of their ideas if they're not 100% objectively correct. About ART.

3. All that is to say, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with thinking your work/ideas are better than someone else's. Like...if you're going to critique art in any capacity, you will probably have to assert that at some point. You don't have to be mean or judgmental about it, but it's kind of inevitable, because you can't try to improve someone's work if you don't think your suggestions will actually improve it.

Like, I know we're all used to promoting the eternally humble, self-deprecating, "I'm literally the worst" insecure artist persona that everyone knows and loves...but I'm sorry to say that it does not work in every situation. Trying to use it here honestly feels like desperately clinging to a get-out-of-jail-free card...like, "no one should be fighting over whose design is better, because no one should actually believe their design is better! I mean, that's ridiculous; we all think our art sucks anyway; amirite??"

When in reality, (a) no, we don't all think our art sucks, some of us DO have self-esteem; (b) if all artists are "required" to think their work sucks, then meaningful art critique ceases to exist; and (c) maybe no one should be fighting over whose design is better because it shouldn't matter that much whether someone thinks their design is better. Even in the worst-case scenario of a truly pretentious artist with an over-inflated opinion of their own work trying to "improve" a universally-beloved character design...so what?? Why should I care...?

[jwabeasley]

Yeah, there's a lot here to unpack. I'd never redesign or redo art from an amateur without their explicit permission, not because art can't be 'better' but because it is discouraging to them, and as a craftsman I want to see other craftsmen develop and improve. It's the same with beta-reading or editing someone's story - I don't want to re-write it for them just because I absolutely can do it better. I want them to improve, and to become more themselves than they were before.

Manny Lagouvardos or P.R. Dedelis can kick my butt at inking. I've hired P.R. to draw some of my Etherwood characters, and I sometimes reference these to inform how I draw. That said, I'd feel bad if they took some of my pages and redid everything to be much better than my version, especially if it was a video where they talked about my art just being bad and then trashed me for some presumed bigotry or something. I'd have felt much worse about it when I was a worse artist than now as well.

On the other hand if they offered to do a page critique and offered some helpful tips, even publicly, I would be delighted.

Apart from that artisan-to-artisan interaction, there's an issue that is similar to how if you get a group of women to rate each other in attractiveness, they will all rate each other 9's of 10's which has nothing to do with how attractive they think they are but has a lot to do with group politics. You see this with amateur artists a lot e.g. "everybody's art is good, it's all subjective anyway."

This is obviously false, but saying so makes you a BAD PERSON(tm), just like if you went into a group of women who are all rating themselves as 9's and 10's and told them candidly that they are all 4's and 5's. The competent ones know the real score, you're disrupting their social game is all. The winning move is to ignore that game and refuse to engage.

Of course art can be better or worse. Art is a form of visual communication, and the extent to which it articulates and expresses meaning is an important factor. Art is also an umbrella term for several technical artisan skills, each of which can be better or worse in various capacities. Some pots are better made than other pots, some prints are more finely made, some sculptures show material mastery more than others. Most of the time, the fine details of these are more evident to masters of their respective fields than to laymen. A good example of this difference is the song "The devil goes down to Georgia" where the devil's solo is crowd pleasing but technically simple, while the fiddler's solo is both crowd pleasing and technically challenging.

If you are a professional artisan, you crave skilled critiques and advice from others skilled in your craft. Applying these to professional media is no issue at all, pros should be used to critique. But for newbies, fostering love and enthusiasm for the craft is more important than the technical skills.

In comics, there are a wide range of skills that have to be mastered and applied. Lots of newbies try to paper over their deficiencies by claiming 'artstyle' or narrative difference. The difference between a capable creator doing a simple style and a rookie is enormous.

I'm better than many artists. I'm worse than many more. I try to learn from everyone I can. I hope to be an even better artist in the future. The same things apply to my writing and storytelling capacities, and even my editing and analysis skills.

False humility rates itself lower than it thinks it deserves. True humility can objectively rate itself just as well as if the work was done by a stranger.

[faisalhussein394]

I never consider myself a great artist. I just want to be good enough to make people understand what story am I showing. Nothing else. Being better than last time takes time, and I am patient enough for my skill in drawing to catch up to the next level.

