HOME | DD
blackadder74 — 12 pack?
by-nc-sa
Published: 2011-08-30 05:25:25 +0000 UTC; Views: 35633; Favourites: 177; Downloads: 620
Redirect to original
Description
--Related content
Comments: 30
Digital Art / Photomanipulation / Surreal ????????????
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Photomanipulation!! OMG.. why can't people see that. Its obvious 90% of people who comment rude here can't read. I wonder how they can type? Awesome work by the way. However.. I would have left room for your belly button. Awesome bod by the way.. I feel SOOOOO fat. cries.. I do think this is the best one though. Defiantly love to see her with out a photomanip though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Now she's ripped!!!! 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Has she got any muscles like that further down...where they might be useful for sex?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Freakish, yeah, but it looks frighteningly real! Good job!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I almost went into photoshop and numbered them. It's 12.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That's not even anatomically plausible, let alone possible. Looks like some kinda chitinous insect under her skin.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It is not at all impossible for a person with exceptional genetics and very low bodyfat to have a 12 pack. It is very unlikely and rare, but not at all "impossible".
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The rectus abdominis muscle is a paired set of vertical muscle bands, not a series of smaller muscles. The separation we see is due to three tendon-like bands that run perpendicular to these muscles and act as support and reinforcement. This causes the familiar "sixpack". On very rare occasions, an "eight-pack" can form when a relatively-harmless genetic anomaly causes four bands to develop instead of three.
To have a twelve-pack would mean having so many crossbands that they would interfere with normal muscle flexibility and motion, most likely making it impossible to bend at the waist and thus make it impossible to develop the abdominal muscles enough to stand out in the first place!
Sorry, but as a former medical buff, seeing such warping of the body really bugs me. Adding muscle to women is okay, but when it starts passing outside the likes of anatomical plausibility if not outright defying accuracy altogether like some I've seen (one artist whom I shall not name draws his women in such a way that they stop looking human, and instead look like someone put a leotard on a scarecrow and stuffed said leotard full of potatoes), then it goes from sensual to freakish.
While I applaud your efforts in taking on the harder task of altering a photo instead of the easy path by drawing a figure from scratch, shrinking a normal sixpack and stacking it doesn't look sexy, it look like there's a centipede about to uncurl and crawl out of her navel.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
For a former medical buff, I find you quite close-minded.
When you say that a 12-pack is not actually possible, you do have a point. But when you digress to what is sensual and what is not, you're trespassing on a poor, questionable moral judgement. Instead of using expressions such as "I think", "to me" or "in my opinion" you're just trying to pass your personal opinions as pure truth, and that's plainly wrong.
Take a look around you, man. Different kinds of humans are doing what they can to defy reality. Scientists, for instance, work to do and produce what wouldn't normally exist. Meanwhile, a woman can decide to get a boobjob, or to undergo plastic surgery, in order to gain physical features that couldn't be possible (think of a huge pair of breasts that don't sag, or to a woman in her fourties that looks like she's in her twenties).
Therefore, it is definitely possible - and, to me, very easy to understand - to be sexually or psychologically attracted by things or bodies that go past what we are used to experience in life.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
As the person before you already pointed out, while what I said was an opinion, it was not presented as such. This is entirely my fault, as I was writing it late at night and wasn't entirely paying attention to how I was writing things out.
Yes, I am aware my opinion is only my opinion, not fact, and my failing to acknowledge that in my original post was only noticed by me later, after I'd gotten some sleep and was asked to re-examine it. I meant no offense, nor did I intend to come off as being closeminded, nor do I consider my opinions as fact. I apologize.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LOL - the artist is not offended 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Doesn't look sexy to you, there is a difference and you'd keep in mind that your opinion isn't a fact and you aren't handing down a verdict on someones work. On your main page, click "popular" instead of "newest". Theres nothing constructive about the comment, it is just genuinely hateful to call those of us who like overly muscular females "freakish".
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I have no problem with muscular women, evne ones who are unusually large. But adding musclegroups outta nowhere like a Rob Liefeld impersonator detracts from the overall appeal of things in my opinion. Yes, musclegirls are sexy. Yes, big musclegirls are sexy. But like I said, when it steps outside the lines of normal anatomical placement/plausibility, it becomes a caricature of the human form.
Perhaps my words were misinterpreted, or my explanations delivered inadequately. Either way, I have expressed my opinion and tried to do so without intent to provoke hostility. That is all I can do.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0