I agree if there made right and th e design looks okay and not too overly coloured then its fine but if its over done like some "Names won't be mentioned" But other then that eh

I think unrealistic "sparkle" animals are ok if they are neatly done, the colors are in the lines, and they are well thought out. Which in most cases this is not true, most sparkle animal characters you see are randomly thrown together just because someone felt they needed a new character. Colorful animals should have detailed well put together designs in colors and bio, if the colors are an eye sore the bio needs to be interesting, Explain why it is in fact the colors it is. and if the bio of the character is atrocious the colors should go well with each other and flatter the character. this rarely ever happens with colorful characters and that's why people don't want them and why there is a large group of people whom hate them.

Personally I believe there should be a check list or quota that the sparkle characters for the site have to live up to. I'm sorry but color dumped characters cannot be taken seriously, people need to put more thought into them.

the sad part is, more often than not, sparkle animals are made messily, rushed, and not plan out.

I make sparkle creatures and animals a lot and i put a lot of time into them, If it's aloud I am thinking about making a "sparkle animal" Guide in the forums, showing what makes them look like and what makes them look like a mess.

Well, I'm not argueing, I respect everyones views, but I think it's ok if people want to make 'unrealistic' characters if they want, but thats just my opinion.

Lionsoulkopa -- Well, The Lion King is an animated film, after all, but at least the lions' colorings are almost natural. I'd say their colors are acceptable.

It's a matter of fans rendering screenshots, many with highly unnatural colors such as blue fur and yellow paws, stuff like that.

Many of the renders on here aren't so bad. If anything they're natural.

Use your imagination, yes, but don't go overboard, as some of these 'sparkle' people clearly have. It's rather... freaky, really.

It's because Animation Source is a site where fans of many movies can let their imaginations run free, with there own made-up characters, and all saughts of drawings, images, etc. The lion king isn't wonderfuly accurate either, since when did lions have bright red manes, bright orange fur and blue eyes?

Yeah, I don't understand either. If I were to make a picture based on The Lion King I would make the colours to match the lions in the movies, maybe with different shades or whatnot, but I wouldn't make a lion such bright colours.

I have the same question. The Lion King is about realistic (somewhat) lions, with natural colors. Of course, if it's your fursona, it's you, and I can understand that, but...

maybe it's because when people do there're first character they do their fav color like me I did my fav color on a lion and plus to me they look cool