[justincarbunkle]

I don’t consider myself a great cartoonist or writer, but I can recognize when I’m doing something better with my works versus others I’ve seen. Does that mean I’m going to state to the world that I’m better than them? No. I like comparing my work + capabilities with others as a way to improve my own abilities. I can compare other peoples work and make ratings of them. I give critical comments to works posted here because I feel my criticism is helpful for them to read. But for directly comparing with myself as an artist, however that's defined, my instinct is to avoid it, and when I think about it, I just don’t care who’s “better”.

I enjoy watching character redesign videos because I like seeing other artists interpretations of designs, and using their commentary to deepen my analysis + understanding of good character design. You can claim + feel your redesign is better. I don’t care. Just don’t come across as a dick. Or do. Just know that’ll push some people away.

[bulgariansumo]

Huh, as far as my opinions on someone thinking of themself as a better artist than someone, it depends on a lot of things. I don't think it's the worst thing in the world to look at someone else's art and have passing thoughts like "They're a little shaky on their anatomy", "I can see what they're going for, but their style isn't refined", and even "I think I have a better handling of these things than they do."

Saying that out loud is where things get tricky. I hope we can all agree that giving unasked for critique on the art of @random_artist321 (made up username) is in bad taste. Straight up saying your art is better to the face of any artist, no matter how successful, is well-known in the business as "a jerk move."

When it comes to redesigning characters, if it's a big name project with a lot of money behind it, I think that's fine for a few reasons. The creator is likely not going to see it, for one. If they do, a no-name artist playing with their designs shouldn't hurt their ego that much; in fact, if the redesigns are posted without the implication that they're better than the originals, the creator might find them charming.

HOWEVER if you as an artist have ambitions of "making it big," it's better not to insult your peers, even your future ones.

For example, complaining about Heartstopper is fine if you're doing it to a small group chat of your trusted friends, or even if you're some rando online with no intention of making a big, successful webcomic. But if you do have that goal in mind... maybe don't complain about it where the creator or their fans can see. You could lose out on future connections. At the very least, you could set yourself up for an awkward interaction if you end up at an event with the creator.

There's kind of an expected level of humility when it comes to showing off things you created. Most people find it easier to root for someone who hates their own art than someone who comes off overconfident. How this impacts the way artists present themselves probably deserves its own essay.

On another note, the projects of people who've built their presence critiquing others tend to get harsher critique. If you're able to point out the flaws of other things, its expected you'll be able to avoid having flaws in your own work (even if it's a little unreasonable to expect anything to be flawless).

And then there's the subjectivity of art. While I'd argue that subjectivity becomes more narrow if you're making something for mass appeal, it's still there. What makes good or bad art is different depending on who you ask. Erotica isn't for me, but I wouldn't say it's all terrible and shouldn't be made. Someone else might, though.

That leads me back to my first point. I don't think it's bad to think you're more skilled than other artists so long as you aren't a jerk about showing it. But even then, you can set yourself up for thoughts of "I'm clearly better than this artist! Why are they more popular than me?" Thinking like this breeds bitterness, and complaining about it in public is basically shooting yourself in the foot in terms of popularity.

So, am I comfortable calling myself a better (visual) artist than someone else? Not out loud. Not even to friends. When it comes to visual art, it's rarely on my mind. When it comes to storytelling, I'm more likely to dunk on things in private with my friends.

Edit: Rereading the original post, I realize most of mine is centered around trying to build a "brand". As far as, like, whether or not to critique art in general? Is it a random artist who's putting stuff out there for free and didn't ask for critique? Again, you could, but most people would agree it's not nice. Did someone specifically ask? Are you critiquing commercial art? Go for it.

[kyupol]

I dunno...

Here's the comics I used to read as a kid...

Now you tell me who is better...

[VibrantFox]

I'll apologize in advance for what may just be word salad but I think my opinion is somewhere in the middle

To start, one big thing I always think about is the use of terminology. Someone critiquing a work of art or a piece of writing usually is done for the person receiving it to use and improve whats being critiqued. But when it comes to "fixing" i think that's where the issues start to come in. Coz honestly I hate it in the way it has that air of superiority. Obviously bad design exists, people can easily point out anatomy flaws or racist design tropes, bad color choice, etc, etc. But when it stops being about correcting flaws and trying to make objectively "better" designs then it feels a little weird.

