Can't find it in the database of Danbooru and why do my posts also get reviewed by biased mods?
These too:
post #3036503
post #3036497
post #3036494
post #3036491
Posted under General
Can't find it in the database of Danbooru and why do my posts also get reviewed by biased mods?
These too:
post #3036503
post #3036497
post #3036494
post #3036491
Haoto said:
Can't find it in the database of Danbooru and why do my posts also get reviewed by biased mods?
These too:
post #3036503
post #3036497
post #3036494
post #3036491
The number of approvers that reviewed a post gets purged after a couple months. In any case, it's safe to assume that at least 13-15 approvers review all posts that go through the queue, so it's not really a problem of "biased" mods, since those are nearly all of the active ones.
Also please link to posts like this to avoid clutter: post #3036494
Lloyd_Dunamis said:
Asking for an appeal or inquiry about how this was not approved, besides from "mods not liking it".
post #3107428 "13/13 did not like the post enough to approve it."
post #3107474 "10/10 did not like the post enough to approve it."I hope it isn't because it's a sketch/line art nor like "not up to par with their standards" or something.
Compare the ass to her body is quite large, making it looks like her lower body is shifted to the side. It's quite a shame, since her upperbody is well drawn.
I've a hard time wrapping my head around her feet. It's like her right leg is twisted behind her left leg.
Right, time to try to answer what hasnt already been answered.
ampzz said:
Had quite a few uploads end up deleted without udnerstanding why considering some are at a higher quality than some of my other uplaods that were approved:
post #3076565
post #3081779
post #3064877
post #3050777Another confusing thing is how I see some of my uploads end up in the "Curated" pool while still being in queue for approval. Take post #3096650 for example.
post #3076565: Dont know why this one didnt get approved. Azure lane is certainly popular enough. Her face is a bit flat and her neck seems kinda long.
post #3081779: Her left hip seems to be mounted to her side. Her breasts are growing to tight toghether on her chest. Her left shoulder is dislocated. Her pose is kinda weird (though this does make the image a bit more interesting). Some pixelation.
post #3064877: Bad foreshortening on her feet/left leg. Shading and colouring are mediocre at best. Shes got large tracts of unused land in her face. Her twintails doesnt seem to be attached to her head. Nitpicks, I know, but together they make an inferior quality image.
post #3050777: I dont know how many "scary Shinkaisei-kan" images we have but they are many. The faux traditional media is kinda neat but I suspect it turned some approvers of. Her breasts seems to be in conflict with her shoulders. Her left foot is missing in action. Still, I might have approved this one if I had the power.
post #3096650: That is not how labias work, yikes. Her corset, jacket "flaps" and shoulder pads makes her arms hard to differentiate from the background. Is she falling backwards into dirty snow? Even if that is the case, her pose is quite weird. Il probably have to say this several times again. Danbooru is an art repository that allows pornographic art but sexually explicit images are less likely to be approved than other images. This one is rated questionable but the point still stand.
MistaMojoRisin said:
1st:The first thing I notice is that she doesnt seem to be touching the ground. She isnt casting a shadow on the background att all. Her right leg is attached to the side of her hip rather than under it as it should be in plausible anatomy. Her breasts seem to have silicon implants given how they defy gravity. Shes got a poorly drawn ear, her mouth is of centre from her chin, her eyes seems to be superimposed over her hair rather than the other way around and her neck is of centre. Most of these errors are nitpicks but together they form a sub par impression.
2nd: This one is trickier. I want to say something like #the overall quality is insufficient" but that isnt very helpful. Her limbs are a bit noodley and her head is a bit big. Her shoes have a comical bulge on them. Much like the post above it seems like the artist drew the girl and the background separately and just pasted her in, causing her to sit in front of the branch rather than on it. She also seems to have her own light source that does not shine on the tree at all.
3rd: Her thighs are super short compared to her long torso. Her high skirt makes her ass look elongated. Her breasts cover most of her stomach. Her neck dosnt seem to grow from between her shoulders and her head is twisted more than 90°. There is considerable pixelation. The image is kinda small. I could go on about the background, her face, her skirt and her hat size but I hope you get the idea.
Yùrí said:
What's so wrong with this post that didn't get approve?
The girls have little to no shading. The linework is simple and bordering on amateurish, Nukos face is only three ovals. Their heads are very wide. The Kyoshinhei has wide thigh gaps. This is bad quality throughout.
Haoto said:
Why was this post deleted? >>> post #3024086
It 'is' an original artwork by NyanAFK the fact that I got this image from her DeviantArt.
Danbooru is a repository for quality art. Defining what "quality" is is hard. Our solution is to have a bunch of approvers making individual judgement calls. Original artwork is nice but thats not really relevant to if a post gets approved or not.
