i must say that a lot of vector/re-cg walls are highlighted and that's not so
fair for other wallers. but now there are changes that have been made on the
highlighting system i hope it's a better system >__<
Quote by ShiXoni must say that a lot of
vector/re-cg walls are highlighted and that's not so fair for other wallers. but
now there are changes that have been made on the highlighting system i hope it's
a better system >__<
Other wallers can clean their scans and
make just as good walls, vectors are a lot more attractive if they are done
right though. Why don't the other
wallers just go and learn to vector if its not fair?
I'll have to really read through the other posts first before I post my opinion
on the highlighting system... I'll just say that its not perfect, and will never
be perfect for every person on Minitokyo at one time.
ahahahhaha..
true true true the descriptions for the highlighted walls aren't all that
great.. i'll have to work on writing something better.. ==;;
and to reply to candy's comment about how not all the highlights not deserving
their place...
sheqel wants there to be a new highlight everyday... and since there's a limited
amount of walls that deserve that place, it's a little hard to update daily with
awesome walls....
plus, we're seeing too many of the same wallers up there and everyone agree's
that we need to limit that.
merged: 02-05-2006 ~ 12:39am
Quote by candy-chanand lying about who
proposes and highlights isn't helping the situation.
oh yeah, and the system won't let us lie about that.
it comes up automatically on who proposes and highlights. and the highlighter is
always the one who writes the comment.
oh, and to see highlighted doujins/vectors/etc... just go to their category
through the art link up at the top..
sometimes I think it is not so hard, don't always think about highlighting walls
that are complete, or superior in construction and so on, sometimes, I can see a
new waller, trying out something new, and it came out quite a refreshing idea,
and although there are problems here and there, there may be something there.
I believe at times, it can be a means to help encourage people to wall,
sometimes I think, just because it is not as perfect doesn't mean it is not
worth highlighting, occasionally, I think you can use the highlighting system as
a means to encourage potential wallers and such. I think it is a good idea.
Their works may have some flaws, but perhaps use this method as a means to say,
"hey you are doing a nice job, why not try harder?"
Just my two cents
Quote by Devildudesometimes I think it
is not so hard, don't always think about highlighting walls that are complete,
or superior in construction and so on, sometimes, I can see a new waller, trying
out something new, and it came out quite a refreshing idea, and although there
are problems here and there, there may be something there.
I believe at times, it can be a means to help encourage people to wall,
sometimes I think, just because it is not as perfect doesn't mean it is not
worth highlighting, occasionally, I think you can use the highlighting system as
a means to encourage potential wallers and such. I think it is a good idea.
Their works may have some flaws, but perhaps use this method as a means to say,
"hey you are doing a nice job, why not try harder?"
Just my two cents
Its not like that hasn't happened before, did you not see the one girls Black
and White swirl wallpaper? Or this... most of the
highlighted wallpapers do have flaws, and are still inspirational. If the
highlighted system was solely used for inspirational wallpapers rather than
actually good wallpapers, it would most likely turn into a heap of crap
again.
I don't see a big deal at all with the description unless it'd be my actual wall
being highlighted, because then I'd want to know why it was highlighted. Most
the time they are highlighted because they are good, the artist can find out the
high and low points in his wallpaper through the comments he recieves from
members., not the highlighter.
EDIT: Highlighted wallpapers don't even get attention :/ Look at the wall I
linked, 2 comments? Are you serious?
ah I was probably getting exasperated when I posted that comment. i still am but
somehow I'm forcing myself into beleiving the highlights did improve since its start.
I still think the main page should have at least one doujin and one abstract art
once in a while, and that the highlighting descriptions arn't great. Might I
reccomend studying how AP does that ( yeah don't kill me because I mentionned
it) .
Other than that, about the lying thing..
It is indeed touchy, and it has nothing personnal to do with you saki of
course, but I still believed only moderators could have the power to highlight.
It is true only moderators can do the second step of highlighting things. Elite
members can only propose things for highlighting.
However, all the things that has saki as the highlighting person is done by her.
She is the one who wrote all those "Reasons for Highlighting." The
reason is that Sheqel wants things highlighted more frequently, and so he asked
saki to pick items for highlighting and to write up reasons because he doesn't
have time to do it himself. Then he put her as the highlighter because he's the
admin and can do things like that.
Edit:
Back-reading a few post, I will give my input on a few more points:
First, I have asked members in the Elite Members Group to be much
more active in proposing items for highlighting. As many of you have noted, the
same highlights are shown for too long, and therefore I asked the Elites to
propose more often and we have discussed the issue amongst Moderators so that we
improve the refresh rate of new highlighted submissions. As we have also
promoted a few new elite members, we hope to see big improvements here.
Second, as per the quality of items highlighted. I will voice my personal
opinion here. I believe that we should not limit the Highlighted Submissions to
the most "perfectest" walls you find. First, artistic evaluation is
subjective, and obviously different people will disagree. Some might dislike
vector art in general, and thus these members will probably disagree with
highlighted walls that use vector art.
