Open menu

Less Tits n' Ass, More Kickin' Ass @lesstitsnass

68 Images
Editing comic book covers, pages and illustrations to turn "babes" back into women - Less Tits n' Ass, More Kickin' Ass (@lesstitsnass)
Carlo pagulayan did these to illustrate what the @lesstitsnass

Carlo Pagulayan did these to illustrate what the poses would look like on a 3D model. You can find his original post here.

If you can’t access the link, Mr. Pagulayan comments:

Seeing the two covers I didn’t see anything wrong with the poses. Granted Land’s depiction of Silk’s anatomy is a bit fragile for my taste, but the pose still works.

SInce I don’t have a female model on call, I had to whip out Daz3d again to illustrate how the poses are perfectly plausible.

Being too technical makes some works stiff and generic, and to me the cover artist’s executions add a bit of grace compared to the other’s suggested corrections, which tends to be a bit more masculine.

A good artist can think in 3 dimensions and figure out how a figure would work. While also thinking of the field of view, or whatever lens effect (Fisheye, extrem perspective, etc). But then not all artist think the same or have the same imagination, and what you think is right, isn’t always the case for everyone, especially when you have different art styles.

That said, I’m sticking with the covers which to me are definitely better

Edit/Add: Also who’s to know what are the anatomical limitations of someone imbued with spider powers?

And on a personal note, you and your followers should probably look more at Milo Manara’s body of work before making all sorts of assumptions based on one not so great cover. Spider-Woman is NOT SQUATTING like you assumed. She is in the middle of climbing up a building with one leg still dangling off.

And your ‘correction’ of Greg Land’s cover looks like they’re in a jazz recital, not superheroes. 

Where do I start? 

First of all, I have to say thank you to Mr. Pagulayan for building a critique of my critique based on the critique itself. I can appreciate that. You are of course entitled to your opinion, and hope you will continue to let me be entitled to mine. 

You say you have no problem with the covers and that’s fine, but I do have a problem with them and that’s fine too. You’ve built 3D models to illustrate your points, and that takes a bit of extra dedication that I respect. Nicely done. I’d like to bring your attention to the differences between your 3D models and the actual cover art. 

When I redlined Greg Land’s cover, it was mostly because it was combined with Manara’s cover, which I found was a bigger issue. Land’s art is often traced, and what your 3D model shows me is that he possibly went from tracing photos to tracing 3D models. Hey, it’s fine to use reference to do your art! Manga Studio is built to have this exact functionality: importing 3D models and positioning them as you need in order to create your comic book art. That’s a really helpful tool, but sometimes, for some people, it becomes too much of a crutch in art. It stiffens everything up, plus there’s the fact that 3D models can be twisted in such a way that it goes beyond what is actually possible for a human body. 

As for Manara’s cover, where did I say anything against the man, or his body of work, at any point in my critique? I talked about this piece, this pose being problematic because of its overt sexuality where no sexual context was involved. I’ve explained this within my post. It saddens me how people jumped to conclusions about how I was insulting Manara’s body of work or his anatomy when all I commented on was the posing. 

Anyway, on to pictures. 

Oh, and for the record, dear submitter, they look like they’re in a jazz recital in the original cover, as well. I didn’t change the pose much at all. As for your comment of my drawings being more masculine, maybe it’s because you’re so used to seeing women drawn all about boobs and butts that anything out of that mold means femininity is lost. 

This said, I think it bears repeating: 

As comicartcorrections once posted

FYI, Comic Artists and Fanboys and Defenders of the Bad Anatomy!  Above is a beautiful example of sexuality on display versus a woman that is doing something awesome.

On the top: Sexy.
On the bottom: Woman At Work, Being Awesome.

Nothing wrong with the top.  But don’t be drawing the top when your character is busy being the bottom one, okay?  Thank you.

Eschergirls joodit submitted let me just @lesstitsnass


Let me just say that while I was scrolling to see the great critiques for Milo Manara’s Spider Woman as soon as that cover was released, I saw this little number & for some reason I couldn’t help but redraw this..

Personally this cover was weak in many ways, and definitely this article as a response & redraw was PERFECT.  The problem was in the way their body language was to convey conflict. There was no conflict.  AT ALL.

First of all, Batgirl’s leg was wrapped around Scorpiana’s thigh (WHY?).  This confused me because there was NOTHING in that image that would want Batgirl to STAY with Scorpiana (an electrified pincer-like attack & giant back-of-the-head stinger to the face are some things that should be avoided).  Then there’s the “tugging of the hair..embrace?”!  I thought the hair tugging is what made Batgirl wrap her leg around Scorpiana, maybe try to counteract the balance of being pulled in another direction..?  Nope.  The tension wasn’t pulling at her hair more than it was to disguise the fact that Scorpiana was pulling Batgirl IN.

And just putting it out there, these COMPLETELY different body languages (i.e. Batgirl pushing everything every which way AWAY from her only to WRAP HERSELF AROUND the villain..?!) make any sense?!  Did their minds say “no” but their bodies say “yes”!?

