[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/trash/ - Off-Topic
The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.

Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 63 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]



File: Shoots foxes, dead.jpg (2.81 MB, 2416x3254)
2.81 MB
2.81 MB JPG
/ZTG/ - Zootopia General: Reasonably Price Peace Of Mind Edition

Pastebin: pastebin.com/iYDU8g2T
Booru: zoo.booru.org
Thread journal Backup: pastebin.com/GiLL5kAS
ZTG Creator List: derpy.me/ztgcclist

Archives: www.ztarchive.com / desuarchive.org / archive.b-stats.org
Previous thread: https://archive.b-stats.org/trash/thread/16801619
Previous thread: http://www.ztarchive.com/trash/thread/16801619
Previous thread: https://desuarchive.org/trash/thread/16801619

Next TT: Zoot Advertisements (SUBMISSIONS DUE TODAY (or soon after))
Previous TT: Folklore (Late subs are cool too!)
TT Archive: t3event.tumblr.com
TT Pastebin: pastebin.com/gudYsYHL
>>
Have a good night /ztg/
>>
ZOOT ADVERTISEMENTS! Scratching posts for felines, drones for rodents, chew toys for canines, nibble sticks for rabbits, deodorant for some of the smellier species--all this and more is available in Zootopia, along with the establishments that offer those products and services, and there will always be a company trying to sell them to you. Tell us what kind of advertisements you're going to run! It'll only take a few minutes. That's right, it's the 5/5 GREENTEXT CHALLENGE! Rules and new prompts below!

RULES:
>Reply to this post to roll; the last two digits determine your prompt

>First digit chooses your object
>Second digit chooses your emotion
>Free Choices are picked from the listed options

>Convey the emotion (without using the word) through the object

>Maximum five minutes to write
>Maximum of five lines

>OBJECTS:

1. Billboard
2. Magazine
3. Newspaper
4. Television
5. Computer
6. Phone
7. Radio
8. Vehicle
9. Clothing
0. Free Choice

>EMOTIONS:

1. Annoyance
2. Wonder
3. Excitement
4. Confusion
5. Resignation
6. Nervousness
7. Pride
8. Bitterness
9. Relief
0. Free Choice

ARTIST CHALLENGE: Roll a prompt and draw a picture of it, or draw a picture for a completed prompt! Let's make a connection between artists and writers! You can have more than five minutes, though.
HARD MODE: Use a color palette that is chosen for you! https://coolors.co/app
>>
>>16819658
Roll.
>>
>>16819719
>walking down a street on a calm day to stretch the legs, no matter if the neighborhood was slightly run down
>A simple calm stroll at least until the corner where an already rusty billboard refused to fall despite its conditions and clear age.
>Already a well known danger yet authorities never seemes to care so most small mammals avoided standing over there
>Yet today there were a few city workers placing a mane shampoo add on a new metal frame, the old already out.
>still would be imprudent to walk through the zone with many workers focused on their job yet one would be able to walk without worry as soon as they left.
>>
>>16819658
Oh good, it's on the new page;
Rollin again...
>>
>>16819658
Why is this kitty still unlewded?
>>
File: New Doc 2018-07-05 (1)_1.jpg (94 KB, 1800x1680)
94 KB
94 KB JPG
Reposting rex for new thread
>>
>>16820244
This is flipping adorable, don't you think?
>>
File: pure felines.png (112 KB, 1344x810)
112 KB
112 KB PNG
>>16820220
>>
>>16820286
Pure lewd, obviously.
>>
>>16820304
Go to bed, SBL.
>>
File: Radio_bun.png (358 KB, 867x1267)
358 KB
358 KB PNG
>>16819976
Radio
Nervousness
>"OK, so remember, don't get too close to the microphone and remember to pace yourself, don't talk too fast."
>The young rabbit sat on the stool in front of the boom mike, nodding while still trying to memorise his script.
>"You wont hear the intro music, but I'll count you in from five with two, one start being with my fingers, OK?"
>With a final adjustment of his glasses, the young tan rabbit watched the stage manager flick down the last two fingers...
>"And now, the adventures of Jack Savage, Bunny Investigator: bought to you by the makers of Hamhocks tooth whitening tonic, now with chlorohexadine..."
>>
>>
>>16820427
>>
>>16820314
That actually wasn't me but I'll agree, it's snooze time you pure lewd kitty you.

>>16820326
Man I really hope his secret santa is another audio drama, loved his first one so much.
>>
>>16819618
>reposting
hey there /ztg/!
NeoTT here with a very important announcement!
TT is OVER!
finito, kaput, sayonara!
out with the old, in with the new!
presenting an all new TT!
that's right, sparkling new and improved!
now, with even more polygons!
all you've got to do is ADD YOUR THEME!

>http://derpy.me/trashthematicthursdays

>http://derpy.me/trashthematicthursdays

>http://derpy.me/trashthematicthursdays
>>
>>16819618
>>16820721
also!
>you are waaaay behind on your tumblr posts
you are totally right!
and what better way to advertise Thematic Thursday than with NEW ENTRIES?
and it's true I need to pic up the pace!

https://t3event.tumblr.com/post/175602430632/tt48-festivals-conventions-expos

https://t3event.tumblr.com/post/175602506882/tt-49-roadtrip
>>
>>16820721
>>16820746
You're a good dude my polyfox.
>>
>>16820836
>my
Mr! I'm not being creepy! Sorry foxo.
>>
>>16820866
too late, the contract has been signed, you are now Ms Polyfox now
>>
>>16820890
No! But what about polybun? I'll be dead by morning!
>>
>>16820909
The Claim Has Been Made
>>
>>16820890
I thought Mr polygonfox was and is married to Mr polygonbun.
>>
File: DXQLE1mVoAUHH2F.jpg (33 KB, 592x388)
33 KB
33 KB JPG
>>16821017
>Polyfox
>monogamy
>>
>>16821048
It's hard to say with a friendly eldrich abomination.
>>
File: 1530825530769.png (44 KB, 444x444)
44 KB
44 KB PNG
We must punish the mongoose for this crime.
>>
>>16821316
They were acting for an pawbook gif that a certain civet wanted to make. They are still going strong.
>>
>>16821017
aren't they more of a brothers?
>>
File: 1530817944008.png (96 KB, 840x780)
96 KB
96 KB PNG
Daily reminder to recycle your squirrels
>>
>>16821316
Yeah that doesnt go to the recicle bin it goes to the biobazard dump, its a biological danger
>>
File: She big 2.png (89 KB, 485x680)
89 KB
89 KB PNG
There is an alarming lack of Big dom Honey and I want to try and fix that
>>
File: 1530643516714.png (21 KB, 666x666)
21 KB
21 KB PNG
>>16821746
>>
File: 1467885782947.png (17 KB, 606x599)
17 KB
17 KB PNG
>>16821805
>>
File: aww yeah.gif (3.12 MB, 800x450)
3.12 MB
3.12 MB GIF
>>16821746

Christ, right in the fetish
Hadn't seen this one until now.
>>
who draw this :v
>>
File: breathplay with Nick.png (139 KB, 1123x676)
139 KB
139 KB PNG
>>16821843
Thanks, glad you enjoy it~
Figured it was time for some more Honey/Nick especially after having this one float around for so long.
>>
>>16821865
kk
>>
File: damn good.gif (375 KB, 500x211)
375 KB
375 KB GIF
>>16821870

Yeah man, I saved the everloving hell out of this image when it first came around.
Big, stronk, dommy women are my jam.
You kick ass.
>>
>>16821316
I see no crime
>>
File: biting.png (163 KB, 700x600)
163 KB
163 KB PNG
>>16821746
>>16821870

So how does Nick fulfill this need now that he's with Judy? She's not big enough.
(Pic not necessarily related)
>>
>>16822003
But it is. Corpses go in the biowaste bin, not in recycling.
City council's pretty stern when it comes to sorting trash properly
>>
>>16822026
She could use her legs instead. I'm sure her thighs could give a good squeeze.
>>
File: hugs.jpg (262 KB, 617x700)
262 KB
262 KB JPG
>>16822066

Hm. That might work.
Doesn't seem quite the same, though...
>>
File: judy in charge.png (502 KB, 853x773)
502 KB
502 KB PNG
>>
File: she wants more.jpg (146 KB, 1056x1280)
146 KB
146 KB JPG
I have a headcanon where Judy is actually the submissive one in the relationship. She's so headstrong and determined and spirited - taking the submissive role in private is so far removed from what she does and how she acts day-to-day that it's really relaxing and liberating for her.
>>
>>16822098
Sure, but it's the best they can do. Plus who wouldn't like having a bun's legs aggresively wrapped around them
>>
File: competitive Judy.png (92 KB, 950x1684)
92 KB
92 KB PNG
>>16822152
>Plus who wouldn't like having a bun's legs aggresively wrapped around them
You raise a valid point.
>>
File: leg lifts.jpg (167 KB, 770x518)
167 KB
167 KB JPG
>>
File: 59967818_p0.jpg (151 KB, 640x746)
151 KB
151 KB JPG
>>16822131
> Judy is actually the submissive

To me, that's the only thing that makes sense.

She really comes off as an adrenaline junkie. Every time there's danger, she runs towards it without giving it a second thought. She wants that sweet nectar of adrenaline and what better way to get it, than being at the mercy of a savage predator.

> She's so headstrong and determined and spirited - taking the submissive role in private is so far removed from what she does and how she acts day-to-day that it's really relaxing and liberating for her.

Couldn't have said it better!

As for Nick though, thanks to the junior rangers, Nick seems to suffer from some sort of PTSD flashbacks. That is not someone who is suited in the submissive role.
>>
>>16819618
>Tranquilizer guns designed for foxes

Judy would never lend her face to this. This is a coming PR disaster waiting to happen.

Okay say Judy used that same dart on another Fox other than Nick, like Gideon. While hes the same species as Nick the fact hes taller and has much greater body mass means it'd probably just give him a buzz. Now lets look at Finnick. He'd likely overdose due to his much smaller stature and body mass as well as the fact Fennecs have some of the most efficient kidneys in the animal kingdom. That advantage in this case however would get him killed as those kidneys would fail due to be being bombarded with a toxin which would completely overwhelm their ability to filter it out.

