First question is where's the artifacting? Can it not be the artist's technique?

He probably used SAI for jpeg compression.

TheBigN said:
First question is where's the artifacting? Can it not be the artist's technique?

Look at the line where the skin of her back meets her hair. Also it's 117.6kb, just sayin'.

TheBigN said:
First question is where's the artifacting?

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/705/fc0f289887cf324c65d1621.png

Red lined to better illustrate. Zoom in if you have to. Notice the blockyness and such. This is artifacting and at this level it's totally unacceptable.

TheBigN said:
Can it not be the artist's technique?

No. God no. Using artifacting can be an art technique but I HIGHLY doubt this is the case here. This is more that the artist couldn't be bothered enough to upload at a higher filesize.

Let this be a message to all uploaders: Mind the image's filesize and resolution, check for extreme artifacting, go through jpeg_artifacts and jpeg_artifacts status:deleted and study the images a bit. Familiarize yourself with artifacting and its effects on images.

I feel that in this image the level of of artifacting is within unacceptable levels and should be reviewed.

[nitpicking]I'd also like to take a moment and point out how terribly artifacted post #630198 is and would love to flag it but at this point and with that score and amount of favorites I'd probably catch a lot of flak.[/nitpicking]

That is really badly compressed. I didn't even need to strain my eyes to see squares on parts of the picture (left arm, the wall etc)

Funny thing about this is it also qualifies for the Pixiv 1000 pool.