Art Errors in Women's Body Parts.

[grävling]

fallen asked me to present these in the twitch. Its not the tits that are wrong in the art, so much, as the clothes.

Ask Officer Genious and ChocoCrowbar to confirm



This woman has a jacket that is too small for her. It will never close over her tits. (Which I am told is a rude word
in the USA. What am I supposed to call them?). This is not because her tits are too large, as is usual in the cartoon
world, whoever drew this woman has a perfectly realistic estimation of the tit size of a female soldier. The clothes
are just too short. The jacket will never close around her, and so it would flap. Her odd neck scarf? thing will flap, too.

Her neck is also way too long, and I am not sure why she has a neck decoration. It only accents the problem that her neck is
way too long.



This woman is doing ok neck-wise.

She just doesn't have any tits at all. Seriously. She has the proper shadows for 'top of tits' and the proper ones
for 'bottom of tits' and those are stuck together, but she had no tits in the middle at all.

Her jacket also will not do up but in her case I am not even sure it is a jacket. Its an insane part of clothing.

Something you don't seem to know is that, in women with significant amount of tits, there is, between the navel
and the bottom of the tits, at best 3 hand width's. Her hands. This woman has a long torso with 7 or more hand widths
in there. I come in the most extreme of female sizes this way, enough that when I was younger and firmer, I could
make money poising in the nude for artists who wanted to draw women with exceptionally long torsos for their tit and
leg sizes --- and 3-4 hand widths is about as good as it gets. 2 is normal. Nobody is longer that way. I astonished
people with 5, but that was due to exceptionally small hands, in addition to a very long torso. 7 isn't happening.




This woman is ok but her collar is not. Either the stupid thing needs to stick out on the other side of her head, or
Gosh I hope, it can be reduced some.


And lastly.



This woman is painful to look at.

Her right leg, between her knee and her crotch, needs a 'erase it all and start over'. The shape is wrong. Her upper thigh is too large and at the wrong angle for the rest of her leg, and the shadowing - or rather the complete lack of it -- is wrong and. well, it sort of leads to the painful part.

The bottom of this woman's tits need to be, not where they are but at the bottom of the red box they are in. So they line up
with her elbows. Or slightly above her elbows. What you have here are tits, grapped up and lifted and stuffed up to her neck. Fashion could demand this, but it would be hideously uncomfortable. God knows I wouldn't want to fight in it.

Again, put 2 hand widths in as between her navel and the bottom of her tits, and you will be ok. This one looks like
she has been strung up by her tits. what do you have there, 5 handwidths? And her hands are large, too. Her tits are strung up like small hams on a drying rack. It's painful, really painful, to look at and imagine being in a costume like that.

I've got some painful personal experience in wearing kevlar armour designed by people who never gave a thought to the
idea that the soldier who might be wearing it could possibly be a woman with tits. They stuffed and grabbed you as well. But the uniform in the art above, that would be _worse_. Ow, it hurts just to look at this one.

[fallen]

Thanks for all the feedback on the art! We'll keep working to improve.

The jackets are a stylized variation of a bomber jacket.

[ntsheep]

grävling, number 3 suggest these names for tits

Boobies
Gazongas
Melons
Puff pastries
Knockers
Wrecking balls
Air bags
Holy cow (if they're really big)
Personal floatation devices
Balancing weights

[grävling]

I own 2 bomber jackets. Yours need to have more fabric in the front. Seriously. I can send pictures of mine if you like.

I am inordinantly pleased that the women in this lineup have 'reasonable tits'. It's not as if I expected different from you, but all my life I have been stuck with 'watermelon women' and even more outrageous. Indeed, a case could be made that women of the largest natural size are being left out. We can easily live with this, with them getting centre stage so often before. But, having got women's natural size down, mostly right, you still have problems with women's clothing.

A girl wearing a 'boys's bomber jacket' -- will buy one that is sized for her tits. This will likely mean that the sleeves are
too long. If it has a waist, it is unlikely to be in the correct place for her -- and there are huge fashion dictates about
if waists are to be high or low ...

but a jacket that is intended to be too short in the front comes, pretty much all of the time, as a lace-up affair. so if you want
to make your jackets front-lacing that will handle the flapping problem.

[xdesperado]

grävling lol how about we call them breasts
You do make some valid points and won't dispute you on things like proportions of the female anatomy.

As for the clothing however...
If you look at historical dress, especially in regards to military and high society of past era's you will find a number of instances where uniform and/or dress "jackets" were never meant to be buttoned up or closed over the wearers torso. They were more a fashion statement than a practical item of clothing.
The loose "scarf" thing is actually the turned back collar of the blouse which you also find commonly in historical garments.
I would say the outfits in top 3 pictures are more indicative of a formal/semi formal dress uniform which is often less than practical or comfortable than an example of daily wear/combat fatigue style clothing.

As a side note even the current U.S. military dress/semi dress jackets which have a looser less tailored fit overall can be difficult for particularly well endowed female troops to button properly and still have a presentable regulation fit and appearance. If they have the money many will get them extensively tailored but a number of women particularly the lower enlisted with limited budget tend to end up more or less feeling rather crushed in the chest when they have to wear their uniform jackets buttoned up.

[grävling]

If you want to attract female players, give us clothes we would like to wear.

xdesperado is perfectly correct that in the past there have been men's formal military outfits which were hellish for men to wear as well. But nobody wanted to wear them either. (Which was sort of the point. I suffer to wear this, for you.)

However you show up wearing your clothing choices in crew combat, so hell-wear or not, you get to fight in them.

[grävling]

Her neck is too long, as well.

[fallen]

Fixed the overly large collar on the woman with the white coat. It was enlarged to prevent overlap that looked bad with longer hair women, but I've redone it and found a middle ground that still works.

[grävling]

The back here on this poor girl isn't quite right, either. That triangular piece on top of her belt. It is shaded as if it were the top of her leg, but it's way to high for that -- it's her back, or the sides of her torso.

[athios]

It has been a long time and many generations since these peoples left their original star system. Maybe they have accumulate weird mutations from all the cosmic radiation that are causing body-plan deformities?