Posted under General
Can anybody please explain, what is low-quality about this image? I'm kind of baffled by this site's quality standards.
I uploaded the image with the intention of saving it because the artist took it off their gallery and it can't be found anywhere else online.
The image is mediocre, but most importantly uploads without a source tend to be unapproved in most cases. I mean, I wouldn't approve it even with a source. But with a source the chance is higher that it gets approved. In such cases it's not wrong to write a comment on the image to let everyone know that the original source was deleted.
Guaro said:
The image is mediocre, but most importantly uploads without a source tend to be unapproved in most cases. I mean, I wouldn't approve it even with a source. But with a source the chance is higher that it gets approved. In such cases it's not wrong to write a comment on the image to let everyone know that the original source was deleted.
I've seen more mediocre images here. Like post #3479580 for example. Actually that one is downright poor quality.
What do you suggest?
sohibil said:
I've seen more mediocre images here. Like post #3479580 for example. Actually that one is downright poor quality.
What do you suggest?
“I’ve seen worse” is not a valid argument on Danbooru. If you think a post has poor quality, flag it for review.
As for that example post, I actually like it more than yours. It has a very simplistic style, but it’s well executed.
post #4658750 is so-so overall, but that raised foot is just bad.
As kittey said, the raised foot is bad, but this wouldn't be a overall problem, if the image itself wasn't kinda meh. Most importantly for me is, that the background characters look so off and bad. The other example is at least in a simplistic but homogeneous artstyle. And has a source.
Images should be able to stand on their own, so comparing your image with another won't help your case and is not encouraged in this topic.
sohibil said:
Can anybody please explain, what is low-quality about this image? I'm kind of baffled by this site's quality standards.
I uploaded the image with the intention of saving it because the artist took it off their gallery and it can't be found anywhere else online.
Foot is off, knees are weird. If the rest of the image is semi-decent then it might squeak by, but the background is just weird with the background characters being drawn in a different, clashing artstyle.
Overall, meh art. And lack of sourcing further discourages approval, especially since the artist isn't really established (here) and there's not many other works to go with (for due diligence purposes).
sohibil said:
I've seen more mediocre images here. Like post #3479580 for example. Actually that one is downright poor quality.
What do you suggest?
Simple artstyle doesn't necessarily mean "bad". If you disagree for post #3479580 in particular, then sure, go ahead and flag it, but it'll probably be reapproved soon in short order.
As for the "there are worse things out there" argument, well, people go with it every now and then, but it doesn't really hold water here. Artwork should generally* be judged on their own merits.
*Main exception being pooled series, especially comics.
Updated
Anatomy isn't always a problem. Just search for the bad anatomy tag and you will see a lot of images that do have this, but are still active. The problem with any weird knee, arm, feet or anything is, when it's so noticeable, that it destroys the overall image quality. But as we already said, that's not the only problem and it could be okay, but the rest of the image is just of poor quality.
Only mentioning, but arguing over that image won't get it approved. You can try to appeal it in maybe a month, so that it goes through the queue again.
Updated
post #4660044 got deleted and I honestly can't see why. I guess the anatomy is off or something? (Maybe the butt's too big?)
sohibil said:
I don't see anything wrong with knees or feet. Can't argue the background though.
Anatomy is a very arguable topic. Pointing out weird knees and feet seems kind of petty and biased when disproportionately large heads and inhuman facial features are OK.
The left shoe looks like it's on the wrong foot because the curve of the shoe seems to be on the outside. Otherwise, I don't think the art is bad but the main characters are in a bit of an antiquated anime style that fewer people are fans of and the contrast with the background style is pretty heavy. Again, I don't think it's bad art, but it's not outstanding in any way so it comes down to approver opinion.
Sproq981 said:
post #4660044 got deleted and I honestly can't see why. I guess the anatomy is off or something? (Maybe the butt's too big?)
The hand in the air is a bit weird but it's a difficult perspective. The way the torso joins the hips also seems a bit weird but that may be due to what I think is the main problem: flat coloring. Oddly, the artist seems to jump between different strengths of shading in it which gives it a bit of an uncanny valley. Probably would've been approved if it was a drawing of a character from a big fandom tbh
Lobuttomize said:
The hand in the air is a bit weird but it's a difficult perspective. The way the torso joins the hips also seems a bit weird but that may be due to what I think is the main problem: flat coloring. Oddly, the artist seems to jump between different strengths of shading in it which gives it a bit of an uncanny valley. Probably would've been approved if it was a drawing of a character from a big fandom tbh
Which is weird because the artist actually does do characters from big fandoms like Street Fighter and King of Fighters. And they also utilize the flat coloring method. It's a very consistent method in their work. I just wanted to showcase more of the artist's recent original pieces since they are every bit as valid as the other approved pieces, but now I'm not so sure...
(And now I'm worried for post #4661788's chances.)
I'd appeal, but the last time I did that, it did not turn out in my favor. Maybe in 1-2 weeks from now?
