Posted under General
Hi there, just wanna know what was the problems with these posts that were rejected in row.
post #5602441
post #5602437
post #5602436
post #5602435
post #5602434
post #5594580
post #5587236
post #5584597
post #5587374
post #5587375
thanks for replying.
PD: Sorry for put it wrong xD
Updated by BaraStuff19
What's so bad about post #5603925 and post #5603944?
Could someone explain this post and what makes it different from post from the same artist?
Updated by Foolboy234
post #5606147
post #5602676
Please check to see if there's anything bad anatomy body or muscular.
I’m not too sure why my posts got deleted, but I’d be happy to hear the reasoning because I’d very much like others to be able to see them ^_^
(Ooops, should probably tag the posts!)
post #5606942 (Can't find reasoning here.)
post #5606938 (Can't find reasoning here. EDIT: This one is fixed!)
post #5606927 (A sketch, but a high-quality one, and sketches from this artist have been approved before. EDIT: This one is fixed!)
(These three have all already been appealed)
post #5606917 (Can't find reasoning here)
post #5606907 (Can't find reasoning here)
post #5606900 (Can't find reasoning here. Very close to above post, but one was a unique one that only I had, and I found it cute enough to warrant both.)
post #5606878 (Can't find reasoning here)
post #5606870 (Can't find reasoning here)
post #5606848 (Can't find reasoning here, this has been newly appealed.)
post #5606832 (Mayyyybe the watermark? I can upload this non-watermarked if that's the issue. This is just what the artist posted themselves on twitter, so it's what got linked.)
I know the issue isn't the artist for over half of these, because I had two separate Leanne arts I posted from the same artist very quickly approved, as well as a Felix/Annette image that had an extremely similar vibe to a lot of these pics.
Updated by Realhi87
Hello! Please check these. I can't find a reason why these got deleted.
post #5610902
post #5610927
Updated by Drimacus
The only submission by this artist that was deleted. Seems a real shame for such a cute picture to be rejected twice. What's the problem with it? post #5553443 by the same artist has a similar pose.
What's wrong with these?
post #5407511
post #5407490
punished_K said:
kimberly_(street_fighter) status:deleted (especially the ones with <10 reviews)
---------
Also
post #5566285
Those 8 reviewers should have their privileges revoked.
If you want to ask for feedback, feel free. If you want to demand revoking approver privileges, there are better places but not probably won't work.
Pizzastoners said:
Feels like it's unfinished and unpolished.
skywalkerred said:
Whats up with post #5599078 and post #5599103? All of the artists other arts get approved, why not these?
Although they're both now approved, it should be noted that the amount of approvals an artist, copyright, etc. has no bearing on individual images.
BaraStuff19 said:
Hi there, just wanna know what was the problems with these posts that were rejected in row.
post #5587236
post #5584597
post #5587374
post #5587375
thanks for replying.PD: Sorry for put it wrong xD
I'm no expert on Mr. Olympian anatomy, but something with the first three seems off. THe pecs in the first, the cawk in the second, and the whole of the third.
The fourth is the neck. It's almost as wide as his head.
Foolboy234 said:
Could someone explain this post and what makes it different from post from the same artist?
Notably weaker fabric detailing and generally weaker shading.
Realhi87 said:
I’m not too sure why my posts got deleted, but I’d be happy to hear the reasoning because I’d very much like others to be able to see them ^_^
(Ooops, should probably tag the posts!)
post #5606942 (Can't find reasoning here.)
post #5606917 (Can't find reasoning here)
post #5606907 (Can't find reasoning here)
post #5606900 (Can't find reasoning here. Very close to above post, but one was a unique one that only I had, and I found it cute enough to warrant both.)
post #5606878 (Can't find reasoning here)
post #5606870 (Can't find reasoning here)
post #5606848 (Can't find reasoning here)
post #5606832 (Mayyyybe the watermark? I can upload this non-watermarked if that's the issue. This is just what the artist posted themselves on twitter, so it's what got linked.)I know the issue isn't the artist for over half of these, because I had two separate Leanne arts I posted from the same artist very quickly approved, as well as a Felix/Annette image that had an extremely similar vibe to a lot of these pics.
The consistent issue I'm seeing is the necks (length and angles are consistent slightly off) and oddly static details. Characters emoting but staring off into the distance, static posing, things like that. It's like they followed anatomy and reference guides too closely and forgot to make them their own.
Drimacus said:
Hello! Please check these. I can't find a reason why these got deleted.
post #5610927
Upper torso feels too wide for the rest of the body and the shading is haphazard. Slight case of "drew tits, phoned in the rest".
1123581321345589144 said:
The only submission by this artist that was deleted. Seems a real shame for such a cute picture to be rejected twice. What's the problem with it? post #5553443 by the same artist has a similar pose.
It's the hands, mostly. They're hard to ignore, plus the noticeable aliasing.
Kyusey said:
What's wrong with these?
post #5407490
Weak shading.
Qeemo said:
Bad anatomy and weak shading on both of them.
Veradux said:
The consistent issue I'm seeing is the necks (length and angles are consistent slightly off) and oddly static details. Characters emoting but staring off into the distance, static posing, things like that. It's like they followed anatomy and reference guides too closely and forgot to make them their own.
