Less Tits n' Ass, More Kickin' Ass

Sure, let’s give this a shot.

eschergirls:

muffinfarming asked you:

Hey, first time poster here! Selkiesiun’s post, specifically the part about “nobody wants to read a comic with a fat female protagonist” made me think: would it be possible to come up with a list of people who WOULD like to see a ‘fat’ superheroine or at least a ‘normal’ one? How cool would it be to pull that list out the next time such a ‘critique’ was given? It probably wouldn’t change anything, but the artists seem so disconnected from the fans that it might at least be an eye-opener.

Okay, sure let’s give this a shot. :)  (And feel free to spread this around as much as you want so more people can throw in their hat)

Who would read a comic with a (well written, not for laughs) fat female protagonist?

Signal boost! I put my vote in! 

More insight on the ever galling subject of B&B poses

keyboardsmashwriters:

I’ve seen a lot of valid arguements circulating tumblr, both for and against the boobs and butt poses. On the “for” side, there are times where it makes sense for both genders. I saw the baseball bat example used, which is a very legitimate reason for both ends being visible to the camera.

But, there are facts that need to be considered.

I’ve studied different forms of martial arts, and what I’ve learned is that power comes from pivoting — not twisting the spine, which is often confused as the same thing. My instructor(s) taught me to gain power from the hips, even when simply punching. Power comes from the entire body.

Here’s an inherent problem:

(source: Escher Girls)

The tension in her body is simply in her shoulders and arm. It’s easy to recognize someone who hasn’t been thoroughly trained when an attack consists simply of throwing the fist forward.

The foreshortening sort of killed me, which is why it’s so sketchy. But mostly it’s for the idea and the shapes (and I didn’t draw with any references, so I apologize again if these aren’t a hundred percent anatomically accurate).

The point here was to highlight tension — to accentuate force and momentum. Because her hips and ribcage tilt at these particular angles, and because the camera is positioned at a higher level, we CAN see the B&B. It’s not impossible and not improbable, as I’ve demonstrated before.

But the problem is that we see a LOT of it.

I mean, A LOT.

I sketched this as an alternative (although it would look much more believable if the two of them were close to the same plane but I won’t point that out). I tried to give her the sense of exhaling, because shouting when attacking provides additional strength from the solar plexus. The twisting of the body is to give the sense of movement.

The foreshortening isn’t as obvious here, though…………. :{ sorry.

So, yes, B&B can be practical and make sense, and it can be a believable pose if made believable. But it’s not often made believable, and it’s done in such excess that it’s become a device for subtle sexualization of women that many people accept.

That’s not good.

A B&B pose for the sake of consumption means that it’s okay to portray women as objects for sexual satisfaction in the public sphere. It’s to the point where I’ve read that redrawing a B&B pose into something more sensible makes the pose less “dynamic”.

(Source: Escher Girls)

This pose is mostly believable, but is it necessary? Does it need to be this way?

I imagined her swinging her leg around to brace herself. If something jumps at me, I naturally step back and block with the opposite arm. A body will balance itself naturally, as described in this much more in-depth post.

In an alternate version, I tried to make her look more surprised and less prepared by varying her hips and legs only slightly:

She’s leaning back more, less twisted. In photography, a pose is interesting if the model grants as many different levels and shapes as possible — that’s what makes a pose dynamic, not if you can get both breasts and cheeks to face the camera.

So, in essence, yes: a B&B pose can make sense. But it’s done so excessively that women can’t seem to do anything except show their assets to the camera, and instilling this idea into minds who are sensitive to their bodies can be damaging and cause people to develop unreleastic expectations of themselves and others.

I MEAN COME ON.

(Source: Escher Girls)

Batman and Super Man are facing the camera, ready to slap some bitches. What the heck is Wonder Woman doing over there? Why is this okay?

Would it be okay if Super Man and Wonder Woman were switched?

Of course not. Men don’t generally and can’t pose like that.

So why is it female superheroes and villains are expected to?

