otaku_emmy said:
This makes you sound entitled.
Oh. Sorry >.< (don't hate me)
Doesn't matter if you apologize if you don't try to change how you actually behave and interact with people around you.
I was honestly just asking because two of my bishoujo posts were approved and the other ones right next to it weren’t so I was wondering if there was a genuine issue with them, so I asked and I got my answer. I didn’t mean to sound like I was entitled to any sort of fast service.
So which one is better:

this or this?

I like both, but I only want to up one.

edit: and forget about the fact that these are resized and jpeg, since if I up it's gonna be the original format.
Are you sure that's anime style art?

Well anyway, they are too ugly for me to bother trying to compare...
That's not anime style art Matty
Zolxys said:
They’re are too ugly for me to bother trying to compare...
Um,, eXcUsE mEEE!! That’s my girl peachy your offending. And that is impeccable artwork!! (Kissing kidding just being a bit humorous ^_^’. It IS good artwork tho >.<)

Lol but dramaticness aside, otaku_emmy DID upload cropped versions of those here so idk I assumed it was ok. I… wouldn’t want to see hers deleted T.T
1. You need to chill with the crop stuff lately. Like, riding people about it and focusing on it.
2. The art itself is fine.
From p.93-p.99, which expressions do y'all like the best? And is pussy juice better/sexier? I'd assume so, but I want people who like woman/know what they're talking about to answer (NSFW)

Thanks in advance. And not saying she's loli, but there's this one pink haired girl in the game that doees take the bait, so although she may/may not be loli...she looks like it >.<
This is the "Image Evaluation Thread". Not the "Make Aesthetic Choices For You Thread".

And the girl with pink twintails is a loli.

If a character is listed as having a "kid" body type on VNDB and she obviously looks like a loli, she's a loli. I don't care if she's in high school.
post #313569 is a duplicate of post #313409. I know mine was from the infamous twitter, but they're both at the same jpeg quality (98) and have no artifact difference when you closely inspect it, except for slight difference in file size. it's clear to me that they are the same file. Same with this and this, for example. (pointing those out too cuz it seems like it's something cait specifically does.
*sniffs* ...So why do you have to keep getting them from Twitter if you KNOW it's going to be on Pixiv?

And why are the scores different? That's kind of interesting...
And if the pixiv version is in fact better, then replace. But if it's the same, then technically it would be considered a duplicate.
Or you could wait and not jump the gun. I won't do it again, but you shouldn't upload Cait's stuff from Twitter again either. Because we've talked about this several times now.

That's been my main point this whole time. You don't NEED to upload from Twitter just because it's there earlier. You don't have to feel like you're competing with other people. You don't have to be first.

We've always preferred Pixiv versions, even if something was posted to Twitter in good condition. Pixiv is more user friendly, it has more of the artist's actual work and other useful links, etc. Twitter is just Twitter. Oftentimes the posts will have much less info than what's available on Pixiv as well. So it's not just the quality of the image we're considering, but also the source.
It's not a competition. At all. But we miss a LOT of pictures on here just because oftentimes there ISN'T a pixiv version. It's not a competition, but more so me stressing over that this website could potentially have more by being open to all sources.

Ok, maybe in *caits* case, this could be. But I am not a guaranteer, and I like taking things at face value, even if you can predict something better is gonna be posted (since by then, the replacement it is). We do have quite some things on here from twitter, from a month or three years ago that still haven't seen a *pixiv* version.

That's all.
I AM TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT CAIT.
spoiler
I hate to be bother but one of the images i uploaded 2 days ago has yet to be approved by a mod or be disapproved. https://konachan.com/post/show/326306/animal_ears-arknights-boots-breasts-brown_hair-clo
The soft focus takes a bit away for me personally, but it's not a bad image. It just looks blurry.
It's not the art style that wins, it's the quality.
That's the thing: when it's blurry I can't tell if the quality is there or not. Just cuz of the style. Kinda like how when artists cover an entire image with static. I don't know enough about that stuff anyway, admittedly. I never learned.
Maybe talk with it with the other mods if you feel like it, Maybe they will give some better insight on what to do with it.
First, check this. One thing is for sure, those are not artifacts (too localised). The art contains plenty of jpeg artifacts, but those glaring squares are not them.
Second, if this were a scan, even that wouldn't be passable. Here is my 1 minute edit into a 16:9 4K UHD (3840x2150) wallpaper. This CAN be passable and edits are not discouraged, so you can upload an optimized version. All I did was open it in Photoshop, downscale it, adjust a bit of brightness and contrast and throw in a sharpen.

The artist is very good at what they do, so I am not sure why this image is presented in this poor quality. From their comment on the art I am left to understand that they made it in a rush?
edit: even if they made it in a rush, this does not explain the final output file being like this.

TLDR: Nah, it's going. Too blurry as Em said.
I trust Ten-chon.
I do not use Photoshop nor edit the image (unless i gotta crop something) I just grab it straight from the source and download it and tag it to the best of my ability, And sometimes it gets accepted sometimes it doesn't that's the way it is, Like i find there's too much work to put that amount of time into a single image.
the quality is way better [in post 327192]
Regarding the quality of 327192 vs. 326089, check again.

They are practically identical in quality. Even in the blush where the artifacts are most apparent, the difference is not clear enough to say that either one is better than the other.