>>2177660>Pic related are the eyes made with the ellipse tool and a few clipping masks to keep everything nice and tidy. The upper and lower eyelashes are the only things made with fills. Notice how it looks nice and uniform. Yours look lumpy, as if you used 5 nodes to make a simple curve where two would do...wow thanks for your demo too.
Again I was wary of making proactive decisions like you have with shapes. If I didn't trace the studio I figured I would hurt the expression. The zero two you linked demonstrates this. The smoothed-out and tapered lines overstate the white of her teeth, and the shadow at the corner of her mouth is almost nonexistent. The vector has the technical features you want but they do not convey her expression with the surety of the original cell.
>He means that you straight up did not vector the outlines.Well yeah this is what my OP was about. I was unhappy about how to approach the lines. I read your earlier posts too and I'm sorry you're having to pretty much repeat yourself on my account- I've done things in the wrong order, you see:
>see Saten Ruiko's smug.png vectored (it was stroked)>decide I want to vector a smug too>open gimp and do all my customary, self-taught pathing there>come here, watch the tutorials and find out that to get gud I should be using different software and not stroke, so I get on that>and bitch about itI'm going to have to make a decision about how much effort I want to commit to the unexpressive lines in a reaction image. The outer wedges already get some kind of mitering and it may be serviceable to just sharpen the sticks with basic bitch masking vectors for now, and maybe I should wait for something else to come along to do things correctly from the beginning, with fills and such. Thanks a lot both of you for your guides & viewpoints on this, very interesting stuff.