Anyway..upon observing just these two details, it was clear to me that this was some awkward tango-esque fight scene.  And in some digging (thanks Google), the artist’s intentions WERE to create a fight scene reminiscent of the tango (mainly because Scorpiana is an Argentinian villain & the most famous of Argentine dances is the tango)!  While I applaud his efforts for trying to create a scene of conflict with a famous dance..the tango is a very sensual, sexy dance.  His hint about using a move from the famous dance is more like a blunt object to the head, which ultimately dazes & confuses you into thinking that there was more of a sex vibe than a cultural one.

It’s difficult to incorporate something into an artwork without having your original intentions be skewed upon releasing it to the public because not EVERYONE has the same way of thinking.  And honestly, I would have just thought that this was just another anatomically-incorrect-for-the-sake-of-hot-babe-action.  Instead, I now see it as an anatomically-incorrect-for-the-sake-of-trying-to-be-subtly-cultural.

Speaking of anatomy, Batgirl’s spine is quite honestly thee thinnest, bendiest spine I have seen in a while.  Why?  It seems like the elasticity of her spine has made itself clear in her neck. Pushing her back & pushing her neck in opposite directions will surely sever that poor thing that is her skeletal structure.  As well as her head that seems to be unaware it’s moving too far away.  But for whatever reason, as structurally unsound her body looks, Batgirl lives.  Believe me when I say my rendering of anatomy is NOT accurate, but if it LOOKS somewhat structurally sound then it can work.  This cover didn’t have that stability.

In the redraw, I immediately discarded the fact that this was meant to be a tango scene (and while the tango is sexual, it also conveys a strong feeling of trust..I mean, look at how close & how fluid tango partners are with their movements.  IT’S FREAKIN’ AWESOME, but that is NOT the feeling I wanted to convey between Batgirl & Scorpiana).  I also tried NOT to have Batgirl’s body bend in an unnatural fashion.

I tried to create a scenario where the very details I noticed about the image that threw me off were to be justified.  I had the Scorpiana threatening Batgirl off the ledge of a building by her hair (sorry for not drawing the buildings, maybe next time..), stinging her with her stinger or pincer-like thing or choke her.  This would all justify why Batgirl would wrap her leg around Scorpiana’s thigh.

Is my redraw anatomically accurate?  Nope.  But at least Batgirl’s head isn’t poppin’ off any time soon, nor are the two going to dance while killing each other.

Thanks for all the work you did to explain what’s going on in the original, and finding out the intent of the artist! :)  I had thought it looked like a dance too (as had another redrawer) but it’s good to know for sure.

And also thanks for going through your entire thought process as to why you drew your version the way you did, and what you thought it should convey thematically.  I love seeing different people’s takes on pictures featured on this blog, and I especially enjoy reading people’s breakdowns of what the scene evoked for them and how they see it.

It’s good to know that the original artist intended this to be a tango-like pose, but I definitely agree that this required retooling. This is very nicely done. 

Its a two fer courtesy of dcwomenkickingass @lesstitsnass

It’s a two-fer! Courtesy of @dcwomenkickingass, and specifically this post, I had to do an edit of these, while my storyboards wait. 

I’m not going to go into long explanations here, I hope the drawings do speak for themselves. In the first case, it’s a Land being Land, although I do have to say that he did give a butt to Silk, as opposed to his usual ablation of hips and gluteus maximi. However, he unfortunately did it wrong. 

Artistic anatomy is all about drawing structure, from the inside out. Your muscles by themselves can’t look right if they aren’t placed on top of a properly proportioned skeleton.  Boobs won’t look right if they aren’t drawn as following the curve of the ribcage, its center line, or the movement of the arms which either pull or push on the pectorals on which the breasts hang. The arms back mean the shoulders are lowered, and the angle of the hands will be different since there’s a ¾ turn on the torso. It shows that Land is drawing by guessed shapes, copied contours and practiced repeated motions. There’s no real structure underneath his shapes.

And if we look at the legs, I can only picture Kitty Pride phasing out of a wall: the legs look like they got mangled up to look like stumps. But even structure-wise, there is no thought put into whether the pose actually works, which is why it looks so clumsy. The legs should be reversed due to the line of action that’s in the torso but not followed through into the pelvis and legs. And I’ve been using the coil technique a lot in order to make my volumes work - it should be obvious by the roughs above - which help me figure out things like foreshortening. 

Silk too was a problem of lack of structure, proportions all over the place, and lack of weight and purpose, but it felt moreso than Spiderwoman. I used the same pose Land did but worked out the skeleton first, using rotation arcs in order to properly proportion the length of the various limbs. I don’t know these characters and I might not have used these poses, but Silk here definitely looks like she’s dancing.

The variant cover by Manara looks like a pose right out of porn, pelvis up and cheeks spread, costume looking like body paint, and it makes me very uncomfortable. She doesn’t look like a superhero about to strike, she looks like she’s about to get… well, it’s a porn pose. This is sexualisation. It also reminds me of the Dog Bone sexy shape. 

