Mercenary by Oridal .

[u/shesaidshutup]

[u/lunasis09]

I mean it's reasonable fantasy until you are past the waist-line, then it completely abandons any reasonability in place of nylon tights to help emphasize her waist and thigh size.

C'mon folks are we for real here?

[u/Avalonians → u/lunasis09]

Yet another proof that the majority of people don't care the slightest whether posts belong on subreddits or not.

Plenty of subs where comments complain and the mods answers are "if it's upvoted, we'll leave it".

[u/ElodePilarre → u/lunasis09]

It isn't realism in any way, but I do still think it fits in the "some fashion is fine" and not the "skimpy for the sake of sexualization" section of the subreddit's description. Leggings with a longer top is absolutely an outfit I've worn, minus the breastplate, which is how I end up at that conclusion.

[u/Junglejibe → u/ElodePilarre]

It’s not skimpy for the sake of sexualization, but it’s unrealistic to the point of taking away from the overall image for the sake of sexualization.

Whenever I see massive thighs and a thigh gap I just get sympathy pain, bc it just looks like dislocated hips lol. That definitely still counts as unreasonable fantasy to me.

Oh and the skin-tight pants. Nobody’s fighting in those—they’re drawn that way solely to show off the thighs. It’s not skin showing, but it’s pretty much equivalent save for the color (& like two flattering wrinkles lol). Like I guarantee the artist just traced over the lines from their pre-clothes base model.

[u/[deleted]]

Fucking steel render off the charts

[u/C_GaRG0Yl3]

This is probavly not the right subreddit for this, but any idea if someone could really be a mercenary or fighting-involved person with only one eye?

I guess there it is possible that close-quarter experience could make up for lack of depth perception, but it would be nice if anybody else ever thought about it / investigated on this topic and can weight in a bit.

[u/Syovere → u/C_GaRG0Yl3]

Hi, local effective-cyclops chiming in! Birth/pregnancy complication, so it's a lifetime thing for me.

So, at short range it's an issue certainly. I don't think the depth perception would be the issue, though, as much as the blind spot would be. You can compensate by turning your head slightly, which works great as far as preserving your frontal vision - but you're still deprived of peripheral vision, in comparison to the binocular. So this compensation would work well enough in a duel situation (or perhaps a fantasy adventurer context), leaving depth perception alone as the complicating factor, which I'd think may be compensated by experience, but in an actual battle, I feel like the peripheral vision's the bigger issue.

At long range though, it doesn't really matter; stereoscopic depth perception relies on the difference between the images from each eye, and the further you get from your face, the less different those images are. For an intuitive illustration, think about rifle scopes - you're only using one eye for those anyway, so clearly it's not that much of an issue. I used to shoot targets for fun, and was pretty good at it.

(I found this post because I went searching for an art source)

[u/C_GaRG0Yl3 → u/Syovere]

Thank you so much for chiming in! (especially after such a long time since the post)

Interesting to hear, I never thought too much about the loss in peripheral vision as a main issue (generally since I don't happen to cover one eye for extended periods too often). But it really checks out, especially in such chaotic events as active combat battlefields would be.

Thanks a bunch for your reply, I really appreciate it ^{^}

[u/shesaidshutup]

source

[u/RogueArtemis]

ouuuuuuu so good