Well do stop moving the goalposts and post the proof already then. So far I've only seen one photo and apparently the first photo reference didn't show the correct pose when I pointed out the inconsistency. I then based my corrections on the pose you were trying to show in the picture, but apparently not being telephatic, that was the wrong pose as well.Guildmaster Van wrote:Nor is it mine. My argument is "I'm right because I physically demonstrated the pose is possible"Mvmarcz wrote:"Style" is not a valid argument.
Like me and my girlfriend did when we were in art college (Okay, okay, I quit it after a semester because I think most artists are autistic faggots, but she finished the full course). And like I did again this year when I began a class in animation. And like the pretty pictures I take with my digital camera. And where were we? Oh yeah! We were right about at the part where the camera pans to show your foot in your mouth.Mvmarcz wrote:Anyone who had ANY schooling of any form for any art has had at least 15 minutes of life drawing.
I'm sure whatever pose you intended to do, it was possible since you tried it, but whether this pose was translated correctly into your illustration is the point of contention here. I've tried that same pose with heels on in the mirror, doesn't seem possible at all, and after burning my arm I'm really not too keen on breaking an ankle. However, I'm curious now, because everything I know says that pose is not possible without a few corrections, but you insist it is.
Of course, since you can prove it, then please do post that proof, and then get your hard-earned apologies from everyone.
Otherwise saying "I've physically demonstrated it's possible" without any witnesses isn't going to convince anyone. Sorry.