So I turned the pose sideways to figure it out, and to see what would work better. The sideways pose as is, as you can see, is angled to do quite the opposite of ass-kicking. Were she to try to leap from that pose, she’d fall flat on her face. The second pose is the “coiled like a spring”, but in the camera angle of the cover, it’s an ugly, ugly pose. So I tried to do something in-between, and just by making the pelvis horizontal and lifting the torso off the ground, I’ve managed to move the center of gravity so her weight is on her feet instead of her knees, she can use her arms to maneuver in most directions, and you still get an interesting body shape to look at. I think this works better, and much more ready to spring into motion.

Wanted also to say thanks for all the reblogs, likes and recent follows! I appreciate each one of them, and it’s because you’re still sharing and commenting that I came back to do this. However I’m still really busy! I won’t be posting a lot, but I do plan on posting more than I have. Back to storyboards for me! 

Kanthara oh hey artists and those who want to @lesstitsnass


Oh hey artists and those who want to be artists!

Betty Edwards’ book “Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain” is available as a starter kit at Chapters! I don’t know if the kit is available online, but I saw it on one of the tables on my way out of the store. You can check Indigo, as well, since it’s all the same company.

This is one of those how to draw books that I readily recommend because I find it is the best book to learn how to draw what you see, not what you know. If you don’t have it yet and have a Chapters near by, go and get it. It’s worth it.

Kanthara krudman why yes yes i am a @lesstitsnass



Why, yes. Yes, I am a character designer that works in the game industry. How could you tell???

THIS SO MUCH THIS I pointed this out in lesstitsnass and it’s so very true. And wrong.
Dawnbest reftastic swegener speaking of @lesstitsnass




Speaking of different body shapes. These are all basically peak human bodies. 

How come 99% of them don’t conform to what the entertainment industry tells us is the perfect body?

This is a FABULOUS set of body refs. So glad this came back across my dash so I could reblog it here :D

Totally reblogging it too cuz I lost it the last 3294 times I saw it on the interbutts. GJ!

I know you probably have seen this before, but here it is again. I love that this includes males bodies as well, and is a great reference for anyone wanting to design a various cast of characters. The mere size difference between some neighbours on some photos should give you artists great pointers on how to portray height variation in a believable way to your viewers!

(Also that way I have it in a place I'l remember and will be able to get it whenever I need it so there.)

Eschergirls ghostarin submitted redrew this @lesstitsnass


ghostarin submitted:

Redrew this

I’m certainly not the best at stuff like this, but at least she’s not broken anymore.I could have spread the legs a -little- more to make it more dynamic though.

I also fixed her top/collar cause I couldn’t figure out how they made sense in the other picture. I also gave her shorts under her… kimono-thing. I figured if you knew your dress would constantly give you panty shots, I’d wear shorts under. I think most would do that.

I think the best way to reply to this is the @lesstitsnass

I think the best way to reply to this is the phrase I used before: Sexualisation is adding sexual content without sexual context. Also, sexiness is about the person himself or herself (or whichever gender identity applies to them) feeling like they are appealing, being happy with the way they feel, and that confidence is thus sensed, perceived or otherwise noticed by the viewer (in the drawing/photo and out of it) who can interpret it as “this person/character is sexy”. 

Therefore, pinups can be sexy, if the character drawn in the pinup is designed as acting like they’re aware and happy of the effect they have on themselves, and secondarily on their audience. This is what I mean by story. If you look at the picture of Wolverine and Jungle Girl (or whoever she is), the story the picture tells you is that Wolverine is grinning like he’s a psychopath about to slice and dice someone, and the girl is posed as if she’s trying to seduce someone who’s off camera. I’m not seeing a team-up here. I’m seeing passive poses, eager-to-hack-and-slash Wolverine standing next to eye candy I can’t take seriously as a person, and I have no interest in learning more about her, or about what Wolverine is doing in that jungle in the first place. This is bad storytelling, when comics are about telling stories with pictures. 

Porn, Playboy photos and pinups ARE sexual context by nature. They are designed to titillate, to excite, and the participants are willing. Yes, some art is tasteless, some drawings are bad, some photos are awful, but it doesn’t change the fact that the context is there. If the content of the photo showed a woman in only an apron in the kitchen making googoo eyes at her man/the camera while baking a pie, I might call it sexist, but not sexualised, because she’s doing the sexy thing on purpose and within a sexual context. 

Hope that clears it up!

Maverynthia lesstitsnass hi guys i missed @lesstitsnass



Hi guys, I missed you and I missed doing this! 

I got this question sometime last week, and I had to mull it over for a while because whether it’s intended or not, this is a loaded question, and I had a hard time finding the words to properly respond. Then, I got somewhat caught up on Laci Green’svideosandtumblr, and that’s when it hit me: how to answer this question. 

Your question confuses Sexism, Sexiness and Sexualisation.While related because they are all questions about sex and society, they are not the same thing. 