Basically Fox Away isn't just a false product, its one which is going to cause a lot of deaths and not just to fennecs. Furthermore it'd be a disaster for Vixen's as it could be used as a potentially lethal date rape drug.

In short, unless Judy's agent is a complete fucking moron he'd not let Judy have any association with such a product especially as a cop.
>>
File: holding on tight.png (843 KB, 992x1280)
843 KB
843 KB PNG
>>16822310

I hadn't considered the adrenaline junkie angle, and that makes a lot of sense.
As for Nick, given what he went through as a kit, and the rough time he's implied to have had since, I'd bet being the dominant one would be really empowering for him.
Not to mention the whole "ancestral prey" thing.
>>
>>16822131
Yea,because she's a woman
>>
>>16822339
The doorway needs a silhouette of Stu carrying a shotgun
>>
File: 1529817893322.png (179 KB, 1019x848)
179 KB
179 KB PNG
This is a fox performing the tradition fox greeting.
>>
>>16822498
I thought the traditional fox greeting was to swipe your wallet after offering free hugs
>>
>>16822551
That's towards non-foxes
>>
File: elote.jpg (423 KB, 855x760)
423 KB
423 KB JPG
>>
File: Not_gay_pedo_honest.png (592 KB, 465x659)
592 KB
592 KB PNG
OK, just thinking aloud here;
Trying to see if I can match the 'Pack Street' crew with the cast of 'Lost in Space'?

A. John Robinson
B. Maureen Robinson
C. Judy Robinson
D. Don West
E. Penny Robinson
F. Will Robinson
G. Dr Smith
H. Robot

>who matches?

1. Al
2. Velvet
3. Betty
4. Avo
5. Ozzie
6. Charlie
7. Remmy
8. Anneke
9. Wolter
10. Marty

>will this even work?
>>
>>16822498
Who could refuse his kind offer of anal?
>>
>>16819658
I bet this Smug jaguar wears a buttplug to work every single day, that's why he's always got a smirk on his face.
>>
File: 1501845620201.png (3.52 MB, 2749x2977)
3.52 MB
3.52 MB PNG
>>16823340
That would be rude, its just a way for foxes to tell who has the better ass and dick.

you have to seduce the other one first.
>>
File: 1519334868476.png (985 KB, 2016x1504)
985 KB
985 KB PNG
>>16823488
Nick has already been seduced.
>>
>>
>>16823488
I bet foxes have some sort of ranking systems that they use to determine who has the better ass or dick., and the one with the best dick gets to top.
>>
File: 1528347847685.png (494 KB, 1135x1174)
494 KB
494 KB PNG
>>16823547
>best fox gets to be bottom

FTFY
>>
File: 1530823106300.png (274 KB, 1040x1440)
274 KB
274 KB PNG
>>
don't mind me, just wasting a bump :^)
>>
>>16823805
Every time a new fox moves into an area, they have to find their place in the local anal pecking order.
>>
Which one of you commissioned this series?

I know you’re here somewhere
>>
>>16823934
which vixen is this supposed to be?
>>
At what time of the day do these threads get good again?
>>
>>16824036
Take one guess
>>
File: 1474075283717.jpg (95 KB, 872x960)
95 KB
95 KB JPG
Hey gang!

It's a day late, but here's my TT entry for "Zootopia Ads".

https://www.fanfiction.net/s/12992529/1/Zootopia-Ads

I hope y'all enjoy!

-- Stu Fox
>>
>>16823934
Dunno, but they have good taste.
>>
>>16824045
When the incestfags go to sleep
>>
>>16824160
>Even the answers are reposts
It's that bad, huh
>>
>>16823915
You bastard!
>>
>>16824177
Yup, incestfags pretty much kill this entire general
>>
>>16824054
I'm just gonna pretend it's a random vixen then
>>
>>16824198
And totally not the whiny babies unable to skim past content they don't like, right?
>>
>>16824201
You're one to talk :^)
>>
>>16824201
>>16824198
>>16824219
Please stop replying to yourself and get help.
>>
Reminder that big penis good.
>>
File: Finnzelle.jpg (552 KB, 1851x2048)
552 KB
552 KB JPG
Besto ship
https://twitter.com/ulako414/status/1005689867173445632
>>
>>16824201
>Skim past content you don't like

>[Post a Reply][Return] [Catalog] [Top] 84 / 40 / 35 / 2 [Update] [Auto]
>>
File: YEET.png (39 KB, 968x967)
39 KB
39 KB PNG
Anyone have any drawings from threads that they think work as a desktop background?
I'm currently rocking this one by nobby.
>>
>>16824344
pretty transphobic desu
>>
>>16824344
Screenshot for proof
>>
>>16824357
this is both unfunny and almost entirely unprompted unless you're on the spectrum and the mere mention of his name triggers your 'tism
>>
File: 1530816898617.png (129 KB, 770x840)
129 KB
129 KB PNG
>>
Just post the fucking foxes already you inbred retard
>>
>>
File: 0110-1452-2452.jpg (307 KB, 2560x1440)
307 KB
307 KB JPG
>>16824344
>968x967
>desktop background
>>
>>16824386
Wow, that was both unfunny and unprompted.
>>
>>16824453
I know, I just made it fit to screen then matched the background colour, see >>16824364
Thanks for the contribution.
>>
>comic from 2016-07
>>
>>16824473
fair enough
>>
please don't bring transphobic posting back
>>
>>16824484
acting like judy was into him since the beginning ruins their whole thing
>>
>>16822326
>using fox away products to date rape vixens.

I like the way you think.
>>
Trans people are not real people.
>>
>>16824561
>Posting this when >>16823805 gets posted
>>
please don't bring predphobic posting back
>>
please don’t bring posting back
>>
File: Compare.png (1.89 MB, 1780x1352)
1.89 MB
1.89 MB PNG
>>16822326
> Gideon taller than Nick

Wrong, anon. It's amazing how people still think this, after 2 years.
>>
Might as well go sleep then. Night thread.
>>
File: confused.gif (2.34 MB, 481x404)
2.34 MB
2.34 MB GIF
>reading a comfy fic
>get extra depressed because i know i'll never be this comfy
>depression loops back around to 0 and now i actually feel better
>>
>>16824606
wow not funny not prompted
>>
>>16824715
Sleep tight incestfag.
>>
>>16824074
i only read some of it cause im really lazy but i liked it
>>
egg
>>
>>16824833
randum
>>
Hi trad, please find recycled old draw
>>
>>16824979
>Farmer proto-Judy

I never knew I needed this.
>>
>>16824979
Also pencils only v
>>
File: pendants.jpg (150 KB, 768x1024)
150 KB
150 KB JPG
>>
>>16825009
>>
>>16825016
>>
>>16825024
>>
File: 1460322732370.jpg (1.71 MB, 3420x2432)
1.71 MB
1.71 MB JPG
>>16824830
>i only read some of it cause im really lazy but i liked it

Thank you, Anon!
>>
File: 1502334683850.png (310 KB, 500x468)
310 KB
310 KB PNG
>>16825016
Those hips should be illegal
>>
>>16825052
I can’t believe chumpy is fucking dead
>>
>>16825056
They are, why else do you think they bring donkeys and mules to the glue factory
>>
>>16824979
I want to nuzzle her tail
>>
>>16824979
>>16825006
cute! are those watercolor pencils or did you do something else?
i've come to the conclusion that watercolors are better for landscapes and colorful subjects while pencils are better for detail and realism but i havent gotten the chance to try watercolor pencils yet
>>
>>16825071
>I can’t believe chumpy is fucking dead

Many sadnesses for this.
>>
>>16825099
Thanks mate, yeah I used faber-castell watercolours, they blend nicely and are easier to control than actual watercolours and the end result still looks like a real deal. Amazing stuff really because watercolour require a lot of setup while with pencils you could basically dip your finger in a glass of water and start blending (which is what I did with the farmer violet draw)
>>
>>16825198
damn i need to get me some of those, i've got a couple of unfinished draws that could really use the texturelessness of watercolors but with the finesse of a pencil
>>
>>16823930
What of the vixens?
>>
>>16822326
>>16824591
:v
>>
Late TT sub
A poster for a little coffee shop idea that sprang to mind
>>
>>16825620
I wonder if animals know how its processed.
>>
File: 1521601363745.jpg (186 KB, 746x1072)
186 KB
186 KB JPG
>>16825620
>Late TT sub
>A poster for a little coffee shop idea that sprang to mind


That's really nice, Anon.
>>
>>16825693
that tiny fox is adorable
>>
>>16825687
I wonder how many mammals want it fresh
>>
>>16825726
Hygiene is priority anon, animals can get sick if something goes wrong
>>
>>
>>
>>16825111
>>16825333
>>16825888
Wasted trips
>>
File: 1530796871073.jpg (264 KB, 1600x1110)
264 KB
264 KB JPG
>>16823934
>>
File: 1530796954923.jpg (268 KB, 1600x1110)
268 KB
268 KB JPG
>>
>>16826032
Fuck off bastard.
>>
>>16826032
>>16826041

who draw these? kinda reminds me of Chumpy
>>
>>16825726
Not many I'd imagine. It's an acquired taste.
>>
File: Nick by chumpy.png (268 KB, 832x871)
268 KB
268 KB PNG
>>16826055
looks nothing like chumpy's work
junyois.tumblr.com
>>
>>16826109
still reminds me of chumpy
>>
>>16825620
Nice drawing, ACA!
>>
>>16824074
Random but kind of funny. Though the whole joking of Judy fucking around on Nick was meh.
>>
>>16826310
>Random but kind of funny. Though the whole joking of Judy fucking around on Nick was meh.

Thanks -- I'll do better next time.
>>
hare or puma
>>
>>16826401
Hare
>>
https://youtu.be/bGM9HRCjMf4
>Little Rodentia traffic
>>
>>16825016
>>16825056
That's one pretty ass...
>>
>>16826028
gideon&sharla OTP
>>
>>16826032
>>16826041
why does high quality art get wasted on child incest?
>>
>>16820244
Poor Rex needs a headpat.

