Comment on The Spring Swan by Ninjatic
Good attempt, especially with the more complex lighting, but you've got the surface anatomy of her neck and back rather wrong. The spine's wrongly aligned and you've placed C7 a whole vertebral level too low. You've also made some anatomical mistakes with the sternocleidomastoid and the trapezoid muscles, but, anyway, you're not asking for critique so I won't take that any further.
I wonder if you still think the same after looking at the photo 
To be honest, I don't think there is anything anatomically wrong with this picture.
To be honest, I don't think there is anything anatomically wrong with this picture.I saw the photo before I posted a comment. 
I am a final year medical student and anatomy is what I did for two years, so I notice subtleties. I stand by what I said about the vertebral representation in the photo and the muscles.
I am a final year medical student and anatomy is what I did for two years, so I notice subtleties. I stand by what I said about the vertebral representation in the photo and the muscles.So you're saying there is a big difference between the back in the drawing and the photo?
Not a big difference, no. Well, I don't expect it to be a big difference to somebody who's not working on anatomy.
But yes, the surface anatomy is significantly different between the two - I was referring mostly to the neck, though. If you look at the way the light falls, it's different in the painting and the photo - that's the muscles. And the embossments along the spine are also different. I know the level at which the vertebra prominens (the bulge at the base of the neck) is, and it's distinctly at the wrong level in the painting. Notice also that the neck in the photo is an almost straight line along the dorsal aspect, from hairline to base of neck, while in the painting it's convex. It's a small difference and wouldn't have mattered if =Ninjatic had adapted the muscles and the bones accordingly, but as it is, it emphasises the wrong placement of the C7 vertebra in relation to the other vertebrae.
And to explain what I mean about the muscles, too (because I ended up going into detail about the bones) - the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) in the photo is straight (as a contracted muscle would be) whereas in the painting it's curved in an impossible way. I love the SCM, which is probably why it hits me this strongly.
But yes, the surface anatomy is significantly different between the two - I was referring mostly to the neck, though. If you look at the way the light falls, it's different in the painting and the photo - that's the muscles. And the embossments along the spine are also different. I know the level at which the vertebra prominens (the bulge at the base of the neck) is, and it's distinctly at the wrong level in the painting. Notice also that the neck in the photo is an almost straight line along the dorsal aspect, from hairline to base of neck, while in the painting it's convex. It's a small difference and wouldn't have mattered if =Ninjatic had adapted the muscles and the bones accordingly, but as it is, it emphasises the wrong placement of the C7 vertebra in relation to the other vertebrae.
And to explain what I mean about the muscles, too (because I ended up going into detail about the bones) - the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) in the photo is straight (as a contracted muscle would be) whereas in the painting it's curved in an impossible way.
I love the SCM, which is probably why it hits me this strongly.