Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



memii ([info]memii) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2006-01-07 22:59:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:fanart, fandom: full metal alchemist, gaff

GAFF Wank - With BNF Rage!
Ravenbell GAFF's a Full Metal Alchemist BNF's fan art.

Agammenon, supposedly youkofujima (the artist in question), shows up to wank. The BNF's friends show up and accusations of stalking fly. It all goes to hell from there.

Then, on the second page, Agammenon claims that she, Ravenbell, youkofujima are the same person! (Ok, not really. But she had you going there for a minute, didn't she?)

ETA: Agammenon != youkojima. She/He is just another overzealous fan. You may resume snarking.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

(Post a new comment)


[info]sennet
2006-01-08 07:17 am UTC (link)
Called it! Mind taking! :O

(Reply to this)


[info]kami
2006-01-08 07:38 am UTC (link)
Certainly didn't take long for the artist's friends to show up.... makes one wonder of they troll boards looking to see if their BNF is being OMG mistreated!

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-08 10:21 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kami, 2006-01-10 03:34 am UTC

[info]elektra3
2006-01-08 07:45 am UTC (link)
No comment on the wank, but I'm still boggling at the idea of female!Al.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]mcity, 2006-01-08 05:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]pyratejenni, 2006-01-08 08:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mcity, 2006-01-09 02:02 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]pyratejenni, 2006-01-09 02:57 am UTC

[info]embyquinn
2006-01-08 07:47 am UTC (link)
Damn, it turned nasty, didn't it?

Nobody cares about my opinion, but here it is. The chick's art isn't bad at all--it's a damn sight better than 90 percent of the drek out there. So Ravenbell needs to STFU already. There's a big difference between not liking someone's artwork and said artwork being shit.

(I actually tried to explain this to someone once on 4chan. Yes, but I was so young and naive then.)

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]iczer6, 2006-01-08 08:22 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nekoneko, 2006-01-08 08:32 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 08:37 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]marsdragon, 2006-01-08 09:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nekoneko, 2006-01-08 09:34 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]memii, 2006-01-08 10:40 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nebbieq, 2006-01-09 09:20 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 09:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]drworm, 2006-01-08 10:12 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 10:22 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-08 10:27 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 10:38 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-08 10:49 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 10:54 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-08 10:56 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 11:01 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]drworm, 2006-01-08 11:06 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 11:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]doomsday, 2006-01-09 12:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-08 11:30 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aerobot, 2006-01-08 03:33 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sairobi, 2006-01-08 07:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mmanurere, 2006-01-09 12:04 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-09 12:14 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]lukita, 2006-01-09 05:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]drworm, 2006-01-08 11:04 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-08 11:08 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]drworm, 2006-01-08 11:34 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-08 11:38 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]drworm, 2006-01-09 12:33 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 11:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]arabel, 2006-01-08 12:04 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-08 12:14 pm UTC
(no subject) - jenova, 2006-01-08 11:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-09 08:37 am UTC
(no subject) - winterfox, 2006-01-08 09:37 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkbunny, 2006-01-08 11:02 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 09:33 pm UTC

(Anonymous)
2006-01-08 08:10 am UTC (link)
So someone replied to the admittedly grudgy wank saying 'OMG stop being mean and critical, you are killing fandom!!1' on -GAFF-? Isn't there a problem there?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2006-01-08 03:30 pm UTC

[info]aerobot
2006-01-08 08:19 am UTC (link)
Wow, it's like a grudge-GAFF. Because her art seems fine to me.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]dark_puck, 2006-01-08 08:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]pyratejenni, 2006-01-08 09:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]dark_puck, 2006-01-08 09:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]pyratejenni, 2006-01-08 09:33 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-12 01:58 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-09 01:02 am UTC

[info]nlb_muffin
2006-01-08 08:38 am UTC (link)
The art's pretty good, but Agamemnon's reaction is definitely over the top.

You're never going to realize that this post was hurtful and very poorly executed on the behalf of Youko, and I quite frankly am never going to realize just what is so "terrible" about her art.

