What unpopular/uncommon design elements do you like?

[Foxridley]

A lot of furries apparently don’t like human characters, but I’ve always liked the human (or nearly human) character with a tail. Heck, Goku from the original Dragonball (not actually human, but close enough) was one of the childhood influences that started me on a furry path.

 

[Morisith]

A lot of furries apparently don’t like human characters, but I’ve always liked the human (or nearly human) character with a tail. Heck, Goku from the original Dragonball (not actually human, but close enough) was one of the childhood influences that started me on a furry path.

I think a lot of furries "dislike" human characters because they are hard to draw. Or rather, if you focus on the fully anthro characters - then drawing humans are hard AF. (not to mention we as humans are automatically more critical to human art as we automatically look for familiarities or flaw in other humans as an instinct. and if something is slightly off we immediatly dislike/distrust it).

I also think it's an immersion thing. Like take my sona as an example. She is a numbat that is inspired by a cherry vanilla coke colourscheme. She can be anything and anyone - with complete seperation from me as my human self. If I interact with someone as myself, or try to draw myself - then I automatically put the same societal filters on as I would if I was interacting irl or the drawings where real photos. But with a fully anthro sona I don't have to do that. Like I can draw really crude NSFW art and not feel a drop of shame, but if my sona was human or human like - then I think I would feel icky about posting it for others to see. This can ofc be a me thing, and not the majority. but it could be an explanation.

There is also some beef with the cosplay/anime community as they tend to dislike furries. Luckily I see less and less of that, but for a while there it was very much an us vs them culture. just like furries and mlp was at one point an us vs them, but now it's mostly integrated and both are accepted by each other. (at least from what I've seen).


Sorry this was a whole book to say; "I get why some don't like them, and I also enjoy human faced/mostly human characters" Like I love centaurs, or human looking characters with furry limbs (say from the knee/elbow down) and maybe some animal ears/horns and tail. But I don't draw them because I am horrible at it

 

[Deleted member 160111]

I don't like furries. My favorites are anthro. The more anthro character have the traits of a beast, the better. I mean an elongated torso, like a marten, large hind legs, like a rat. The tails are like real animals, but they have a not fluffy letter "s".
I also prefer a natural (or close to it), restrained color of wool, feathers, scales, etc.
Character behavior is also important. Why can't a squirrel climb a tree using its clawed paws?
In furries, except for the muzzle, there is no difference in the structure of the body.

It's boring for me! Of course, it's a matter of taste, but anthro forever.
I hope my general idea is clear.

 

[Dragon64]

I don't like furries. My favorites are anthro. The more anthro character have the traits of a beast, the better. I mean an elongated torso, like a marten, large hind legs, like a rat. The tails are like real animals, but they have a not fluffy letter "s".
I also prefer a natural (or close to it), restrained color of wool, feathers, scales, etc.
Character behavior is also important. Why can't a squirrel climb a tree using its clawed paws?
In furries, except for the muzzle, there is no difference in the structure of the body.

It's boring for me! Of course, it's a matter of taste, but anthro forever.
I hope my general idea is clear.

Isn't anthro still technically furry?

 

[Hollowsong]

I don't like furries. My favorites are anthro. The more anthro character have the traits of a beast, the better. I mean an elongated torso, like a marten, large hind legs, like a rat. The tails are like real animals, but they have a not fluffy letter "s".
I also prefer a natural (or close to it), restrained color of wool, feathers, scales, etc.
Character behavior is also important. Why can't a squirrel climb a tree using its clawed paws?
In furries, except for the muzzle, there is no difference in the structure of the body.

It's boring for me! Of course, it's a matter of taste, but anthro forever.
I hope my general idea is clear.

I didn't know "furry" and "anthro" meant different things...

 

[Deleted member 160111]

Isn't anthro still technically furry?

I didn't know "furry" and "anthro" meant different things...

No, there are no clear boundaries between anthropo and furry, but there is a pattern.
Look, the redneck will explain to you!
Furry is a character with animal features. Usually, it is always a structure - identical to a person (the same proportions, length of limbs and proportional paws). They may be finger-walking rather than foot-walking, but this is immaterial. The main thing is that furies of different types have 70 - 90% human features (in nsfw art, often, among other things, breasts and genitals similar to a person).
The head usually resembles a human skull with an attached muzzle (a high forehead is characteristic of humans).

An anthro is a humanoid character with more resemblance to a beast. If it is an OS rat, its front paws may be generally shorter, and the butt and hind legs are massive - like a real rat. He will also have a greater tendency to rat behavior, such as climbing well and clinging to branches/pipes. The head is almost always close to the head of a wild animal (the forehead smoothly passes into the bridge of the nose).
If it is a ferret, its trunk and neck will be elongated, and its paws will be short.
If it's an otter, its tail will be massive and dragging on the ground, for example.
There are no exact boundaries. Anthro is a very vague concept. The artist can vary from a more realistic beast to a more human one. 50 - 80% of animal traits, I would say.