 Drawing a woman with sexy clothing is not sexist if you’re doing it because that’s the way your character is - her personality, her motivation, her story.

That’s loaded right there because MANY.. MANY artist use that as an excuse to support their sexist artwork “Well that’s just how the character is!!” The author/artist is behind the characters motivations and the character only does what the author/artist wants them to do. The character has no free will. It’s the author’s/artists personality for her, the author/artists motivations for her and the story set out by the author/artist. The character is not alive and has no free will.
So saying “Well that just the character!” Won’t hold water with me and I’ll still call it misogynistic crap. It’s better to own up to it and try to explain WHY you need a sexy character than to just think the character is some how alive and decided all that stuff themselves.

I think you missed my point. 

I know very well that the character is a creation of the author and/or artist. When I talk about the character this way, I’m appealing to the writers and artists to think about their character and tell the story about them, in words and/or art. I’m not giving them a free pass to draw misogynistic crap. If it’s misogynistic, sure, call them out. Don’t assume however that every sexy drawing out there needs to have a Big Reason To Exist As They Are. Sometimes it’s just fun to draw a sexy character, because it makes ME, the artist, feel sexy doing it, even if no one can see me. And I put that sexiness in the character through intent, attitude and body language, not just with clothes or pose-that-shows-the-most.

Hello there i hope you will accept this post @lesstitsnass

Hello there! I hope you will accept this post. It’s not my best work - I didn’t spend enough time with it as I should’ve have. Long story short: the outfits on the original picture were simply ridiculous (see here), I had to re-do them! Yes, “Freesia”’s anatomy is doomed but it would take a complete re-draw to fix, and I was mainly focused on the outfits here. (But I did fix Uni’s and Socie’s waists - not Harmonys’ because I was lazy and I can just pretend that obi is extremely tight.)

I don’t believe you have to cover up absolutely everything to make a outfit seem okay - but dressing them like that… it’s just no. Their outfits doesn’t tell me anything. Nothing but FANSERVICE all over the place. Nothing about the story or their characters - just - HEY, boobs, butts, legs and crotches! I mean god damn - what was that material out of? And why wouldn’t they wear underwear - really? And BUTT CLEAVAGE? Again - I personally don’t mind when they show some skin - just… don’t make it ridiculous. Just don’t.

I also have nothing against shorts - although they were extremely tiny on Freesia - but I found it annoying that all three girls had thigh-high socks.

But yeah. I hope you like it! 

My Tumblr

I do! 

Sorry I didn’t get to post this earlier. You did a really good job here and I should have posted this way before but I got so completely trampled with life and storyboards… anyway. 

Your costume redesigns have turned these girls from sexualised back into sexy (except for that last contortionist pose, no amount of fixed clothing will save that pose from sexualisation) because they now look like they’re wearing actual clothes instead of carefully applied tape (heck, that first one should have areola showing) and carefully applied tape like this is usually a design created to make men horny, not for women to feel sexy. 

(That said, I’ve seen some seriously sexy and well-owned “carefully applied tape” cosplay and burlesque, and wow. What a difference attitude makes.)

Thanks for submitting!

Hi guys i missed you and i missed doing this i @lesstitsnass

Hi guys, I missed you and I missed doing this! 

I got this question sometime last week, and I had to mull it over for a while because whether it’s intended or not, this is a loaded question, and I had a hard time finding the words to properly respond. Then, I got somewhat caught up on Laci Green’s videos and tumblr, and that’s when it hit me: how to answer this question. 

Your question confuses Sexism, Sexiness and Sexualisation. While related because they are all questions about sex and society, they are not the same thing. 

In the following text, I’m using “she” to make the text lighter, and because this blog is mainly about the sexualisation of female characters in comics. People of any gender can experience the following states.

Sexism is disparaging someone because of their sexual or gender identity. Clothes are not inherently sexist. People can be. Drawing a woman with sexy clothing is not sexist if you’re doing it because that’s the way your character is - her personality, her motivation, her story. 

Sexiness is something a person feels and expresses about themselves. A person who is sexy is a person who is confident in her body, mind, attitude, whether she’s acting in a sexual mindset or not. She is attractive, people may find her sexy even if she’s smudged and dirty wearing unshapely coveralls while drywalling a room, because she exudes confidence and accomplishment. A person might feel sexy because they’re wearing a set of frilly underwear even if no one else gets to see them. Even a person who messes up can be sexy, if they feel like it’s okay to mess up and know they can fix it or do better the next time. Sexy is something a person is, for themselves, that can be noticed and appreciated by other people.

Some examples of my art, where I’ve drawn sexy women:

In a sexual context: 

Sexy in a NOT sexual context (because she just doesn’t give a crap what people think and rocks that corset): 

Sexualisation is using sex-appeal for the viewer’s gaze only. It’s not about the person anymore, it’s about showing choice bits of a person like she’s a thing to titillate the audience. It’s about boobs and butt in the same shot, making sure you break that spine so “dat ass” is up there. It’s about ripping clothes strategically to make viewers horny. It’s about the things done so people see it and go “I’d tap that” instead of “I’d make love to her”. See there? “That” instead of “her”. 