Despite the fact that Agamemnon doesn't appear to know what "on behalf of" means, if I were Youko I wouldn't really give a shit about what one person on GAFF says in a post that gets lackluster agreement, if any at all.

As for Agamemnon, he should be more worried about the wifey.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]b_jellybean, 2006-01-08 08:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nlb_muffin, 2006-01-08 09:14 am UTC
(no subject) - sharonapple, 2006-01-08 05:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mcity, 2006-01-08 05:46 pm UTC
P.S. - [info]mcity, 2006-01-08 05:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]devils_devotion, 2006-01-09 08:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-12 02:01 am UTC

[info]drworm
2006-01-08 09:04 am UTC (link)
Where you see errors, I see individual style.

I fuckin' hate it when people say shit like this. I just got done with three months of listening to a classroom of people whining this twice a week, and I can't be having with it now. *puts on Granny Weatherwax boots*

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]acrimonious, 2006-01-08 09:28 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]drworm, 2006-01-08 10:06 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]innsmouth_eyes, 2006-01-08 02:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 11:52 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-09 06:00 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-09 09:11 pm UTC
(no subject) - winterfox, 2006-01-08 09:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]malika, 2006-01-08 09:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]dez_chan, 2006-01-08 11:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]velvet_mace, 2006-01-08 09:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - jenova, 2006-01-08 11:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]velvet_mace, 2006-01-09 01:08 am UTC
(no subject) - jenova, 2006-01-09 01:15 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]velvet_mace, 2006-01-09 01:25 am UTC
*fapfapfapfap* - [info]drworm, 2006-01-09 12:29 am UTC
Re: *fapfapfapfap* - (Anonymous), 2006-01-09 12:34 am UTC
Re: *fapfapfapfap* - [info]velvet_mace, 2006-01-09 01:19 am UTC
Re: *fapfapfapfap* - jenova, 2006-01-09 01:36 am UTC
Re: *fapfapfapfap* - [info]drworm, 2006-01-09 01:39 am UTC
Re: *fapfapfapfap* - (Anonymous), 2006-01-09 02:06 am UTC
Re: *fapfapfapfap* - [info]issendai, 2006-01-09 03:48 am UTC
Re: *fapfapfapfap* - (Anonymous), 2006-01-09 04:50 am UTC
Re: *fapfapfapfap* - (Anonymous), 2006-01-12 02:54 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sunhawk, 2006-01-09 08:19 am UTC

[info]wrongly_amused
2006-01-08 09:11 am UTC (link)
I kinda think the post was wanky to begin with. I mean, I always assumed GAFF meant literally that - "god awful." This, though...the girl's art could use some tweaking, yes, but she shows potential and talent in what she's already done. It's not quite what I'd call eye poison.

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2006-01-08 09:46 am UTC (link)
*wades carefully through all the wanking to the art*

You know, what upsets me the most (and this is observation drawn from a skim of the subject, so margin of error applies) is the fact that this artist, Youko, seems to draw primarily from reference even though she appears to have no small amount of skill. There are plenty of things that are 'technically' correct with her pictures, but then she's got the vacant, cookie-cutter stare with her eyes and the almost amature-ish feel to her anatomy and details where references might not fill in all the gaps.

It's one thing to draw from reference and apply, and another entirely to not take anything from it. Just an observation from a fellow artist sick of seeing 'style' covering up for shortcomings and filling in for lack of origonality.

In short...
Ordinary wankers = boring
artist = in need of some friendly C&C

~ happytemplar @ LJ

(Reply to this)


[info]kalika_maxwell
2006-01-08 09:48 am UTC (link)
What's more embarrassing, being on GAFF or having that raving Agamemnon 'defending' you? I don't think Youko deserves to be on GAFF but there's no need to try to outwank the OP.

As to those who whine about chimera!Al... This is when the 'don't like, don't read look' rule is acceptable, kiddies. Don't want to see it, DON'T CLICK. I want to see it, so I'll click. Everybody can be happy!

The world will end when people become reasonable, won't it?

