Home
Creators
Search Recent Missing Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Celebration of Art - Elaine! (Patreon)

Published:
2021-09-23 19:00:00
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Content

First of two (possible three) pictures of Elaine!

The other two are still WIP sadly, but WOW am I looking forward to them! This artist was pretty cheap ($20) looking forward to getting more art from them

Files

Comments

FrostyNips

Boobs aren’t big enough

Tate Browder

that is the best piece for under 25 i have ever seen

Rainer
>>68410341

Armor isn't supposed to show boobs.. and any fantasy armor that does is practically useless

Rainer
>>68410341

It creates a weak point in the armor making it easier to damage and less armor than otherwise intended

SelkieMyth
>>68410341

I totally agree and her actual armor doesn’t. I’ve given up trying to convince artists not to draw boob armor though

Scott

Pretty good. If it's possible to have alterations done, maybe address the left index finger (kinda long and crooked). The right arm looks a bit thick(shoulder to elbow) but that could just be the perspective and/or resolution.

Alexey Gladkich
>>68410341

@RexiBoi boob armor doesn't add any real disadvantages. Historical armor were known to add elements to enhance some physical traits... *cough* *cough*... even if the additions had no benefits in terms of defence. But indeed making boobs overly large is ill advised. The ones on the pic are well balanced.

FrostyNips
>>68410341

I’m well aware of the downsides of fantasy boob armor in a realistic setting. However, I like boobies. And I wish to see them on the main character.

Alexey Gladkich
>>68410341

@FrostyNips I don't have anything against boob armor. And I don't agree that it's impractical. Bikini armor on the other hand is absolute horrendous bullshit.

Alexey G

About Boob armor - Shadiversity made two videos on the subject. https://youtu.be/lBtvS5yhTA8 https://youtu.be/6KHz0qWQA9I In short, if women were prominent as warriors in history then most probably we would have boob armor. The change in shape and angle isn't much different from some other armor in history. Also historically armor tended to enhance or pronounce desirable physical traits for aesthetical reasons.

Simon T Andreasen
>>68410341

Depending on the size of their breasts, it might have actually been a necessity to have at least SOME shape to the armor.

Chloe Grace whitson
>>68410341

Now you know we woman are supposed to bind our breast before putting on armor. Lol There is no way I would be able to wear a flat chest piece. 😂🤗

FrostyNips
>>68410341

Again. I am aware of of how breast would operate in amour for the most part. I’m just horny. Horny for boobies.

Aclys
>>68410341

Honestly this looks less like 'boob' armor and more like "lets actually have room in this chestplate for her chest" armor. As long as it's not showing bare skin or has obvious "stab me here" gaps, it's good.

fox5s
>>68413100

Totally agree. One point you missed. Even assuming that the shape was a problem (and it isn't), it's still a plate of hardened steel. That's good protection no matter how you slice it. :3

Thenais
>>68413100

according to my extensive mmorpg playtime, i can safely affirm that plate bikini is the best armor for female warriors.

Melting Sky
>>68410341

The only problem boob armor has is it basically creates a V-shaped valley aiming towards your heart and lungs which will naturally catch and deflect blows inward towards your vital organs. It doesn't make the armor useless as some people claim. It just isn't as good as if you designed it without the central valley. You can have a chest bulge to accommodate a woman's anatomy without it causing an issue so long as you remove the angles that deflect inward.

Alexey Gladkich
>>68410341

@MeltingSky there were quite a few historical armors with the V-shape (only horizontal, not vertical) leading towards the stomach. It's not that big of a deal just make armor there a bit thicker if you expect more hits.

Vadim J.
>>68413100

Ask the human lvl 300 blacksmith/ metal-shaper producing custom made armor or lvl 400 dwarf woodshaper what ze limits are.

Falxie
>>68413100

Mmh. As far as I remember boob armor (specifically the shape) is a major problem. Because armor shapoe design was meant to deflect and hitting on the inner side of a boob would deflect the strike to the sternum where the blade will be captured between the boobies and therefor the armor and body would have to absorb the full energy. As far as I remember the problem for female warriors was mostly solved through adding more padding between the armor and the body but more or less keeping the "male" shape of the armor to keep the deflection properties.