Sexualisation is also very much about adding sexual content without sexual context. “Oh noes! We are being attacked by a horde of zombies! This must be why I’m thrusting my ass at them while turning at the swivel-hip so both my gravity-defying boobs can be seen practically bursting out of my ripped top!” Um, no. 

This is sexualisation: 

As is this: 

Because the poses are exaggerated and don’t make any sense story-wise. 

So go ahead and draw your sexy girls in crop tops: if they own their looks, if they as a character do it for themselves, and not just because you want people to ogle your art and see sexual attributes without being interested in finding the character underneath, then you shouldn’t worry. 

A last piece of art to close this. This is fan art I did for a series of comics made by friends of mine called L'Académie des chasseurs de primes. You could say all three characters are sexy in their own way. All three show their personality through their clothing and their attitudes. Only the last one uses her sex appeal as part of her sexiness, and that works. 

Nechayano ok i was recently reminded that this @lesstitsnass


Ok I was recently reminded that this exists (i-I think someone DA-famous linked it or something because WHAT) and I think this may be relevant to tumblr’s interests so here’s my~female body variation tutorial~ whoo~

This came from some things I scribbled down when I was trying to keep my character designs consistent, and I realised that it kinda made me see bodies/proportions somewhat differently so I pasted it into this smarmy old tutorial, now cut up into (I hope) tumblr-friendly chunks so right-click for full size I think? (disclaimer: I don’t know anything and it is so far past my bedtime that it’s been tomorrow for a whole day so I’m going to nap and then maybe regret posting this.)

I’m posting this because it addresses every single reply I get about asking for body variation and being told “I don’t want muffin-top in my videogames/comics”. Body variation does NOT automatically mean “make the women fat”. This reminds me of that Dove beauty commercial, especially that last lineup. I have it somewhere, I’ll have to post it. 


Im not dead just a hi and thanks for sticking @lesstitsnass

I’m not dead! 

Just a hi and thanks for sticking around and sorry I haven’t been here and all that stuff. This show has been very demanding of my time, so much so that I had to step down from another storyboard gig that I was really looking forward to, started, and was supposed to do part time. I also haven’t had any time to work on Sunset Val, which is my other much loved project, which I’ll hopefully be getting back to bright and early in the new year. There have also been family issues to deal with, and they are ongoing, fluctuating, but at the moment better and hopefully in a direction towards resolution. 

Mostly, I haven’t been reading any comics, or looking at any comics blogs or such because I’ve been swamped with work and deadlines. I’m taking a bit of time this morning to post this because in the last few days there’s been a few asks sent my way and I will get to them, it’s just… aaagh. I do miss this terribly but deadlines and family come first! 

I’ve changed the way I work on Martha Speaks boards, and hopefully this will be less time consuming for me. I’m loving this show, it’s fun and cleverly written stories in a nice looking package. I’m glad to be a part of it, but I miss making comics and the blog. I miss interacting with you guys, getting your feedback, and both teaching and learning from you.

Thanks again for sticking around!

Gailsimone dangerous ladies bam nailed it @lesstitsnass



BAM! Nailed it. Park’s lucky I didn’t crack a tile with that landing!

Cosplayer is Jenn, photo by Josh.

Gorgeous, great costume, perfect acting.

Supergirl lives (and I want to write her!).

You know what? I’m reblogging this because of a sarcastic comment my husband made, smirking at me all along, “But look at her stomach overlap over her belt, that’s just wrong, don’t you know Kryptonians have invulnerable, retractable skin that molds perfectly to her pose?” Seriously listen to this point he’s making, about how art in comics refuses to show any kind of skin fold or flesh pucker for fear of drawing the dreaded FAT. Life drawing teaches artists about the existence of these skin folds! They are routinely being erased from models in magazines and aren’t being drawn by several artists in comics. They aren’t wrong, they aren’t ugly, and they are natural and actually appealing and interesting visually, because they communicate movement and volume. For the record, that cosplay is awesome, that photo really well timed, and that pose has been added to my reference library.
Avengers vs x men the broken spine and no pelvis @lesstitsnass

Avengers Vs. X-Men, the broken spine and no pelvis edition.

At first glance of the thumbnail of this cover, I thought it was drawn by Greg Land, because he is an artist commonly known for making women’s hips and asses vanish. I know this isn’t the case, as this cover was drawn by Mike Deodato, so I have to wonder how this happened. 