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2006-01-08 09:49 am UTC (link)
For the record, youkofujima already knows about the GAFFing, and seemed to handle it a lot better and in more good humor than Agammenon did. The post is f-locked to her journal though.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]frenzy, 2006-01-08 10:13 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 11:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]shockfluff, 2006-01-08 02:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]brick_me, 2006-01-08 03:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shockfluff, 2006-01-08 04:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]supertetris, 2006-01-09 09:55 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]randomsome1, 2006-01-09 08:07 am UTC

[info]frenzy
2006-01-08 10:07 am UTC (link)
On the one hand, the art really isn't godawful. I don't care for it myself, but whatever. And the whole "why do they have to hurt my fandom" thing...geez. Chill.

On the other hand, everybody accusing Ravenbell of stalking is really grasping at straws. Youkofujima's stuff is not hard to find. She's got [info]rookie_jet linked right in the top post on her journal. She's also very prolific and not shy about pimping her work, so it's also not hard to stumble across, especially if you're clicking on links without looking at the artist's name. Not that you're not accountable for it, but it happens, and it isn't stalking.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-08 10:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]frenzy, 2006-01-08 10:21 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-08 10:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gweniveeve, 2006-01-09 06:28 am UTC

[info]miss_arel
2006-01-08 10:10 am UTC (link)
Ah, I wondered when this would show up.

I can vouch for the fact that Youko is mostly just terribly amused by the GAFFing, and the worst she did was link to it. She definitely didn't sic any crazy fans on Ravenbell deliberately.

Also, I'm just amused by the fact that Ravenbell has in fact shown up to comment on Youko's art before, often quite complimentary about it. (Warning: pic not worksafe for m/m sexin'.) Which makes all this sudden venom completely out of left field. Whatever.

WHY DO THEY HAVE TO HURT MY FANDOM???

I'll think of some crushing response to this later... right now, I'm just gonna laugh.

--Arel, the other half of rookie_jet.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 09:37 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 01:35 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-10 02:22 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]supertetris, 2006-01-10 04:01 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-10 04:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-01-10 04:14 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]supertetris, 2006-01-10 04:39 am UTC

[info]pepperlandgirl4
2006-01-08 10:46 am UTC (link)
Art isn't structural drawing. If it was, Picasso wouldn't be as famous as he was and still is.
That quote KILLS me!

Yes, I can see why you'd want to bring to mind This and this when discussing art like this

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]nlb_muffin, 2006-01-08 11:29 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]jamac, 2006-01-09 05:05 am UTC

[info]kalicephirot
2006-01-08 11:33 am UTC (link)
Me thinks the GAFF-er is holding a grudge. The art? Not my cup of tea, but it's not GAFF material, not really.

But I'm sorry for Agammenon. S/he is gonna be sore in the morning from all the wanking.

(Reply to this)


[info]brick_me
2006-01-08 01:20 pm UTC (link)
I was looking at her art and reading the comments here, and suspecting with horror that the certain artist she was trying to emulate ... was Shimizu Reiki. Turns out I was right in my suspicion.

Before I read thatm I wasn't going to say anything about her art. Really, she's not half-bad and maybe she'll improve if she wants to. But after having read that ...

Bitch, imitating only the stylized facial expressions of Shimizu's work without even trying to learn from her 1) fucking brilliand anatomy work, 2) awesome attention to detail, and 3) wonderful high quality coloring, and then saying you're modeling your style after her is ... is ... gah, SACRILEGE. Plz to be stopping talking about Shimizu in any relation to your "art". No, I mean it.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]oh_envy, 2006-01-08 08:05 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]brick_me, 2006-01-08 08:33 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]oh_envy, 2006-01-08 08:39 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]brick_me, 2006-01-08 09:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]oh_envy, 2006-01-08 10:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]brick_me, 2006-01-09 11:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - ladygoddess, 2006-01-09 12:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]isa, 2006-01-09 03:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]influencethis, 2006-01-10 02:51 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]isa, 2006-01-10 04:10 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]influencethis, 2006-01-10 08:51 pm UTC

yuuko
2006-01-08 01:33 pm UTC (link)
Hmmm, wank aside, there should be a law about mentioning Picasso in a fanart discussion.