Like i still remember the twitter era where a lot of folks were going around "fixing" art and in some cases it was maybe not phrased the best but in many cases was usually someone trying to help folks with color choice (especially with folks drawing embarrassingly pale black or brown characters) but there were also those who either were outright doing so from a place of malace or from the mindset of "I'm better and this sucks so let me do it for you" which is genuinely just a crap approach when a person could just say "i'm not a fan of this but i tried to put my own spin on it and came up with this".

Plus i think that even if comparison is something that will happen in creative spheres i often kind of hate the "x is better than y" framing sometimes coz it does lead to a lot of internalized negativity but also unnecessary competitive atmospheres which nowadays feels especially unneeded when the arts are already under attack as it is. Like yeah I can say there's people who grading by skill or time spent i could be seen as a "better" artists but there's also plenty of people better than me so it feels pointless in that regard. What feels more productive is saying that I'm better than I was as an artist in the past but thats a natural byproduct of continued work and effort.

Like growing up and honestly to the day I still kinda hate some of those "art critique" channels coz it does feel like it's just randomly grabbing works from whatever small artist and tearing them down but if someone's bothering to do actual critique and help that person learn and grow then that seems more effective or worthwhile i guess. Big corpos wont give a crap unless it costs them money but specifically as it relates to creative communities I'd rather take a constructive approach that lets folks work and grow together than tearing each other down based on who is or isn't good at a thing

[DokiDokiTsuna]

But if you do have that goal in mind... maybe don't complain about it where the creator or their fans can see. You could lose out on future connections. At the very least, you could set yourself up for an awkward interaction if you end up at an event with the creator.

That's actually a very good point, and it seems like the kind of thing Celestia would talk about; surprised it didn't get mentioned in the video...maybe she'll discuss it in the future. Art diplomacy is indeed an important soft skill, when you're looking for a professional career. ^^;

But even then, you can set yourself up for thoughts of "I'm clearly better than this artist! Why are they more popular than me?" Thinking like this breeds bitterness, and complaining about it in public is basically shooting yourself in the foot in terms of popularity.

Yes, yes to all of this...which I unfortunately know from experience... TT_TT

Although, oddly enough, the one time I have complained 'publicly' about my work not getting the attention it deserved (that's not exactly what I said, but it seems to be how it came across) what I actually got was a bunch of last-minute sympathy views and subs. And it really weirded me out...it's a difficult feeling to describe, or even respond to. ^^; I took the project down the same day, as planned.

It wasn't all pity-traction, though; I did have to answer for some of the more feather-ruffling stuff I said. ^^; But it could definitely have gone a lot worse, and I've seen it go worse for other artists...I could do a whole thread on that, tbh.

There's kind of an expected level of humility when it comes to showing off things you created. Most people find it easier to root for someone who hates their own art than someone who comes off overconfident. How this impacts the way artists present themselves probably deserves its own essay.

IT DOES
...And if you don't write it, I probably will! >_< Someday...it's a topic I've alluded to a lot throughout the years; I have a lot of thoughts to distill. ^^;

On another note, the projects of people who've built their presence critiquing others tend to get harsher critique. If you're able to point out the flaws of other things, its expected you'll be able to avoid having flaws in your own work (even if it's a little unreasonable to expect anything to be flawless).

I believe that is a valid assumption to make...strangely, though, it hasn't been my experience. ^^; Despite all my years as a fairly harsh critic (even way back when I wasn't even good at it), I've never really gotten any substantial response criticisms...not even on this forum.
If I thought I could reasonably "invite" it that way, I'd probably get even harsher, tbh. ^^; Because as someone else mentioned we all need critique, and I've gotten very very little throughout my entire artistic life...

I think I just happened to start online at a level where it was hard for most of my peers to tell what my weak spots were, and since then I've only gotten better, so...there's yer Catch-22. ^^ In order to invite critique from internet strangers (even judgmental ones), I have to look like I need it. But the reason I desperately need it is because I look like I don't. o(￣▽￣)o Eh. Maybe my number just hasn't come up; I know my Youtube channel isn't exactly popular yet...

(sorry I've been replying to you so much; I swear I'm done now XD)

Plus i think that even if comparison is something that will happen in creative spheres i often kind of hate the "x is better than y" framing sometimes coz it does lead to a lot of internalized negativity but also unnecessary competitive atmospheres which nowadays feels especially unneeded when the arts are already under attack as it is.