I decided to deal with each character independently. The more obvious issue of spine breakage will be addressed first. The problems here aren’t just about the spine being broken sideways for the sake of dynamism and maybe showing some butt: as you can see from that second picture, the action of the body and the secondary action of the hair and cape are contradictory. This is a somewhat classic “jumping away from the thing I’m shooting at” and yet the hair and cape are being dragged towards the target of the shooting. The shoulders are way too wide, probably due to a bit of confusion of where everything should be with the guns hiding part of the body. As for the spine, yes, it can bend sideways, but as a curve, and not as much as it is here. The rib cage is vertical and the pelvis is horizontal, with a definite snap in the middle. A real person couldn’t bend that far, even if lying down on the floor sideways and pushing their torso up with their arms. In any case, there’s a whole issue of flesh folds that’s completely absent from this picture, too. Even a skin and bones woman will have flesh pinching because the skin will overlap itself in you press the hips towards the rib cage. The absence of this fold is not an indication of thinness, it is a mistake in drawing. Heck, it’s the kind of detail that often gets photoshopped off of models in fashion magazines.

So then I address the way the form should have been. I placed my line of action, the line of the shoulders and contraposto line of the hips, keeping in mind the direction of the action. Add rib cage and pelvis as basic shapes. With that in, I solidify my skeleton. I chose to have a leg extended and a leg bent here, it makes for a more dynamic silhouette and emphasizes the sideways movement. Could I have kept the bent legs? Sure, but not the way they were drawn, unless I changed the entire upper body. Another way this could have worked is switch which leg is bent and have the other extended, with the body turning away from the target of gunfire.

In fleshing out the body, I thoughts of the stretch and pinch, and I also changed the direction of the secondary action of the hair and cape.  

Spider-Man seemed odd to me, especially that weird big bulge below his thigh, so I had to go in and figure out where his pelvis was actually plotted. I realized in reworking the image that his thigh is actually way too long: if you continued the arc of rotation towards the shoulder, it would come up to his mouth when it should line up below his shoulder. I shortened it, and fixed the exaggerated butt and thigh muscle bulge and valley, as these muscles are actually relaxed, not flexed in this position. (Poor Spidey.)

Note, though, that the original Spidey DOES have that flesh pinch at the waist, the one that wasn’t drawn on the woman (sorry, I don’t read this comic, I don’t know who she is), because his spine, while shown as pretty flexible, actually follows a realistic curve, and his ribs and hips work. Hm.

And now for Hope Summers: a new pelvis, mostly. A little bit of a fix of the ribcage and breast placement, but that’s nitpicking, whereas the absent hips and straight line down from the ribs to the knee is really weird. It’s a fairly straightforward fix.  

Which brings me to this bit about behinds, and the seeming reluctance of artists to draw real bums. I keep seeing those illustrations in comics and in fantasy art, those weird crouching poses that have arched backs and butts sticking up and out, which make me think of fart jokes far more than I should. I also shake my head a lot at Greg Land-ish lack of butts and hips to go with them, and also Barbie-like legs that attach to a thong and show no butt, just a thigh that starts at the waist. To address this, have a little tutorial. 

Sephiramy enough of you seemed interested or @lesstitsnass


Enough of you seemed interested, or at least curious!, about this, so I gave it a shot! It is rather short and condenses lots of information, but I think it manages to get its points across, especially if someone is a beginner and needs to learn the very bare (no pun intended - well, maybe a little) basics.

Like I said, someday maybe I will do a more detailed version with more on clothes and how it can affect shape, but that would also require me to conquer my fear of tutorials for a second time. WE’LL SEE.

ALSO. It wouldn’t be a proper tutorial on anatomical structure, if I didn’t put a disclaimer down here and say that there is never a good substitute for life drawing or real study of the human body if you want to learn the correct way something works. Even the examples shown here are stylized, so ENJOY but bear this warning in mind!

I cannot stress how much truth there is to all of the above. And I personally hope, Sephiramy, that you do tackle and beat your fear of tutorials again, because this is very well done. Thank you for this! 

Its ckvirtualcara again i dont even know where @lesstitsnass

It’s CK/ title=""virtualcara again!

I don’t even know where to start with this cover (Suicide Squad #1, cover by Ryan Benjamin), there is just too much wrong with the way Harley is shown here. So I’ll try and point out the things that aren’t. 

- You can see that her shoulders and hips are on a different angle from each other. This is correct, it happens when a person walks. The forward leg’s hip will rise while the shoulder on the same side dips to maintain balance.

- Her boobs seem to be obeying gravity, which is normally a rare thing to see in comics. HOWEVER in this context, she’s wearing a laced corset top which has no support to stay on aside from how tight the lacings are. Unless it’s using tape or spirit gum on the underside I’d expect to see more breast distortion there (this is roughly half of what corsets were designed to do, during a time when small breasts were considered more attractive - the other half is to distort the ribs & waist to make hips appear wider and more childbirth-y).

- Line of action (red line) - the composition doesn’t have any unfortunate implications that would lead the viewer’s eye to stay on T or A, instead it goes right up and into the logo space. 

What I changed:

I added more definition and weight to Harley’s torso, giving her a pelvis and I gave her breasts a bit more support - though even while they look more less implausible they still look a bit unnatural (see: corset). I also brought out her right arm so it was visible and made her raised arm slightly shorter so it wasn’t as exaggerated with the other changes.