However, I do think that the Highlighted Submissions should encourage all
members, not only those whose work is highlighted. As bromithia points out, even
highlighted works have flaws. But I think they can still be worthy of a
highlight because of the aspects that are done well. That, of course, is not to
say that we should not have a high standard for Highlighted works, but I do not
believe that setting that bar so high as to have only "near
perfection" highlighted is the best for the communitiy. Thus I believe that
artwork can and should be highlighted when they have demonstrated above a
certain level of creativity, design, skill, etc, and, perhaps it is not perfect,
but it does have some "inspirational" aspect to it, to quote
DevilDude.
In my time moderating, I have highlighted two works: this one and this one. I believe that
these two works are well done. They are not without flaws, yes it is true,
especially with bromithia's comment regarding Black and White. However, I do
believe that these two works have unique aspects that are well done, that they
demonstrate significant ability and effort, and are thus worthy of highlights.
Third, I will talk with the other moderators and Elite Members regarding
highlighting Doujinshis, Vector Arts, and Abstract Art. I believe that
Candy-chan has a very valid point that these categories should also get
attention.
Fourth, I will also remind other Moderators and Elites again to write more
detailed reasons for highlighting. I agree that members should know clearly why
a moderator decided to highlight any piece of work.
I think that should address the major concerns. If I have left out anything,
please feel free to comment and criticize.
erm...as a side note Bromithia, the wall that you linked was already commented
by me in Animepaper. So I find no need to re-comment again, unless I wish to
copy paste what I already said. Indeed, you have a point as well.
Again, art is in the eyes of the beholder I guess, I hope this will all be
sorted out. Thanks EP for your patience in explaining it.
As an addendum to my post last night, or rather this morning around 2 am,
lol:
Today I asked moderators and elite members to also make sure they make a gallery
comment when they propose items. I am sure many of you have seen that some
highlighted items don't have comments from the person who proposed it, so you
only get one person's reasons for highlighting rather than 2 as it's supposed to
be in this system. So hopefully, they'll read my comment and start commenting,
lol.
thanks for your devoted participation EternalParadox, it's appreciated.
Allright, about Saki: I beleive I understood that is what was happenning. not
that I am against her highlighting but if she is, why not make her a real
moderator? Because isn't it a bit unfair for other Elite members? I just don't
think that part is done very... sincerely.
I also think that highlighting new wallers and hidden talents is a good idea.
Picking up wallpapers made by already reknown wallers would not bring much new
ideas and generations ( because there ARE walling generations) However, I do not
think the six slots should be reserved for new talents and unperfect walls. The
general overall quality of the picked items should still increase a bit. Showing
very good flawless wallpapers is not a bad idea to forget
Lastly, there only is a little detail that I think should be discussed again. A
wallpaper using a vectored scan is not a problem at all, as Vectoring only is a
reCG technique. There is nothing wrong with picking vectored stuff when it's wel
done.
HOWEVER, something like THIS should never be highlighted. Why? because it's a reCG,
and involved absolutely no artistic creation from the member, but only time and
good work. Now do we highlight scans where the member took time to stitch the 2
pages together? NO. Why? Because it's not art per se ( the member's, of course). I beleive the six slots on
the top page should exclusively be reserved for pieces where creation was
involved.
Quote: thanks for your devoted
participation EternalParadox, it's appreciated.
Devoted? hehe, I'm just doing my job.
Besides, I believe that we really can make the Highlighted Submissions a great
place to showcase exceptional talent, and I really want to make the system work
and improve on what we have, because you are right, there are currently many
flaws.
I understand your frustration and that's why I am here in this thread. I feel it
is especially important now that I have been relegated the responsibility to
moderate the Vector Arts section during Nuriko's absense.
Quote: Showing very good flawless
wallpapers is not a bad idea to forget
Of course. Highlighted items should always show a high level of skill and
quality. But definitely a new artist with something innovative should also get
attention, so we get fresh blood into the midst. I think if all 6 of the highlighted pieces are like the
Sistine Chapel all the time, then that
would negatively affect the community as it would intimidate new artists. We
want to show that new artist do get appreciated here, so a very good piece, even if imperfect in certain
respects, should still be worthy of highlights.
Quote: HOWEVER, something like THIS
should never be highlighted. Why? because it's a reCG, and involved absolutely
no artistic creation from the member, but only time and good work. Now do we
highlight scans where the member took time to stitch the 2 pages together? NO.
Why? Because it's not art per se
I respectfully disagree. The central question here is "what is art?" I
do not believe that art imperatively must have creation of something new.
Vectoring/reCGing an image is fundamentally different than stitching two folds
of a scan together because it does involve the personal input of the artist and
is a fundamentally transformative process, which I believe is one of the
qualifications of art.
During the Renaissance, painters strove to achieve the highest level of realism
possible, and they proceeded to study the human anatomy and develop different
techniques of perspective and the Chiaroscuro shading to create depth. Artists
had the ability to paint what he sees in his eyes exactly onto the canvas. Today, there are also artists with enough
skill to paint a copy of a photograph. By your definition, such works would not
be "art" because no creation is involved. The individual just made a
copy of the photograph by hand.
But I disagree. By the very process of transferring what is on the photograph to
the canvas, the artist inherently filters what he sees through the lense of his
own perception. To be able to exactly duplicate something in paint also requires
a fundamentally high level of skill. It is not something anyone can do.