Alright, fair enough on mine. What exactly is the difference between what I posted and what has already been approved by the same artist though? Nothing as far as I can tell, as again, multiple of the ones I've already posted from the same artist DID get approved, as well as posts from other people from the same artist, so the inconsistency is confusing.
Not to mention the fact that one of the ones I appealed has gotten approved now, but the rest just were all glossed over beforehand I assume. Furthermore, the last post was from an entirely different artist, so I'm still in the dark about that one.
Honestly, I'm just still a bit confused on what exactly "passes" on this site vs doesn't, as so far I've yet to see much rhyme or reason.
Realhi87 said:
Alright, fair enough on mine. What exactly is the difference between what I posted and what has already been approved by the same artist though? Nothing as far as I can tell, as again, multiple of the ones I've already posted from the same artist DID get approved, as well as posts from other people from the same artist, so the inconsistency is confusing.
Not to mention the fact that one of the ones I appealed has gotten approved now, but the rest just were all glossed over beforehand I assume. Furthermore, the last post was from an entirely different artist, so I'm still in the dark about that one.
Honestly, I'm just still a bit confused on what exactly "passes" on this site vs doesn't, as so far I've yet to see much rhyme or reason.
The last one is noticeably worse, with very questionable anatomy, weak linework, and bad shading. The artist signature isn't even noticeable. As for uploading a version without that, it wouldn't pass the queue but keep in mind that you should always upload the best version. If the signature-less version you have is because it's your commission or something, you should post that and tag it commissioner upload. If it's an edited version, do not upload it.
Again, always upload the best version you can find from a rules-abiding source.
Your biggest mistake is thinking that the artist matters. What matters is the image. 95% of the time, it is entirely the image. Sometimes some confounding factors like a bad source or a dupe cause issues, but stop talking about the artist. Hell, I'm the one that created the artist's tag and uploaded the first images on the site from them. In fact, I'm noticing a lot of my complaints are not present (or at least significantly reduced) in their non-commission works. Deadlines be a bitch sometimes, I guess. But that doesn't mean I'm judging an individual image in comparison to another when approving. Just observing a pattern now that someone is asking.
Further, keep in mind that approvers are not a group. Each one of us is an individual. Each one of us can only answer so much and we are all subject to our own biases. It only takes one approver to approve an image.
Veradux said:
The last one is noticeably worse, with very questionable anatomy, weak linework, and bad shading. The artist signature isn't even noticeable. As for uploading a version without that, it wouldn't pass the queue but keep in mind that you should always upload the best version. If the signature-less version you have is because it's your commission or something, you should post that and tag it commissioner upload. If it's an edited version, do not upload it.
Again, always upload the best version you can find from a rules-abiding source.Your biggest mistake is thinking that the artist matters. What matters is the image. 95% of the time, it is entirely the image. Sometimes some confounding factors like a bad source or a dupe cause issues, but stop talking about the artist. Hell, I'm the one that created the artist's tag and uploaded the first images on the site from them. In fact, I'm noticing a lot of my complaints are not present (or at least significantly reduced) in their non-commission works. Deadlines be a bitch sometimes, I guess. But that doesn't mean I'm judging an individual image in comparison to another when approving. Just observing a pattern now that someone is asking.
Further, keep in mind that approvers are not a group. Each one of us is an individual. Each one of us can only answer so much and we are all subject to our own biases. It only takes one approver to approve an image.
I'm not going to argue, but a fair amount of this seems greatly arbitrary and completely up in the air depending on the individual, which I guess is just how the moderation/approval works on the site, so fair.
Fair enough on the last image, at least the "uploading best version" part. Again, I think outright calling any image "worse" or "bad" completely defeats the purpose of art as a whole, but I digress.
People are gonna find different quirks in art, and so long as the approval process is tied to personal bias, there's always gonna be a level of confusion when you get new posters coming in, uploading things that theoretically meet literally every possible guideline, but get shut down anyways "just because."
I'd argue, for example, that I don't notice a lot of the issues you mentioned in the works I've uploaded with any more severity than the ones already uploaded by that artist, but that's a matter of opinion.
Guess that's just that then, I hope to see my stuff get back up, but c'est la vie.
Oop, I forgot to say, thank you for responding at least, I do appreciate it.
Updated by Realhi87
How does post #5615664 break the rules? Where are the rules?
skywalkerred said:
How does post #5615664 break the rules? Where are the rules?
Nude filters are prohibited.
skywalkerred said:
Where are the rules?
You can find the Upload Rules by clicking on the Wiki link at the top. They’re right there on the first page. There’s also a “Help” link in the top menu when you’re trying to upload something, mentioning the Upload Rules in big letters.
Talulah said:
Nude filters are prohibited.
So that's why I couldn't see any of them...
But WHY are they prohibited?
skywalkerred said:
So that's why I couldn't see any of them...
But WHY are they prohibited?
See also:
skywalkerred said:
So that's why I couldn't see any of them...
But WHY are they prohibited?
You can't see them because they're deleted. If you want to see deleted posts you can add status:deleted, so nude_filter status:deleted will show them.
They're banned because we generally do not like third-party edits. We want the original image from the artist themselves. There are a multitude of reasons to dislike them: see topic #3568 and topic #1791 for previous discussions on them. But the tl;dr is they are almost universally bad (between poorly drawn or copy-pasted nipples/genitals that don't match the style) and low-effort horny posts.
