Posted under General
post #3270073
There's two explicit and one tanned version of it that were posted by an auto-approve user yet the non-tanned version I posted was not approved by any of the 16 approvers that supposedly looked at it.
What is wrong with this one that is not in the other three to get them deleted?
Curious as to what's wrong with this.
post #3284514
I don't understand how this was considered not good enough and got deleted.
post #3283692
post #3283699
post #3283703
post #3283710
These and their variants.
post #3283656
post #3283647
post #3283727
I think they all have good quality, why did they got deleted?
ricroll said:
I don't understand how this was considered not good enough and got deleted.
The legs look a bit weird to me, and the hair being see-through doesn't quite fit but I certainly don't think it outweighs the general polish of the image. It might be the lack of tagging at the time most of the approvers saw it as well. I probably would have approved this.
Kyoriku said:
post #3283692
post #3283699
post #3283703
post #3283710
These and their variants.post #3283656
post #3283647
post #3283727I think they all have good quality, why did they got deleted?
So...can anyone actually give me a reason for these?
Kyoriku said:
So...can anyone actually give me a reason for these?
They’re pretty mediocre to be honest, the proportions on a lot of them are off and the facial features look squished.
post #3283647 is pretty busted. The perspective and proportions are the main problems here. The rendering is also very poor.
Wanting to ask why post #3289524 was unapproved. It's of comparable quality to other art drawn by anonymous artists - see drawfag - and has been sourced and tagged reasonably well with a couple of other users modifying the initial tags it was posted with. If there's any ambiguity about it being a selfpost, it's not my art; I can't draw.
Both of these are official artworks of well-known games.
Mysterious_Uploader said:
post #3241603 - Super low resolution (for a cowboy shot) and full of JPEG artifacts; unsourced.
post #3291158 - I guess it wasn’t interesting enough; no details, no background; unsourced.
Both of these are official artworks of well-known games.
Doesn’t matter. Even official art can have mediocre art or bad image quality.
kittey said:
post #3241603 - Super low resolution (for a cowboy shot) and full of JPEG artifacts; unsourced.
It's an old image, but i could try finding a better one.
Doesn’t matter. Even official art can have mediocre art or bad image quality.
Alright, i see. Thank you.
Elfaleon said:
The legs look a bit weird to me, and the hair being see-through doesn't quite fit but I certainly don't think it outweighs the general polish of the image. It might be the lack of tagging at the time most of the approvers saw it as well. I probably would have approved this.
I don't really agree with the hair and legs, but I tagged the hell out of this from the get-go. At least it gets your hindsight approval, and I wish you were one of the reviewers. Is there any way to attempt another upload process for approval?
ricroll said:
Is there any way to attempt another upload process for approval?
In here you can ask for a re-evaluation. Beware though, it might get ignored.
This isn't exactly about feedback, more about uploading in general, but shouldn't an upload get approved if it is a higher quality version of an active post? For example I uploaded a few posts that were mostly pixiv versions of Twitter posts and they were not approved, which didn't make sense to me.
忍猫 said:
This isn't exactly about feedback, more about uploading in general, but shouldn't an upload get approved if it is a higher quality version of an active post? For example I uploaded a few posts that were mostly pixiv versions of Twitter posts and they were not approved, which didn't make sense to me.
In general, better versions of files should become parents, but not every approver approves the same things. If the original approver is no longer active, and especially if the original comes from someone with permission to bypass the queue but without approval permissions, It's quite likely no one currently in the queue finds an image approvable, even if a lower quality version got past the queue in the past.
A few of the artworks I've posted got deleted because they never got approved. I want to know if there's a way for me to get them back up?
Updated
Goldenevil5 said:
A few of the artworks I've posted got deleted because they never got approved. I want to know if there's a way for me to get them back up?
No, probably not.
This thread is for asking for feedback why they were deleted, so here we go:
post #3274014 - The eye placement is a bit weird but passable. Everything looks good from head to shorts… and then the artist decided to put some zero effort legs on her.
post #3268365 - This has perspective and proportion issues all over. For example, the bottom girl’s legs and feet seem to be floating off the ground. The top girl’s hands are massive. For reference, the size of a hand, from wrist to fingertips, should roughly be the same as from chin to hairline. Here, from wrist to knuckles is already about the same as from chin to hairline. The whole image also feels kind of cramped and I personally don’t like this dull coloring style.
post #3268371 - A bit sketchy and simplistic. Maybe just barely below the approval threshold.
post #3281181 - The face looks wonky, especially the eye placement.
post #3283861 - No comment from me; it has tags that I have blacklisted.
