Busts shouldn't have arms.

andy

I know I am in the minority - but busts should not have arms on them.

They just look like FS that have been chopped off at the waist when they have arms on them.  

besides, the classic definition of a quot;bustquot; is as follows:

bust - noun
a sculptured, painted, drawn, or engraved representation of the upper part of the human figure, esp. a portrait sculpture showing only the head and shoulders of the subject.

No where in the definition does it mention arms.  And I have yet to see a classic greek bust with arms on it.

So my point is - Randy if you want to sculpt arms on the characters - make them FS and if you are going to do a quot;bustquot; - do it right and make them without arms.

My thoughts are I guess it depends on how the sculptor wishes to depict the expression/body language on the character.

Just look at havok MB, without arms...god knows why he was angry or what he was doing... but with arms he was portray as discharging his powers.

A classic no arms bust for me was warlock MB, depict with a melancholy look.

Busts need arms, if they dont have them, then they are paperweights....

I think FS statues shouldn't have arms either.

the warlock bust with no arms doesnt bother me. the hawkeye bust with arms folded does bother me. some should have them and they should be doing what they are supposed to if the do have arms.

I liked Phase 1 the best where it seemed more of 50% with arms and 50% without arms...I like the variety!


Originally Posted by BobbyWI liked Phase 1 the best where it seemed more of 50% with arms and 50% without arms...I like the variety!

I agree 100%



I figured it out a long time ago.  If a character is sculpted showing any emotion, he needs arms.  If the character just has a straight face, no arms can work.

A lack of arms on the HULK bust just wouldn't look right;
no arms just look strange to me but you wacky bust collectors can fight it out..lol