Sproq981 said:
post #4660044 got deleted and I honestly can't see why. I guess the anatomy is off or something? (Maybe the butt's too big?)
Bad feet/legs, especially the left one. It looks like there are no feet and the shoes are just stuck on the bottom of the legs. It would’ve helped to actually draw some ankles instead of drawing smoothly shaded rods.
Not liking the torso/hip area either.
Sproq981 said:
Which is weird because the artist actually does do characters from big fandoms like Street Fighter and King of Fighters. And they also utilize the flat coloring method. It's a very consistent method in their work. I just wanted to showcase more of the artist's recent original pieces since they are every bit as valid as the other approved pieces, but now I'm not so sure...
(And now I'm worried for post #4661788's chances.)
The artist's OC works appear to be drawn with less detail than their Street Fighter and KoF art. The original works so far are also consistently titled 落書ちゃん, or "Sketch(ed)-chan".
post #4660044 in particular has some issues with the hip area and the legs/feet. Lines look kinda off.
Sproq981 said:
I'd appeal, but the last time I did that, it did not turn out in my favor. Maybe in 1-2 weeks from now?
Best to do it at least a month later. It takes that long for the approver 'votes' to expire. Otherwise it will be hidden to all the approvers that have previously reviewed the image.
Lobuttomize said:
Probably would've been approved if it was a drawing of a character from a big fandom tbh
I'm not sure whether you're serious, but this is completely incorrect and neither @Sproq981 nor anyone else coming to this thread for advice should take it seriously. What copyright a post is connected to is almost entirely irrelevant to whether or not it gets approved. I've even heard one approver say that they actually are more lenient on posts from obscure franchises just because those get so little art. In the last 30 days, a higher percentage of original uploads were approved than -original uploads.
CormacM said:
I'm not sure whether you're serious, but this is completely incorrect and neither @Sproq981 nor anyone else coming to this thread for advice should take it seriously. What copyright a post is connected to is almost entirely irrelevant to whether or not it gets approved. I've even heard one approver say that they actually are more lenient on posts from obscure franchises just because those get so little art. In the last 30 days, a higher percentage of original uploads were approved than -original uploads.
I have my specific reasons for believing so but I will not elaborate
post #4661788 just got deleted today. The anatomy doesn't look completely off to my eyes, so I can only guess this is due to the flat coloring and/or the weird pose and face?
To be fair, how often do you see girls squatting with that particular expression? Not every often, I would imagine. In any case, I guess I'll just appeal this one in a month's time. No harm done.
Updated
posts #4664949 https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/4664949?q=status%3Adeleted+user%3ATekunichiD
posts #4664943 https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/4664943?q=status%3Adeleted+user%3ATekunichiD
posts #4664937 https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/4664937?q=status%3Adeleted+user%3ATekunichiD
these posts got deleted to day, I don't know what's wrong but the art pretty sure beautiful and I don't understand why it was not approve or this low quality yada, yada. somebody explain to me cause I know everybody has their own preferences.
TekunichiD said:
posts #4664949 https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/4664949?q=status%3Adeleted+user%3ATekunichiD
posts #4664943 https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/4664943?q=status%3Adeleted+user%3ATekunichiD
posts #4664937 https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/4664937?q=status%3Adeleted+user%3ATekunichiDthese posts got deleted to day, I don't know what's wrong but the art pretty sure beautiful and I don't understand why it was not approve or this low quality yada, yada. somebody explain to me cause I know everybody has their own preferences.
I don't love the head shape in the first one - but take a look at her feet in general. Otherwise I quite like the background. If the feet didn't take me so out of it I'd consider approving it.
Second one has the same issues as the first with additional size, perspective, neck and proportional errors.
Elfaleon said:
I don't love the head shape in the first one - but take a look at her feet in general. Otherwise I quite like the background. If the feet didn't take me so out of it I'd consider approving it.
Second one has the same issues as the first with additional size, perspective, neck and proportional errors.
I see...Thanks for responding by.
I hate to be intrusive but I'll keep this in a civilized approach.
I wasn't be able to see anything wrong with what you said so maybe perhaps you could elaborate/convey more of what didn't impress you with the 1st pic and also what you meant "by her feet didn't take me so out". (Her feet looks even well pretty drawn and painted if ya asked me) Cause I'm pretty sure some pictures here are accepted despite it being quickly drawn, simple or even with some minor proportional mistakes (heck even those bigger boobs that were normally supposed to be abnormal or back breaking in reality, so every artists may have their own imaginative approaches_*much like Sakimichan (for example!) there are somethings I didn't like the way she draw in some anatomy or depicting other characters in my opinion as time passes by but her artworks are good in general.)
as much as the 2nd one goes *cause I saw two versions of them so...the only minor mistake I could I think would be Janna's waist (maybe a bit thinner) but the rest looks alright I think. Sorry if my approach to scrutiny may be different from your approach.