>>16821316
Anyone know who drew this?

>>16822098
That moment when you realize your new accountant who just needed a place to hold up the night isn't just a predator but also a freaking vampire!
>>
File: 1475345397960.png (30 KB, 666x666)
30 KB
30 KB PNG
>>16826941
>wasted
>>
>>16827001
>Anyone know who drew this?
nemo, i believe
>>
>>16827126
Coolio, thank you Anon.
>>
>>16824074
Just read it. I like the small amount of world building you have in this, e.g. the prices of popcorn and the seating arrangements in the cinema. The ads were quite funny.

But Judy kinda drags the whole thing down for me. She's clearly only with Nick, because of her pred fetish and as we see in the end, Nick isn't even enough to satisfy her. That wasn't my cup of tea, exactly.
>>
>>16827158
>Just read it. I like the small amount of world building you have in this, e.g. the prices of popcorn and the seating arrangements in the cinema. The ads were quite funny.
>But Judy kinda drags the whole thing down for me. She's clearly only with Nick, because of her pred fetish and as we see in the end, Nick isn't even enough to satisfy her. That wasn't my cup of tea, exactly.

Thank you, Anon. I appreciate your critique very much.
>>
>Conspiracy spiritual sites tell you that modern mammals can't see spirits and ghosts because they trim their whiskers
>>
>>16824676
You're right that nick is taller, but that image is waaay off. there a better one floatin around somewhere.
>>
give me something to draw
>>
File: fusion-ha.jpg (352 KB, 1050x1650)
352 KB
352 KB JPG
If anyone wants some drawing ideas, I'd love to see some fusions. Preferably of Nick and Judy like pic related, but feel free to replace one or both of 'em. DBZ or Steven Universe style of fusion, whatever works. ^^
>>
>>16826941
Go ahead and commission them to draw whatever else you'd like.
>>
File: Character Heights.png (454 KB, 1000x300)
454 KB
454 KB PNG
>>16827714
>>
>>16827769
>Replying to non-content shitters
>>
File: thatswrongretard.jpg (104 KB, 600x456)
104 KB
104 KB JPG
>>16824676
Wow... whoever made this is a fucking idiot. In neither picture is Judy parallel with either fox, in the left shes standing at least half a foot in front of Gideon which from that distance would have a significant affect on her perceived height making her appear much taller than she actually is in comparison to Gideon, likewise shes standing in front of Nick but at about a fourth of a foot and facing to her side, this again makes her appear taller than she actually is in relation to the character only the effect is not as pronounced since she is closer.

Either way this comparison is complete bullshit. If you want an accurate comparison of her height to each Character she must be parallel to that character side at an equal distance form the observer.
>>
>>16827841
That one is even worse accuracy-wise. The feet arent even close to matching up and it throws everything off. The perspective is different as well, but thats to be expected with screenshot comparisons like that. Hard to find two scenes with the exact same perspective.

Also wow Bonnie is underrated. Lookit those cute lil chubby cheeks and teeny ears.
>>
>>16827870
If you're gonna force this meme you gotta push it harder, man. You can do better than this.
>>
>>16827936
Half a foot figure btw comes from the standard diameter of a pie pan which is 9 but reduced by 3 inches to account for the fact these animals are about a third human size
>>
>>16827972
get help
>>
>>16827745
Are you taking requests?
If you're doing nsfw lewd a CC, otherwise Mrs. Otterton and Judy together at the pool.
>>
>>16827972
If you post a fox, he'll spend all day manually spamming. Its fun.
>>
>>16828138
no u
>>
>>16827841
Where to begin with this, on the left yes Judy is standing parallel to Nick however in the picture on the right shes shes standing again a good distance in front of all characters meaning the perspective is way off, she'd a appear much taller than she actually is in relation in gideon meaning this comparison chart is also bullshit and the heights given arbitrary non-sense.

Again if you want an accurate comparison, you need to have each character parallel to each other at equal distance from the observer and on the same observational plane in relation to the observer. To get accurate height number though you need something for basis of comparison, problem is nothing in Zootopia conforms to reality given the wildly different sizes of the characters in the movie
>>
>>16828181
>spamming
Benign shitposting**
>>
>>16827745
>give me something to draw
Not him but seconding >>16827746
>>
>>16828225
A day well spent.
>>
>>16828261
foxxos are cute...
>>
File: fed.png (34 KB, 298x279)
34 KB
34 KB PNG
>>16826041
>>16826032

>Pictures hot
>But picture contains cub
>Confused boner
>>
File: snow poff.jpg (132 KB, 1024x734)
132 KB
132 KB JPG
>>16828280
They sure are...
>>
>>16828332
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OaxZXizA0M
>>
>>16828332
polar ones r ok too
>>
>>
>>
Also interestingly, arctic foxes mating call is similar to fox cubs cries for fox mom.
>>
>>16828393
Judy is fit, it makes no sense she'd be this busty
>>
>>
>>16827936
I made that chart.
And I understand that there is some warping in the images, but first it is not as severe as you assert and second I didn't simply use the vertical height. I compared the size and length of several other pieces (eg. distance shoulders to hips, eye size, etc.) to make the two Judys more similar.
There is an error, when I posted it the first time I estimated it in a couple of inches/5 cm max. Also it's true that it should be better with characters magically lined up, but there is no such scene in the film , this is the best I've found.
Notwithstanding, not only me but others (like >>16827841) reach a similar consensus on the general height of Judy and Gideon: around 2'5''/73 cm for the first, 3'2''/sligthly less than 1 m for the latter. Also keep in mind that the models change their height in the film (for better scenes), so a smaller error is not really possible.
>>
>>16828332
>>16828372
>>16828382
>>16828433
>>16828447

If it wasn't cruel as all hell and wasn't illegal in my country I'd want a floofy Arctic fox as a pet
>>
>>
File: 1521611603825.png (931 KB, 652x1038)
931 KB
931 KB PNG
>>16827745
Nick, but noodle
>>
File: Arctic-Fox-6.jpg (20 KB, 400x250)
20 KB
20 KB JPG
>>16828497
Your best option is a fur farm rescue or a rehab.

Though foxxos are for watching not raising.
>>
File: silentconfusion.jpg (24 KB, 615x422)
24 KB
24 KB JPG
>>16828484
>And I understand that there is some warping in the images

This statement by itself demonstrates both charts are bullshit. If you want accurate comparisons there can be no warping, either way its not that they are warped its that the screen caps used are not compatible to each other as they are from different angles to the subjects in relation to the observer and the characters are not on the same horizontal plane meaning the character closest to the camera would appear taller than they actually are. In all cases the character used to gauge other characters height is Judy but shes the one who is front making the whole thing bullshit.

>Also it's true that it should be better with characters magically lined up, but there is no such scene in the film , this is the best I've found.

Which is why you can't use screen caps from the movie to compare heights, that is unless you find something that can be used commonly between the two pictures which you know the height for which is on the same plane as the characters you seek to determine heights for.

>Notwithstanding, not only me but others (like >>16827841) reach a similar consensus on the general height of Judy and Gideon: around 2'5''/73 cm for the first, 3'2''/sligthly less than 1 m for the latter

Except its bullshit as the heights given are arbitrary and there is nothing in common between either picture compared that you'd know the height for that you'd be able to use to determine the heights of each character.

>Also keep in mind that the models change their height in the film (for better scenes), so a smaller error is not really possible.

You are basically saying then that any attempt to determine the heights of any character is completely pointless as you can't know if the characters are at the same height as in the picture you are comparing without commentary from the digital artists themselves.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>16828644
Not in Canada, Arctic and Red foxes are considered native species, its against the law in Canada to keep a undomesticated native species as a pet unless you have a special permit. That permit however is usually reserved only rehabilitators, reserve workers, and sanctuary owners
>>
>>16828734
domesticated Native species doesn't include domesticated Red Foxes however due to the damage that could be caused by one getting into the wild and interbreeding with local foxes
>>
>>16828707
Isn't Skye English?
>>
File: poolepile.png (2.37 MB, 1634x1080)
2.37 MB
2.37 MB PNG
Remember to stay hydrated, /ztg/!

Poolpile

76.91.36.250

Download Drawpile, join this room, make a layer, create the art
>>
File: height comparison.jpg (725 KB, 1400x804)
725 KB
725 KB JPG
>>
>>16828680
Just because you can only make an estimate it does not mean that's it's all "bullshit".
You can't pinpoint to the millimeter the right height, but you can make an estimate.
You see that Gideon is a little more than 3/4th of Nick's height and Judy is roughly around two feet and half.
Just because one cannot claim perfect accuracy you shouldn't throw everything away.
>
You are basically saying then that any attempt to determine the heights of any character is completely pointless as you can't know if the characters are at the same height as in the picture you are comparing without commentary from the digital artists themselves.
No, I'm saying that there is some little "elasticity", nothing too severe, in the height. I don't remember exactly where I read it, but from what I understood it is common technique to obtain better scene.
Still, this doesn't justify saying "it's all bullshit". The world is not black and white, you can know something not perfectly, with not a great accuracy. Sadly this is the best I could do with the material I had, just an indication to help drawers draw them with roughly the right proportions.
>>
>>16828859
Damn I wish I could draw as I have a whole scene visualized in my head

Nick and Judy in the center back chairs relaxing, Skye and Jack in the chairs next to those reading/working
Dawn in an orange jumpsuit in the window
Clawhauser panting from the heat near the latter and Fangmeyer and Wolford prepare to dump ice on him but not to be cruel, just in good fun.
Otterton does a deadmans float in the pool with her kid on her belly and Mr Otterton swimming underwater below them
Finnick is in the pool in Floatees
Lionheart can be seen in the chair to the right and bogo stands as life guard
>>
>>16828981
People give things their best shot even when their best isn't near as good as someone else's all the time
Break your wishes up into wants and go do those things
You might not create the mona lisa but you'll have fun
>>
>>16828859
why is there a lewd tube in the pool
>>
>>16828600
Since Nick is a tube now, does that make him less or more gay?
>>
>>16828953
>Just because you can only make an estimate it does not mean that's it's all "bullshit"

You are missing the point, if the estimate is based an inaccurate comparison between two pictures then it is essentially bullshit. You put garbage into an equation you'll get garbage out.