A feral is a complete beast with human features. 90% is a beast. The structure is completely identical to the animal counterpart, but they, at the behest of the artist, can take objects in their paws, use tools - on a limited scale. Because the structure does not allow you to behave like a person. They also do not need transport, because they walk on four paws. They sleep, for example, in burrows, because the beast cannot build an apartment.

Many do not distinguish furry from anthro, this creates difficulties.

 

[Foxridley]

No, there are no clear boundaries between anthropo and furry, but there is a pattern.
Look, the redneck will explain to you!
Furry is a character with animal features. Usually, it is always a structure - identical to a person (the same proportions, length of limbs and proportional paws). They may be finger-walking rather than foot-walking, but this is immaterial. The main thing is that furies of different types have 70 - 90% human features (in nsfw art, often, among other things, breasts and genitals similar to a person).
The head usually resembles a human skull with an attached muzzle (a high forehead is characteristic of humans).

An anthro is a humanoid character with more resemblance to a beast. If it is an OS rat, its front paws may be generally shorter, and the butt and hind legs are massive - like a real rat. He will also have a greater tendency to rat behavior, such as climbing well and clinging to branches/pipes. The head is almost always close to the head of a wild animal (the forehead smoothly passes into the bridge of the nose).
If it is a ferret, its trunk and neck will be elongated, and its paws will be short.
If it's an otter, its tail will be massive and dragging on the ground, for example.
There are no exact boundaries. Anthro is a very vague concept. The artist can vary from a more realistic beast to a more human one. 50 - 80% of animal traits, I would say.

A feral is a complete beast with human features. 90% is a beast. The structure is completely identical to the animal counterpart, but they, at the behest of the artist, can take objects in their paws, use tools - on a limited scale. Because the structure does not allow you to behave like a person. They also do not need transport, because they walk on four paws. They sleep, for example, in burrows, because the beast cannot build an apartment.

Many do not distinguish furry from anthro, this creates difficulties.

Probably the fact that the distinctions themselves are a bit fuzzy (no pun intended) is one reason many people don’t realize that there are distinctions. Anthropomorphism is something of a spectrum with several modes.
There’s also the issue of words having different meanings in different contexts. “Furry” also refers to the fandom in general, which has an interest in anthropomorphic animal characters. That includes the whole range you mentioned as well as a few less common variants like taurs and kemonomimis.
I’ve also seen different terms used. Like the one artist who refers to “anthro” and “halfanthro.” Respectively equivalent to “furry” and “anthro” as you define them.

 

[Deleted member 160111]

taurs

This is definitely anthro for me, at least 2/3 of the body is 100% animal, in which case the upper part of the body is usually anthro. If it's a centaur-well, it's a mythical creature, not a furry, not an anthro, and not a man.
Philosophical theme.

kemonomimis.

People with tails and ears. I wouldn't even attribute them to this fandom.

 

[Deleted member 160111]

Oh, by the way! Usually taurs and some other creatures - non-standard creatures - are taken out separately, I draw / don't draw. (I talk about these things as an artist, not a member of the community).
The artist just has a list of what he doesn't draw. And kemonomimis. - would be among the people.

 

[Foxridley]

Oh, by the way! Usually taurs and some other creatures - non-standard creatures - are taken out separately, I draw / don't draw. (I talk about these things as an artist, not a member of the community).
The artist just has a list of what he doesn't draw. And kemonomimis. - would be among the people.

Makes sense. Kemonomimis do count as in the fandom for me. But that at least partly has to do with transformation being a fair part of my furry interest. So a kemonomimi can be the result of a partial transformation in either direction.

 

[Yastreb]

I didn't know "furry" and "anthro" meant different things...

Anthros are animal people. Furries are folks who like anthros.

 

[Schrodinger'sMeerkat]

Breasts on female non human characters. It either looks like the person who drew it does not understand how to draw animals or is purposely trying to sex them up. Humans are the only species to develop them before pregnancy and most of these characters are still teenagers. Also seeing them on bird and reptiles characters. Just why?

 

[Woozle]

I'm really fond of anthro characters retaining instinctual/ animalistic behaviors. For example that part in Zootpia when Judy almost gets stepped on and she darts out land crouches like a bunny just out of panic. idk, as a furry I don't just want to see animals acting human. I want to see them acting like human-like animals. Even simple things like characters making animal sounds when exerting themselves or whatever goes a long way.

I actually love rabbit anthros in particular, especially when they act like rabbits. I love it when they "thump" with their back legs when they're excited or annoyed. Judy Hopps does this at least once in Zootopia. And of course Thumper from Bambi, although he's more feral than Judy.