The Kagaya scan section has been emptied and deleted. The author expressely
forbids putting his scans anywhere else on the net. As such, all the scans have
been deleted and the category deleted as well. The scans have been deleted with
"scan rip" reason, but of course no warning has been issued.
It is regrettable but necessary. Please note that Kagaya is a web-based artist
mostly, and that is why his images were so widely available.
Quote by toxictea23Ah, i understand
now..
ps..why are we not supposed to post in the SB for a while though..sorry..half
asleep>.<
It means to not speak of the deletion
in the shoutbox for a while because that could probably upset some members. They
need to find it out, and this thread could be a bit of a rant thread for that
deletion.
Thank you for the explanation. I had some things deleted and the reason given
was insufficient information/improper crediting even though I know I clearly
stated where I got the scans from. This thread clears things up and lessens the
annoyance generic, automated responses can sometimes generate. Thanks again.
In response to you doing this to respect Kagaya, there are actually several
artists that MiniTokyo has categories for and on their homepage they have
'Please do not use any of the images on this site'. Like for instance Shu http://www5a.biglobe.ne.jp/~mish/
if you go to her homepage in English at the very bottom of the page under the
Little Bit sig it states *Do not use any images on your site.* So would that
mean MiniTokyo would have to delete her category as well? Because people are in
a way using her images for this site. If this is the case then about half or
maybe more of the artist categories would have to be deleted to respect the
artists' wish. Just to list a few would be Carnelian, Izumi Sakurazawa, Yura
Izumi, Sumi Keiichi....and so on. I know this would be terrible to reduce
MiniTokyo's galleries so much, but are they worth keeping them up if they really
do violate an artists' request?
i just thought I would let everyone in on that. I would hate to see so many
wonderful artists' art get deleted, but it is bad to not to respect what they
want. I'm sorry I had to give such bad news to everyone
In regards to that, I think that we aren't suppose to post images from the
artist's website that states we aren't suppose to use those images on other
sites. Scans and other commercial images are I guess fair game here or there
would be no images available at all at the site. So taking the Carnelian
example, most images in that gallery are commercial works and not directly off
the artist's home page (because really there isn't any images available at the
moment on her page).
If the author directly tells us to not use his/her artwork at all then it is a
different story entirely. Then we are forced to pull down the whole gallery (as
the case with the Kaguya gallery).
If we are talking about images just on artist's homepages, there isn't really
that many that need to be deleted. Most posted works on artist's sites are
usually well below the resolution limit of MT (1mil pixels) so if they exist
here...they were likely blown up and quite noticeable anyways. A very good safe
guard I might add. So saying that half the galleries have to be eliminated
seems to be quite the over-estimation but I could very well be wrong. This is
my understanding of the rules here.
The problem seems more to be applied to the unknown section where many works
are taken from image boards (which I am guilty of doing as well). There is not
source on these so many of them likely do come from an artist's homepage that
doesn't allow outside posting.
The Kagaya scan section has been emptied and deleted. The author expressely forbids putting his scans anywhere else on the net. As such, all the scans have been deleted and the category deleted as well. The scans have been deleted with "scan rip" reason, but of course no warning has been issued.
It is regrettable but necessary. Please note that Kagaya is a web-based artist mostly, and that is why his images were so widely available.
Ah, i understand now..
ps..why are we not supposed to post in the SB for a while though..sorry..half asleep>.<
It means to not speak of the deletion in the shoutbox for a while because that could probably upset some members. They need to find it out, and this thread could be a bit of a rant thread for that deletion.
Alright then, I was surprised but now I understand, thanks for the notice
I can understand that...uumm,do you know where is his website...could you post a link?I really like this art.
http://www.kagayastudio.com/ <-- Main site but there are others.
Oh...thank you!!
....Uummm are there any on english?I don't speak chinese or korean or
japanise... 
Thank you for the explanation. I had some things deleted and the reason given was insufficient information/improper crediting even though I know I clearly stated where I got the scans from. This thread clears things up and lessens the annoyance generic, automated responses can sometimes generate. Thanks again.
In response to you doing this to respect Kagaya, there are actually several artists that MiniTokyo has categories for and on their homepage they have 'Please do not use any of the images on this site'. Like for instance Shu http://www5a.biglobe.ne.jp/~mish/ if you go to her homepage in English at the very bottom of the page under the Little Bit sig it states *Do not use any images on your site.* So would that mean MiniTokyo would have to delete her category as well? Because people are in a way using her images for this site. If this is the case then about half or maybe more of the artist categories would have to be deleted to respect the artists' wish. Just to list a few would be Carnelian, Izumi Sakurazawa, Yura Izumi, Sumi Keiichi....and so on. I know this would be terrible to reduce MiniTokyo's galleries so much, but are they worth keeping them up if they really do violate an artists' request?
i just thought I would let everyone in on that. I would hate to see so many wonderful artists' art get deleted, but it is bad to not to respect what they want. I'm sorry I had to give such bad news to everyone
In regards to that, I think that we aren't suppose to post images from the artist's website that states we aren't suppose to use those images on other sites. Scans and other commercial images are I guess fair game here or there would be no images available at all at the site. So taking the Carnelian example, most images in that gallery are commercial works and not directly off the artist's home page (because really there isn't any images available at the moment on her page).
If the author directly tells us to not use his/her artwork at all then it is a different story entirely. Then we are forced to pull down the whole gallery (as the case with the Kaguya gallery).
If we are talking about images just on artist's homepages, there isn't really that many that need to be deleted. Most posted works on artist's sites are usually well below the resolution limit of MT (1mil pixels) so if they exist here...they were likely blown up and quite noticeable anyways. A very good safe guard I might add. So saying that half the galleries have to be eliminated seems to be quite the over-estimation but I could very well be wrong. This is my understanding of the rules here.
The problem seems more to be applied to the unknown section where many works are taken from image boards (which I am guilty of doing as well). There is not source on these so many of them likely do come from an artist's homepage that doesn't allow outside posting.