>>16828953
You can't pinpoint to the millimeter the right height, but you can make an estimate.

You actually can if you had something you knew the height for in each picture on the same plane as the subject you wish to compare with another subject. In such a case you can do a pixel by pixel comparison if the resolution is the same in each picture and come to a conclusion which is accurate to the millimeter

>You see that Gideon is a little more than 3/4th of Nick's height and Judy is roughly around two feet and half.

Again though that only because he is standing at different distance to Judy that Nick is in his own picture and not on the same plane. You are basically comparing two separate optical illusions. The only way you could make an accurate comparison of Nick, Gideon and Judy's heights is if they are all on the same horizontal plane in relation to the observer, equal distances to the observer, and at the same angle in each picture.

>No, I'm saying that there is some little "elasticity", nothing too severe,

Actually its very severe in those first two examples due to the differing angle to the observer and the fact the common variable (Judy) is on a different horizontal plane in each comparison picture.

Like look at >>16828927, the angle to the subjects is different, on left we are looking at the subjects from a diagonal position while in the picture on the right we are viewing them from a completely different angle, and furthermore they don't account for the fact Judy is leaning into Nick on the left picture meaning she would appear much shorter than she actually is because shes not standing upright making even this comparison picture bullshit
>>
File: size_dif_4.jpg (1.33 MB, 7200x1212)
1.33 MB
1.33 MB JPG
Okay, so I just made this. It's literally impossible to get a good shot where they stand precisely parallel to each other while the camera is facing them, perpendicular.

So looking at the first image far to the left, the issue here is that Gideon is standing behind Judy, which brings him further away from the camera.

In the next image, they're finally standing parallel to each other, but the camera sits at a slight angle, which brings Judy, slightly closer to the lens.

In the third picture, we finally get a camera that is facing them at a perpendicular angle, but they don't stand exactly parallel to each other. Nick is a bit closer to the camera, also they're both leaning forward.

In the last image to the far right, the camera again sits at a perpendicular angle, but it sits very low to the ground in comparison to the other pictures. Also, Judy stands slightly to Gideons left, so they're not parallel to each other.

But Nick is definitely taller.
>>
>>16828953
>Still, this doesn't justify saying "it's all bullshit".

I explained in detail why its bullshit, you are usually inconsistent variables without an constant for basis of comparison to attempt to make a calculation. Again garbage in, garbage out. You need consistent variables not ones you try and present as consistent when they are not.

>The world is not black and white, you can know something not perfectly, with not a great accuracy.

That would be true if we were talking philosophy but we aren't talking philosophy we are talking math

>. Sadly this is the best I could do with the material I had, just an indication to help drawers draw them with roughly the right proportions.

and I explained in detail why its complete horseshit
>>
File: 1519323374859.jpg (8 KB, 206x214)
8 KB
8 KB JPG
>>16827745
>"taking requests!"
>radio silence
Typical
>>
>>16829269
>But Nick is definitely taller.

I think the guy has forgotten the point of the argument in favor of accuracy; yes, we may not know the exact height difference, and there is some optical issues with all the comparisons, but none of them are so extreme that anyone can ignore the fact that Nick is definitely for sure taller than Gideon. Maybe not by a crazy amount, but he is significantly taller.
>>
>>16829342
drawings take time to be drawn, my dude.
>>
>>16829298
Nick is taller and no matter how much you try to deny it, your have about as much evidence for the opposite as a flat-earth theorist.
>>
File: Ugh.png (33 KB, 450x450)
33 KB
33 KB PNG
Good evening /ztg/.
Sadly the next week, starting from this Saturday/Sunday and ending next Sunday, I will be abducted by my supervisors for a cycle of conferences abroad, so I will not be able to draw.
/blog
But I want to ask now what to draw when I return (other than TT). So, tell me, /ztg/.
>>
>>16829269
Picture on the left Judy is standing about half a foot in front of gideon and not on the same plane

center left the characters are parellel but standing unnaturally upright because they saluting eachother, that isn't their usual posture meaning they'll appear taller than they actually are

center right picture both Judy and Nick are slouching forward and so would appear shorter than they actually are the complete opposite of center left

and finally the picture on the right is from a completely different angle from the picture on the left where Judy is not on the same horizontal plane as gideon. In this picture she is parallel to gideon but you can't compare it to the first picture because in that first picture Judy is in a completely different position on the horizontal plain and we are observing them from a diagonal perspective meaning she must be way out in front of gideon otherwise she'd appear behind him due to optical perspective

Rather than repeat myself I'll just say it concretely, the reason these charts are bullshit is there is no commonality between picture being compared. The variable are all different from picture to picture and inconsistent, you need consistency to even make a vaguely accurate calculation of something like height
>>
File: he_didnt_mean_it.png (216 KB, 600x621)
216 KB
216 KB PNG
>>16829425
you treating Nemo with kindness
>>
>>16829342
thank you for your input
where is the content youre making.
cmon youre shitting on CCs i bet youve got sime content to show
>>
>>16829425
You like fusions? If so, maybe >>16827746 ?
>>
File: Nemo.png (44 KB, 365x365)
44 KB
44 KB PNG
>>16829425
Terry and Nemo having a meal together
>>
>>16829425
Noodl? >>16828600
>>
>>16829425
Terry karaoke night!
>>
>>16829425
Remmy crafting the ultimate sandwich.
>>
>>16829425
Terry selling Nemo to Sleazy for his freedom.
>>
>>16829436
congrats, you missed the actual comparison that makes sense, the center left and the right pic, since, as you say, they are both parallel

you literally compared the pictures with the worst possible outcomes each time
>>
>>16829398
Until you produce a picture which is actually comparable or have Gideon and Nick stand next to each other I'm not going to agree with you based on your comparison charts because those charts are complete bullshit.

Whether Nick is taller or Gideon I don't care, but when you try to illustrate one way or another mathematically you best be using consistent variables and not just random pictures you eyeballed as being comparable when to anybody with eyes and half a brain they are clearly not

>>16824676
Like here, can you even account for the cut off on the left picture so it'd be comparable to the right or are you just eyeballing it?
>>
>>16829614
No actually I explained why NONE of those pictures are comparable to each other in detail. If you think any of those pictures are comparable even though they are taken from scenes where the characters have different postures or are in different positions and presented at different angles then you are a bigger retard then you let on
>>
>>16829602
>Terry trying to sell his bf to "escape" even though everyone's told him the door is open and can come and go as he wants.
That guy sure is something.
>>
>>16829614
Also it's you who are ignoring details, I actually pointed out that while the two center picture are on the same plane to the observer, one has Nick and Judy standing unnaturally upright while in the other they are slouching and leaning forward meaning that they are no more comparable to if Judy was standing way out in front as you can't account for the differences in height brought on by such postures as you have no basis of comparison for either, furthermore picture on the center right is closer then picture on the left meaning the heights are off again even if they had the same postures as the closer one would appear bigger then the one from further away.
>>
>>16829659
but if you ACTUALLY compared judy in the center left pic and the center right pic, you can see that they are the same size, and the same height, which means the saluting posture did not add any height to her character

i mean, if you actually measured these things, we wouldn't even be arguing.
>>
>>16829721
>>16829659
>>16829725
i meant center left and far right, for all my posts, the ones you SAID were parallel and in the same plane goddamn it.
>>
File: 1465438738880.png (58 KB, 492x465)
58 KB
58 KB PNG
>>16827936
>>16828680
>>16829298
>>16829621
>the absolute state of buttblastedness of foxlets
>>
>>16829699
He doesn't want to admit to himself that he really likes being pampered by Sleazy and the other tubes but he also doesn't want to deny the same comfort from his BF so he's talked himself into this scenario as the only way to satisfy the contradictory drives.
>>
>>16829436
>>16829621
Our evidence stands even if you proved that they aren't 100% accurate, they are still the most accurate thing we got, and we measure with what we got.

We don't know the exact sizes, but by making multiple estimations based on multiple images we can come quite close to it.

If that's not good enough for you, too bad
>>
gay...
>>
>>16829738

Actually I did, read my post again. I point out that while they are parallel to eachother our observation angle and distance to the subjects are not the same as the center left picture is taken from up close while the picture on the far right is taken from further away and slightly to the left while also creating a optical illusion due to Bonnie and Stu there. Stu is taller than Judy yet because hes standing behind her he appears shorter but due to lack of focus being that this cgi it appears Stu and Judy are on the same plane when they are not but to your brain they are.
>>
>>16829784
you're basically agreeing with that dude you know? he was saying that yes, nick is obviously taller, but the exact measurements that were listed in the comparison pictures were obviously wrong and will always be wrong unless we get a pic of all three next to each other or separate pictures on the exact same plane at the exact same angle.
love each other
>>
File: shrink.png (832 KB, 442x750)
832 KB
832 KB PNG
>>16829621
Things get even murkier when you consider that Bonnie totally shrinks.
>>
File: SpookyDebating.png (7 KB, 500x500)
7 KB
7 KB PNG
>>16829890
>>
>>16829890
this is ripe for a conspiracy theory.
what happened to the first bonnie? is the second one a twin? an actor? a reincarnation of a younger, slightly smaller bonnie?
>>
>>16828859
Its a cool drawpile but not many people have been contributing to them recently. Sucks.
>>
>>16829818
>center left picture is taken from up close while the picture on the far right is taken from further away
???

now you're really not making any sense
>>
>>16829947
Why would they?
>>
File: bigger luke.png (92 KB, 257x447)
92 KB
92 KB PNG
>>16829942
Quick somebody write up a detailed wikia about Bigger Bonnie
>>
>>16829866
am not
he calls it "bullshit"
>something that has zero merit or justification to be accepted
I call it "estimation"
>something that has merit based on partial evidence that is close to reality and should be accepted without providing better evidence
>>
>>16829784
>Our evidence stands even if you proved that they aren't 100% accurate

You're 'evidence' is based on a false comparison, when you base something on garbage you get garbage out. Its not accurate as none of the pictures you are comparing to each other share any common factor you could use to check your accuracy. Something like a street lamp of determinate size which variables can be known and don't change

>We don't know the exact sizes, but by making multiple estimations based on multiple images we can come quite close to it.