I would have marked this poor quality. The linework is blotchy and uneven. Her fingers are unnaturally long (or her hand is short). High contrast isnt liked by everyone and there is nothing interesting going on in this image.
Haoto said:
Can't find it in the database of Danbooru and why do my posts also get reviewed by biased mods?
These too:
post #3036503
post #3036497
post #3036494
post #3036491
post #3110385: Danbooru is an art repository that allows pornographic art but sexually explicit images are less likely to be approved than other images. Its got a gigantic penis with extreme mosaic censoring. Its got a bit of a stomach bulge. Thats really all thats wrong with it but its enough to make 15 queue moderators say no.
post #3036503: Has this artist never seen cum? Why does it have bubbles in it? Also not how breasts work unless they have some bad implants and her pupils are poorly drawn. But really this is just an other image of a "defiled" girl. We have enough of those already.
post #3036497: Repeat everything I wrote for the post above.
post #3036494: Same again plus his testicles seems to be split.
post #3036491: Broken spine. Bubble but. I dont know what that yellow slime is. Pee mixed with cum? Pussy looks like its about to pop of. Again with the bubbling cum.
I hope this helps some of you in your search for good uploads.
What is the problem with this image?
Haoto said:
So, we're allowed to reupload as long as we provide the source?
"Search Google For Image"
*Having a better engine which we can't use*
Uploading pictures that have already been uploaded is only good if you have a better quality version than what's already up: Higher resolution, better JPG compression (better=less artifacts), PNG format instead of JPG, for example. Though, higher resolution isn't good if it's upscaled -- that's why it's best to upload directly from the artist's websites and not third party sources like image boards (unless it's high-quality scans).
You can use the same image search engines that everyone else does, there's a list included in help:image source. I personally use SauceNAO and ASCII2D. SauceNAO is good for showing where/if an image is on Pixiv, and ASCII2D has the most complete index of Twitter of the engines I've used. Depending on your browser, you may even be able to get an extension that will let you right click an image and search with the engines on the page I linked.
I would never upload something I found on Google Images without first using IQDB to make sure it's not already here, and then SauceNAO or ASCII2D to find where the artist themselves uploaded it; or, if I can see the artist's Pixiv or Twitter account in the Google results, using that result. Even if the others claim to have higher resolution -- those have probably been upscaled.
Which should be the parent? Both by the same artist, one from the waist up but posted earlier, the other full body.
Both same size
g3gen said:
Which should be the parent? Both by the same artist, one from the waist up but posted earlier, the other full body.
Both same size
Not sure why you posted this here but full image should be the parent.
I have 7 deleted posts that are higher quality official sources (blog of the person who commissioned the art) from art that already was posted here:
post #3111788
post #3111796
post #3111797
post #3111798
post #3111800
post #3111801
post #3111804
Is there something I should I be doing different, or should I just quit uploading replacement art when I find better sources?
why didnt approved this post?
Would be interested to know why this was deleted.
Any bit of criticism is helpful because there are certain things I miss, and it will go a long way for comms to come.
Not the one who uploaded it but why did post #3054089 got deleted?
Entweihen said:
Would be interested to know why this was deleted.
Any bit of criticism is helpful because there are certain things I miss, and it will go a long way for comms to come.
I can't see anything horribly wrong. The line indicating her right leg goes all the way to the end, creating a sectioned look that doesn't jive with the rest of the linework and the neck/shoulders area creates an imperfect relation to the breasts/chest area but only minorly so. Neither of those would've been large enough reasons for me to pass this over (if I normally looked at explicit uploads).
Out of the nine that I've uploaded, these six were deleted:
post #2997612
post #2792987
post #2701842
post #2701800
post #2698168
post #2719567
Is there anything wrong?
Updated
Back at it again then
MrLight said:
What is the problem with this image?
Not that much in my opinion. The chairs are oddly elongated giving Leolouch abnormally long legs. Some items are more detailed than others suggesting the artist used pre existing assets to make the background. Still the image as a whole is quite good and the concept is interesting. I would have approved this if I had the power to.
shikonsa said:
I have 7 deleted posts that are higher quality official sources (blog of the person who commissioned the art) from art that already was posted here:
post #3111788
post #3111796
post #3111797
post #3111798
post #3111800
post #3111801
post #3111804Is there something I should I be doing different, or should I just quit uploading replacement art when I find better sources?
Pretty much yes. You should only upload replacement art if the quality is "good enough" for Danbooru. Those original images where uploaded five years ago when the threshold was lower than today. These images are unlikely to survive if sent back to the mod queue, the first one has already been flagged and deleted (although the flag reason was invalid).
