Search (Advanced)
Tags
Statistics
- Id: 303046
- Posted: about 5 years ago by otaku_emmy
- Size: 1904x1470
- Source: /yande.re/post/show/...
- Rating: Questionable
- Score: 601
- Favorited by: sambarino, Draniest, j521chocthunder, 维我灬独尊, tirader, Aylial (184 more)
Options
Image boards aren't a valid source :X
It's only included in order to show the full image. Sometimes we crop rewards or scans so...yeah.Jennifer003b said:
Image boards aren't a valid source :X
This is the actual source btw https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/76720867
Except it's not. That's not even the same image.Jennifer003b said:
This is the actual source btw https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/76720867
?? it looks identical to me
Then there is something wrong with your eyes. It's not the same resolution either.
True the one from Pixiv is lower resolution but it is the same imageotaku_emmy said:
Then there is something wrong with your eyes. It's not the same resolution either.
I merged the two images:
https://imgur.com/a/5gJK8yL
On the left it's the one from the pixiv source and the other one is from Yande.re (The one from Pixiv has the artist's signature on the top right corner)
They're the same image
They're not (slightly more detail is included and there is no artist signature), and I'm not going to keep arguing with you. The source won't be changed because the image here is likely a reward and is NOT the one from Pixiv. And if someone WANTS the artist's Pixiv they can find it.
So basically you're not giving proper credit to the artist with the excuse that the image on Pixiv is lower resolution, has a signature and has "Slightly" more details (whatever they are I don't see any).
That's very disrespectful towards the artist, but okay, whatever you say.
I'd also would like to hear someone else's opinion on just how almost identical are the 2 pictures, because I am not blind I am sure of that, arguing that's not the same picture because of a very minor artist revision its preposterous
That's very disrespectful towards the artist, but okay, whatever you say.
I'd also would like to hear someone else's opinion on just how almost identical are the 2 pictures, because I am not blind I am sure of that, arguing that's not the same picture because of a very minor artist revision its preposterous
Dude.
The image is over 2 years old. And it's not the only image from the artist here. If someone wants to visit his Pixiv, the person has just to check out other posts from Kona.
The image is over 2 years old. And it's not the only image from the artist here. If someone wants to visit his Pixiv, the person has just to check out other posts from Kona.
So ? that's no reason not to add the real source, the fact that is 2 years old or that there are other posts from the artist has nothing to do with it.
The image has a proper source, and so it should be properly applied.
The image has a proper source, and so it should be properly applied.
It's almost as if you've never seen this happen before, which is the odd thing to me. I know you're not NEW here.
THIS image is not a "revision". Often times artists release different versions of images for monetary reasons. A good example is if they've been hired by a larger company to make official/cover art for something. They will post a version to Pixiv, usually advertising a product or game, while the OFFICIAL art is posted elsewhere.
Then you have paid rewards. Those are posted to places like Patreon, with the ACTUAL source being a page you can't see anyways unless you're already a paid subscriber. Hence why we don't really add Patreon links.
Konachan has always worked tirelessly to credit artists when possible. We have tagged the artist, and anyone of average intelligence can find their Pixiv if they want to. We have NEVER used Pixiv links as sources for images that AREN'T directly sourced from Pixiv.
THIS image is not a "revision". Often times artists release different versions of images for monetary reasons. A good example is if they've been hired by a larger company to make official/cover art for something. They will post a version to Pixiv, usually advertising a product or game, while the OFFICIAL art is posted elsewhere.
Then you have paid rewards. Those are posted to places like Patreon, with the ACTUAL source being a page you can't see anyways unless you're already a paid subscriber. Hence why we don't really add Patreon links.
Konachan has always worked tirelessly to credit artists when possible. We have tagged the artist, and anyone of average intelligence can find their Pixiv if they want to. We have NEVER used Pixiv links as sources for images that AREN'T directly sourced from Pixiv.
Em is correct here.
The only time we've ever intentionally linked to a lower quality source was when the artist herself gave us a higher res version and requested we link to their lower res version on dA. A comment was made by Stahn to explain the incorrect source.
If you think it's too difficult for people to check the other posts for the pixiv account, why don't to take the initiative to populate the wikis for the artist tags?
That's what the tags are for, not the source link.Jennifer003b said:
So basically you're not giving proper credit to the artist.
The only time we've ever intentionally linked to a lower quality source was when the artist herself gave us a higher res version and requested we link to their lower res version on dA. A comment was made by Stahn to explain the incorrect source.
If you think it's too difficult for people to check the other posts for the pixiv account, why don't to take the initiative to populate the wikis for the artist tags?
There's also a TON of overlap in use for people who frequent anime boorus. If you wanted EVERY link related to an artist you can usually go on Danbooru and find them no problem (provided they're not a "banned" artist).
Ex. Masami Chie's info: https://danbooru.donmai.us/artists/65048
Ex. Masami Chie's info: https://danbooru.donmai.us/artists/65048