I do not know why this was deleted.

Tagged under Ikkitousen

This thread is closed for posting.

page 1 of 1 9 total items

Astara

Astara

Scanner, Artistic

Cancel

Quote: Astara,
nipple area to profound through shirt
Inquiries can be made in the Deletion Complaints forum.


----
You have topless art, and the same image has been in your library for 4 years. Now that I add a copy it suddently is not ok?
Would you care to justify your arbitrary caprice?

Just in the last week of approved scans there are these that show better outlines or more nipple than the one that was deleted.


Dansai Bunri no Crime Edge#631758


Dansai Bunri no Crime Edge#631758

and this one, though doesn't show nipples, sure outlines the labial parts with more detail; are you arguing it is in better taste than the one I uploaded: http://gallery.minitokyo.net/view/631270. Continuing:
Kohaku Sumeragi#631293

and
Nan Yaegashi#631007

Are you wanting to delete a fair number of scans to become a US-puritan site?

Those were ones I found under the general index. If I search on the term Ecchi or similar, I bet I find alot more.

Of course you now remove the 4 year old scan that mine was a duplicate of -- its been ok, till now, but now your standards are changed because I submitted it?

Fenafir

Retired Moderator, Scanner

Fenafir

Cancel

It was the nipples that were the problem not the bust size. Erect nipples are acceptable as long they do not look like suction cups. We deleted similar scans like these in the past so no I'm not joking.

Astara

Astara

Scanner, Artistic

Cancel

Quote by FenafirIt was the nipples that were the problem not the bust size. We do not accept these "suction cup" nipples on scans.


I assume you are talking about the shadowed outline? So outlined nipples showing through a shirt are not ok, but camel-toed vulvas are?

Why was the same image acceptable by someone else for the past 4 years, but when I submit it, a new rule pops out?
Is this rule documented anywhere? Because it sure seems like when I post something, it becomes subject to some new rule.

Like the last wall I posted you moved to indy-art on some presumption that a 4K/2160p image (http://www.theanimegallery.com/gallery/image:171090/high-school-dxd:rias-senpai) had somehow been created by simply tracing a 720p image? How do you do that? If it was not a wallpaper, why would it get an A+ rating on AP -- their highest rating based on downloads?

It appears you are giving me special treatment. Why would you do that?


Fenafir

Retired Moderator, Scanner

Fenafir

Cancel

As time goes by things change and evolve, nothing remain static forever. In this case MT rules has change within those 4 years and maybe will still continue to change in the future. Changes that could be for good or for worse. We cannot make everyone happy here. Also we do not just randomly pull out a new rule just to antagonize you. Our time is more suited elsewhere than just to annoy you. This rule has been around for some time. Hence you rarely see any suction cup nipple scans littering the galleries.

Unfortunately I'm not in charge of indy art or wallpaper so you have to make a separate appeal on that matter. I'm here to only reply on scan deletion issues.

I also do not understand what you mean by special treatment. I reply and treat every member the same way as I always done in the appeals.

Valuna

Retired Moderator

Valuna

Naughty Artist

Cancel

There has been a discussion about close ups of characters as wallpapers some time ago. This also belongs to changes of the rules. Apparently, your Rias wallpaper was too flat of a close-up, in which it was more considered an indy art than a wallpaper. Then to think that AP standards crumbled down a long time ago...sorry to say that but it only took a few downloads to reach a high score at some point.

These beautiful, fragile days are reborn, unfaded
Signature
	Image

Astara

Astara

Scanner, Artistic

Cancel

Quote by ValunaThere has been a discussion about close ups of characters as wallpapers some time ago. This also belongs to changes of the rules. Apparently, your Rias wallpaper was too flat of a close-up, in which it was more considered an indy art than a wallpaper. Then to think that AP standards crumbled down a long time ago...sorry to say that but it only took a few downloads to reach a high score at some point.


I read the article. I'm not sure I even agree with the premise, but since indy art is just wrong to put a wallpaper when indy art has no wallpaper section. how can you put in multiple sizes?

Also indy art reflects art that is NOT series based -- that why it is independent.

Clearly mine is a popular wall of a series and indy art doesn't fit. It also didn't fit in with the
examples that were given:

On my own by Yuki-k
On my own by Yuki-k

Bloody Eye by Bad--Girl
Bloody Eye by Bad--Girl

Attack! by Morrow
Attack! by Morrow

Now as you can see all these wallpaper sized arts showcase very close images
of the character/characters, much of the background isn't visible and it looks more like
we're looking to see the vectoring quality than an actual wallpaper as a whole.


