>no rules just tools
What is your interpretation of this phrase?

You’re a tool.

>>7630308
you're not wrong

>>7630305 (OP)
I think the way that vilppu uses it he means that there are many ways to make art and you should be open minded and use whatever technique let's you make the best art you can. Most people use the phrase as an excuse to be a lazy hack.

>>7630312
I think so, too. In the end it's all about the result.

>>7630305 (OP)
just draw

>>7630305 (OP)
trace AI

>>7630305 (OP)
>don't talk to me when I do something different than what I teach just shut the fuck up

> what did he mean by this
That we should have a Vilppu drawing manual general

>>7630305 (OP)
I just see it as another way of saying "Whatever gets you to reach the end/your goal." If Im creating a character, a painting, a comic, whatever, and Im struggling I should learn how to use this technique or apply this rule to get there, but getting obsessed over having to follow step A and B and C shouldnt be your goal, finishing your piece is. If making a piece requires ignoring this rule or that rule, so be it, and if its a good piece art faggots will go "WELL THIS GUY LEARNED THE RULES BEFORE HE COULD BREAK EM" but the reality is normies wont care if you followed rules or not or even if you learned the rules cause its not like theyll ever know what the """""rules"""" are.

>>7630305 (OP)
C H E A T I N G
H
E
A
T
I
N
G

>>7630305 (OP)
It means I draw whatever I fucking want

>>7630305 (OP)
There is no one universally correct way to draw.
Any methods taught to you can and should be disregarded in certain circumstances, but you should know when to disregard them.
As long as your art turns out looking good in the end, that's what matters, not the exact procedure you followed.

>>7630483
>There is no one universally correct way to draw.
That's a rule. There are no rules, so there is a right way to draw, and it's a tool we can use.
Retard.

>>7630305 (OP)
Tracing is good. Ruler is good. Stealing is good. Being friends with whore is good. Taking inspiration from God is great. All is good if you know you are only here to execute the ideas of the gods and the muses. You get into the zone and ask for help. You do not have the divine spark to be original and the divine spark is not yours to give. It comes to you and you receive. You are therefore part of the tool, you don't exist, only the task at hand exist.

>>7630484
>there is a right way to draw
That's a rule. There's no rules except the one rule that there's no rules.

>>7630495
But what about the tools?

>>7630495
It's a tool, midwit. The absence of something isn't a tool, it's a rule. Something being available for use is a tool.
Nobody says you have to use it, your art will just stay shit.
QED
Don't reply to me u til you grow an extra 50 IQ

>>7630305 (OP)
It means that artmaking is an anethical and amoral pursuit.

It does not operate by deontological rules, there are no "must nots" that are unique to art.
Its subjective nature also means that consequentialist rules also don't apply.
This means that you have only virtue ethics to guide it, but even then the only virtue that universally apply to artmaking is "make authentic art", the remainder are really moreso about conduct and mentality (CJTheX's 7 Deadly Art Sins goes into both and Greg Guevarra Circles of Art Hell video goes into the latter type.)

So really, you have to basically determine what art you like, and then make that. This means get in touch with your authentic self, then your rubric for judging your own art is based on that, and you can use anything you want to attain a good result based on that. And you can say "fuck off" to anyone else who tries to impose their own rubric onto your art in a majorly mismatched way, while connecting with people whose rubric lines up closer.

>>7630305 (OP)
the rules come after your done with your tools.

>>7630305 (OP)
>>7630343
I don't understand how anyone can not follow what he's very clearly saying.
Use the methods he's teaching for drawing as you need them, don't use them so strictly as if they required; they are not rules, they are merely tools, and tools only come out when needed.

Seeing people use this line as a justification for AI is now even more baffling, having now seen the its origin, so its not even applicable to that context in any manner.

>>7630764
It’s only a matter of time when celsys adds AI features into the program. What then?

>>7630305 (OP)
No one cares how art is made. Only the end result matters.

Use A.I.

>>7630764
Its because it applies to any artform, not just drawing.

Read >>7630518
If you can't understand it, ask for clarification. It's very freeing once you realize you can just do things and not give a fuck.

>>7630305 (OP)
>>no rules just tools
>What is your interpretation of this phrase?
People without skills have to find other ways to be able to draw.

>>7630305 (OP)
AI is a tool.

>>7630305 (OP)
Just draw nigga, use rulers for straight lines
use reference for thigns you dont know how to draw
trace complicated mechanical things if you can find a good 3d model of it
And nowadays generate textures or poses in AI and then paint over them instead of photobashing
Professional artists dont care about doing 100% of a drawing by hand, only how it looks in the end matters

>>7630305 (OP)
Gotta learn the rules before you break em, bud. Otherwise it'll be a bunch of nonsensical garbage.

>>7632588
There are no rules, that's just something teachers say to bring me down back to earth on their level. They're afraid of my talent.

>>7632588
>nu rules
>HURRR LEARN DA RULES DURR

>>7630305 (OP)

the fluidity and acceptance of the art community always rubbed me the wrong way as a meticulous little autist. art doesn't have "rules" as in "what qualifies as good art" but there are also foundational techniques that almost everyone uses for conventional artworks and deviation from those techniques is the exception. i had a figure drawing teacher in college who said out loud "i'm not here to tell you how to draw" and i immediately dropped the class because i was PAYING her to teach me the techniques needed to draw in a professional manner. artists are a bunch of goddamn hippies, i swear...

>>7632821
It's a teachers job to give the students the tools to create art with

Plenty of professional artists already use A.I. as part of their workflow. You'd be stupid not to. Don't fall behind now

>>7630305 (OP)
Anything you learn (like construction, proportions, etc), is only a means to help you get across what you are trying to draw. If in any particular situation your brain is going "wait, this is supposed to be X long and Y shape, but if I draw it like that it looks fucking awkward", then instead of rigidly sticking to it like a rule you should throw it out, and go with what looks better. A good example is sacrificing anatomical accuracy for dynamism.

>>7632851
Yes and the techniques are the tools.

>>7630804
What has clip studio, or what you're saying, got to do with anything? Shut up retard.

>>7631312
>Its because it applies to any artform, not just drawing.
Sure, but if we're talking about specifically the quote from Vilppu, then IT IS actually specifically about drawing - because the tools he's talking about are the methods for drawing that he's teaching, which he's saying shouldn't be depended on like they're rules for drawing.

And since we're talking about this saying in the context of art, and Vilppu is the one who popularised it in that context, we sort of are also referring to it as he said it then - people are just misinterpreting or out right misrepresenting the saying.
It's gone from meaning something like
>"The methods being taught shouldn't be treated as sacred like a rule, but only brought out as needed like a tool"
which is something most everyone can agree to; to something like
>"There are no rules or standards in art, thus we can do anything we like such as ductape a banana to a wall, or just use AI! Everything is a valid approach in art, everything is a tool!"
Which is a lot more controversial and debated. AI aside, many would contest the idea that anything can be art, and there are be no rules for it, but that's really a different debate.

Granted, I'm just arguing pedantically about semantics here, and a saying gains a life of its own once it enters public lexicon, so everything I'm saying here may well be mute.

>>7630305 (OP)
So tracing the basic reference and then filling out the rest of the details myself is not cheating? Good good

>>7633129
>What has clip studio, or what you're saying, got to do with anything?
Do you want me to tell you why or no? Don't tell me to shut up if you want me to answer, dipshit.