Odd, because I saw this fanart a couple of nights ago. While I don't find the art itself bad done -then again, I'm not exactly an expert on art and I'm easily pleased-, the catgirl bears no resemblance with Al to me *shrugs* I've seen worse concepts in FMA fanart, though.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]dragonfangirl, 2006-01-10 12:49 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]influencethis, 2006-01-10 02:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]brick_me, 2006-01-10 02:16 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]influencethis, 2006-01-10 08:42 pm UTC

[info]morbide_mind
2006-01-08 01:51 pm UTC (link)
So drawing Alphonse and Ed as girls with wings and a tail = lot of crazy girl fans + title BNF?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Sounds like a plan! - [info]nebbieq, 2006-01-09 09:44 am UTC
Re: Sounds like a plan! - [info]morbide_mind, 2006-01-09 10:16 am UTC
Re: Sounds like a plan! - [info]nebbieq, 2006-01-09 10:30 am UTC

[info]simkin_mouse
2006-01-08 02:12 pm UTC (link)
The art? Downright pitiful in terms of structure, application of general anatomy and I will not bring up the "style" issue- but most of all? Redundant.

That said, it's by no means GAFFable, and the wank reeks of personal spite, rather than objective criticism.

...but on the other hand? WTF is up with the stalking accusations?! Every one of those links are what you can find if you take the 1.2 seconds to check. Her. LJ. Userinfo.

If that's what being a stalker means, then...
*sits back to await the fandom police with Nabokov-ian nonchalance* take me away, boys.

(Reply to this)


[info]innsmouth_eyes
2006-01-08 02:28 pm UTC (link)
Does anybody else get a really icky crawly feeling while reading Agamemnon's patronizing "pet pet" comments? Ew. Don't do that.

I think art can definitely be godawful even if it's really good. But this isn't really good or really bad, and so it's totally inappropriate to GAFF (much like all the other mediocre stuff that's gotten posted lately). I'm just glad it's not my fandom. *looks at pretty King Baldwin fanart*

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]gweniveeve, 2006-01-09 06:31 am UTC

[info]chikane
2006-01-08 03:14 pm UTC (link)
I don't see the problem, really.

Someone draws art. Some people like it.
Again. What is the problem with that?

Why are people fuming with froth in their mouth, whining that omg it isn't great art and that the artist HAS TO FOLLOW THEIR CRITICISM OR ELSE
So...what? Who exactly cares that it isn't 'great'? I have yet to see a single post about that. Not even crazed Agamemnon said it was.

The stench of jealousy is quite noticable indeed. Just let her be popular. It doesn't hurt anyone but the pride of jealous people who have less attention.

I don't even care for the fandom, nore have I ever even heard about this artist. Yet even I notice that this is just another OMG SHE IS BNF LETS BASH HER attempt.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2006-01-08 03:37 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-10 03:42 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-08 09:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2006-01-09 04:36 pm UTC

[info]doroc_sabah
2006-01-08 04:24 pm UTC (link)
That post? on the blog? with the wawwipap?

oh yes.

(Reply to this)


[info]mcity
2006-01-08 05:36 pm UTC (link)
Um, said artist isn't all bad, but OMG ED/AL SLASH MY EYES.

(Reply to this)


[info]fuzzybluelogic
2006-01-08 06:39 pm UTC (link)
This kind of wank always makes me just shake my head. Eye of the beholder, and all that. Not a style I'm a fan of, since Super Duper Girly Guys look really weird to me. Maybe it's a yaoi thing, since I think in Japan, yaoi's aimed at women, right? Not gay guys? So, maybe it's the In Thing to have guys who aren't guys but ARE guys and, boy howdy, are they puuuuurdy and yet, still guys and have guy parts and ...and those are my thoughts on yaoi.

That said...the girl draws shitloads better than I can.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2006-01-09 03:56 am UTC
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map