I think I have to agree...maybe? It's weird because I framed the title of the topic the same way, but now that I think about it, it's a little bit beside the point. Or rather, it's reflective of an assumption that I made about the point that I don't think I explained. ^^;

So basically, what weirded me out enough to start this discussion wasn't the idea that people would be offended by artists thinking they were better or superior or whatever (that kinda goes without saying...), but instead, this repeated assertion that that belief is all it took to cause offense. Like, people would constantly focus on the word 'fixing' and ideas of pretentiousness from the creators in question, because no matter what their intentions were or how good their critique was, that was apparently the main problem.

Despite the fact that, in the world of media criticism where I spend most of my time...that's very normal? ^^; It's both normal and common for critics, rewriters, and redesigners to feel like they're 'fixing' things, to speak like they have knowledge and to share it accordingly, even if it's admittedly from an amateur's perspective. And like I said, most media fans don't seem to mind this...so there seems to be a disconnect here. ^^;

I assumed it might be because believing yourself to be better than other artists isn't something we should be comfortable admitting (hence, the title), so when attention is drawn to it through things like "art fixing" discourse, it'll be the first thing that gets attacked.
Even though, again, it's normal. It's gonna happen, even if the artists in question don't express it directly by saying things like "x is better than y"...but again, according to many of the people complaining, these artists are still doing something wrong even if they DON'T express it directly, so we're back to the disconnect. It's a weird phenomenon...

[NickRowler]

I am OK with redrawing characters but I am not a fan of art fixing.

I feel like people who simply redraw characters are fans of the series. There are a lot of examples of this with Equestria Girls from MLP G4. The official designs are quite bland, and a lot of the fan redesigns are better at showing off the characters personalities. There are also series like Strawberry Shortcake that has a history of rebooting and redesiging its characters. So fans doing their own spin on the designs isn't really disrespectful to what the series is.

For art fixing, it often feels like it comes from a place of hate. Hazbin Hotel redesigns from people who hate the series never look good to me. They may be well drawn but they look like completely different characters or they don't embody the character's personality at all. It sort of reminded me of a guy who said he wanted to redesign Monster High "to improve it" by making the characters actual monsters. It just seemed like he didn't understand the series or why the fans (who were mostly girls/women) liked it.

[jwabeasley]

But even then, you can set yourself up for thoughts of "I'm clearly better than this artist! Why are they more popular than me?" Thinking like this breeds bitterness, and complaining about it in public is basically shooting yourself in the foot in terms of popularity.

Usually when I have those feelings, I make it a learning opportunity: "What are they doing that I'm not? What do their promotions look like? How are they connecting in a way that I'm not?"

However, I recognize that might not be everybody's process.

[VibrantFox]

this repeated assertion that that belief is all it took to cause offense. Like, people would constantly focus on the word 'fixing' and ideas of pretentiousness from the creators in question, because no matter what their intentions were or how good their critique was, that was apparently the main problem.

i think to me or what ive observed is a combination of both phrasing and attitude leading to those reactions or the formation of such beliefs and all laced with those subjective opinions. coz someone who is good can say their good and be confident about it but if people who observe that person or their work don't agree then that could be where the disconnect happens.

it could also just be one of those things about artists speaking about their peers versus art observers, something i think the ai wave has kind of pointed out on top of already observed (i'm sorry i keep using this word) behaviors. coz people tend to be picky in general when an artist exudes confidence of any kind but within creative circles it's encouraged to have some degree of that just to kind of stay afloat mentally amidst all the chaos plus the fact that sometimes people will dog on the person whose a self loathing individual so it's a weird mixed social bag

like thinking about the question again when it's not late at night and i'm a little more mentally present i dont mind calling myself a better artist but i'll always see myself as having room to learn and grow which i think is the better mindset to have in general

[Caro]

I know that as far as professionals at my level go I’m pretty low tier as far as artistic skill goes and I’m comfortable and okay with that. I’m good at the language of comics, good at writing what I write, and draw in a way that suits my needs and it all amounts to an okay living and that’s fine by me. I do not really feel comfortable giving critiques even when asked because quite frankly, I’m not good at giving critiques! Unless there is something glaringly wrong like a perspective issue or a spelling mistake and I was asked for input.