Keith Rice

True, but that armor has little "valley" to dip into. Assuming the 'breasts' of the armor are mostly formed through decorative pieces and not a dip in the shape, it'd be very reasonable. For instance this "uniboob plate" is actually historical (and worn by men, the 'breast' appearance is to deflect blows): https://i.imgur.com/OwTs8Zo.png It wouldn't be hard to add decorative pieces to that to make it appear breast-like. An actual depression in the center though is right out, that's suicide. Also worth noting that Sentinel armor is probably customized to the sentinel, unlike ranger armor. They're supposed to be rallying points on a battlefield, that's no good if they look generic. So "flourishes" like decorative pieces and capes should be expected. In point of fact historically there were entire decorative plate armors that were never meant to be worn in combat - wearing an incredible and impractical piece of armor was a fashion statement (albiet a very, very expensive one). Now Night might find that a tad much, but I could see some sentinels having armor just to meet with politician in in much the same way army soldiers today have wildly impractical "dress uniforms"

fox5s
>>68413100

@Falxie I used think that as well. However, the aesthetic shape preferred in a lot of Plate has the exact same issue at the high pinched waist section. And even with that armor, you aim for the joints where the armor is weak; you don't try to go through the hardened steel plate except with large weapons that are a threat no matter where they hit. All this is covered by Shad's videos. Watch them! They are super interesting and changed my mind quite some time ago!

fox5s
>>68464395

@Keith suicide? That's excessive. It is still a plate of hardened steel. The "uniboob" plate you linked has the same issue at the pinched waist exacerbated by all the fluting, both of which is only there for aesthetic purposes. And, in either case, you would not aim to go directly through the hardened STEEL plate. You would aim at the joints. Though, seriously, check out the Shadiversity videos on the subject. I used to think the same thing as you but they changed my mind about it ages ago. Plus Shad is super interesting and goes into far more articulate detail than I can. Links are in that other comment by Alex Gladkich.

Melting Sky
>>68410341

Alexey Gladkich, Horizontal "V" as in "><" ? If you are referring to the sort of hourglass angles near the waistline then it is true those are a weakness that will catch blades and guide the force and the blow towards the body rather than deflecting it away but the difference is it is somewhat necessary unlike the valley seen in boob armor. Humans flex at the waist where their pelvis connects to their spine and torso and there is a natural valley there where we need to bend. A picture is worth a thousand words so it's a bit tough to describe but a suit of armor basically has to have a joint between your chest and leg pieces and joints are plate armor's Achilles' heel. So to cover that waistline joint, the bottom of chest plates do often flare out resulting in this "><" kind of shape. In this case, the "><" shape is intended to catch the blow so the sword won't skite down the side of the breastplate until it reaches the gap between the leg and chest armor. That gap is instead safely hidden up underneath the outwardly flared bit at the bottom of the chest plate. If the whole chest piece is roughly shaped like a "V" without the flared bit at the bottom, then any blow from the side will tend to get deflected downward towards either unprotected legs, if leg armor isn't worn, or towards the seam between the chest and leg armor if it is. In this case, deflecting the blow towards the weak spot at the point of the ">" at the waistline is the lesser of two evils. With boob armor, you can remove the problem altogether by simply making the two separate boob bulges into one big bulge that stretches horizontally across the top of the whole chest plate thus removing the unnecessary valley between them. Also, as I mentioned, its not like boob armor is completely useless like some people like to complain. It's only a minor added weakness. Just look at some of the ludicrous codpieces some real-world male armor had. That was a minor weakness too, but it obviously didn't result in too many severed family jewels or they wouldn't have dared to do it.

fox5s
>>68410341

@Melting Sky, this keeps coming up and you keep missing an important detail. Even if we agree that there is a funneling effect, force is still lost and distributed on any deflection. And, most importantly, the blow still has to get through hardened STEEL. Even with such a funneling effect, you wouldn't aim there, you would aim at actual weakpoints like the joints where you don't have to go through hardened STEEL. Seriously, watch the two Shadiversity videos that Alexey Gladkich left in his other comment thread. The second one especially addresses your concern. I used to be of the same opinion as you but they changed my mind ages ago.

SelkieMyth
>>68410341

For the love of god, can we please not have "boob armor argument #44444444444". Please. Spare me and my poor inbox I can't tell you how many times I've heard the same argument