This analogy, I think, is appropriate for the Vector Arts highlights. When one
vectors a scan, the end result is not the scan. The artist must use personal
interpretation of what she must do to produce which effects to replicate the
original. A vector still requirees interpretations of style and perhaps even
meaning. Thus a very well done vector would be putting that interpretation to an
image through skill, and I think exceptional vectors like that do deserve
recognition.
Quote: By your definition, such
works would not be "art" because no creation is involved. The
individual just made a copy of the photograph by hand.
But this is a trace job and not a self-painted job. Renaissance artists started
off with a blank canvas. Vector trace starts with the original scan layer
underneath. It's a line for line thing. No personal intepretation involved as it
is just follow the scan thing.
agreed with kiopi. A vector needs no artistic talent whatsoever, only time.
Vectoring cant either be compared to painting. Tracing over and copying are two
different things. of course both of techniques require no imagination from the
person but replicating something on a blank canvas is indeed creation, just like
you said the artist filters what he decided to emphasize and whatnot. However a
vector that replicates an existing scan is not creation as the person has
exactly the existing lines to recopy on the layer underneath, like kiopi said.
The "vectorer" needs not to filter anything, but only recopy the best
he can the curves.
This is something you would understand best if you were an actual artist.
To just clarify about my position.
I got promoted to highlight because people were complaining about the
highlighted walls, AND because the mods weren't very active in
highlighting.
Oh, and I know that I've made some bad choices for highlights ==;; So I'm going
to make sure that I get around three people's opinions before highlighting
something or proposing <3 Plus, I'm going to work harder on the descriptions
*-* by asking other people to help <333
'
For the "description on the highlights" --> all of them are written
by the highlighter, not the proposer.
Now, about the vectors.
A vector doesn't take any artisit talent.. just time and practice. I don't think
vectors should be up on the highlighted walls, but kept in their own area of
highlights in the VECTOR page. Vectors are just copying the actual scan and
re-coloring and tracing... there is no imagination involved at all.
Quote: This is something you would
understand best if you were an actual artist
I do take studio art in school, fyi. I
think it's too gross a generalization to say anyone who does not make art using
a computer but is still a member here is not an artist, ne? I will say that I am
never at the top of my class and that whatever I can do with paint does not
translate well to photoshop and a brush is not a mouse, but I have studied art
and know what "art" is, however vague that definition is. Well, at
least a set of definitions that I have formed over the years.
But that is beside the point. I will definitely take into consideration what you
all have said. I maintain my position that a vector is still art and that it is
created by merely a different artistic process than making something from
scratch. But, for the sake of making the system work, we all ought to reach a
common ground in the middle, ne? So in the future I will take greater care in
highlighting things from the Vectors section.
Would you believe, then, that pieces using vectors, but is not merely a
"retrace" can be "legitimate" highlights? Pieces like this one? I take that as an
example because I also proposed that one yesterday.
Opinion, suggestions, criticisms, more comments about how since I don't make
walls I'm not an artist?
You're all more than welcomed to post them here. It would seem that I'm the only
moderator currently who's actually taking heart in this thread, lol. But I will
be sure to share our conclusions with the others. So fire away!
merged: 02-06-2006 ~ 11:34am
One more thing I forgot to mention in my last post regarding saki's suggestion
of separate highlighting areas.
Each section does have their own highlighting areas on their sections page. The
one on the front page is just a collect of the 6 most current highlighted
pieces.
I don't believe we need to change that, because once we can have a common
agreement of what general types of things should be highlighted and how
frequently, we should be fine.
haha, sorry about that misunderstanding, i was reffering to the, let's say
graphism art that us wallpaper makers do. Of course I'm not cursing on the other
arts, since I myself love to draw, paint and take pictures. I was probably more
pointing out the fact that people who actually use Photoshop and Illustrator
know9/i] when they create and when they recopy,
and it's easy for them (us) to understand the concept kiopi was talking about.
Now onto that link you posted.
In my opinion, it,s not only a retrace because the member took time to place his
vector on a wallpaper canvas, think of something and add a (rather) simplistic
background. so he did DO something to it, however the vector itself is still
only a trace. What I would call vector art and not trace would be more somethign
where the original scan is completely altered and does not identically look like
the finished product.
examples: http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/85628/
->>now this has creation from the waller http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/211895/
->>original art of course http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/185503/
->>vectoring real people http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/209076/
->>vectoring manga http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/51521/
->>this probably had scan alterations too
We can use the term "digital art" to encompass the medium. How's that?
Hmm, most of these aren't submitted in the vector arts section but as regular
walls in their respective categories. Except of course for DarkDay's Roses are
RGB.
It would seem that we're actually using different definitions for the term
"vector art." You mean works that use vectors as a component to a
larger piece, and I mean the actual vectored images, i.e. found mostly in the
Vectored Art section. It's probably because I got relegated the moderation of
that particular section, but anyhow.
I'll see what pieces in the Vector Art section have significant artist input in
the form of artistic transformations beyond the reCGing of the scan. Though I do
fear that some of the really good vectors in the section would get neglected
simply because it's a reCG, or at least has not as much extra input as making it
into walls and such. Such works are still worthy of recognition I think. After
all, not everybody can pay the same attention to detail and have the skill to do
vectors as some members here, or perhaps new members in the future. I think you
would agree that we do have some really good submissions amongst the 845 items
in the section.
