wickedwims Rough! Animation [WickedWims]

[Roughh]

Rough! Animation [WickedWims]

View File

---

 

Hello everybody !

 

I make NSFW animation for the sims 4 and i will majorly create MFM animation ♂️♀️♂️

I just learned to animate so it will be a little bit goofy

It take me quite a long time to make a proper animation. For the moment, i make 1 animation in 2/3 week. So consider that my next animation will come in 14/20 day ?

 

If you feel genereous (or don't know what to do with your money) don't hesitate to support me on my patreon. In general, money is  the best boost for artist ?

 

If you like, or hate my work, if you have a problem or a tip to give, feel free to message me

 

 

?️‍?️ MY PATREON ?️‍?️

 

?

 

? Preview ?

 

 

Animation list

 

• Dp cowgirl 3P: Male/Female/MaleSOFA

• Toilet Fuck 3P: Male/Female/MaleTOILET

• Toilet Fuck Harder 3P: Male/Female/MaleTOILET

• Stretched pussy 3P: Male/Female/MaleDOUBLE_BED

• Reverse cowgirl DP 3P: Male/Female/MaleDOUBLE_BED

• Reverse cowgirl DP 2 3P: Male/Female/MaleDOUBLE_BED

• Cowgirl DP 3P: Male/Female/MaleDOUBLE_BED

• Two in one 3P: Male/Female/MaleDOUBLE_BED

• Cowgirl DVP 3P: Male/Female/MaleDOUBLE_BED

• Intense Cowgirl DP 3P: Male/Female/MaleDOUBLE_BED

• Intense DVP DP 3P: Male/Female/MaleDOUBLE_BED

• Fast DVP 1 DP 3P: Male/Female/MaleDOUBLE_BED

• Fast DVP 2 DP 3P: Male/Female/MaleDOUBLE_BED

• Summer double vaginal DP 3P: Male/Female/Male Chair_Lounge

• Cowgirl double penetration DP 3P: Male/Female/Male Floor

 

 

---

• Submitter
  Roughh
• Submitted
  04/29/2023
• Category
  Animations - WickedWhims
• Requires
  Wickedwims

 

[Angelus75]

Welcome New Animator @Roughh , good Start ?

 

[Ripcat]

In general, money is  the best boost for artist

 

 

oh my bad, I though best boost for artists was passion...

[Roughh]

3 hours ago, Ripcat said:

In general, money is  the best boost for artist

 

 

oh my bad, I though best boost for artists was passion...

i could talk for hours about this, but to make it short: passion is the engine, it drive artist to do what he like whatever happens

Money is a boost, or, a reminder to keep the good work

[Petr54]

On 5/1/2023 at 8:12 PM, Roughh said:

Money is a boost, or, a reminder to keep the good work

An artist's passion makes him work no matter what, so you said. The artist doesn't need to be reminded that he has to do good work. His nature reminds him of that. If money reminds him to do good work, then he is not an artist, but a craftsman.

[AtheneDea]

On 5/28/2023 at 1:31 PM, Petr54 said:

An artist's passion makes him work no matter what, so you said. The artist doesn't need to be reminded that he has to do good work. His nature reminds him of that. If money reminds him to do good work, then he is not an artist, but a craftsman.

 

Maybe this might make more sense if put into another perspective. Money helps with the focus, since money helps with food and everything else needed to shift the focus from "Doing something for fun, but still only part time since real life dictates otherwise" to "Doing something more often since it helps pad the bank account for survival"..? That is just my understanding of it. I am not a dev on LL, but I have worked and created things for fun before, so I can understand the viewpoint. 

Like I said, no disrespect or hate to anyone making the comments on money.. just sharing my viewpoint. ^_^

[Petr54]

20 hours ago, AtheneDea said:

Maybe this might make more sense if put into another perspective. Money helps with the focus, since money helps with food and everything else needed to shift the focus from "Doing something for fun, but still only part time since real life dictates otherwise" to "Doing something more often since it helps pad the bank account for survival"..?

 

 

It is worth recalling that all the great artists in the history of mankind were, as a rule, poor and penniless. Nevertheless, they created masterpieces of world culture. Such artists were recognized as great only after their death. There are very few exceptions to this rule.

 

[AtheneDea]

4 hours ago, Petr54 said:

 

 

It is worth recalling that all the great artists in the history of mankind were, as a rule, poor and penniless. Nevertheless, they created masterpieces of world culture. Such artists were recognized as great only after their death. There are very few exceptions to this rule.

 

Thankfully we no longer have to live by this rule. The greats, back then, were sadly only realized after their deaths because not many could see their creations. It was very limited, and when they did sell them, the collectors hid them away for their own enjoyment long before those artistic pieces were placed into museums for the masses to enjoy. Now, we have the internet. A virtual area to where art mediums have changed and advanced far beyond the brush or chisel or quill, and many more can enjoy the new creations that are made without the limitations of the past and creations can be enjoyed long before the creators' death. 

That is why, these days, we can create things just for the fun of it.. but survival still dictates on how much time we spare for things we find fun. 