Repeating what I said in my last post in this thread: Danbooru is an art repository that allows pornographic art but sexually explicit images are less likely to be approved than other images. The more cum and slime in an image the less chance really, though there are approvers that like it many are turned away. The phimosis futa penis in the second image is particularly grose.
The futas in the third image has baseball bat penises and their sweat drops are coloured as their skin even when hanging out from it.
Same sweat problem in the fourth image and the girls in the background have no eyes.
The fifth post has bad penises, bad hands, Miqo'tes crotch and especially face are bad. I flagged the child post for review.
Sixth, same problems I mentioned above and Alteras cock seems to be penetrating Manuxs but cheek. I flagged one of these to.
Seventh post is a little better. Once again there is the weird skin coloured slime sweat. The lineart throughout these images is quite rough. Most Approved posts from this artist are a bit better in that regard.
Still, I understand why someone would think this would get trhough, given what else is approved from this artist.
maulo123 said:
why didnt approved this post?
Because it isnt very good?
Sorry, thats not helping.
The whole image looks slightly blurred or unfocused. There is no shading outside the girls faces and hair. There is very little detail beyond the "magic" effect. Turning Marvel superheroes into anime girls is really not an interesting concept.
Entweihen said:
Would be interested to know why this was deleted.
Any bit of criticism is helpful because there are certain things I miss, and it will go a long way for comms to come.
Other than what Elvaleon said, the screentone is very obvious when the image is viewed at full size. Is this a scan? Grayscale is a bit of a risk, an approver might have just approved some well coloured images when confronted by a black and white one and find it inferior to what they are "used to".
More BDSM has been deleted in the last month than the months before. Perhaps some mod has stopped approving such posts.
Useless said:
Not the one who uploaded it but why did post #3054089 got deleted?
Balloon tits and a big ass, not grounds for deletion but many approvers dislike it. Though technically rating:q the slime and the "flesh thing" makes it look like a rating:e post. The colouring is good but the lineart is subpar, especially on the flesh thing and the wall. The image is also kinda small compared to most that get uploaded today.
Skydragon0 said:
Out of the nine that I've uploaded, these six were deleted:
post #2997612
post #2792987
post #2701842
post #2701800
post #2698168
post #2719567Is there anything wrong?
Il answer but asking for critique on six posts is a lot.
1: Its quite pixelated in places. Their breasts are round like beach balls. Blond girl has her but disconnected from her torso (I have seen worse, but many little things add up). The background seems to be a separate layer and does not "touch" the girls. Colouring is quite simple. Not a terrible image but not good enough for Danbooru.
2: Thats not what a bent forward torso looks like. Was the artist looking at a dog for anatomical inspiration? Purple hair girls got her upper body shifted to the right compared to her hips. The inset with the pussy and dildo looks downright unnatural. Blue hair girl has a weird neck. I could go on but really this is a bunch of artistic/anatomical mistakes that combine to make an inferior image. The no nose or lips style isnt liked by everyone.
3: Small, kinda blurry sketch. Bad breasts, a bad nose and purples head is not attached to her shoulders. This is rubbish.
4: Its easier to list the things that arent bad in this image (purples face and scarf, blacks hand and hair). This is a simple meme sketch made with little effort. Not high quality art. There is a place for memes on Danbooru but there are close to five hundred special feeling (meme) posts already.
5: Dear gods what is going on with their hips? I kinda like the image other than that but that anatomy isnt remotely human.
6: Nothing terribly wrong here but also not much that is good. Photo background arent well liked by many mods. The adult girl has a misplaced nose though this isnt immediately apparent. Mostly I think this was just a mediocre image that didnt catch any approvers attention.
I hope I dont sound to harsh here. Most users get deleted uploads before they learn what is appreciated on the site. Keep at it.
Kyusey said:
post #3126128: Kiyohime has a very long left arm if she can reach around Fujimaru like that. Kiyohime looks kinda flattened. The tape does not seem to be drawn the same way as the rest of the image. Still I believe this could have been approved on a slow day. The chains in the parent post are really poorly drawn.
As for the third post. The disconnected torso. The weird hair ball. The text covering much of the image. What even is that thing on her head. And ofcourse its explicit. There really isnt much good about this image at all.
Please read a few other posts in this thread to learn what is appreciated before you post again.
Balloon tits and a big ass, not grounds for deletion but many approvers dislike it. Though technically rating:q the slime and the "flesh thing" makes it look like a rating:e post. The colouring is good but the lineart is subpar, especially on the flesh thing and the wall. The image is also kinda small compared to most that get uploaded today.
Ok, thanks for the answer, I found it weird because that's the artist usual fetish and how he usually draw. Many pics from him previously got approved hence why I was asking.
Curious as to why both of these parent posts wound up getting flagged for deletion when their child posts have long since been approved and are still up on the site.
post #3074461
post #3097575