Really? I think the anatomy looks fine.

>thick thighs

Foreshortening.

>vagina misplaced

Foreshortening makes it looks misplaced.

Jesus Christ.

Anotomy looks completely fine. The way the back bends makes it look weird but it's anotomically correct.

Actually, I have to ask about the male figure...

Where do the legs go? Shouldn't they be extending far further past that little platform 2b is on? If there's that much foreshortening on 2b's ass, why aren't the feet, which should be much closer, either off-camera or frame-fillingly huge?

NWSiaCB said:

Actually, I have to ask about the male figure...

Where do the legs go? Shouldn't they be extending far further past that little platform 2b is on? If there's that much foreshortening on 2b's ass, why aren't the feet, which should be much closer, either off-camera or frame-fillingly huge?

Male legs are on the downside of the picture, which is yet again another foreshortening. Judging from the position of the male hips, he spread his legs on V-shape and foreshortening makes his legs looks shorter but bigger (feet).

Regarding 2B's feet, judging that the angle of this picture was taken from 2B's behind, it's reasonable for the ass is bigger than the feet when squatting because the focus is in the ass. For feet to be bigger, the picture must be taken from front, not behind. Squatting is V-shape after all.

Sacriven said:

Male legs are on the downside of the picture, which is yet again another foreshortening. Judging from the position of the male hips, he spread his legs on V-shape and foreshortening makes his legs looks shorter but bigger (feet).

Regarding 2B's feet, judging that the angle of this picture was taken from 2B's behind, it's reasonable for the ass is bigger than the feet when squatting because the focus is in the ass. For feet to be bigger, the picture must be taken from front, not behind. Squatting is V-shape after all.

Foreshortening is proportional.

The feet are clearly closer to the camera than the ass - the penis is at the same distance as the ass, and that leaves the entire length of the legs for the feet to come closer to (or past) the camera. The feet don't seem to be any, or at least, not significantly more foreshortened than the ass and penis, but should be massively more foreshortened, to the point that they reach up the sides of the image, or, more likely, should be physically "behind the camera" if this were a 3d scene considering the proportionality of foreshortening for the distance between head and ass.

For that matter, thinking about it, 2b's feet also seem fairly small, since they should be at least close to the same distance from the camera as the ass, yet seem to be about half the size, implying they are proportionately some significant factor of distance further away from the "camera"... at distances which, again, beg the question why the man's feet aren't far "behind the camera"?

In my eyes, the thighs are the most weird part here.
They don't fit with the feet and also not really with the upper body. Foreshortening is taken her to an extreme and should get a check in my eyes.
As for why that post got flagged: The flaws are very good visible here, since no text and no movement.

He's right it looks like he has no legs.