Those are face shot more than head shots.

Mine was nothing like that.

Vs. the ones that were ok...:
Examples of what doesn't belong in the Indy Art

Midnight Magic by Yamibou-Eve
Midnight Magic by Yamibou-Eve

And the Angel Sings by Yamionpu
And the Angel Sings by Yamionpu

rudeboy by Fran
rudeboy by Fran

In these we have a background visible, it brings the wall together and you aren't staring at just the face
of the character.
===
Mine had at least as much background as any of them. I had to create a background to fit the look I was going for in the walll -- @ 720p the original was way to small to copy, so the 3120p version had lots of detail created including a background. If you talk square inches or % of picture or pixels, bu any measure, I had more background than the ones that were said NOT to belong in in indy-- yet mine was put there because I said I created the wall with vector techniques. Problem is when I say vectoring, I mean vectoring -- something made with vectors layers shades gradients, fills 100+ layers -- some well over 500 layers. Most of my source files are in the 100-700mb size range with a fair percentage over 1GB -- and one topped 4 before I went back and redid bitmap layers as vectors.

That's not the type of vectoring most people talking when they talk about vectoring -- that more of a tracing. But you can't get a 3000-4000 pixel image out of a 720p, by tracing.

So it didn't fit the indy category in any sense of the word... so they put it there. It made no sense.

Personally, I also think it is a bit insulting to the artist to tell them where they can put something that met the criteria for wallpapers in terms of size and content, but then add them to section where they can't add multisizes and isn't shown as a wallpaper when people search for such. -- Even though it is a wallpaper by size.

Other sites have polices that if you submit someting in the dimensions of a wall -- it's a wall, very objective.
Problem with both these rules is that theya re very subjective and are arbitrarily enforced....

I saw another Risa Senpai that was nearly the same as mine -- and it was left in wallpaper. and it had less background than mine -- but I don't belive you should single them out either. They are happy where it is at .. why cause waves?

Valuna

Retired Moderator

Valuna

Naughty Artist

Cancel

Actually...a vector is a shape created by mathemetical inputs that makes it defy the law of 'pixels'. For that mere reason, a vector can be made originally in 720 but can be upscaled without any quality loss to any higher resolution. People are not mistaken by this. If you call it tracing, then most vector art on this site is traced from existing scans or pictures. You can vector without doing that though...then it would be original.

Thing is...your wallpaper did not meet the criteria this site has. You can't decide this on your own. I wouldn't say it is subjective. When it comes to your wallpaper compared to those that met the criteria as an example...there is a big difference. In the examples that don't belong in indy art have a massive flow of detail, focus and emotion, a true close up scene. The things yours doesn't have. Your wallpaper looks more like a vectored screenshot, which fits better in the indy art section. I can see you put some detail in the background, but it isn't very noticable or makes your wallpaper pop out like you wish it to be. It is not as detailed as you might think it is. You would have been better off putting more detail in Rias, rather than the bg itself. Heck, you can even make an eye as the only thing in the wallpaper. But if you do that, make it special and unique so it stands out. Pretty sure it would be accepted, in a way.

All in all, don't be so stuck up about it. You can always go to the sandbox for help considering wallpapers and art. It takes a while before you usually get better, but it helps a lot.

These beautiful, fragile days are reborn, unfaded
Signature
	Image

Fenafir

Retired Moderator, Scanner

Fenafir

Cancel

I'm going to close this appeal since its no longer has relevance to the the original topic. Feel free to make a new thread to continue on.

Darthas

Retired Moderator

Darthas

レキシコン

Cancel

Quote by Astara
I read the article. I'm not sure I even agree with the premise

Quote by Astara
I read the article.

Quote by Astara
I'm not sure

Closed.
Also deletion appeals should not be mistaken for a free arguing pass.

[20:54] Lexicon: I may be 3rd place in the popularity poll but at NASA, the # order is 3>2>1.
[20:56] DXBlair: its a placement poll..not a countdown idiot
[SIG design by Valuna]
Signature
	Image

page 1 of 1 9 total items

Back to Deletion Appeals | Active Threads | Forum Index

Only members can post replies, please register.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Read more.