I have also never really engaged with anything artistic online beyond just very simply me posting my own work and have never engaged in the redrawing of anything really except for my own private studies in my sketchbooks occasionally. I think the whole culture of redraws is just an area of the internet I’m not very familiar with. And I wouldn’t want to do it anyway because I am in the industry and there are people who follow me who have worked on a ton of stuff from comics, to animation, to video games. It would kinda suck if I redrew something because I thought I could do a “better job” and then it turned out that person or someone they know follows me.( I also simply probably couldn’t!) I think if it was something I wanted to do I would just say it was fanart of a character reimagined the way I draw.

Also on the subject of “humble artists” vs. “not so humble artists” I think its tricky. Someone posting about how much they hate everything they do doesn’t inspire any confidence in me. If I had to work with another artist at this point I wouldn’t choose a person like that for a few reasons. 1) I have tried before thinking it would help them gain more confidence and it was such a grueling process they were so difficult to work with I cancelled the project and 2) I would just feel like I was never getting the best work out of them I could. But also overconfident artists are easy to dunk on because people on the internet love trying to knock people down a peg and try to humble them. Sometimes people genuinely think that will help them get better. Its like a heckler at a comedy show; they almost always think they’re helping the show along but they’re just being mean and disruptive.

I think neutrality is the best route. When I post its just “here’s a thing I did! thanks bye!” and 10+ years into posting on socials with a relatively large following I almost never get any rude comments.

But yeah ultimately I think I’m an ok artist-not the best not the worst. But I know people better than me with worse numbers and I know that I’m doing something differently than them so when I see someone “worse” than me (maybe as in they’re drawing stick figures) and they’re doing better than me then there’s something they’re doing that I’m not doing and its chill.

(I feel like I’m responding to multiple things said in multiple posts but I’m on mobile and its hard to quote the specific things!)

[B_SH_M]

I don't want to bore you, so I just give an example and drop the mice Just kidding
2 yeas go when I first started:

Today:

I hope I can improve even better 2 years from now.

[DokiDokiTsuna]

For art fixing, it often feels like it comes from a place of hate. Hazbin Hotel redesigns from people who hate the series never look good to me. They may be well drawn but they look like completely different characters or they don't embody the character's personality at all. It sort of reminded me of a guy who said he wanted to redesign Monster High "to improve it" by making the characters actual monsters. It just seemed like he didn't understand the series or why the fans (who were mostly girls/women) liked it.

...This is really interesting to me. ^^ Because I simultaneously agree and disagree...the sticking point is knowledge of the characters.

When you 'hate' something from a place of ignorance ("why is everyone into this; it's so cringe; I don't see why anyone would like this thing I don't care about in the slightest...I should "fix" it"), yeah, you're naturally gonna end up with bad redesigns, because you're missing half of the process.
Character design is half 'character', and half 'design': You can do amazing things from the design half simply by being an experienced artist, but without the character half your designs are always gonna fall flat, because you have no idea what message you're supposed to be sending with them. You don't know what personality traits you should be illustrating, what shape language you should be using, or how to make the character 'feel' like themselves despite looking different. Never redesign someone you know nothing about; that's one of my golden rules. ^^;

However...when you 'hate' something from a place of frustration ("this thing was a huge disappointment to me, I expected so much and got so little; I don't understand how fans can be satisfied with this...I should "fix" it")...that's not a handicap. If anything, it's a huge motivator, to use a character design to bring out what you saw in a character that other people might not have seen, or a possibility with them that was never explored.

If done well in this way, I think the Monster High 'monstrous redesigns' could actually have been cool (tbh, that's exactly what I would be doing if I were an actual huge fan of the franchise. ^^ Frankie Stein as an actually creepy-looking reanimated corpse? Clawdeen as a giant hulking werewolf?? Sign me the f*ck up; that sounds really fun)...all that is to say, I think knowledge (or just creativity/personal taste) has much more to do with any failure of design than 'hate'; there's no reason that idea couldn't be executed well, no matter how the artist personally felt about the characters.