What would make this even better:

A different costume. In Batman Beyond, Harley’s granddaughters pulled off a great halter/hotpants outfit while appearing practical and comfortable.  This one is incredibly busy and doesn’t seem nearly as economical as the DeeDees. 

Eschergirls lesstitsnass supergirl 1 huh @lesstitsnass



Supergirl #1, huh?

[correction snipped]

That’s Ian Churchill… and unfortunately he has much experience drawing women (whether he draws them well however, is another question).  Also, that’s actually issue #0 not #1.  I was a HUGE HUGE HUGE Supergirl fan at the time and so psyched that they had brought Kara back to the DCU, and Ian Churchill (and the terrible writing by Loeb and Kelly) just ruined the entire thing for me.  If you look at my Supergirl comic reviews at the time you can read all about it

Churchill drew her REALLY thin (especially her arms and calves/ankles), and within the comic book, she was bra-less and underwear-less and her costume was vacuum sealed onto her breasts.  It was really annoying.  I avoid posting just every singe picture Churchill ever did of that series simply because a lot of the times the complaint would just be “Supergirl’s too thin and has muscles so therefore her bones must be pipe cleaners”.  He also can only draw one female face.

Ian Churchill’s art on Supergirl really is what started my realization about the ways artists were drawing women in comic books, and who they were drawing them for, that Supergirl, who, to me, is the heroic, female avatar representation of the Superman S symbol and all it represents, her reboot was not for me.  Having Turner and Churchill on the art and how they drew her made it pretty clear, it was meant for something else, and she wasn’t there to be heroic (and during the Turner/Loeb/Churchill/Kelly run, she wasn’t) she was there to be somebody’s blonde 16 year old fantasy girl. 

In many ways, you can thank Ian Churchill, more than any other artist (even Rob Liefeld) for starting the thought process which eventually led to me creating this blog. xD

 Anyway, sorry for the tangent, I just wanted to fill you in on the artist that you were re-drawing.  I agree with you that there’s nothing really “wrong” to redraw, but what you did made me smile huge because it’s Supergirl and I think you made her look awesome, so I wanted to reblog it and tell you. :)

Holy crap, and there I was thinking this was just a bad drawing due to inexperience… Well, I was partly right: it’s due to inexperience at drawing real women. 

And thanks Ami! I’m glad you like my (messy) redraw!

Part of me thought I should be looking up WHO drew the image before I decided whether this was a T&A case or not, but then I thought knowing who did the art (and whether they already have a history of liberally bending the rules of anatomy in order to cater to horny straight males) might make me biased against them. That, or it was so late in the evening and I was tired. Or something.

Knowing now what Churchill’s been up to (and recognising the art you’ve linked as things I’ve been shocked by before, eek, ow, and on my list of possible corrections), I’m definitely seeing the pattern here. This illustration above is weak, as I’d stated before, because of its poor construction, and because of the bad habits Churchill’s taken, like putting the belt on Supergirl pretty much at the pubic bone, if not lower, while the hem of the skirt barely covers the buttocks; like making the torso way too skinny and super long; like making the arms and legs unrealistically thin, likely because he has learned drawing from looking at other comics rather than drawing from life. It’s a pattern, it’s bad habits he would need to break. 

When I see patterns like that, it makes me wonder if anyone mentions these things (or make similar comments) to artists. I’m of the opinion that unless you are told there’s a problem., chances are you won’t know about it, or that you have to fix it. If no one’s edited Churchill’s work or told him, “Put some flesh on that woman, man, she’s too skinny to look good”, or even mentioned something like, “Are you sure this is right?”, how can he possibly change the way he works? If he’s getting hired to draw books, maybe he doesn’t see that he can up his game and how he can become better. Maybe doing the same old thing keeps him employed, and that’s enough for him. 

Too bad it’s not enough for us. 

Supergirl 1 huh so i received this question @lesstitsnass

Supergirl #1, huh?

So I received this question, and I went to look up the picture. And for the first time, I’m actually conflicted. 

And by conflicted, I mean that I couldn’t decide whether I should or shouldn’t be editing this drawing. Because as odd as it seems anatomically, it’s not due to the desire of the artist to show as much T&A as possible. In this case… it’s just a weak drawing, done by someone who’s possibly not used to drawing women. 

If I just focus on the line quality, the muscular definition is way too detailed on Supergirl. I can understand that she’s Super Strong and all that, but she’s still a teenager (especially in the reboot) and women naturally have more body fat between muscle and skin, so unless Supergirl has been on a major fat burning diet in order to compete in a body building competition, she shouldn’t be showing every single bump in the abs and arms and legs. 

The movement should show that she’s flying up and tilting back as she’s doing it. That’s what her body’s telling me; however, her hair, skirt and cape are going all over the place, no direction to their action, which makes the actual action really hard to determine. And yes, anatomy-wise, there are things wrong, like the ribs being way too far apart from the pelvis. Also it’s pretty skewed, which you can see when you flip the image like a mirror. But again… I can’t see this drawing as being a candidate for this blog. 