So I guess we're back to the discussion of what should the highlighted
submissions feature. I would still say that 1 vector piece among the frontpage 6
once in a while is appropriate.
I currently have this break down, which of course will have to depend on what
pieces are submitted and the quality thereof. It's hard to highilight anything
when there isn't much that's really worthy of a highlight, ne?
3-4 wallpapers.
1 piece of doujinshi
1 piece of abstract art (depending on availability of submission, since this
category gets far less than walls and even doujins)
1 piece, perhaps every 2-3 weeks, for a vector, which I will do my best to find
ones that have good amounts of artist input. That way, we don't completely
neglect the section, because again, most of the vector art by your definition
are in the wallpaper section, not vectors.
The numbers are rough. When there really just isn't anything to highlight in the
smaller sections, wallpapers might take over again, but I can live with that
because I personally would never highlight anything just for the sake of
mathematical balance.
Edit:
Why am I editing so much today? *sigh*
Anyways, let's get other members to also post on this, so this thread doesn't
turn into a 2 person dialogue between candy-chan and myself. The wellbeing and
fairness of the highlighting system concerns all members, so please, also give
your input.
haha, that's because we're the only 2 obsessed on this thread today But it
ain't bad that we dispute on a public thread as it can give others ideas
My examples were indeed in the wallpaper section but IMO I don't care, they ARE
vectors right? And they very well could have been submitted to the vector
section ( wich in my opinion, should only exist for reCGs, not art like
DarkDay's and vector-only wallpapers (since the category should be the same of
the series) bu then again what is art and what isnt..)
and we agree on the rough proportions, and lack of highlighting material ( just
wait till I submit my wall rofl )
I have a request, unlikely as it is to be put into effect... On the vast
majority of wallpapers, the description by the waller him or herself is
unbelievably vague, often a single line. I have seen several with nothing but
emoticons. I understand most people do not want to spend ten minutes typing a
description of every single process and technique they implemented in creating
their wallpaper, but at least something
would be nice.
Descriptions such as...
It perty
Took me a long time
... are rampant, and give absolutely no insight into, well, anything. I myself am not a waller, so if I
see a particularly intriguing effect that I would like to toy around with, I
will not know which kind of tutorial to Google, and even if I happen by it I
probably would not recognize it.
Additionally, though not necessary by any means, it would be very nice to see
some mention of inspiration, or even the setting of their
wallpaper/doujinshi/etc. What I mean by 'setting' is the scenario the artist was
imagining whilst creating the piece, or even simply the feeling they are trying
to convey. An example of what I would consider to be a very nice description
(and a very good wallpaper as well), would be Persevering Hope.
Of course I am not saying I believe people should be forced to give such long
descriptions as this, but "Angel with flowers" or "two enemies to
eter alucard to us incognito versus" just seems unacceptable to
me.
It is my opinion that better descriptions, such as technique or the filters
used, would greatly aid those who choose the highlights. They would then have
something to go by, as opposed to guessing how the artist may have achieved the
effect in their wallpaper. They could then gauge the cleverness of its
application. It may very well turn out that a wall is simply layer upon layer of
cheap filters that gives an illusion of something else.
It would also greatly enhance one's ability to give a worthwhile comment on
why exactly it was highlighted, and of
course this would apply to normal gallery comments as well.
Quote: and we agree on the rough
proportions, and lack of highlighting material ( just wait till I submit my wall
rofl )
Good, now we have a big piece of common ground to work from.
Let's wait to get some more input, and then we can finalize the changes and I
will push it with the other moderators and elites.
------
Re LordWe:
I think one way we can help prevent this problem is a minimum character count
foro gallery descriptions. This count will not the enough to provide all
details, but will prevent members from posting with just a smilie.
Then, on top of this, we can establish a set of guidelines for good descriptions
that members should follow. The guidelines ought to include the items that you
have enumerated. I don't want an overly rigid list of A, B, and C, but a general
guidelines of what types of descriptions are necessary and what are encouraged.
And indeed, it would help us very much to know what exactly the member was
trying to accomplish in a piece when we contemplate a possible highlight. I
think a criterion of good art is its ability to successfully convey the artist's
message. So if we can read what the artist wanted to do, then assess how well
that meaning is conveyed, we should have high quality, and better justified,
artwork on the highlighted list.
This would also make it significantly easier to spot rips. If a person did not
create it, they could say nothing of the creation process. Of course we will
occasionally get someone who will just BS a description in an attempt to fool,
but that would most probably be spotted by an experienced waller or moderator.
After all this, if a moderator is still unsure they can always send an enquiry
to the member for the PSD file.
Lately I have seen several wallpaper submissions of which I am positive was not created by the uploader, but
unfortunately for some I cannot prove it. Many are official wallpapers from
video games or anime series, and while I believe they are allowed to be uploaded
as scans, many people submit them as wallpapers, likely just to see if they can
get away with it or from ignorance of MT's policy. Still others are simply
resized and completely unaltered scans with a signature added. I reported one of
those just yesterday...