^_^ 

Edited June 2, 2023 by AtheneDea

[Petr54]

19 hours ago, AtheneDea said:

but survival still dictates on how much time we spare for things we find fun. 

 

 

Your phrase above refers to the great artists of the past, not to those of today. Artists of the past had a much greater need to survive because of the underdeveloped productive forces of the past centuries. They were more destitute than artists of the present because poverty then embraced a much larger percentage of the population than today. Poverty covered almost 95 percent of the population. There were the poor, the very poor, or the rich. The concept of middle class did not exist. That class came into existence in the 20th century. So you correctly noted the fact, "Thankfully we no longer have to live by this rule ".
Nevertheless, they created their masterpieces only because they couldn't not create them.

Talent always strives for self-expression, it is difficult to contain it, despite the external conditions of existence. That is why it is called talent.

And someone who just knows how to do a good job for the money is just a good artisan. But he's not great.

[AtheneDea]

13 hours ago, Petr54 said:

 

 

Your phrase above refers to the great artists of the past, not to those of today. Artists of the past had a much greater need to survive because of the underdeveloped productive forces of the past centuries. They were more destitute than artists of the present because poverty then embraced a much larger percentage of the population than today. Poverty covered almost 95 percent of the population. There were the poor, the very poor, or the rich. The concept of middle class did not exist. That class came into existence in the 20th century. So you correctly noted the fact, "Thankfully we no longer have to live by this rule ".
Nevertheless, they created their masterpieces only because they couldn't not create them.

Talent always strives for self-expression, it is difficult to contain it, despite the external conditions of existence. That is why it is called talent.

And someone who just knows how to do a good job for the money is just a good artisan. But he's not great.

I agree, also I enjoy your verbiage and how you wrote that. It left little room to disagree while still stating that, in a way, both view points are correct; even as they are also different. 

 

I must say, I enjoyed this discussion. ?

[Archybald]

2 hours ago, AtheneDea said:

also I enjoy your verbiage

 

It is you, not Petr54, who are verbose. He is saying the right things. You, on the other hand, make the same argument in different sets of words. Your argument is that talent needs money or it will not create masterpieces. Money is needed, no one is arguing. But besides that, Petr54 says that talent will express itself through creativity even in conditions unfavorable for nomal existence, because talent requires an outlet in creativity.

[Petr54]

2 hours ago, AtheneDea said:

how you wrote that.

 

Perhaps I did not write in the manner and form accepted by those who speak English. The fact is that English is not my first language. I write my answers with Google-Translator, which I think is a very bad translator. The reverse translation through the same translator says something completely different from what I wanted to say. So it takes a very long time to bring the translation to an acceptable level. But it has the undeniable advantage that it is built into the Chrom browser.

[AtheneDea]

9 hours ago, Archybald said:

 

It is you, not Petr54, who are verbose. He is saying the right things. You, on the other hand, make the same argument in different sets of words. Your argument is that talent needs money or it will not create masterpieces. Money is needed, no one is arguing. But besides that, Petr54 says that talent will express itself through creativity even in conditions unfavorable for nomal existence, because talent requires an outlet in creativity.

Verbose - using or expressed in more words than are needed.

I do not think I was being verbose, I was just stating my opinions and thoughts on what was said, and then Petr54 and I were having a discussion on it. There was no argument, it was communication with full respect of their opinion and taking what they stated into account while also voicing my own thoughts and why. And if that is "being verbose" because I want to make sure what I meant was understood clearly so there is no misunderstandings, then so be it.  

I was complimenting Petr54, saying how I liked how they worded their statements. I was not being argumentitive. It was a discussion on opinions. I was stating that money can be a drive to be able to create full time, while working for free leaves the timeframe for updates and something new at a much larger timeframe inbetween. Since, sadly, money is needed just to survive in this world. (Unless you live on a farm where you have your own animals and gardens, but even then you usually have to have money to get started... but that is another topic all together.) But the discussion veered off to the masters of the art world and how things are different now-a-days.. Which I agreed with Petr54 on what they stated.

So not sure where you are coming from on saying that I was "making the same argument in different sets of words". There was no argument, though now you can call what this, is a disagreement with what you have stated about myself. Which would be the start of an actual argument since you are aiming it directly at me and not what is being talked about. 

Edited June 4, 2023 by AtheneDea

[AtheneDea]

8 hours ago, Petr54 said:

 

Perhaps I did not write in the manner and form accepted by those who speak English. The fact is that English is not my first language. I write my answers with Google-Translator, which I think is a very bad translator. The reverse translation through the same translator says something completely different from what I wanted to say. So it takes a very long time to bring the translation to an acceptable level. But it has the undeniable advantage that it is built into the Chrom browser.

Honestly, I never would have thought that English wasn't your first language, you articulated it very well. It was purely a compliment in what I said because, how you were wording things, it was easy to understand and I enjoyed our discussion. Like I told Archybald when they stated that I was being "verbose and arguing", I really was not trying to be if it seemed like I was. It was fun and enlightening to your opinions without any disrespect or arguing with each other. 