However… Well, I’d worked on it, so I decided to just keep going. 

One of the problems is detailed in the caption here: What's going on

I suspect, however, that the artist wasn’t thinking of a sideways bend as much as a backwards bend, like she flew up and is about to curve back and maybe do a flip. That made me go and fix the perspective to what it should have been, with the horizon line higher above her (as opposed to the one on the city below, but this cover is a composite rather than an ensemble). So what makes the previous perspective wrong? Simply that parallel lines, when seen in perspective, are farther apart from each other when they’re close, and closer together when they’re far. The points on the side of her body that’s closest to the viewer should be further apart than the ones on the opposite side: shoulder to hip to knee to ankle. 

So I now get this: 

What it should be

Please note that the pose is different a bit, because trying to redraw it on top of the existing pose meant that I was following the old drawing as a template and making the same mistakes. Plus it gave me a really stiff drawing. Anyways, please forgive how messy this is, I realized I needed it because it shows the perspective lines. 

With the sketch tightened, we get this: 


Note as well the placement of the cape and hair. I’m following the flow of the action by having the cape drag behind her, her hair pulled back a bit like the cape; Superman in the BG has a similarly weirdly posed cape, simply for the pinup aspect of the piece rather than following a narrative flow. Basically, capes don’t move that way.

Original and Fix 

So there you go, eldritch48, my thoughts on Supergirl #1. 

Catwoman why does your butt stick out like @lesstitsnass

Catwoman, why does your butt stick out like that? 

Oh HAI tumblr! I apologize for my prolonged absence from this part of the interwebz, which was mostly due to being in pre-convention mode (art show and commissions and art for the con itself and being GOH and all that) and job finding (woohoo! Back to storyboards in August!), which all gets in the way of sitting down and finding + correcting bad T&A comic book art. I’ve received some questions and submissions from you guys, and I will get to them, thanks a lot for sending them my way!

Okay, back to … well, this thing.

It was tweeted to me by Lar de Souza who found it from Faith Erin Hicks. This is an extremely clear example of hypersexualised art, complete with requisite both breasts and both butt cheeks be not only visible, but highlighted, the spine twisted in such a way to accomplish the previous demonstration, and unfortunately no thought whatsoever in the logic of the pose as to how possible it is to perform. 

That said, overhead views are extremely difficult to draw because we are not used to seeing people from above. They take a lot of work to figure out if you don’t have a model (and even if you do, but it is easier). I didn’t have a model and there are things I know are wrong in what I did, but I don’t know how to fix them since I lack reference. 

Anyways… The original drawing, aside from being a big squashed bubble of butt and boobs, also has the head really off center, and the side of the face squished in while the right shoulder is elongated out, which exaggerates that off-center state even more. Artists, flip your drawings over once in a while when you draw. Things that seem okay in one direction may be skewed, so by flipping the drawing (either using “flip horizontally” if you’re drawing digitally or turning your page over and light-boxing your drawing) will allow you to notice those skewed and crooked things, which you can fix in flipped mode and turn back to the original way to continue drawing. 

The original’s pose is also all squished up, and there’s foreshortening on the arms but not on the hips. I tried to place the structure underneath, but it didn’t fit. So I did a sideways pose to try and figure out where everything was. That box at the top is shorthand for a camera. I’ve put some notes on the drawing, as you can see. 

So what should that pose be? If she’s jumping, there should be some extension. If there’s extension, there should be some contraction. And for interest in the pose, a twist at the waist is not a bad thing (it is if it’s exaggerated, but by now you know what that means and looks like). Contra posto means counter position, a thing the body naturally does to keep its balance. One hip rises, the corresponding shoulder lowers to compensate so you don’t fall over. 

Translating this into an overhead shot means figuring out first the general body direction, then where the shoulder to hip relationship is. And that’s where the problem often lies, in drawing poses like this: how do I show a narrow waist if my character’s ribs and hips hide it? So we try to smudge things, shift things, move pieces of the body in order to show that small waist because otherwise she’s going to look fat, no? Yes, it’s hard. It’s hard to overlap shapes and show volume. I fought with this drawing and redid the lower half of the body about five or six times before I finally dropped the stylus and declared it good enough for this purpose. I wished several times I had a model. Yet… I managed to place the head right, include the shoulder blade on the left arm, take in account that the left breast is pushed forward while the right one is pulled back with the right shoulder (and thus is less round, more stretched sideways); I made the left butt cheek rounder because it is flexing to pull the leg back and is pushed up by the back of the thigh muscles, and the right butt cheek is flatter because the muscle is relaxed since the leg is forward. These are all things to think about when you’re drawing a character, even a simplistic, stylised or cartoony one. You want the curves on the flexing muscles, and the straight lines on the relaxed, extended muscles.

Anyways, enough from me for now. I still have a pile of commissions to finish; I’ll get to some of the questions and submissions later this afternoon or tonight.