HOME | DD

#anatomy #mutant #study #angelanatomy #birdanatomy #ascending #humananatomy #musclesanatomy #winganatomy #humanavianhybrid
Published: 2015-10-30 15:35:12 +0000 UTC; Views: 10177; Favourites: 83; Downloads: 27
Redirect to original
Description
A re-upload on my "theory" (a more correct term would be "idea" since this is purely for science fiction, but I prefer to say theory becuase I like it.) for Human-Avian Anatomy: the 2% Edition. I repositioned the scapulae further apart from the spine, thus giving the mutant more flexibility in the wings. This time, I'm focusing more on the muscles. I'll get into more depth and detail when I get more time for a study. Feel free to download this prototype. The official copy is still a work in progress, so i'm not losing any sleep over it. (Also I did not include the platysma.)To get to the point: Putting wings directly on the shoulders/scapulae does not make any anatomical sense! This means every film or show you have seen with wings on someone's upper back was probably wrong! Yes, Cyborg 009 Re: Cyborg film, I'm talking about you.
If you react like this: "Well, this is just the way I do it."
Then, fine! That's your style. You should be proud of it. But if you want to make sense, or you're obsessed with sci fi/fantasy creatures and their engineering then let me provide you with some clarity.
Here it is, Leute! The wing and back of a human-avian! Later on I'll stitch together the rest of the body systems, including whether or not Human-avians lay eggs or give birth to live young.
(I feel like such a mad Einstein right now *evil eureka laugh!*)
EDIT: All the muscles (including the wing muscles) are intertwined and stitched together, Thus creating new muscle never before seen on a human. (Hence nothing is added, nothing is exactly "stretched over" or "covers" "regular" muscle. Unless it is grafted on. But even grafting has some intertwining of muscle fibers.) The mutant does not posses strength equivalent to a human. The muscles are designed to take more strain (Which means more mitochondria in muscle cells.....even more than human's have.) and absorb more oxygen, yet to not be so huge that they would weigh down in flight. Despite being more lean this does not make them weak. They are more flexible and so are the tendons. So mutant's are stronger, faster and more physically capable than human beings.
Allowing Flight: Wings are not the only thing that will lift them off the ground. The mutant's entire body must be redesigned. They must weigh less. Although 2% (in this case) is not such a big number, it has a huge effect. While outwardly there is not much change, inwardly there are alot. The bones are thin and porous/hollow yet still sturdy and strong (genetically enhanced). The rib cage is larger and the lungs have been altered to absorb more oxygen. They also have air sacs around the stomach. As far as I know, no gizzard, but the digestive system and high metabolism suck every last bit of nutrients out of anything that is consumed. The heart is slightly bigger and beats faster than normal humans. The blood have cells nuclei.
The Human avians are lighter despite what they seem, and they must also consume at least 3,000 cal. per day. 6,000 or more when younger also depending on the species.
Another interesting element of flight: Every flying object or craft must have some sort of "tail" or weight. Kites have string tails, planes have tails, birds have tail feathers. Those who are only 2% avian don't poses tails or tail feathers. Instead the legs serve as that tail or weight. (Those who are above 2% avian may possibly have tail feathers as well as feathers replacing body hair.)
I APOLOGIZE FOR ANY SPELLING ERRORS. I'M VERY LAID-BACK WHEN IT COMES TO ENGLISH.
Human Avian Reproduction answered>>fav.me/d6jtqjg
Human-Avian Hybrid Anatomy Idea.Theory.Art©Maxim Wolf (me )
Related content
Comments: 19
I-si-u [2017-10-08 01:00:40 +0000 UTC]
And on the front may have larger second pair of pectorals , that looks weird but real.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
birdmama [2016-11-11 11:54:17 +0000 UTC]
Quick question: why do you think people put the wing on the shoulder blades? Is it because many think it's more aesthetically appealing?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MaximWolf In reply to birdmama [2016-11-11 14:52:00 +0000 UTC]
Great question. As they say "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", so whether it is more aesthetically pleasing or not depends on who is beholding the sight. Now this is just all inference and observation, but... if we look at older art even before the Renaissance, we can see that in ancient Egyptian and Babylonian art winged creatures have the wings within close proximity to the shoulder rather than in the middle of the back. We see the same thing in Hellenistic statues and finally in religious art in the depiction on angels. I found the same thing with the Japanese Tengu.
Thus, the wing in contact with the shoulder is more canon than my own theory. :3
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
birdmama In reply to MaximWolf [2016-11-12 01:22:17 +0000 UTC]
Oh, oke. Just asking because I have a friend that has almost always drawn wings on the back (for humanoids)...I never really thought about it until I saw this, though, so it was interesting. Like, even some published anthro books tell to (or hint to) draw wings attached to the shoulder blade...but would that throw off your sense of gravity?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MaximWolf In reply to birdmama [2016-11-12 05:34:03 +0000 UTC]
No, i wouldnt throw off your sense of gravity. But flight would be less flexible.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
birdmama In reply to MaximWolf [2016-11-12 13:37:09 +0000 UTC]
Because we can't bend our arms all the way back? (As in, how birds can bend their wings way to the front--if we had wings attached to the shoulderblade would this be harder?)
And sorry for the Q's it's just I've never seen anyone yet (apart from my friend) that's been interested in human-aviian anatomy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MaximWolf In reply to birdmama [2016-11-12 19:02:06 +0000 UTC]
I's fine. I like these discussions.
Okay let's look at this from a simple way:
Those with 2 pairs of scapulae and those with one shared pair:
Now lets apply movement to both.
Imagine both executing a downstroke move in flight. Who's will be more effective?
Now imagine both turning their torsos in midair (like how one turns around when sitting in a chair).
Who can reach their arms back without obstructing their wings as they fly?
That is what I mean by "flexibility" and "agility".
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
birdmama In reply to MaximWolf [2016-11-12 19:06:43 +0000 UTC]
Ooh, very true. Oke thanks :>
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Mairwynn [2016-03-01 02:18:42 +0000 UTC]
May I use this as a reference? :3 Credit will be given of course!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MaximWolf In reply to Mairwynn [2016-03-01 15:52:10 +0000 UTC]
Of course you may. :3 Thank you for asking me first. :3
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Mairwynn In reply to MaximWolf [2016-03-02 23:13:18 +0000 UTC]
You're very welcome, it would be rude not to! X3
The idea you have expressed just seems so much more...well, right in regards to how human-avian wing anatomy should be!
Thank you! c:
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MaximWolf In reply to Mairwynn [2016-03-03 13:53:42 +0000 UTC]
Thanks! I'm glad you find it so.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AttackOfTheFlash [2015-11-02 21:17:10 +0000 UTC]
Awesome guide; it will be helpful once I can draw my winged OCs!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MaximWolf In reply to AnonymousnessAnomaly [2015-11-02 13:23:20 +0000 UTC]
............all of it...........
👍: 0 ⏩: 1