HOME | DD

Description
A crudee than usual sketch.

So, when a big bust artist whose style I enjoy, draws a piece, I always wonder what would be his ideal size to draw. Because I know some who can draw amazingly pretty busty girls, but that in reality enjoy much smaller bustlines.

Take for example me, I have no maximum size limit regarding breasts. But for me drawing breasts with no visible female body attached to them, is not as 'encouraging'. I may love supra universal sizes in literature and RPs, but drawing them has plenty of trade offs, because the impact made by the drawing is not universal nor instantaneous, as with much smaller sizes. It may require explanations and signaling or insetings, and is those need time to be 'assembled' by the brain and that lack of instantaneous impactis what makes graphical representations of really big breasts (mountain size and up), less interesting than most smaller breasts representations.

So in the figure above there are 5 feminine figures cladded in bikinis and with different degress of bustiness. Also, this will apply to sheroidal breasts, not to saggy or too pointy ones as they maybe long but lack width or depth. Anyways, I'll explain them a little, counting them from the left.

Class 1: Let's start with the 4th one, the smallest of them all. This is a common size, and maybe the minimum-maximum size I'd expect a big breast fan would like (In other words if even that size is too big for you, I can't consider you a big breast fan). I call it 'ribcage full capacity'. It is close to the maximum size breasts could get, while still not hiding a girls midriff. In reality this breasts could still get a bit bigger if they gained volume upwards. As I said this is a 'common' size that even occurs in real life human females. It has the advantages that it is practical, the girl having them that big is still basically 100% autonomous (can do almost 'everything' on her own), and it can be drawn in almost any pose for a composition. Her breasts, although dominant, don't obscure the frontal anatomy of the subject.

Class 2: Now the 5th one. In this case we start to notice how the anatomy of the frontal 'shots' of the female begin to be obscured by the girl's breasts. Basically they cover all the torso (neck/shoulders down to the hips). With no midriff exposed, some people think this size class is less sexy than the previous one. This class still exists in real life, although it is way scarcer than the previous one (chelsea charms, beshine...someone else?) I guess some autonomous faculties are lost, however, most remain. Drawing fromtals of this one isn't as interesting, many would say. In any case I think backside views can be hotter than frontals, in any case.

Class 3: The 1st one. That is 'down to the knees'. Although In real life a woman with breasts that size won't be able to move unaided, it 'looks' as if she could indeed move on her own, at least in fiction. I dare to say that that size would be close to the maximum size a woman in real fife could attain. However this is just my opinion and purely theoretical., as so far we have no evidence of the existence of real women proportioned like that. In this case most of the frontal anatomy of the figure will be obscured, so drawing frontals of this size becomes quickly boring for people like me. But once again, few things are 'hotter' then drawing back shots, with all that side and 'back' boob. lol

Class 4: For the 2nd one, we have now the entire frontal area of the figure will be eclipsed, so to make what I consider an entire composition you will be restricted to side and backshots. The chances of females with this proportions manifesting in real life are negligible, so this size belongs just to the realm of fantasy (sadly, lol). It is one of my favourite sizes to draw. The breasts are pretty largeish and you can still get enough detail in the body and even in the face. Also although I said they belong to fantasy, for freaks like me, it still looks somewhat 'feasible' in real life.

Class 5: I call these u-mountain size. This is the last size class where you can see the figure's body with enough level of detail. It is a nice class, sadly it is very infrequently drawn compared to the previous ones. It is the biggest class that is still able to cause an instantaneous impact on the viewer, as the body can still be distinguished and used as a comparative scale. Sadly it being at the limits of resolution of my hand makes it a bit uncomfortable to draw (as all the figures drawn in this sketch lol), which is a pity because it is a class I really like. How about 'real life' with it? IMO not only impossible but even for a real life setting fantasy, pretty unfeasible (Awww ) Still I like it.

Class 6: This wasn't drawn. This class extends upwards from the point the figure's body can't be distinguished with enough detail to be certain it is a human female (I think mointain size is a nice comparison), to the infinity and beyond!. I like this class (oh surprise of surprises) sadly it lacks the instantaneous impact factor of the lesser classes, so at least for me drawing it is not as nice . You need insets, arrows, telling the viewer what are planets, galaxies, universes...it requires a few more fractions of a second to realize what is going on and preferrably being a pretty profecient artist so drawn universes, or suns or planets, could be easily interpreted as so. Technically it maybe the most challenging class to depict.

Well that was it. Danke 4 all da faves.

