Honestly, I don't see anything off about this to warrant reflagging. It's a really well-designed 3d model and the details are quite amazing.

Squishy said:

Honestly, I don't see anything off about this to warrant reflagging. It's a really well-designed 3d model and the details are quite amazing.

Imo, the hair do completely not fit with the rest. They look even more like plastic than her skin. Especially the tips of her twintails look like spaghetti...
I also wonder how her internal organs are placed in this very small waist.

And yes, she has ass and breasts. That's the biggest point for this post, so it's likely to get approved.

Squishy said:

Honestly, I don't see anything off about this to warrant reflagging. It's a really well-designed 3d model and the details are quite amazing.

I don't know how you can call this amazing. Amazingly bad anatomy maybe. Her torso hurts to look at. And her legs are twice the rest of the body.

Provence said:

Imo, the hair do completely not fit with the rest. They look even more like plastic than her skin. Especially the tips of her twintails look like spaghetti...

Style issue, not an anatomy issue. It's a 3D model designed to look like figurines, it's supposed to look like 'plastic'. Check the artist's other pieces and see for yourself.

nonamethanks said:

Her torso hurts to look at. And her legs are twice the rest of the body.

Small torsos are some of the weakest reasons to use against anime-style art. It's a common stylistic decision. As long as it is done tastefully and with care, it shouldn't count against the image's overall quality.

As well, legs are 1.6 ratio to the body at most, even counting the high-heel sandals and discounting the head. Misrepresent much?

Squishy said:

Style issue, not an anatomy issue. It's a 3D model designed to look like figurines, it's supposed to look like 'plastic'. Check the artist's other pieces and see for yourself.

That doesn't mean it looks good and while the flag reason focusses on the anatomy there are still other parts to be considered as an Approver and I don't even minimize my arguing on this alone. If you would have quoted more from my statement then you should see that.

Honestly, I'm tired of repeating everytime the same arguments. I think the approval process should be crystal clear by now.
I value the other aspect here more than the anatomy but that doesn'T mean that I think the anatomy is great.

Provence said:

That doesn't mean it looks good and while the flag reason focusses on the anatomy there are still other parts to be considered as an Approver and I don't even minimize my arguing on this alone. If you would have quoted more from my statement then you should see that.

I'm not sure why the hair is being brought up then? Unless you mean this aspect itself is flag-worthy aside from the anatomy. Given how this artist's other pieces have not been slapped for the plastic hair shapes, I'm not sold on this angle being enough reason to exclude from Danbooru.

And your point about the waist was covered in the second half of my response, there really isn't a need to write the same thing twice. I hope that addresses the remainder of your statement.

Squishy said:

I'm not sure why the hair is being brought up then? Unless you mean this aspect itself is flag-worthy aside from the anatomy. Given how this artist's other pieces have not been slapped for the plastic hair shapes, I'm not sold on this angle being enough reason to exclude from Danbooru.

That pretty much proves that you haven't really understood my statement.
The rest is probably unflagged because other aspects are still good there. Look at the recent Mash uploads from the artist that came afterwards. The hair and other stuff is also very plastic looking, but at least it has other featurers well done, most prominently the anatomy. But all of this artist's 3d models suffer from the same thing in one way and it really does not help to get the image approved. It alone won't be a flag reason but images get evaluated as a whole even when the flag reason is only mentioning the anatomy aspect.
And to be honest, I don't buy "it's the artist's style" argument. Granted, a lot people disagree with me on that one but I will still stay on this unpopular opinion: If that's said then this is a killer argument in every debate about an image. You are not able to say anything against "it's the artist's style". Except, when I see this as a reason against a flag then flagging should probably be abolished since every image from a certain artist becomes unflaggable then and that shouldn't really be considered. The artist who has drawn an image should have nothing to do with the success of a flag. Clearly, there are stylized images but you can usually detect them from really bad anatomy, since stylized means that the whole character still makes sense (see all the Jojo posts). Artist's style shouldn't excuse bad anatomy.

Can someone please explain how Nero's anatomy is bad? She seems to have everything where it should be on a human form.

cd_young said:

Can someone please explain how Nero's anatomy is bad? She seems to have everything where it should be on a human form.

Probably the narrow navel

Provence said:

That pretty much proves that you haven't really understood my statement.

And to be honest, I don't buy "it's the artist's style" argument. Granted, a lot people disagree with me on that one but I will still stay on this unpopular opinion: If that's said then this is a killer argument in every debate about an image. You are not able to say anything against "it's the artist's style". Except, when I see this as a reason against a flag then flagging should probably be abolished since every image from a certain artist becomes unflaggable then and that shouldn't really be considered. The artist who has drawn an image should have nothing to do with the success of a flag. Clearly, there are stylized images but you can usually detect them from really bad anatomy, since stylized means that the whole character still makes sense (see all the Jojo posts). Artist's style shouldn't excuse bad anatomy.

