News
Search Options ►Insi Redraw
Pets
NEW LINEART
OLD LINEART
Feel free to post comments on this news post too.
Posted by Jack
(#1) on Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:36pm
- gl.tch
(#4144)
-
Posted on: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00pm
The back leg is NOT too long; the hip is swung, the foot is extended, and the hock straightened.
As I said before, this is a stance that can be demonstrated by any four-legged animal.
- rammy
(#3514)
-
Posted on: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00pm
The back leg isn't too long, though. It's in motion, with the heel raised.
- Ash
(#90)
-
Posted on: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00pm
I'm curious then gl.tch if you can find a comparison to where that pose is found, because it doesn't look correct to me for any animal I know of.
- gl.tch
(#4144)
-
Posted on: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00pm
RAMMY THANK YOU.
- Rae-sauce
(#837)
-
Posted on: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00pm
I understand what you're trying to say, but I still don't think it's correct. Yes it is supposed to look a bit longer from the pose, just not that much. And in Nikki's red line it's not in the same pose, so how could you say it looks worse? Her's looks like it's in a stance rather than moving.
- Dember
(#679)
-
Posted on: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00pm
Definitely adore the new. x3 Anyone who's all that greatly opposed to it could easily use a dawn crystal on theirs, but this? I'm not much of a fan of insis, but I would definitely own this. ^^ One qualm, though. What is that odd line right through the middle of its torso?
- gl.tch
(#4144)
-
Posted on: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00pm
Frey: a selection of images to showcase what I mean.
https://www.outdoorphoto.co.za/forum/photopost/data/517/ktp_awc.jpg
https://www.roadghosts.com/images/beastcloseup.gif [apologies for bad quality of photo]
https://farm1.static.flickr.com/23/31412738_09e0533bf1.jpg?v=0
https://www.arkive.org/media/E9/E9E141C9-1F92-490A-9BAB-36D00FBA09DA/Presentation.Large/photo.jpg
I assume that's enough.
- gl.tch
(#4144)
-
Posted on: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00pm
A proper side on one, too, in a stationary pose.
https://img1.photographersdirect.com/img/15610/wm/pd1109663.jpg
- Ash
(#90)
-
Posted on: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00pm
Yes, but, gl.tch, look at the proportion of front leg to back leg, it still doesn't excuse the really shortened foreleg and shoulder area.
Posted on: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00pm
How could the leg look even LESS anatomically correct? It was pretty bad before, gl.tch.