This is a very well thought out and well illustrated commentary that pretty much complements and adds to the one I did. Excellent. 

Is there a good reason to use a boobs and butt pose?

There’s a debate on tumblr about whether boobs-and-butt poses are doable or not, because they are labeled as impossible by some people. Photo reference was offered to show that it is a possible pose, and a lot of the backlash this post got was due to the actual overuse of a pose that is just that: a pose for the camera.  Sometimes, the pose is used simply as a pinup pose. It’s all over the place. It’s in comics, in movie posters, in ads to sell clothes or makeup or anti-cellulite cream, what have you. It’s not a natural pose and looks (and feels) obviously staged. The BNB positioning tactic is used as “action” when drawing a woman to show she’s turning to face another foe, or zomg is surprised by someone sneaking up behind her, or other such excuses the artist may make to cover the fact that he (or she) wanted to show the character’s sexual assets. It’s been argued that action poses that show boobs and butt are not practical or realistic (and yes, we’re talking about comics, take your pithy comments about asking for realism in comics out of here before I slap you).  

So I’ve been trying to figure out when a boobs and butt pose would be appropriate in action. The thing is, a lot of “how to draw comics” or “how to draw dynamic figures” books tell the reader that there needs to be a swivel between the hips and the ribs in order to make the drawing dynamic. They make it sound like an aligned pelvis and sternum make for a stiff drawing. I beg to differ, because dynamism isn’t just in the torso, and it’s possible to make even the stiffest of military attention poses dynamic. The problem lies mostly in “well if there needs to be a swivel at the waist to make the drawing dynamic, then more swivel means more dynamic, right?” No. No, it doesn’t. Too much swivel and you strain the pose, and a bit more sends you either in the snapped or rubber spine territory, the former making the drawing look like two separate halves of a person and the latter removing any form of tension in what should be an extreme pose. 

And that’s just it: the only reason for boobs and butt at the same time in action is a split moment of tension, the extreme at which the body will twist, before settling back into a more comfortable position. 

This brings me to those zomg surprise! poses. The thing is, when we turn suddenly to react to something behind us, we don’t twist at the waist. My physics teacher in high school liked to tell us that the body is its own physicist and will always try to remain in balance, which is why your right arm sticks out by itself if you’re carrying something heavy in your left hand, and why your foot and hands will throw themselves out to catch you from falling. When you turn to look behind you, yes, you will swivel at the waist, but you will also turn your pelvis in that direction, you will bend at the knee, one of your feet will turn on the ground to accommodate the movement that happened to the rest of your body and keep you balanced. So normally, in these poses, you may get side boob with your two butt cheeks, or side butt with your two boobs. 

So how could I get 2 boobs and 2 butt cheeks? I figured it out. It starts from the ground up. The only way it could happen realistically is if the person doing the body twisting needed to keep both feet firmly planted on the ground in a feat of strength. Like catching something heavy and throwing it over their shoulder. Something that already has momentum. Behold my quick chicken scratches! 

Clicking the image will show it bigger. 

So yes, using the momentum of the car on a collision course, She-Hulk (I guess) grabs it and tosses it around and back, using its momentum. It’s the extreme pose, and lasts only a split second before she recovers and steps back to catch her balance and de-swivel. I traced her feet from one pose to the next to make sure it made sense. Just like a storyboard artist or an animator.

I said before that I think about movement whenever I draw a pose. I think about the sequence of movements that go around the pose I’m drawing. Now that I think about it, I could have added the final pose of her recovery. My point remains that thinking of movement is what makes the pose make sense to the reader. Artists, don’t be afraid to get up and strike the pose. Make the movement that leads up to the pose, follow through to what happens after, to become conscious of where exactly everything actually goes and what the limbs, pelvis and torso actually do in relation with each other. 

