It would be helpful to know when approvers unapprove the image before it gets eventually deleted. Not just learning to know it got deleted afterwards. I don't understand.
I think you're misunderstanding how the queue works.
When you post an image, it goes to the queue. It has three days to get approved. It takes exactly one approver to approve an image. If not a single person approves it after three days, it's deleted.
It doesn't matter if 16 approvers or some other arbitrary number dislike it. If approver #17 likes it, it gets approved. That can happen in the first few minutes or it can take all three days.
The image you posted has only been up for 14 hours. It still has 58 hours before it's deleted. This thread is for deleted images. Not for pending images.
I think you're misunderstanding how the queue works.
When you post an image, it goes to the queue. It has three days to get approved. It takes exactly one approver to approve an image. If not a single person approves it after three days, it's deleted.
It doesn't matter if 16 approvers or some other arbitrary number dislike it. If approver #17 likes it, it gets approved. That can happen in the first few minutes or it can take all three days.
The image you posted has only been up for 14 hours. It still has 58 hours before it's deleted. This thread is for deleted images. Not for pending images.
My first upload. I'm guessing it was because it's a third party edit? The rules said images who's content has been significantly altered by third parties aren't allowed, including things like upscaling. What kind of third party edit is allowed? Because I can't think of any kind of third party edit that isn't either too significant or too insignificant to be allowed here, based on what I can gather. Yet there is a third party edit tag. I thought that since the tag exists, there might be some kind of third party edit that is allowed, but based on some of the posts I've seen in this thread the last couple of pages, I now realize that even third party colorizations are too significant.
What's the point of the tag, then?
It doesn't matter. I apologize. I'm stupid, so I probably just misunderstood. At least I got reminded that I shouldn't ever try to be anything other than a lurker. Hopefully I won't forget that in the future. I'm sorry for bothering all of you with my smooth brain stupidity.
My first upload. I'm guessing it was because it's a third party edit? The rules said images who's content has been significantly altered by third parties aren't allowed, including things like upscaling. What kind of third party edit is allowed? Because I can't think of any kind of third party edit that isn't either too significant or too insignificant to be allowed here, based on what I can gather. Yet there is a third party edit tag. I thought that since the tag exists, there might be some kind of third party edit that is allowed, but based on some of the posts I've seen in this thread the last couple of pages, I now realize that even third party colorizations are too significant.
What's the point of the tag, then?
It doesn't matter. I apologize. I'm stupid, so I probably just misunderstood. At least I got reminded that I shouldn't ever try to be anything other than a lurker. Hopefully I won't forget that in the future. I'm sorry for bothering all of you with my smooth brain stupidity.
My obvious guess would be the anal tail being a real cat tail, which makes no logical sense of course, but there's also a lot of nonsense things when you search with the tag "what" approved, is it because those were intentional? Also, I've found this post from the same artist without the cat tails which also got deleted: post #4997067
I'm not an artist myself so when I look at them, these four drawings have a similar style with the ones from this artist that got quickly approved, what exactly makes them different and bad?
Hello, I would like to know why did these posts got deleted:...
One consistent factor in each of those is their poor shading. If you check post #4995184, for example, it hasn't been applied appropriately relative to the light source in the image (the left side). It lacks any environmental shadows in addition to proper shadowing on her clothes and skin.
I'm not an artist myself so when I look at them, these four drawings have a similar style with the ones from this artist that got quickly approved, what exactly makes them different and bad?
It more has to do with the near 180-degree rotation on their spines.
As for the artist's approved works: 1) Images are judged individually. No artist, copyright, etc. gets a free pass. 2) Frankly, a majority of that artist's works could be flagged. A lot of them are pretty bad.
Furry content drawn in a western furry style, which usually features full-body fur, long snouts, digitigrade feet and emphasis on a more animalistic look. Eastern furry is mostly humans with animal features tacked on, or when it’s going for a more furry look, the emphasis is more on cuteness.
Check out post #717380: Eastern furry is mostly grade 1, sometimes grade 2; western furry is usually grade 3 but drawn less cutesy than in this image.
Hello. Just wanted to ask what exactly was wrong with a picture I tried to post. post #4862006. The artist already has work uploaded here, and even has one image of the same couple. Did I do something wrong? Or is that couple not accepted here for whatever reason? Since I recently uploaded another image of the same couple, but it appears that's about to be deleted too.
Hello. Just wanted to ask what exactly was wrong with a picture I tried to post. post #4862006. The artist already has work uploaded here, and even has one image of the same couple. Did I do something wrong? Or is that couple not accepted here for whatever reason? Since I recently uploaded another image of the same couple, but it appears that's about to be deleted too.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: All images are judged on their individual merit. It doesn't matter who the artist, uploader, or couple is. What matters is the quality of the image (and that it doesn't break rules like no paid rewards).
Both images you mentioned are generally middling-at-best but have some really awkward faces. Thus, they really don't have any positives. A similar thread can be found with all your deleted images. (Personal pet peeve: they do that thing where it shows lips in the face profile but the mouth is nowhere near the outline.)
Also, you're getting image replacement notices on them. Make sure you're using the bookmarklet to upload when possible.
If approvers/mods just didn't like them, that is one thing. However, a downscaled version of the first image was already uploaded by someone else and that was approved with no issues:
Neither deleted image is a upscaled/doctored version of the approved one. I commissioned the drawing, and I specifically requested that Nori Tamago draw both versions--The first deleted image is the same as the approved one except in its original resolution, and the second deleted image is a different version with Yuyuko's paper fan opened.
For some reason, Nori Tamago decided to upload a downscaled version on Twitter, and that was the one that got approved. I have access to the .psd file from Skeb if the mods/approvers need to see it.
If approvers/mods just didn't like them, that is one thing. However, a downscaled version of the first image was already uploaded by someone else and that was approved with no issues:
Neither deleted image is a upscaled/doctored version of the approved one. I commissioned the drawing, and I specifically requested that Nori Tamago draw both versions--The first deleted image is the same as the approved one except in its original resolution, and the second deleted image is a different version with Yuyuko's paper fan opened.
For some reason, Nori Tamago decided to upload a downscaled version on Twitter, and that was the one that got approved. I have access to the .psd file from Skeb if the mods/approvers need to see it.
It was not approved, it was uploaded by an Unrestricted user which bypasses the queue. It was rightly flagged two days ago.
