Professional that you distinguished between the two types of kudu! I forgot about it myself.

It turned out great - with small kudus you can feel the delicate structure of the body, and with large kudus - massiveness. Another big plus - a slightly marked anus. A large one would evoke associations with inflammation:) One small oversight - females of both types of kudu do not have antlers/horns. Buuut I'm a bit picky:)

So what, Eland will be next? In this case, the females also have antlers
https://nv.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%CA%BCelyaa%C3%ADg%C3%AD%C3%AD:Eland_%28Taurotragus_oryx%29_female_..._%2850416876038%29.jpg

parszuki said:
One small oversight - females of both types of kudu do not have antlers/horns. Buuut I'm a bit picky:)

I have taken several artistic liberties when it comes to sexual dimorphism - with Kudus but also with the Blackbuck and the Red, Mule and Whitetail Deer where I decided to go with references of males because I figured the final result would look more interesting. I want to try to to stick to realistic dimorphism 9/10 times, but with some of the ruminants if I only went with realistic females I'd end up with many extremely similar results.

I'll put the Eland on my list, no problem in giving it a shot sometime in the future.

lungfish1223 said:
I have taken several artistic liberties when it comes to sexual dimorphism (...)

The antlers add massiveness and majesty to the figure. But then the delicacy of the female's structure disappears.