Now, if I may come back to the usual “it’s a comic, duh, it’s not realistic” argument that keeps popping up: Good artists, the ones we viewers find good, are the ones who draw things that look like they could happen, regardless of style. Sure, it’s a cartoon mouse, or it’s a flying guy with a cape, but if you draw the flying guy in a cape with his feet flat, or his back hunched, or otherwise in a way that contradicts the notion of movement through the air, you won’t find it a good drawing. It’s the realism in the POSE, not in the CONTENT, that makes the viewer believe the story.  

About amateur artists: a repost

My blog is about professional work that is done to show the most sex appeal while fudging/ignoring basic rules of anatomy. I’m not going to complain about a bad drawing as much if the picture is not intended as “heylookomgsexy”. Heck, I look at the art I did in the Gargoyles comics: it was pre-life drawing classes… and I didn’t know what the heck I was doing with legs and pelvises, let me tell you. 

Almost any artist’s first published comic is going to be inferior to their present work and most learn to draw better as they gain more experience and knowledge. My work today is far superior to what I’ve done in the past. I take amateur artists the same way. Everyone has a starting point, and everyone is learning and getting better at their skill regardless of publication status. That said, I will not critique amateur art in this blog. Like I said earlier, this is about pro work. And not about all pro work, it’s about pro work that goes out of anatomy’s way to objectify/sexualize women. And I’m hoping what I do with this blog will be an encouragement to amateurs as well as professionals to be aware of why they are making the choices they are in their drawings of women.

Now, if anyone is interested in receiving a constructive critique from me, be it a general commentary or a redlining of their work to make a drawing better, I am open to offering it, provided I’m not too busy with work and deadlines. These critiques are private for the person who requests them.

The blogs that carp on amateurs are petty and discouraging, and pretty much the best possible way for people who are just learning to give up and decide never to draw again. And that’s a damn shame, because today’s beginner might be next decade’s Alex Ross or Amanda Connor. 

Your responses to the latest post

You guys! 

I sincerely did not expect the five replies I got in my asks after I posted my reply. Instead of answering them all individually because some could get the same answer over and over, I decided to do it in one post. 

Okay, first of all, thanks for the support on the excuse of “style”. astrail pretty much sums up what the Style post is about, and I know Liefeld’s name is flung around as the prime example of Bad Anatomy In Comics (even orobasart, in his “respect” for the art, disses it) but this is not what the blog’s about. It is about how we can make things better in comics, and showing by example. 

So please, guys, no insults, no character attacks on posters who don’t agree, the “fined” thing may have simply been a typo, as the “e” is just above the “d” on the keyboard. His approach was rude but that’s no reason to insult his beliefs. 

Like I said, the guy’s entitled to his opinion, he may not like my art and that’s his choice and his taste. I merely pointed out that he, like the others who’ve used the same argument before him, are using a flawed argument. 

I didn’t take issue about his critique of my art. He can say whatever he wants about it, and I would be pretty damn hypocritical if I thought MY art was beyond critique! Heck, I know several of my corrections are not as good as if I’d done an original drawing from scratch. What I’m taking issue with is that his statement boiled down to “you shouldn’t do your blog and your corrections because it’s wrong”. I take issue with being told what I can’t comment on or blog about, which is why I said, if he doesn’t like it he can just change the channel. 

And thank YOU for the vote of support! I’m glad you like what I’m doing. See, I’m very well aware that not everyone will like what I do or draw or work on. I’ve had a friend “rant” at me for ruining comics for them because all they see now is the bad anatomy and twisted up posing. I’ve had people commenting here after a correction I made that I got it wrong, and they were absolutely right, which led me to fixing the art and the commentary. I’ve even had someone a while back telling me they were using my anatomy and posing tips to draw their male characters better! How awesome is that?

The thing is, no one can please everyone. I’m aware of that. I’m tackling a subject that is minor compared to other issues of intolerance and bigotry, but it’s one I feel strongly about and I know I can make a difference by addressing it due to my skills and experience. And hey, if I make some people uncomfortable with what I’m saying or drawing or fixing, I guess it means I’m not just preaching to the choir, am I? 

And that’s why I’ll keep at it.