I apologize if it seemed like I was, it was not meant to seem that way. 

[Petr54]

20 hours ago, AtheneDea said:

It was purely a compliment in what I said because, how you were wording things, it was easy to understand and I enjoyed our discussion.

 

 

My response was, again, due to the inaccuracy of Google Translator's translation of your post. This is what I was talking about in the previous post. This translator is the worst of all translators. It gives an incorrect translation of one of your expressions. Now you have clarified your answer and I saw the translation errors.

[Dosentino]

That is tooooo hot!!!! Thank you very much!!!

[Roughh]

On 5/28/2023 at 7:31 PM, Petr54 said:

The artist doesn't need to be reminded that he has to do good work. His nature reminds him of that. If money reminds him to do good work, then he is not an artist, but a craftsman.

I agree, i think this more acurate said like that. A craftman( or a technician) his intention is to sell his ware, his merchandise.
While, an artist, due to his heightened perception , his intention is to express something, to show his vision through his art.

 

On 6/2/2023 at 7:24 PM, Petr54 said:

It is worth recalling that all the great artists in the history of mankind were, as a rule, poor and penniless. Nevertheless, they created masterpieces of world culture. Such artists were recognized as great only after their death. There are very few exceptions to this rule.

I would also like to add an accuracy. I often heard it, and by this, a lot of people think that: an artist is automatically someone poor
But it is not true, a poor social condition doesn't create an artist. It doesnt depend from what class the artist come from. It only depend if someone, like i said before, has and advanced perception and the creativity to express it

I can give you one famous example: Mozart, coming from a wealthy family, he was a skillful composer with some great humour ?

[Petr54]

In some things I agree with you, in others I do not. Moreover, I detect a violation of logic. On the one hand, you say:

 

18 hours ago, Roughh said:

But it is not true, a poor social condition doesn't create an artist.

On the other hand you say the opposite thing:

 

18 hours ago, Roughh said:

It doesnt depend from what class the artist come from. It only depend if someone, like i said before, has and advanced perception and the creativity to express it

So do bad social conditions create an artist or not? Or do talent, developed perception, and creative ability come first?

 

18 hours ago, Roughh said:

I can give you one famous example: Mozart, coming from a wealthy family, he was a skillful composer with some great humour 

I'll tell you more, all the famous composers usually came from wealthy families. Why? Because a grand piano in those days was very handmade and cost a lot of money. That kind of money was out of reach for people from poor families. Composers wrote music for high society and therefore were accepted and included to it. A poor person simply could not get into high society.

I was talking about the great artists. Great artists created their masterpieces on easels, using brushes, paints, and canvas. All this was relatively affordable and cost hundreds, thousands of times less than a grand piano. They sold their masterpieces for a pittance to ordinary people. The masterpieces were appraised by later generations, after the death of the great masters.
So your example with Mozart was unfortunate.

 

 

Edited June 9, 2023 by Petr54

[Roughh]

On 6/9/2023 at 9:35 PM, Petr54 said:

I'll tell you more, all the famous composers usually came from wealthy families. Why? Because a grand piano in those days was very handmade and cost a lot of money. That kind of money was out of reach for people from poor families. Composers wrote music for high society and therefore were accepted and included to it. A poor person simply could not get into high society.

I see, i though Mozart was an exception, i didn't know it was very common in this time.
Hopefully, nowadays this domains is not only for to the rich class.
I dont know a lot about music history and his artists, thats why ^^ , i am more interested in painting.

 

And, maybe what i said before was a bit confused.
Hard work, developed perception, and creative ability come first. This values create the artist.
Social condition come after, as a factor.
A factor for the choosen subject.
A factor for the capacity to create. (A poor artist will struggle to buy paint materials, canvas or a workshop)
And maybe a factor to create relations, to gain social exposure (a rich artist, due to his parents status, will easily create relations with big institues or rich persons)
It can play as other factor but it can be very long to enumerate 

 

[Petr54]

5 hours ago, Roughh said:

I see, i though Mozart was an exception, i didn't know it was very common in this time.
Hopefully, nowadays this domains is not only for to the rich class.
I dont know a lot about music history and his artists, thats why ^^ , i am more interested in painting.

 

 

 

I forgot to mention that writing music required a musical education and knowledge of musical notation. Education was available to the children of wealthy families. In poor families, even a regular education was not always available, let alone a musical one.

In addition. The modern system of musical notation emerged in the 11th century, and the final form of this system acquired 500 years later. All the famous composers of classical music lived and worked in the 18th and 19th centuries. This is recent history. While in Ancient Egypt, Ancient Greece, artists were already creating.

For example, Agatharchus, Apollodorus, and Aristophon worked in the 5th century BC.

 

5 hours ago, Roughh said:

(A poor artist will struggle to buy paint materials, canvas or a workshop)

 

Dyes of different origin were used to create the drawings: mineral (hematite, clay, manganese oxide), animal, vegetable (charcoal).

Edited June 16, 2023 by Petr54