You underestimate a phenomenon known as selection bias. It seems consistent because you are subconsciously making it consistent when its really not because you are ignoring variables which invalidate your comparison, things like position, standing position, angle to the viewer, distance and angle in relation to subject of comparison, distance from viewer, perpective, optics and I could fucking go on.

Again I don't give a shit whether you think Gideon is shorter, whats pissing me off if you bastardizing math to support your belief.

>If that's not good enough for you, too bad

Its not good enough for me because its complete horseshit based around your ignorant understanding of how to find unknown variables. In order to do some you need to know at least 1 variable to gauge your accuracy and other variables must be consistent.
>>
>>16829948
Camera lenses apply to animation. Lenses can distort things that are much farther or much closer than midground.
I assume thats what he meant, anyway.
>>
someone just ask byron nicely for the canon heights
>>
>>16829993
When an argument gets to a point where someone start talking about denotation of specific words used, the argument is over
>>
File: 65387920_p5_master1200.jpg (351 KB, 882x736)
351 KB
351 KB JPG
I like gideon
>>
>>16829993
>he calls it "bullshit"
>>something that has zero merit or justification to be accepted

Pot calling the Kettle Black, I'm making arguments and backing up those arguments, you basically throw out the same argument and go 'na uh' to each argument I make rather then try to address them. Its not me who has zero merit, its you.

>something that has merit based on partial evidence that is close to reality and should be accepted without providing better evidence

One problem, your 'evidence' isn't even partial, its subjective in that you've eyeballed it and drew a line with a ruler rather then actually do any calculations while ignoring all invalidating factors. I've explained multiple times in detail why you are in error and used math, logic and optics to support it meaning I stand on in a better position evidence wise then you do so by your own logic you should be accepting what I say, however I don't want you blindly accept what I say I want you to understand why I view your comparison charts as bullshit.
>>
File: giddy.jpg (1.24 MB, 1936x2375)
1.24 MB
1.24 MB JPG
>>16830123
me too anon, me too
>>
File: He's trying his best.jpg (840 KB, 1080x1500)
840 KB
840 KB JPG
>>16830123
Me too, he's a cute foxo.
>>
>>16829621
>>16830000

If you are really only caring about math, then why refute pictures like >>16828927 that are just trying to make an eyeball comparison? Unless Judy is heavily bending her knees, which she isn't, she is simply not going to reach up to Nick's neck even if she stopped slightly leaning towards him. And I don't think any change in camera angle will make Judy suddenly stand at the center of Gideon's chest.

You are right when it comes to how we can't make any accurate mathematical guesses at their heights, but it is pretty clear that Nick is taller than Gideon, which was the entire point of the pictures in the first place.
>>
>>16830000
> whats pissing me off if you bastardizing math to support your belief.

that's what you are doing, completly denying the worth of estimated values. Just because they are not 100% accurate, only 98%, they are not bullshit.

that is bullshit
>>
>>16830024
No I meant literally, there is no distortion from camera lens because there is no camera let alone a lens. The scene was generated by a computer and in one scene we as the viewer are closer to the subjects we are looking at while in the other we are viewing them from further away.

While it maybe cgi it still has been designed to give an illusion of depth simulating actual depth. When we see Nick and Judy on stage saluting eachother we are brought to a position where it seems we are at the end of the stage, while in the picture with gideon standing parallel to Judy we are viewing them from further away so Bonie and Stu can be in the shot which also creates an optical illusion due to Stu appearing to be on the same plane as Judy when in fact hes behind her.

Being parallel to each other is only one of the factors needed to make a good comparison but its not the only one, you have to account for other factors. Comparanon is ignoring those factors to support his belief which is what annoys me, not the possibility he maybe correct but his methods of coming to his conclusions.
>>
>>16825024
See, this one is a bit weird 'cause it's like;
>"Check out my new bag, I had it made from the skin of a black person"
>>
>>16830081
Just spam your fucking foxes.
>>
File: 1468803692796.jpg (218 KB, 1200x1221)
218 KB
218 KB JPG
>>
File: 1522508325912.png (1 KB, 200x200)
1 KB
1 KB PNG
>>16827745
>>16829425
draw my bee
>>
>>16830281
source?
>>
>>16829425
>>16830294
Terry with a big swollen mouth because he ate a bee
>>
>>16830277
Bro what makes you think i was the shitposter from just that post
>>
>>
>>16830190
>then why refute pictures like >>16828927

because mathematically its a bullshit comparson, in that picture Judy is leaning into Nick meaning she would appear shorter and also the distances are not equal. The guy needs to stop drawing fucking lines between the pictures because that only works if they are at exactly the same distance from the viewer, on the same plain in relation to the viewer, and in the same position
>>
>>16830294
>>16828600
Reddit.
>>
>>16830296
it was Kenket, ex Blotch, she made it on a stream i guess and she haven't posted it
>>
File: 1507498936912.jpg (144 KB, 648x808)
144 KB
144 KB JPG
wish i could pet him lads
>>
>>
>>16830294
FUCK OFF BEEFAG
>>
is arma still making that ps game?
>>
>>16830201

No why I think the estimated values are bullshit is because you have no known value in which to determine those values, again something like our fictitious lamp we know the size of and doesn't change nomatter perspective we view it from because we know that value concretely, there would be no guessing.

Have you ever tried to solve for x on a math test? Imagine how hard that would be if you didn't know the value of y or z. You are pulling arbitrary numbers out for x without defining y or z and thats what pisses me off as that isn't how math works.

Also this charts bullshit too and you can even see its bullshit as Judy's height is all over the place, she has her lower legs cut off without it being accounted for and whats more she apparently is taller in a forward position than upright? Who made this?
>>
>>16830441
disgusting
>>
>>16830492
<3
>>
>>16830469
By the way if you hadn't clued in yet I was alluding to triangulation. If we had that one known value then Judy and Gideon/Nick's position to eachother wouldn't matter as we'd be able to use that known value to determine their distance from eachother then account for it so mathematically at least they won't be on the same plane even if visually they weren't
>>
>>16830469

Nick is 4ft tall canonically. It's on his police academy application form, and unless you say, that info is not reliable, you are just full of hot air.

we estimate everything to this 4ft.

estimation is acceptable because that's all we have.

End of your f00kin argument mate.
>>
>>16830469
we DO have a known value though

the heights of the character models

since we know how the camera can affect the perceived heights of the characters, we can still draw estimates from that if we get samples from the most favourable camera angles, and the most unfavourable
>>
>>16828393
>Just glares at the cover of the porno in her paws.
>"This looks nothing like me," she grumbles, and shoves it back on the shelf in front of her.
>There was an entire row of porn featuring gray-and-white furred rabbit does in what could never be called police uniforms.
>She looked over at Nick, seeing him hold up a life-sized synthetic doll that looked exactly like her.
>Her mouth hung open as he pressed his finger into a hole in its packaging, and the box started to vibrate.
>Nick fell to the floor laughing as she screamed obscenities too vile for the sex shop they were visiting.

>It turns out the store had a break-it-buy-it policy.
>Or, that's what Nick said.
>So, they were now the shameful owners of a life-like Judy sex doll that vibrated.
>Seething, Judy pointed at the doll sitting on their bed, "Throw it away, Nick."
>"Come on, Fluff! We could dress it up in your uniform on holloween and scare the kits!" he half-heatedly begged.
>Glaring daggers at him, she yelled, "No! You either help me take it apart and trash it, or you're sleeping on the couch for the rest of your life!"
>"Alright." he said in a calmly, and took the doll in his arms.
>Smiling to herself, she nodded her head. "Good."
>He turned to her, head high, pouting, "I'll be sleeping on the couch with Jiggly Hipps, then."
>"Wha- What? Nick! Just throw that thing out!"

>He actually did it.
>She watched his chest rise and fall as he slept on the couch.
>The doll that looked exactly like her nestled in his arms, just like she would have been.
>Turning back to their bedroom, she glared at the remote for the doll, on their nightstand.
>Deciding on having some petty revenge, she looked it over, and discovered that, other than a giant vibrator, it could also heat up, and had various life-like movements, like breathing, swallowing, and vocalization.
>It took her a few seconds to hatch a half-assed plan.
>>
>>16830567
Source?
>>
>>16830612
>>16830628

Stop arguing with him, he doesn't really care about math. >>16830190 doesn't even mention exact heights or numbers, just pointing out Judy's height compared to Nick (about the center of his chest) and Gideon (about his neck/shoulders), but he doesn't give a fuck about it because of the slightest nitpick of "Judy is leaning sideways" (even though it isn't that significant of a change) and shit. None of the factors are so extreme that suddenly Gideon will be taller than Nick, but that doesn't matter to this guy.
>>
>>16830469
>as Judy's height is all over the place

Yes, her height does change, but it isn't "all over the place". With literally all these comparison pictures, all the characters hights has a lower and upper limit. At no point does their hight get lower or exceed these boundaries. Their hights should be somewhere in that area.

Literally, all our comparisons, show that Nick is taller than Gideon. If your claim, that it's bullshit, was true, then there should be images where he would appear taller than Nick, but it simply doesn't happen.
>>
>>16830673
>>Just glares at the cover of the porno in her paws.


I'm glad I'm not the only one who does the Just/Judy thing.
>>
>>16830694
yeah it's understandable that positions, camera angles, and positions affect the perceived height of characters, but so far it hasn't been shown to actually make a significant different.
>>
Gideon is taller than Nick as long as you do this
>>
>>16830685
Looks like Zootopia.
>>
Reminder that it's perfectly fine to have a small penis, Nick.
>>
>>16830730
Not him but happens all the time when I phone write
>>
>>16830685
http://oystercatcher7.tumblr.com/post/141459939063/making-this-edit-made-me-realise-im-terrible-at
>>
>>16830744
No it isn't soý
>>
>>16830673
Please continue. This is gold.
Bonus points if it doesn't turn lewd.
>>
>>16830744
Quit projecting, Gideon.
>>
>>16830612
Actually no as I already invalidated that point when comparing the center left picture where Nick is standing upright and the center right where he is slouching and leaning forward on this toes. I pointed out there that a persons height is dependent on their posture and if you wish to compare it another picture the subject needs to be in the same posture with that subject (which Nick isn't)

A persons height is not a constant value as it can be lowered or raised based on how that person is standing (ie flat foot and erect versus standing on ones tippy toes with their head up).