Now for the minimum character count... how about 400? That would be less than
the above paragraph even without any
spaces. The below example is exactly 400 characters (including spaces)
:
This isn't very long at all, and could easily be filled. Most, once they get
into the habit, would probably exceed that requirement by a fair amount. Perhaps
it should be reduced to 300 for doujinshi, abstract art and vectors, but I
believe a 400 minimum character requirement for wallpapers is more than
reasonable. I honestly can't conceive of a reason a person would be unable to
fill this condition unless they did not create the piece, or if they are too
young to type XP in which case they should not be on a computer at all.
*edit : ARG! The example paragraph keeps truncating...
**edit : Finally got it to work It
looks pretty ridiculous and messy now (I had originally used all a's with no
spacing) but it was the only way I could get around the truncation.
The highlighted scans was in the first few days when the highlighting system was
born alongside MT3. Back then, there wasn't any guidelines for highlighting, so
a few scans got highlighted.
Now, we don't highlight scans, but I guess we'll have to wait for sheqel to get
rid of the box in the scans galleries.
I'm going to go over the character limit for the gallery description with the
other mods when the next opportunity comes up. I do see that 400 characters is
not very long.
i must say that a lot of vector/re-cg walls are highlighted and that's not so fair for other wallers. but now there are changes that have been made on the highlighting system i hope it's a better system >__<
Other wallers can clean their scans and make just as good walls, vectors are a lot more attractive if they are done right though. Why don't the other wallers just go and learn to vector if its not fair?
I'll have to really read through the other posts first before I post my opinion on the highlighting system... I'll just say that its not perfect, and will never be perfect for every person on Minitokyo at one time.
ahahahhaha..
true true true the descriptions for the highlighted walls aren't all that great.. i'll have to work on writing something better.. ==;;
and to reply to candy's comment about how not all the highlights not deserving their place...
sheqel wants there to be a new highlight everyday... and since there's a limited amount of walls that deserve that place, it's a little hard to update daily with awesome walls....
plus, we're seeing too many of the same wallers up there and everyone agree's that we need to limit that.
merged: 02-05-2006 ~ 12:39am
oh yeah, and the system won't let us lie about that.
it comes up automatically on who proposes and highlights. and the highlighter is always the one who writes the comment.
oh, and to see highlighted doujins/vectors/etc... just go to their category through the art link up at the top..
sometimes I think it is not so hard, don't always think about highlighting walls that are complete, or superior in construction and so on, sometimes, I can see a new waller, trying out something new, and it came out quite a refreshing idea, and although there are problems here and there, there may be something there.
I believe at times, it can be a means to help encourage people to wall, sometimes I think, just because it is not as perfect doesn't mean it is not worth highlighting, occasionally, I think you can use the highlighting system as a means to encourage potential wallers and such. I think it is a good idea.
Their works may have some flaws, but perhaps use this method as a means to say, "hey you are doing a nice job, why not try harder?"
Just my two cents
Its not like that hasn't happened before, did you not see the one girls Black and White swirl wallpaper? Or this... most of the highlighted wallpapers do have flaws, and are still inspirational. If the highlighted system was solely used for inspirational wallpapers rather than actually good wallpapers, it would most likely turn into a heap of crap again.
I don't see a big deal at all with the description unless it'd be my actual wall being highlighted, because then I'd want to know why it was highlighted. Most the time they are highlighted because they are good, the artist can find out the high and low points in his wallpaper through the comments he recieves from members., not the highlighter.
EDIT: Highlighted wallpapers don't even get attention :/ Look at the wall I linked, 2 comments? Are you serious?
ah I was probably getting exasperated when I posted that comment. i still am but somehow I'm forcing myself into beleiving the highlights did improve since its start.
I still think the main page should have at least one doujin and one abstract art once in a while, and that the highlighting descriptions arn't great. Might I reccomend studying how AP does that ( yeah don't kill me because I mentionned it) .
Other than that, about the lying thing..
It is indeed touchy, and it has nothing personnal to do with you saki of course, but I still believed only moderators could have the power to highlight.
Re: Who actually can highlight?
It is true only moderators can do the second step of highlighting things. Elite members can only propose things for highlighting.
However, all the things that has saki as the highlighting person is done by her. She is the one who wrote all those "Reasons for Highlighting." The reason is that Sheqel wants things highlighted more frequently, and so he asked saki to pick items for highlighting and to write up reasons because he doesn't have time to do it himself. Then he put her as the highlighter because he's the admin and can do things like that.
Edit:
Back-reading a few post, I will give my input on a few more points:
First, I have asked members in the Elite Members Group to be much more active in proposing items for highlighting. As many of you have noted, the same highlights are shown for too long, and therefore I asked the Elites to propose more often and we have discussed the issue amongst Moderators so that we improve the refresh rate of new highlighted submissions. As we have also promoted a few new elite members, we hope to see big improvements here.
Second, as per the quality of items highlighted. I will voice my personal opinion here. I believe that we should not limit the Highlighted Submissions to the most "perfectest" walls you find. First, artistic evaluation is subjective, and obviously different people will disagree. Some might dislike vector art in general, and thus these members will probably disagree with highlighted walls that use vector art.