Description
A crudee than usual sketch.

So, when a big bust artist whose style I enjoy, draws a piece, I always wonder what would be his ideal size to draw. Because I know some who can draw amazingly pretty busty girls, but that in reality enjoy much smaller bustlines.

Take for example me, I have no maximum size limit regarding breasts. But for me drawing breasts with no visible female body attached to them, is not as 'encouraging'. I may love supra universal sizes in literature and RPs, but drawing them has plenty of trade offs, because the impact made by the drawing is not universal nor instantaneous, as with much smaller sizes. It may require explanations and signaling or insetings, and is those need time to be 'assembled' by the brain and that lack of instantaneous impactis what makes graphical representations of really big breasts (mountain size and up), less interesting than most smaller breasts representations.

So in the figure above there are 5 feminine figures cladded in bikinis and with different degress of bustiness. Also, this will apply to sheroidal breasts, not to saggy or too pointy ones as they maybe long but lack width or depth. Anyways, I'll explain them a little, counting them from the left.

Class 1: Let's start with the 4th one, the smallest of them all. This is a common size, and maybe the minimum-maximum size I'd expect a big breast fan would like (In other words if even that size is too big for you, I can't consider you a big breast fan). I call it 'ribcage full capacity'. It is close to the maximum size breasts could get, while still not hiding a girls midriff. In reality this breasts could still get a bit bigger if they gained volume upwards. As I said this is a 'common' size that even occurs in real life human females. It has the advantages that it is practical, the girl having them that big is still basically 100% autonomous (can do almost 'everything' on her own), and it can be drawn in almost any pose for a composition. Her breasts, although dominant, don't obscure the frontal anatomy of the subject.

Class 2: Now the 5th one. In this case we start to notice how the anatomy of the frontal 'shots' of the female begin to be obscured by the girl's breasts. Basically they cover all the torso (neck/shoulders down to the hips). With no midriff exposed, some people think this size class is less sexy than the previous one. This class still exists in real life, although it is way scarcer than the previous one (chelsea charms, beshine...someone else?) I guess some autonomous faculties are lost, however, most remain. Drawing fromtals of this one isn't as interesting, many would say. In any case I think backside views can be hotter than frontals, in any case.

Class 3: The 1st one. That is 'down to the knees'. Although In real life a woman with breasts that size won't be able to move unaided, it 'looks' as if she could indeed move on her own, at least in fiction. I dare to say that that size would be close to the maximum size a woman in real fife could attain. However this is just my opinion and purely theoretical., as so far we have no evidence of the existence of real women proportioned like that. In this case most of the frontal anatomy of the figure will be obscured, so drawing frontals of this size becomes quickly boring for people like me. But once again, few things are 'hotter' then drawing back shots, with all that side and 'back' boob. lol

Class 4: For the 2nd one, we have now the entire frontal area of the figure will be eclipsed, so to make what I consider an entire composition you will be restricted to side and backshots. The chances of females with this proportions manifesting in real life are negligible, so this size belongs just to the realm of fantasy (sadly, lol). It is one of my favourite sizes to draw. The breasts are pretty largeish and you can still get enough detail in the body and even in the face. Also although I said they belong to fantasy, for freaks like me, it still looks somewhat 'feasible' in real life.

Class 5: I call these u-mountain size. This is the last size class where you can see the figure's body with enough level of detail. It is a nice class, sadly it is very infrequently drawn compared to the previous ones. It is the biggest class that is still able to cause an instantaneous impact on the viewer, as the body can still be distinguished and used as a comparative scale. Sadly it being at the limits of resolution of my hand makes it a bit uncomfortable to draw (as all the figures drawn in this sketch lol), which is a pity because it is a class I really like. How about 'real life' with it? IMO not only impossible but even for a real life setting fantasy, pretty unfeasible (Awww ) Still I like it.

Class 6: This wasn't drawn. This class extends upwards from the point the figure's body can't be distinguished with enough detail to be certain it is a human female (I think mointain size is a nice comparison), to the infinity and beyond!. I like this class (oh surprise of surprises) sadly it lacks the instantaneous impact factor of the lesser classes, so at least for me drawing it is not as nice . You need insets, arrows, telling the viewer what are planets, galaxies, universes...it requires a few more fractions of a second to realize what is going on and preferrably being a pretty profecient artist so drawn universes, or suns or planets, could be easily interpreted as so. Technically it maybe the most challenging class to depict.

Well that was it. Danke 4 all da faves.