However there is a silver lining here, you can use Nicks height in the saluting pic to determine Judy's height which in turn you can use to calculate Gideons in another picture where they stand on the same plane.... but only if they are both in the same position upright position as the gradutation screen, otherwise your calculation could be off by inches which on their scale is considerable.

Again you have account for all the factors, not ignore them when they suit you
>>
>>16830628
>we DO have a known value though
>the heights of the character models

You don't though as I pointed out you need to account for posture, though as I pointed out in >>16830811 you can do it but it only works if the subject of comparison is in the same position
>>
>Nicholas "4.5" is within the average range" Wilde
>Nicholas "There are no nerve endings past the first 3 inches anyway" Wilde
>Nicholas "Big dicks can hurt" Wilde
>Nicholas "The clit is more important" Wilde
>Nicholas "I could always use toys" Wilde
>>
>>16830857
>>
Gay size difference is C U T E.
>>
>>16830738
>but so far it hasn't been shown to actually make a significant different.

It does though even if the person isn't standing all that far away.

For instance this picture her >>16829436 would you have guessed that to create this illusion the guy only needed to step 8 ft away? Even a small change in distance and or angle in relation to the viewer can have a profound impact on a person perception of the object they are observing which is why I keep bringing it up. You dismissing it for the sake of your argument rather then countering it with an argument of your own shows your position to have no validity
>>
File: Goodnight5.png (219 KB, 800x800)
219 KB
219 KB PNG
Those requests are... something
For now, may you have a good night /ztg/
>>
>>16830889
8ft is a large distance anon, i don't know why you wouldn't think that, in addition, the camera is much higher than any differences we have in the pictures we've posted

you've shown that yes, exaggerating angles and position creates perceived differences, but so far failed to prove it's actually significant

>>16830834
we have a slouched and an upright position, we can estimate from that
>>
>>16830294
I’m curious actually, we’ve never seen honey in zootopia. I’m now imaging Gideon as a beekeeper.
>>
>>16830923
Have a good snooze mongoose.
>>
Gideon would be hot if he were like 6'6"/6'7".
>>
>>16830889
in fact, you can't actually disprove this as you're lacking the same evidence we are

we are in fact arguing over nothing, we are not able to prove this either way
>>
File: can_you_believe_this.png (712 KB, 724x530)
712 KB
712 KB PNG
>>16830811
Again, I will ignore it, because the things you list result in half a centimeter error at max, no matter how much you try to size them up.

The screenshots are perfectly lined up, if you watch the movie, they are about the same distance from the camera with the same perspective, all characters standing perfectly up and you still will come up with some bullcrap just to stir shit.

The estimations like >>16830938 said, are close enough to reality. Call them bullshit, it will just make you the one being wrong.
>>
>nick is 4' tall

Ah, so Gideon's like 4'5"?
>>
>>16831095
4.5 centimeters tall, that's correct
>>
I'd totally date a 4'5" Gideon.
>>
>>16830938
>8ft is a large distance anon, i don't know why you wouldn't think that, in addition, the camera is much higher than any differences we have in the pictures we've posted

You are missing the point here, if 8 ft can make a person seem the size of a mouse, imagine how just 1/2 a foot could throw off your comparison. Again this negated if you have a known factor which you can use along the fixed value of the angle of the subject in relation to the viewer to calculate the distance a character is standing in relation to that object (which in turn will define the distance and position they are standing from each other allowing you to compensate for it.)

>you've shown that yes, exaggerating angles and position creates perceived differences, but so far failed to prove it's actually significant

You're hopeless. Repeating that it isn't significant doesn't mean it isn't significant. I'm explaining why it is yet again you dismiss it out of hand without argument or reason. Your statement has no validity.

>we have a slouched and an upright position, we can estimate from that

How do you do that when Nicks height while slouched isn't known? I know how to do it, its pretty easy but I've never heard you or someone like you say it, instead preferring to take two different pictures with no commonalty and then drawing a line across them like it meant something
>>
File: in_the_forrest.png (1.27 MB, 1280x720)
1.27 MB
1.27 MB PNG
>>16828859
>Its a cool drawpile but not many people have been contributing to them recently. Sucks.
Checked thumbnail and thought it was a photograph.
Now seeing that it is actually artwork, I think would probably intimidate all but the stick figure drawers.
Those with some pride in their work (good or not) want to match their work to the scene, or at least as well as they can.
For example;
>>
>>16830673
>Walking back over to Nick sleeping on the couch, with the doll's remote in her paw, she gave him a quick once-over.
>He was in a pair of boxers, and he was pitching a tent. Something she typically woke up to at night, prodding her backside.
>Normally, she'd be wet and ready for him after a few seconds of half-awake groping.
>Sometimes she'd wake up at that, blow him or ride him in his sleep, and then clock back out after;
>Other times she'd ignore it they'd both wake up to him with his knot extended and she'd take care of them then.
>She'd decide on the former.
>Turning the doll's heater on, she went to work.
>Getting down to her knees, she pulled his boxers aside, and freed his dick.
>With one paw fondling his balls, the other stroking his sheath up and down, and her lips wrapped around his sheft, it barely took a minute or two to get his knot out.
>Moving her mouth from his dick, full of precum and saliva, she pressed her lips to the doll's silicone pussy, and spits the slick fluids into it.
>Giving the opening a few licks, she looked up its body and imagined for a moment she was going down on another doe. With a quick suck at the clit, she went back to her plan.
>Lining Nick's dick up between the doll's legs, she grabbed the bulge in his sheath that was just slipping out. Nick let out a gruff breath as his hips jerked forward as one of his paws lazily groped at its chest.
>Guiding him with her paws, his tip slipped into its entrance, and pulled back out as his hips began moving back and forth on their own.
>Bracing her paws at its hips, she let her sleeping, sex-hungry fox do the rest of the work.
>With each of his thrusts, his paws snaked around the dool, and the fluids she spits into it began to pour out, down its fake fur thighs.
>As his knot began slapping its silicone mound, held the pelvis steady, and heard Nick gasp.
>>
>>16831179
>Repeating that it isn't significant doesn't mean it isn't significant

And repeating that it is significant doesn't mean it is is significant

> I know how to do it, its pretty easy but I've never heard you or someone like you say it

you're talking to a different person, more than likely multiple people who all agree you're wrong, but if you really really want to, please enlighten us peasants

i'm pretty sure i know what you think you're talking about but i'm also sure you're talking out your ass
>>
>slice of life gay greentext of Nick and Gideon as a cute couple

Or

>kinky green about Judy catching the rwo of them with their pants down
>>
File: check_dis_guy_out.png (599 KB, 500x208)
599 KB
599 KB PNG
>>16831179
>You're hopeless
>>
File: drawpile 7 6 18.png (2.43 MB, 1634x1080)
2.43 MB
2.43 MB PNG
>>16831238
What matters isn't how well you do something, just that you do it
>>
>>16831301
>Gideon

how about neither
>>
>>16831301
I like both of those ideas but I really enjoy slice of life more.
>>
>>16830923
It's fine not to post this shitty picture every evening. it's okay, really. Start a tumblr blog or a twitter or whatever, just stop posting this eyesore here.
>>
>>16831238
>>16831308
>What matters isn't how well you do something, just that you do it
This. The drawpiles are supposed to be fun, not a competition.
>>
File: densemotherfucker.jpg (33 KB, 480x360)
33 KB
33 KB JPG
>>16831015
>in fact, you can't actually disprove this as you're lacking the same evidence we are

Actually I can quite easily, all I need is two caps taken within seconds from eachother when the camera angle hasn't changed but something else has. Can you guess what that thing is or what I'm alluding to? This whole thing isn't about whether gideon is shorter than nick or taller, my problem here is peoples failure to understand entry level geometry which I find disheartening as fuck.

>Again, I will ignore it, because the things you list result in half a centimeter error at max, no matter how much you try to size them up.

Pot calls Kettle black a second time thinking something will change. I already explained multiple times why it doesn't matter if they are lined up you have to account for other factors, there is more to consider whether the subjects are parallel to eachother in one picture, you also have to account for things like distance from where they are being observed, posture, angle from where they are being observed, ect. I've said this repeatedly, who is ignoring things now?

>The estimations like >>16830938 said, are close enough to reality.

Except you can't even call them estimations because they are based on arbitrary values rather then values which actually can be used for comparison, again this is something I've explained in detail but you seem determined to ignore rather then address.
>>
>"He's 4'1 dumbass"
>"No, he's clearly 3'11", says so in the script!
>"But that's open to conjecture?"
>"But the dumbass is right!"
>Don't call me right unless you have proof, dipshit."
>"Dipshit?, gee, that was unprompted."
.
Well, at least it isn't fox spamming.
>>
File: I miss Kam.jpg (333 KB, 1228x1268)
333 KB
333 KB JPG
>>16830923
Sleep well tuber
>>
>>16831374
imagine posting the same shitty bitch about the same picture being posted once a thread in a hidden portion of a chalkboard for messages about Mesopotamian hieroglyphics
>>
File: z001r.jpg (68 KB, 504x500)
68 KB
68 KB JPG
>>16831425
>repeating untrue insignificant arguments as significant reasoning why our estimations aren't real estimations, why we perfectly explained that we estime stuff based on canon informations that can be seen in the movie
>>
>>16831425
>Actually I can quite easily, all I need is two caps taken within seconds from each other when the camera angle hasn't changed but something else has

Then either do it or shut up

>you also have to account for things like distance from where they are being observed, posture, angle from where they are being observed, ect

Yes, and it still make little to no difference, good job on that
>>
>>16830323
The fact that you are refuting that picture just shows you're full of hot air.

>>16828927 On the right picture, if we were to move Judy closer to the camera, so she is standing exactly parallel in front of Gideon, she would, in fact, become slightly taller. As I see it, the top of her head should be able to just about touch the underside of Gideon's muzzle.