However, I do think that the Highlighted Submissions should encourage all members, not only those whose work is highlighted. As bromithia points out, even highlighted works have flaws. But I think they can still be worthy of a highlight because of the aspects that are done well. That, of course, is not to say that we should not have a high standard for Highlighted works, but I do not believe that setting that bar so high as to have only "near perfection" highlighted is the best for the communitiy. Thus I believe that artwork can and should be highlighted when they have demonstrated above a certain level of creativity, design, skill, etc, and, perhaps it is not perfect, but it does have some "inspirational" aspect to it, to quote DevilDude.
In my time moderating, I have highlighted two works: this one and this one. I believe that these two works are well done. They are not without flaws, yes it is true, especially with bromithia's comment regarding Black and White. However, I do believe that these two works have unique aspects that are well done, that they demonstrate significant ability and effort, and are thus worthy of highlights.
Third, I will talk with the other moderators and Elite Members regarding highlighting Doujinshis, Vector Arts, and Abstract Art. I believe that Candy-chan has a very valid point that these categories should also get attention.
Fourth, I will also remind other Moderators and Elites again to write more detailed reasons for highlighting. I agree that members should know clearly why a moderator decided to highlight any piece of work.
I think that should address the major concerns. If I have left out anything, please feel free to comment and criticize.
erm...as a side note Bromithia, the wall that you linked was already commented by me in Animepaper. So I find no need to re-comment again, unless I wish to copy paste what I already said. Indeed, you have a point as well.
Again, art is in the eyes of the beholder I guess, I hope this will all be sorted out. Thanks EP for your patience in explaining it.
speaking of which this one is good too, but again, the comments are....few.
http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/214434/
As an addendum to my post last night, or rather this morning around 2 am, lol:
Today I asked moderators and elite members to also make sure they make a gallery comment when they propose items. I am sure many of you have seen that some highlighted items don't have comments from the person who proposed it, so you only get one person's reasons for highlighting rather than 2 as it's supposed to be in this system. So hopefully, they'll read my comment and start commenting, lol.
thanks for your devoted participation EternalParadox, it's appreciated.
Allright, about Saki: I beleive I understood that is what was happenning. not that I am against her highlighting but if she is, why not make her a real moderator? Because isn't it a bit unfair for other Elite members? I just don't think that part is done very... sincerely.
I also think that highlighting new wallers and hidden talents is a good idea. Picking up wallpapers made by already reknown wallers would not bring much new ideas and generations ( because there ARE walling generations) However, I do not think the six slots should be reserved for new talents and unperfect walls. The general overall quality of the picked items should still increase a bit. Showing very good flawless wallpapers is not a bad idea to forget
Lastly, there only is a little detail that I think should be discussed again. A wallpaper using a vectored scan is not a problem at all, as Vectoring only is a reCG technique. There is nothing wrong with picking vectored stuff when it's wel done.
HOWEVER, something like THIS should never be highlighted. Why? because it's a reCG, and involved absolutely no artistic creation from the member, but only time and good work. Now do we highlight scans where the member took time to stitch the 2 pages together? NO. Why? Because it's not art per se ( the member's, of course). I beleive the six slots on the top page should exclusively be reserved for pieces where creation was involved.
Devoted? hehe, I'm just doing my job.
I understand your frustration and that's why I am here in this thread. I feel it is especially important now that I have been relegated the responsibility to moderate the Vector Arts section during Nuriko's absense.
Of course. Highlighted items should always show a high level of skill and quality. But definitely a new artist with something innovative should also get attention, so we get fresh blood into the midst. I think if all 6 of the highlighted pieces are like the Sistine Chapel all the time, then that would negatively affect the community as it would intimidate new artists. We want to show that new artist do get appreciated here, so a very good piece, even if imperfect in certain respects, should still be worthy of highlights.
I respectfully disagree. The central question here is "what is art?" I do not believe that art imperatively must have creation of something new. Vectoring/reCGing an image is fundamentally different than stitching two folds of a scan together because it does involve the personal input of the artist and is a fundamentally transformative process, which I believe is one of the qualifications of art.
During the Renaissance, painters strove to achieve the highest level of realism possible, and they proceeded to study the human anatomy and develop different techniques of perspective and the Chiaroscuro shading to create depth. Artists had the ability to paint what he sees in his eyes exactly onto the canvas. Today, there are also artists with enough skill to paint a copy of a photograph. By your definition, such works would not be "art" because no creation is involved. The individual just made a copy of the photograph by hand.
But I disagree. By the very process of transferring what is on the photograph to the canvas, the artist inherently filters what he sees through the lense of his own perception. To be able to exactly duplicate something in paint also requires a fundamentally high level of skill. It is not something anyone can do.
This analogy, I think, is appropriate for the Vector Arts highlights. When one vectors a scan, the end result is not the scan. The artist must use personal interpretation of what she must do to produce which effects to replicate the original. A vector still requirees interpretations of style and perhaps even meaning. Thus a very well done vector would be putting that interpretation to an image through skill, and I think exceptional vectors like that do deserve recognition.