It's also very much possible to have fun with a design even if you don't like the character you're working with. For example, I did a whole video redesigning Lanz and Sena from Xenoblade 3...and Lanz in particular is a character I hate, from a game that I hate, from a franchise that really hasn't impressed me in a very long time. And yet, that video was a blast to work on. ^^ It's one of my favorites; I think anger and spite actually brings out the best in me when I'm doing designs. Probably because seeing more problems gives you more interesting problem-solving to do. ^^;

Of course, not everyone agreed with the opinions I expressed in the video (not everyone even thought my redesign was an improvement XD) but the comments were all pretty cordial...overall, it was a good time. Despite coming from a place of 'hate'. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

[Zhengo]

When it comes to published work, it's kind of expected that people will do crazy things with your work like r34, so design "fixing" is relatively tame.

I will say though, a lot of people seem unaware how much their own preferences and biases play a role in character design, so unless they can provide a good enough reasoning for their design change choices that can't be applied to the og, I'm skeptical on objective superiority. In addition, most of these "redesigns" do not take into account the medium and work environment the work is created in. I've seen many redesigns of animation characters where a bunch of extra detail is introduced that would've made animating said character much harder. For team produced work such as 3d games, we lack context on the deadlines set by executives and whether some design choices were made to make it faster for 3d artists to sculpt and the animators to animate. In addition in corporate produced work, there's a good chance that some character design decisions were made due to marketing purposes rather than something linking to said character's personality or story. In the end, maybe a character design might be "superior" if you're just seeing a comparison of still artwork with their bio next to them, but is it actually superior when factoring goals external to the story?

Basically, unless the work is a 100% indie, no cash incentive, no deadline, one person or incredibly small team where everyone is fine with whatever decisions another individual chooses, and somehow no constraints of the medium, chances are character design choices aren't just dictated by design principles or character, which seems to be the only things most redesigns focus on.

So my view is, call yourself superior all you want, but unless you can make a compelling case that your design can get through the work environment the character is produced in, I don't see the point in lording superiority and it just feels like ego stroking. This isn't to say that you can't make redesigns without having some depth of knowledge of the work process, but at the end of the day it's just a "for fun" thing and trying to treat it more importantly like which design is superior is pointless when for the most part most people don't deeply know what goes on behind the scenes for one design choice to be chosen over another. The creator themselves might actually even agree in some cases if said redesign is "better" but it just also could be this hypothetical redesign would've never left the concept phase due to external factors. You could argue maybe your concept is better than whatever exec has in mind, etc. but in most cases I've seen more people claim their work is better than the "Creator's" idea, when in most cases these designs weren't just dictated by one person.

[Red_Dog]

I know I'm better than I was a few years ago. That much I can say with confidence at least.

[jwabeasley]

Those are good points for professional projects. There are many projects, especially complex ones like film, where you would think they could be better in some way but it wasn't possible with the constraints they had and the available resources.

I haven't done any redrawing or public art fixing myself. I often think about it or exercise that privately, but it's only for the development of my own skills. I also do it with plots - but I'm trying to make the existing story as good as possible, not pleasing producers or impressing other writers or anything else that might be going on in any given writer's room.

[giamarvelousunime]

Perfection is impossible, but the happiness by making your drawing evolution is worth as getting closer to perfection

[Zhengo]

I do sometimes discuss story rewrites of existing media with others. And when I do I actually do try to take into account possible constraints that the creators may have had. One gripe I've had with some story rewrites/critiques I've seen is that some people will just go "Just increase the number of episodes/parts", without thinking that the number of episodes was probably a non-negotiable restriction placed on the writers. In those instances, I try to go a "cut the fat" approach so that I try to keep it close to what I think the constraints the writers had, so that I could at least make some argument that my approach could've been a pitch worth considering within the production.

Like I said, I actually don't mind if people deeming their character designs "superior" are done with consideration of the possible constraints, it's just that most of the time that I've seen those constraints are not considered. I think you could only make the case that your rewrite/redesign is superior if you could also make the case that your idea wouldn't have been DoA in an actual production environment.

[jwabeasley]

Fair, but most of the time I feel like I wouldn't be welcome in most writer's rooms, and I don't have enough experience being present in one to be able to simulate that.

Often times I have a fundamental disagreement with a franchise, but I try to see if I could keep what was good about a story while losing things I heavily disliked, or if there was a fix that seems obvious looking back at the whole thing but probably wasn't obvious at the time.