HOME | DD
bamuth β Knight
Published: 2014-04-24 05:01:50 +0000 UTC; Views: 134942; Favourites: 8048; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
KRelated content
Comments: 409
Because the entire purpose of armor is to protect the wearer, fantasy or not. The purpose here is lost. She's not a knight. She's a battlefield sacrifice.
Besides, women in skimpy armor is a hilariously overdone concept.
It can still be art and be enjoyed, but it's hard to take seriously because of those things.
π: 0 β©: 3
Again I understand, though you can't say "fantasy or not", because fantasy is fantasy. It's supposed to be estethics, whether you agree or not doesn't matter because looks is always subjective. Armor is armor. It covers the upper body. It's no secret that it's a skimpy armor, I think anyone can tell that, but it's still a design. It's a fantasy armor. Everything doesn't have to be like it is in real life, that's the purpose. And if you can't take this piece of art seriously, then it's obviously not the kind of art for you.
π: 0 β©: 0
Her vital organs are covered. I don't think an arrow or sword to the butt would kill you. It would just hurt a lot.
π: 0 β©: 0
This being fantasy is all the reason it needs to be as skimpy as the artist wants. Why you ask? Because guys also claim that right to fight almost naked. Take the average barbarian for example, he mostly fights only with bare upper body, to impress and frighten enemies. So girls can do this just as well to distract opponents or anticipate where they're likely to strike. See nothing wrong with that when it comes to battle logic. Sure they're more vulnerable, but maybe they want to appear that way. Combat is deadly anyway, despite any grade of armor one could possibly wear. It all comes down to how you want to fight. If the hip region is uncovered it could mean she is agile and needs to do quick leg-work while fighting. Ofc she could wear pants of some sort, but this doesn't necessarily protect her more.
As for the picture, it's great! The armor and sword designs are awesome. I just wished she could be seen whole
π: 0 β©: 1
Freaking finally someone gets it!
π: 0 β©: 0
By the fact that it looks ridiculous? Didn't you know that flimsy armor on women it's such an overdone trope that people can't help make fun of it? If she at least had some pants on she would look fierce and commanding as a knight. Like this she's just some piece of meat the artist made for eye candy. Might as well title this apple-bottom knight.
π: 0 β©: 4
why, does it hurt if shes an eye candy? this is imagination sir, and if it bothers you so much,you need to understand what fantasy is...
π: 0 β©: 0
Cool, maybe you pay the artist to make it the way you wanted it.
π: 0 β©: 0
I dunno dude, she still looks fierce to me.Β
I understand the issue here, but honestly when it comes to art just let people draw what they like.
I would have been more riled up if a female character with suggestive armor or the like has horrible character development.
π: 0 β©: 0
Awesome pic.Β I love the contrasts, including the lack of ass protection. Elevates it from a straight forward picture of chick in armor to a bit fantastical and whimsical. Also sexy, never a bad thing.Β And works great with the somber, serious expression.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
Great piece of work!
Thanks for sharing...
Featured in Daily Inspirations in hangaroundtheweb.com/2014/04/dβ¦
π: 0 β©: 0
Oh the things that could go horribly wrong. Is this a knight or a bulls-eye?
π: 0 β©: 2
well besides the general impracticality of the armor's design, knights really are supposed to look like bull's-eyes to their enemies.
there's no hiding when you're a knight.
π: 0 β©: 1
But this is especially bull's-eye since every enemy will start with her then move onto her friends.
π: 0 β©: 0
at least get a tan to hide that shiny whiteness
π: 0 β©: 0
Very well drawn!Β I love the anatomy here...
What knight would be insane enough to actually wear that little armor?
π: 0 β©: 1
I wish I could get my art as detailed as something like this...
π: 0 β©: 0
WAIT A MINUTE.
DID ANYONE NOTICE THAT BAMUTH FORGOT TO DRAW THE ASS ARMOR?.
BOY is Bamuth going to be totally embarrassed when I send a pm about this.
π: 0 β©: 1
oh shit man didn't even realise! Quickly everyone spam with pm
π: 0 β©: 0
my goodness O-O amazing work!!!
π: 0 β©: 0
I get it. During battle she doesn't plan on getting off of her horse, that way her fabulous white ass will be covered.
π: 0 β©: 0
these are the works that deserve applauseΒ Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β Β
π: 0 β©: 0
this armour does not look very practicalΒ
π: 0 β©: 0
Her armor aint gona do shit for her ass!
π: 0 β©: 1
I was just thinking the same haha..
π: 0 β©: 1
Eheh, it looks like one of those nightmare where you go to school without pants
Amazing work !
π: 0 β©: 0
She may not have any armor on her lower half but she has a freaking amazing horse xD This is really cool I like your style ^^ the designs kind of remind me of Nightmare from Soul Calibur for some odd reason xD
π: 0 β©: 0
Did she...like forget to wear the bottom half of her suit?
π: 0 β©: 1
Why's her butt hanging out of her armor? is she fighting against chastity?
π: 0 β©: 1
nothing is hanging out
π: 0 β©: 1
I use the expression to mean "exposed" in a vulgar or suggestive fashion.
π: 0 β©: 1
Still, that definition is not being represented in the piece of art.
It's not vulgar, it's a side shot. There is no real exposure.
It's not suggestive, the character is not doing anything sexual.
Whiners will go to great lengths to exaggerate in order to find something wrong with anything.
Do you go to the beach and yell at everyone who isn't covered up?
π: 0 β©: 1
At the beach people have the legitimate reason of being out to enjoy the sun and surf. In this picture her top half is armored, her bottom half is bare, yet she is posing, so this isn't a case of a character depicted in the process of dressing or undressing. This leaves me at least, wondering why the subject was depicted without pants, which distracts from the technical skill of the artiest, who obviously is quite good at figure, shading, and other artistic elements. Kind of like someone giving a nude piano recital, are you supposed to pay attention to the music or the fanny?
Β
The logical explanation for all of this is that many people like to look at women's bottoms, and the artist is catering to that, rather than to any particular story line. Hence my comment about her battling against chastity. Historic codes of chivalry seemed to be big on knights being pure and chaste (whether anyone actually was or not) In that light this picture may even be a joke on the image of hard armored chaste knights, showing that this one at least has a soft and frisky side.
Β
TL
Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Aquaman used to wear an armored top and shorts....are you going to protest that too?
There is no distraction, you're fabricating reasons to complain.
π: 0 β©: 1
Who's Aquaman?
It's amazing how you can tell what distracts me and what does not. I also find it interesting that the artist of this piece appears to have no opinion on my comment. You must be able to psychically tell what offends them, also.
π: 0 β©: 1
OMG! Aquaman? The most useless DC superhero ever?
π: 0 β©: 0
She maight end up being a victim from the war, but at least she'll be a fashion victim! LOL
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 0
<= Prev | | Next =>