But this is a trace job and not a self-painted job. Renaissance artists started off with a blank canvas. Vector trace starts with the original scan layer underneath. It's a line for line thing. No personal intepretation involved as it is just follow the scan thing.
agreed with kiopi. A vector needs no artistic talent whatsoever, only time. Vectoring cant either be compared to painting. Tracing over and copying are two different things. of course both of techniques require no imagination from the person but replicating something on a blank canvas is indeed creation, just like you said the artist filters what he decided to emphasize and whatnot. However a vector that replicates an existing scan is not creation as the person has exactly the existing lines to recopy on the layer underneath, like kiopi said. The "vectorer" needs not to filter anything, but only recopy the best he can the curves.
This is something you would understand best if you were an actual artist.
To just clarify about my position.
I got promoted to highlight because people were complaining about the highlighted walls, AND because the mods weren't very active in highlighting.
Oh, and I know that I've made some bad choices for highlights ==;; So I'm going to make sure that I get around three people's opinions before highlighting something or proposing <3 Plus, I'm going to work harder on the descriptions *-* by asking other people to help <333
'
For the "description on the highlights" --> all of them are written by the highlighter, not the proposer.
Now, about the vectors.
A vector doesn't take any artisit talent.. just time and practice. I don't think vectors should be up on the highlighted walls, but kept in their own area of highlights in the VECTOR page. Vectors are just copying the actual scan and re-coloring and tracing... there is no imagination involved at all.
I do take studio art in school, fyi.
But that is beside the point. I will definitely take into consideration what you all have said. I maintain my position that a vector is still art and that it is created by merely a different artistic process than making something from scratch. But, for the sake of making the system work, we all ought to reach a common ground in the middle, ne? So in the future I will take greater care in highlighting things from the Vectors section.
Would you believe, then, that pieces using vectors, but is not merely a "retrace" can be "legitimate" highlights? Pieces like this one? I take that as an example because I also proposed that one yesterday.
Opinion, suggestions, criticisms, more comments about how since I don't make walls I'm not an artist?
You're all more than welcomed to post them here. It would seem that I'm the only
moderator currently who's actually taking heart in this thread, lol. But I will
be sure to share our conclusions with the others. So fire away! 
merged: 02-06-2006 ~ 11:34am
One more thing I forgot to mention in my last post regarding saki's suggestion of separate highlighting areas.
Each section does have their own highlighting areas on their sections page. The one on the front page is just a collect of the 6 most current highlighted pieces.
I don't believe we need to change that, because once we can have a common agreement of what general types of things should be highlighted and how frequently, we should be fine.
haha, sorry about that misunderstanding, i was reffering to the, let's say graphism art that us wallpaper makers do. Of course I'm not cursing on the other arts, since I myself love to draw, paint and take pictures. I was probably more pointing out the fact that people who actually use Photoshop and Illustrator know9/i] when they create and when they recopy, and it's easy for them (us) to understand the concept kiopi was talking about.
Now onto that link you posted.
In my opinion, it,s not only a retrace because the member took time to place his vector on a wallpaper canvas, think of something and add a (rather) simplistic background. so he did DO something to it, however the vector itself is still only a trace. What I would call vector art and not trace would be more somethign where the original scan is completely altered and does not identically look like the finished product.
examples:
http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/85628/ ->>now this has creation from the waller
http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/211895/ ->>original art of course
http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/185503/ ->>vectoring real people
http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/209076/ ->>vectoring manga
http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/51521/ ->>this probably had scan alterations too
We can use the term "digital art" to encompass the medium. How's that?
Hmm, most of these aren't submitted in the vector arts section but as regular walls in their respective categories. Except of course for DarkDay's Roses are RGB.
It would seem that we're actually using different definitions for the term "vector art." You mean works that use vectors as a component to a larger piece, and I mean the actual vectored images, i.e. found mostly in the Vectored Art section. It's probably because I got relegated the moderation of that particular section, but anyhow.
I'll see what pieces in the Vector Art section have significant artist input in the form of artistic transformations beyond the reCGing of the scan. Though I do fear that some of the really good vectors in the section would get neglected simply because it's a reCG, or at least has not as much extra input as making it into walls and such. Such works are still worthy of recognition I think. After all, not everybody can pay the same attention to detail and have the skill to do vectors as some members here, or perhaps new members in the future. I think you would agree that we do have some really good submissions amongst the 845 items in the section.
So I guess we're back to the discussion of what should the highlighted submissions feature. I would still say that 1 vector piece among the frontpage 6 once in a while is appropriate.
I currently have this break down, which of course will have to depend on what pieces are submitted and the quality thereof. It's hard to highilight anything when there isn't much that's really worthy of a highlight, ne?
3-4 wallpapers.
1 piece of doujinshi
1 piece of abstract art (depending on availability of submission, since this category gets far less than walls and even doujins)
1 piece, perhaps every 2-3 weeks, for a vector, which I will do my best to find ones that have good amounts of artist input. That way, we don't completely neglect the section, because again, most of the vector art by your definition are in the wallpaper section, not vectors.
The numbers are rough. When there really just isn't anything to highlight in the smaller sections, wallpapers might take over again, but I can live with that because I personally would never highlight anything just for the sake of mathematical balance.