In the left picture. Judy isn't anyway near Nick's muzzle, even if she were to stand up and doing a salute, she wouldn't be able to touch it with the top of her head.

We don't need mathematical precision in order to figure this out. You can see it right there, clear as day.
>>
Who fucking cares anymore you autists
>>
>>16831274
>And repeating that it is significant doesn't mean it is is significant

There is a difference in my case, I explained WHY it is insignificant. The point was you need to back your statements.

>but if you really really want to, please enlighten us peasants

In the movie Nick after saluting Judy turns towards the camera, the transition into that position he slouches forward given you a basis for comparison you could use inorder to calculate what Nicks height would be while slouching as hes in the same position on the same plane, only his posture as changed. You simply measure how tall he is while slouched in comparison to saluting then note the difference and use that to correct for it in comparison pics where Judy is on the same plane. Easy stuff, you learned it in grade 9.

>i'm pretty sure i know what you think you're talking about but i'm also sure you're talking out your ass

That is because you have a bias, one you aren't even willing to defend beyond repeating the other person is wrong. Again at least I make arguments and am willing to back them up, which is more than what you've been doing.

Now are we going to dance this dance all night or are you going to concede that you may need to review a text book?
>>
>>16831568
Make content, anon or we're just going to continue with our tirades.
>>
>>16831306
The irony of you focusing on that statement while ignoring the rest is delicious. Notice how I explain why you are hopeless, posting meme picture doesn't insult me it validates me. You simply cannot back up your position because you are happy to dogmatically hold onto a belief rather then look at the bigger picture here, that you don't know how to math.
>>
I can't believe Gideon is ACTUALLY a foot taller than Nick.

Foxlets, when will they learn?
>>
File: dead_jack.png (38 KB, 1634x1080)
38 KB
38 KB PNG
>>16831308
OK, still trying to come to grips with using drawpile, so dropping this as a layer.
Need more practice.
>>
>>16831444
>Sees following posts
Well, that was a wasted post.
>>
>>16831569
go and make a better character height estimation chart, idiot

until you have one these ones are better, no matter how much you call it bullshit, it still better than what you came up with
>>
The autism is strong with this thread
>>
File: 11389812.jpg (49 KB, 443x500)
49 KB
49 KB JPG
>>16831614
I don't respond more than meme picture because that's all your big mathematical brain is worth here? You have spent shitposting hours about an insignificant mathematical estimation error margin, nobody cares about
>>
>>16831569

>There is a difference in my case, I explained WHY it is insignificant.
You theorised why, with no actual proof

I also theorised why it would make no difference, because the actual positions of the cameras and the angles are minute, it would make almost no difference to the actual comparisons

>In the movie Nick after saluting Judy turns towards the camera

But he doesn't.

>You simply measure how tall he is while slouched in comparison to saluting then note the difference and use that to correct for it in comparison pics where Judy is on the same plane. Easy stuff, you learned it in grade 9.

That is not what I thought you meant at all, I thought you were actually going to present something clever

>That is because you have a bias, one you aren't even willing to defend beyond repeating the other person is wrong

I'm pretty sure the only one endlessly repeating themselves here is you
>>
>>16831485
Pot calls kettle black a third time.

You say my statements are untrue and insigificant, well why? If you throw out a statement be prepared to back it up otherwise your argument is insignificant as it has no argumentation to support it.

> why our estimations aren't real estimations,
You do realize you are proving my point about you basically going 'nu uh' to argument rather then actually address them.

>why we perfectly explained that we estime stuff based on canon informations that can be seen in the movie

And I explained why it doesn't matter, because you aren't accounting for the other variables which can alter the value you are basing your estimates on that render it inaccurate.

>Then either do it or shut up
Already did, its pretty bad when I have to do all the work and tell you how to support your argument because you either can't be arsed or don't know how to do yourself.

>Yes, and it still make little to no difference, good job on that

Again repeating a statement doesn't make it factual. You say it makes no difference, well why? Explain yourself otherwise your statement has no validity
>>
Are people really getting upset about how tall the characters in Zootopia are, or is this some kind of meta-thing?
>>
>>16831838
it's literally just one retard
>>
Kris the Otter is 2 inches tall.
>>
>>16831838
Meh
Fox poster is around though, desperate to make himself heard with his 2 year old repeat shitposts.
>>
>>16831256
>Grabbing the remote, she turned the doll's vibrator on as high as it would go, and watched with glee as Nick's toes curled and his hips shook.
>A primal, throaty moan left the fox, followed by a long, drawn out "Fuck,"
>His eyes snapped open, and his head thrashed around as he stared wildly at the walls, and then down at her, and then the doll.
>Before he could move, she jumped on him, and pinned him against the couch, with the doll sandwiched between them.
>"Judy!? I wasn't, I didn't!" he said, panicked, tried to push the doll away.
>Looking down at him, she grinned, and tossed the remote across the room. "I know, Nicky. But you made your bed. Now lie in it,"
>His eyes squinted as he tried to furrow them, and he began to ask, "What," before another moan slipped past his lips.
>She could feel the entire doll's body vibrate between them, and her body was feeling uncomfortably warm from its heat.
>"Turn this thing o-off," he managed to say between hard breaths.
>Giving him a bap on the nose, she simply said "No."
>His hips gave another hard thrust as he wimpered, and tried to pull himself free of its waist.
>"Ah, fuck! Please, Judy," and he wimpered again.
>Getting off of him, she went over to the remote, and snatched it from the floor.
>Looking over at Nick, who looked back at her pleadingly, she waved a paw at him and headed to their bedroom.
>Closing the door, she heard him let out an angry gekker, and there was a thud.
>She locked the door, and put some ear plugs in before she went to sleep.
>>
>>16831861
and she's still taller than Gideon
>>
A pair of grown men arguing mathematical minutia about the height difference between two cartoon foxes. What have we become?
>>
>>16831798
stop responding to multiple people while only referencing one post, you idiot.

>Pot calls kettle black a third time.
That's me, and you do the same thing every fucking time you post. You tell us we don't see the bigger picture, we tell you you are the one who doesn't see it.

>>Then either do it or shut up
>>Yes, and it still make little to no difference, good job on that

this is a different anon, you idiot, don't answer him by replying to my post.
>>
>>16831914
who, in turn, is taller than Nick.
>>
>"Taller, maths says so!"
>"Not fucking taller, my theories prove it!"
OK you two, slide rules at twenty paces...
>>
>>16831524
>The fact that you are refuting that picture just shows you're full of hot air.

So basically you are saying if I did agree with you I'm automatically wrong? Way to logic.

>In the left picture. Judy isn't anyway near Nick's muzzle, even if she were to stand up and doing a salute, she wouldn't be able to touch it with the top of her head.

You are still doing it, not accounting for other factors. You are drawing an imaginary line from nose tip to nose tip in your head and thinking that proves your point. It doesn't you have account for everything that could throw your comparison off and then account for it, Again a small difference in distance in relation to the viewer can have a significant effect on that persons perception of height, same goes for posture which if you don't believe me on that, next time you are at the doctor try slouching when they measuring your height then measure your height standing erect. You'll notice the difference isn't a few centimeters but inches which again on the scale of a 4 foot fox is pretty significant.

I don't even need to address the rest of your post as I'd basically be repeating that point.
>>
File: IMG_0884.jpg (1.07 MB, 3056x1795)
1.07 MB
1.07 MB JPG
>>16828600
>>
File: NickKrisGuitar.png (657 KB, 1280x905)
657 KB
657 KB PNG
>>16831932
Hold it!
>>
>>16830673
>>16831256
>>16831876
>>
>>16831876
That's literally rape
>>
File: IMG_0883.jpg (1.03 MB, 2203x2385)
1.03 MB
1.03 MB JPG
>>16830294
>>16830300
>>
>>16832050
ik :V
>>
>>16831921
>Autists incapable of cutting their losses and letting the other have the final word in an e-argument that was retarded from the very beginning
It's the quintessential 4chan experience

>>16832036
No step on Nik
>>
>>16832037
It's a trick of the sun reflecting off of the guitar.
>>
>>16831846
>>16831865
Delusion at its finest

>>16831838
Not about the exact heights, just about how people are measuring the heights. The two arguing about it seems to both have massive egos though so neither is backing down despite having both repeated their arguments multiple times already.
Get a room, ladies.
>>
File: 536653-20120427-ERlxNI.gif (509 KB, 339x197)
509 KB
509 KB GIF
>>16832023
Jamie?

pls stop. You make yourself look like a jackass
>>
>>16832111
>Delusion at its finest
Fuck off retarded shitstirring shitposter, fucking go be a leech to someone else you fucking mentally challenged shit.
>>
File: NickKrisPool.png (743 KB, 1280x904)
743 KB
743 KB PNG
>>16832073
>>
>>16832050
That's like 90% of the hot content in these threads
>>
File: 1491184096889.png (511 KB, 2000x2000)
511 KB
511 KB PNG
>>16832063
eat it
>>
File: 1491183332459.png (165 KB, 772x716)
165 KB
165 KB PNG
>>16832176
>>
>>16831914
wouldn't that make Judy a Bunlet?
>>
>>16832128
That's Dylan.
>>
>>16832143
Ah! Finally, an intelligent argument.
>>
File: hoppsfamily.png (922 KB, 1024x665)
922 KB
922 KB PNG
>>16832187
What made you think she wasn't?
>>
>>16831793
>I don't respond more than meme picture because that's all your big mathematical brain is worth here?

Again I don't claim to have a big mathematically brain, I'm just pointing out the methods of these comparison pictures suck and explaining why, you aren't countering anything I'm saying besides to try an insult me, or just say I'm wrong, or make appeals to numbers. Those aren't arguments in defense of your position, in fact you've made none to defend your position save empty ones like the examples I mentioned. This suggests one of two things, your arguments have no validity or you don't know how defend them in any degree.