Quite agree that "artist's style" is not an excuse for bad anatomy, for exactly the reasons you mention.

Except my usage of that reasoning here is solely with regards to the spaghetti hair that you're taking issue with, as it is a style meant to mimic the look of figurines. Bringing the artist's specific style into the discussion was not my rebuttal against the anatomy issue being raised here, nor have I ever used such reasoning in my past discussions.

However, I have -made- references to the 'anime' style overall, which I define as a genre that has recognizable conventions that are normally associated with Japanese-style art such as large eyes, tiny noses, impossible hair styles+colours, those iconic facial expressions, and other exaggerated anatomy.

In a stylistic medium where breasts as big as a person's head on slim girls are just as accepted as cat people, OwO expressions, and petite bodies with no business being as curvy as they are drawn given typical human metabolic physiology, I find 'small waist' to be a very weak reason to flag to begin with.

Especially since the overall anatomy makes sense and the proportions are within the general bounds that we see in various treatments of the female body in anime art, I remain unconvinced that the flag reason is strong enough to warrant removal of the image since it is hyperfocusing just on a single minor point. Nobody has explained why this waist is especially offensive, other than being small and other unrelated deflections regarding the image's overall quality.

Squishy said:

Quite agree that "artist's style" is not an excuse for bad anatomy, for exactly the reasons you mention.

Except my usage of that reasoning here is solely with regards to the spaghetti hair that you're taking issue with, as it is a style meant to mimic the look of figurines. Bringing the artist's specific style into the discussion was not my rebuttal against the anatomy issue being raised here, nor have I ever used such reasoning in my past discussions.

However, I have -made- references to the 'anime' style overall, which I define as a genre that has recognizable conventions that are normally associated with Japanese-style art such as large eyes, tiny noses, impossible hair styles+colours, those iconic facial expressions, and other exaggerated anatomy.

In a stylistic medium where breasts as big as a person's head on slim girls are just as accepted as cat people, OwO expressions, and petite bodies with no business being as curvy as they are drawn given typical human metabolic physiology, I find 'small waist' to be a very weak reason to flag to begin with.

Especially since the overall anatomy makes sense and the proportions are within the general bounds that we see in various treatments of the female body in anime art, I remain unconvinced that the flag reason is strong enough to warrant removal of the image since it is hyperfocusing just on a single minor point. Nobody has explained why this waist is especially offensive, other than being small and other unrelated deflections regarding the image's overall quality.

Won't argue here. I think we would run in circles then :P.
But one thing...
Removal? What do you mean by that? I'm pretty sure you know this but status:deleted is searchable, so it'S like the image gets nuked from the database.

Removal? What do you mean by that? I'm pretty sure you know this but status:deleted is searchable, so it'S like the image gets nuked from the database.

Difficult accessibility is integral to the whole point of utilizing image deletion as a means to maintain gallery quality and for respecting the wishes of banned artists. Other than playful semantics, I do not think downplaying the effective purpose of deletion is helpful, and in fact can be alarming about the site's function if taken at face value.

As well, I'm pretty sure you know that general userbase does not include status:deleted in their searches and most of them are Anonymous or Member users who are limited to two tags per search. Deletion status does it job well enough to hiding images from a large majority of the userbase, which is the whole point.

Squishy said:

Difficult accessibility is integral to the whole point of utilizing image deletion as a means to maintain gallery quality and for respecting the wishes of banned artists. Other than playful semantics, I do not think downplaying the effective purpose of deletion is helpful, and in fact can be alarming about the site's function if taken at face value.

As well, I'm pretty sure you know that general userbase does not include status:deleted in their searches and most of them are Anonymous or Member users who are limited to two tags per search. Deletion status does it job well enough to hiding images from a large majority of the userbase, which is the whole point.

You somehow missed the point (again) as to why I brought something up:
I'm fairly aware what the deletion status means, but if we want to be precisely then we have to use correct semantics. Since flagging is already badly received by the community I want to have as little misunderstandings as possible and saying that something gets "removed" implies for me that it's not accessible, anymore. Yes, it'S only semantics and yes, people don't really do "status:deleted" searches but it should be said how it really is.

Anyway, if the image gets deleted or not is up to one Approver alone and I doubt they bother even reading the tantrum we two are throwing except they are a moderator. So I quit this discussion now but I have mentioned my qualms about this image. I'm not the flagger but I certainly won't approve this.

Provence said:

You somehow missed the point (again) as to why I brought something up:

I'm sorry but I am still unclear as to why you brought up semantics when it has nothing to do with the flagging reason. But since the question was addressed to me as invitation to explain what I meant by 'removal', I gladly did so to clear up any misunderstanding. Was seeking clarification not why you brought this up? Was my answer insufficient or lacking in grasp of the purpose and effects of image deletion or were you looking for a different answer altogether?

Her spine though