Edit:
Why am I editing so much today? *sigh*
Anyways, let's get other members to also post on this, so this thread doesn't turn into a 2 person dialogue between candy-chan and myself. The wellbeing and fairness of the highlighting system concerns all members, so please, also give your input.
haha, that's because we're the only 2 obsessed on this thread today
But it
ain't bad that we dispute on a public thread as it can give others ideas 
My examples were indeed in the wallpaper section but IMO I don't care, they ARE vectors right? And they very well could have been submitted to the vector section ( wich in my opinion, should only exist for reCGs, not art like DarkDay's and vector-only wallpapers (since the category should be the same of the series) bu then again what is art and what isnt..)
and we agree on the rough proportions, and lack of highlighting material ( just wait till I submit my wall
rofl )
I have a request, unlikely as it is to be put into effect... On the vast majority of wallpapers, the description by the waller him or herself is unbelievably vague, often a single line. I have seen several with nothing but emoticons. I understand most people do not want to spend ten minutes typing a description of every single process and technique they implemented in creating their wallpaper, but at least something would be nice.
Descriptions such as...
Took me a long time
... are rampant, and give absolutely no insight into, well, anything. I myself am not a waller, so if I see a particularly intriguing effect that I would like to toy around with, I will not know which kind of tutorial to Google, and even if I happen by it I probably would not recognize it.
Additionally, though not necessary by any means, it would be very nice to see some mention of inspiration, or even the setting of their wallpaper/doujinshi/etc. What I mean by 'setting' is the scenario the artist was imagining whilst creating the piece, or even simply the feeling they are trying to convey. An example of what I would consider to be a very nice description (and a very good wallpaper as well), would be Persevering Hope.
Of course I am not saying I believe people should be forced to give such long descriptions as this, but "Angel with flowers" or "two enemies to eter alucard to us incognito versus" just seems unacceptable to me.
It is my opinion that better descriptions, such as technique or the filters used, would greatly aid those who choose the highlights. They would then have something to go by, as opposed to guessing how the artist may have achieved the effect in their wallpaper. They could then gauge the cleverness of its application. It may very well turn out that a wall is simply layer upon layer of cheap filters that gives an illusion of something else.
It would also greatly enhance one's ability to give a worthwhile comment on why exactly it was highlighted, and of course this would apply to normal gallery comments as well.
Good, now we have a big piece of common ground to work from.
Let's wait to get some more input, and then we can finalize the changes and I
will push it with the other moderators and elites.
------
Re LordWe:
I think one way we can help prevent this problem is a minimum character count foro gallery descriptions. This count will not the enough to provide all details, but will prevent members from posting with just a smilie.
Then, on top of this, we can establish a set of guidelines for good descriptions that members should follow. The guidelines ought to include the items that you have enumerated. I don't want an overly rigid list of A, B, and C, but a general guidelines of what types of descriptions are necessary and what are encouraged.
And indeed, it would help us very much to know what exactly the member was trying to accomplish in a piece when we contemplate a possible highlight. I think a criterion of good art is its ability to successfully convey the artist's message. So if we can read what the artist wanted to do, then assess how well that meaning is conveyed, we should have high quality, and better justified, artwork on the highlighted list.
Good suggestion!
This would also make it significantly easier to spot rips. If a person did not create it, they could say nothing of the creation process. Of course we will occasionally get someone who will just BS a description in an attempt to fool, but that would most probably be spotted by an experienced waller or moderator. After all this, if a moderator is still unsure they can always send an enquiry to the member for the PSD file.
Lately I have seen several wallpaper submissions of which I am positive was not created by the uploader, but unfortunately for some I cannot prove it. Many are official wallpapers from video games or anime series, and while I believe they are allowed to be uploaded as scans, many people submit them as wallpapers, likely just to see if they can get away with it or from ignorance of MT's policy. Still others are simply resized and completely unaltered scans with a signature added. I reported one of those just yesterday...
Now for the minimum character count... how about 400? That would be less than the above paragraph even without any spaces. The below example is exactly 400 characters (including spaces) :
abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hijklm nopqrs tuvwxyz abcdefg hi
This isn't very long at all, and could easily be filled. Most, once they get into the habit, would probably exceed that requirement by a fair amount. Perhaps it should be reduced to 300 for doujinshi, abstract art and vectors, but I believe a 400 minimum character requirement for wallpapers is more than reasonable. I honestly can't conceive of a reason a person would be unable to fill this condition unless they did not create the piece, or if they are too young to type XP in which case they should not be on a computer at all.
*edit : ARG! The example paragraph keeps truncating...
**edit : Finally got it to work
It
looks pretty ridiculous and messy now (I had originally used all a's with no
spacing) but it was the only way I could get around the truncation.
i don't really care much about highlighted items.
but gosh.. there's a highlighted scan.
http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/191168/
That isn't uncommon in the scans section.
The highlighted scans was in the first few days when the highlighting system was born alongside MT3. Back then, there wasn't any guidelines for highlighting, so a few scans got highlighted.
Now, we don't highlight scans, but I guess we'll have to wait for sheqel to get rid of the box in the scans galleries.
I'm going to go over the character limit for the gallery description with the other mods when the next opportunity comes up. I do see that 400 characters is not very long.