>You have spent shitposting hours about an insignificant mathematical estimation error margin, nobody cares about

Clearly people do as they keep responding to me
>>
>>16832143
Badger gore poster, is that you? I assumed your mother stopped bringing you tendies and you starved to death. Glad to see you're alright.
>>
>>16832233
CUTE!
>>
>>16832263
Can't be, not enough "bastard"s in his insults.
>>
>>16832233
Violet towers over Judy too.
>>
>>16832233
oh my god, Judy's a midget.
>>
>>16832296
>Violet towers over Judy
I want to see this, both naked.
>>
>>16832233
So those two brown males are hares?
>>
>>16832257
why should we have to refute your arguments?

you are the one who has yet to leave a convincing or sound argument

we have shown pictures that are almost identical in terms of camera setup, save for a slight angle and height adjustment, and with characters you yourself have said are standing in the same plane

any difference in the angle of the camera is observably negligible, especially when watching in motion

again, all you have put forward is, "you cannot use these two images as a comparison because the camera angles and positions are different"

if you try and frame the same shot with a camera, you would see that it is very difficult to change the relative heights of objects in the same plane simply by moving the camera the same amount shown in the pictures

therefore, while the method is not wholly accurate, it is a decent estimate, which has always been stated
>>
>>16832453
My guess is they're married to the two girl buns at each side.
>>
Girls, girls, you're BOTH pretty.
>>
>>16831796
>You theorised why, with no actual proof

Are you drunk? I've been explaining geometry and trig for the past few hours in great detail along with actual methods used which you'll find in any textbook, I'm not pulling this shit out of my ass

>I also theorised why it would make no difference

No you didn't, you made a statement which I wouldn't consider even a hypothesis which I then proceeded to address point by point explaining why it doesn't work. You focus on that points I keep bringing up while ignoring my explanations of them while also not questioning why I keep repeating these same points. Because you are repeating yours rather then addressing my points.

>it would make almost no difference to the actual comparisons

For instance this statement. Can you explain why it would make almost no difference?

>But he doesn't.

Watch again he does when the audience at the graduation start clapping but before the camera changes to show them.

>That is not what I thought you meant at all, I thought you were actually going to present something clever

If its so simple why didn't you use it? Why did I have to explain it to you.

>I'm pretty sure the only one endlessly repeating themselves here is you

Only because you are. If you actually gave a counter argument I would address that but since you and other like you simply repeat that their original charts correct, that I'm wrong, that differences in position or lack of a common basis of comparison don't matter without actually doing anything to explain why that is meaning all I can do is repeat since they haven't addressed anything I said.
>>
>>16832453
The one in the blue shirt is Judy's first boyfriend and the one who took her virginity. She thought he was the one for her, but ended up dumping him after he tried to get her off the pill to settle down and have a family, despite the fact that he knew it would mean giving up her dream.
>>
>>16832539

fuckin what
>>
>>16832539
Pretty sure that's just her brother.
>inb4 "that's what I said"
>>
>>16832233
Man, Judy sure won the genetic lottery among her family
>>
>>16832233
The kid in the blue tshirt "I'm waaaaay too cool for this family"
>>
>>16832608
She and Violet both did.
>>
>>16832539
>sothisisyourfirstpregnancy.jpg
>>
>>16832608
the one bonnie is holding is clearly the hottest v:
>>
File: 1512474738061.png (930 KB, 1300x1304)
930 KB
930 KB PNG
>>16832633
Violet is such a sweet bunner
>>
>>16832670
be quiet you
>>
>>16832587
>inb4 "that's what I said"
You must be fun at parties.
>>
>>16831925
>That's me, and you do the same thing every fucking time you post.

Not really, again I'm actually making arguments and backing them up.

>You tell us we don't see the bigger picture, we tell you you are the one who doesn't see it.

I have been repeatedly, part of the problem here is you are ignoring it rather then addressing it.

>this is a different anon, you idiot, don't answer him by replying to my post.

No. Statements made will be addressed, if I confuse you for another anon don't be offended just ignore it since it wasn't addressed to you.

>"Taller, maths says so!"
>"Not fucking taller, my theories prove it!"
Again don't give a shit which one is taller, I care about the methods used, methods these Anon should have learned in high school.

>>16832128
Whose Jamie? I haven't watched Supernatural since it jumped the shark and angels showed up.

>why should we have to refute your arguments?

Because if you don't it shows you aren't even confident in your own. Also claims made with evidence or argumentation can be discarded equally without argumentation. I've been backing everything I said, you haven't. Who is on firmer ground here?

>you are the one who has yet to leave a convincing or sound argument

Why is it not convincing or sound?

>we have shown pictures that are almost identical in terms of camera setup

and I explained in detail why they are not

>save for a slight angle and height adjustment

And I explained why these are considerable factors you need to account for.

>with characters you yourself have said are standing in the same plane

Which I explained is only variable in a number you have to consider when making the calcuation

>any difference in the angle of the camera is observably negligible

Which you claimed but never explained.

>again, all you have put forward is, "you cannot use these two images as a comparison because the camera angles and positions are different"

No I said much more than that.
>>
>>16832801
Aw for gods sake let it go you autistic fuck
>>
New thread when?
>>
>>16832233
Spot the main character!
>>
>>16832858
When the two asshats leave
>>
>>16832844
I'm just skipping those long-ass posts. The autism is incredible, though
>>
silent assassin
>>
File: future JRPG protag.png (121 KB, 131x319)
121 KB
121 KB PNG
>>16832874
>>
File: New Canvas.png (187 KB, 831x609)
187 KB
187 KB PNG
>>16832539
>>16832453
>>
>>16832482
>if you try and frame the same shot with a camera, you would see that it is very difficult to change the relative heights of objects in the same plane simply by moving the camera the same amount shown in the pictures

A movement of the camera will throw things off but even if the camera is stationary if the characters move in relation to that camera, change their posture, change in relation to eachother, ect it will have a noticeable effect on their perceived height. Hell sometimes it only takes one character moving to change the perspective completely, as I pointed out with Stu being in a position which makes him appear to be on the same plane as Judy which he can't be as hes taller than Judy not inches shorter.

>therefore, while the method is not wholly accurate, it is a decent estimate,

Its not even an estimate as its based on subjective inconsistent values due to the person making the charts eyeballing random screen caps, drawing a line with a ruler then calling it a day. Its closer to a guess then an estimated and not even an educated one since there are no common values being considered in order to gauge the accuracy of the guess.

> which has always been stated
And I've refuted each time it was stated to no counter argumentation.
>>
>>16832844
>>16832883

Insults do not equal refutation, I'll take your unwillingness to back what you said as conceding that the charts are bullshit
>>
File: Get Out.png (394 KB, 420x430)
394 KB
394 KB PNG
>>16832973
>>
>>16832973
jesus christ anon
>>
>>16832973
No.
>>
>not hiding+nostub it
i just wish i could filter the whiny summerfags
>>
File: Finzelle kissing tr 001.jpg (800 KB, 1851x2048)
800 KB
800 KB JPG
>>16824279
Typeset last thread if you're interested
>>
>>16832784
not really the greatest way to use that line. he was just predicting the "twist"
>>
>>16832908
>>16832874
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2w6siYk_Ge0
>>
>>16832973
Lewds WHEN
>>
>>16833024
It's not an insult, you are genuinely autistic. Look at what you're doing. Just stop and go over what you've spent the last few hours of your life doing. look at it. You autistic fuck.
>>
Page 10

>>16833087
>>16833087
>>16833087

Holy shit, fuck these slow loading captcha pics, like damn man this is painful.
>>
>>16833089
wew lad
>>
>>16833059
I did. Oh, but I missed that one. Thank you good sir
>>
File: AdorableNewChameleon.webm (2.29 MB, 1070x808)
2.29 MB
2.29 MB WEBM
>>16832531
>>16832801
>>16832975

okay, let's go through this slowly

>In the movie Nick after saluting Judy turns towards the camera
>Watch again he does when the audience at the graduation start clapping but before the camera changes to show them.
>webm

>>we have shown pictures that are almost identical in terms of camera setup
>and I explained in detail why they are not
let's go back to this pic >>16829269

we are only going to talk about the 2nd and 4th pics because the rest are misleading, and you seem to have difficulty telling right from left, and up close and far away.

>while they are parallel to each other our observation angle
here you are in fact eyeballing this angle and assuming they are not the same

>distance to the subjects are not the same
this actually does not matter for determining heights, especially in a cgi movie with no lense distortion to worry about

we are ignoring bonnie and stu as they are also misleading in these shots

>it will have a noticeable effect on their perceived height
only if the differences are significant, which no one has so far measured

the difference in the saluting height and the normal standing height would be significant, if the sizes of judy's body parts were not accurately scaled in each screenshot. you can overlay them here and actually see that that judy's body part (leg, torso, head) are the same size, and that judy is in fact saluting at the same size she is standing.

the crux of your argument is that someone has eyeballed the camera's position, angle, and postures of the characters and therefore this estimate is complete crap. you have mostly done this by eyeballing screenshots yourself and then saying that these factors would cause a large variance in perceived height

what you have not shown however is that they do in fact cause a large variance, mainly because it cannot be shown
>>
File: 538.png (180 KB, 750x650)
180 KB
180 KB PNG
>>
>>16830378
I wish i could sleep on his chest and feel his arms around me
>>
File: ob.png (45 KB, 685x614)
45 KB
45 KB PNG
>>16833655
>>
>>16831301
Slice of life with Gideon and Nick as a cute couple please.
>>
>>16831301
what >>16835352 says
>>
>>16832539
>took her virginity
Yep, looks like she just elbowed him in the ribs
>>
File: 147040111111.png (155 KB, 400x480)
155 KB
155 KB PNG
>>
File: Jack's a good bun.png (62 KB, 579x485)
62 KB
62 KB PNG
>>16836103
>>
File: 1527302908832.png (131 KB, 1196x1344)
131 KB
131 KB PNG
>>16836149
>>
>>16836193
I don't have the other pics, just pretend I posted Honey thinking about sheep.
>>
>>16836222
>>
>>16836262
Yoink, thank you Anon.
>>
File: Counter.png (16 KB, 666x666)
16 KB
16 KB PNG
>>16836262
>>
>>16836319
>>
>>16836351
>nick thinking about meat because he's gay



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.