see journal here

What is that I hear? Is that... A choir of angels?

Honestly, I have Palcomix blacklisted. The art is... It is not my thing, at all. I'm not going to say any more though because I don't want to come off as attacking them in any sense.

The thing is, while I really disliked their art, this is sort of a crappy thing that happened to them. I don't know. I'm conflicted between "I wish this hadn't happened" and, from my perspective, "nothing of value was lost".

I'm coming off as really dickish, I think, and I do apologize for that, but I don't know. It's an interesting conflict of emotions I've got going on right now. If someone from Palcomix happens to read this, I express my condolences, and they are genuinely sincere.

I should stop posting while sleepy.

>inkbunny.net

Ozelot said:
>inkbunny.net

Yes, the site FA and it's numerous clones wishes it could be.

Anywho,

Ehh, honestly it was only a matter of time before something like that happened. if they decide to stay closed, I can't really say I'll miss em. With the exception of maybe two comics I somewhat like (that they made YEARS AGO), they're style is "meh" at best and the engrish is laughable bad.

yaaaaaaaaay

ThatBIackGuy said:
Yes, the site FA and it's numerous clones wishes it could be.

If by that you mean the repository for all cub images then yes :o

So basically if I am reading that right, because other people were assholes to them, they are holding their free site hostage for sales.

The people posting stuff they shouldn't is shitty, I agree. but so his that approach lol

Comments disabled on the post like that tells me a lot of what they think of people lol.

Shame, for as much as people bitch about them (see this thread), there is much, much worse

CamKitty said:
If by that you mean the repository for all cub images then yes :o

From a pure functionality and administration standpoint inkbunny.net is far superior to FA, but sadly nobody uses it.
I wish FA had half the features of inkbunny, it'd suck a lot less to upload large series (support for multiple images per submission) or to find things you're looking for (semi-open tagging system close to ours).

As for palcomix, partly understandable reaction, but a very shitty approach to a "solution".

CamKitty said:
If by that you mean the repository for all cub images then yes :o

When you're the only site with enough of a backbone to accept it, yes. But ya know what, sure, I mean who cares about stuff like artistic freedom? We should all just draw and post the same overly humanized anthros, sarkledog ferals, and low effort pony/lion king oc's. After all art shouldn't be a medium where a person can create what they please, no, they should all adhere to a select group of individual's moral views.

But I digress

Upon further poking around comics from their site are still accessible if you look them up by name, so I'm not really sure if they're serious in this shut down, or just forgot to cover all bases.

I'm indifferent to Palcomix and I still am.

If they go, I won't miss them, simply because I pay very little attention to them and their work to begin with.

NotMeNotYou said:
From a pure functionality and administration standpoint inkbunny.net is far superior to FA, but sadly nobody uses it.
I wish FA had half the features of inkbunny, it'd suck a lot less to upload large series (support for multiple images per submission) or to find things you're looking for (semi-open tagging system close to ours).

As for palcomix, partly understandable reaction, but a very shitty approach to a "solution".

Superior? You mean how the admins on InkBunny get all asshurt about their AUP and how any 3D that isn't original, even when the source are cited (like say, the work I do on FA, DA, etc), it's against the rules, even when there are models freely available to use and not copyrighted. I hardly see that as being superior when they won't even allow what I post to be posted. It's a farce -_- But I digress.

FA allows the same art so long as the models' sources are completely cited and not passed off as ones own work. But IB, nope.

Community-wise, sure, IB is an excellent place, a lot of awesome people are on there, but as far as what can be uploaded? It's a fucking joke.

fox_whisper85 said:
Superior? You mean how the admins on InkBunny get all asshurt about their AUP and how any 3D that isn't original, even when the source are cited (like say, the work I do on FA, DA, etc), it's against the rules, even when there are models freely available to use and not copyrighted. I hardly see that as being superior when they won't even allow my posed art to be posted. It's a farce -_- But I digress.

FA allows the same art so long as the models' sources are completely cited and not passed off as ones own work. But IB, nope.

Yes, a site's overall quality is solely determined by whether or not they accept "your" semi-subpar SFM porn. Get over yourself mate.

ThatBIackGuy said:
Yes, a site's overall quality is solely determined by whether or not they accept "your" semi-subpar SFM porn. Get over yourself mate.

Oh shut it. No one asked you, did they? Did I ever say it was my art or my models? No? Didn't I say that it;s using already available artists' models and citing the sources and then making works from it? Do us a favor and go back and read my comment. Good day, sir.

fox_whisper85 said:
Oh shut your festering gob. No one asked you, did they? Did I ever say it was my art or my models? No? I said using already available artists' models and citing the sources and then making works from it, go back and read. You don't even have art on here to speak of, so your opinion is null. Good day, sir.

Actually you did say your art, and of course not your models, you use ones other people made. And a person's post count has nothing to do with their opinion.

*Post removed by user*

ThatBIackGuy said:
But ya know what, sure, I mean who cares about stuff like artistic freedom? We should all just draw and post the same overly humanized anthros, sarkledog ferals, and low effort pony/lion king oc's. After all art shouldn't be a medium where a person can create what they please, no, they should all adhere to a select group of individual's moral views.

that sounds horrible.

i thought we were done with the 3D drama

Mutisija said:
i thought we were done with the 3D drama

palcomix "tragedy" is the sequel.

I didn't even know what Palcomix was, but it sounded like it was weird or off somehow.

I find it rather amusing that we are discussing 3D art in a topic about Palcomix. Their art is ridiculously two-dimensional looking. Then again, they also have one-dimensional writing. So I guess things do add up after all.

alirezatm said:
palcomix "tragedy" is the sequel.

lel

Not closed (for good). Just begging over random piracy, which is unstoppable.

Palcomix may be considered bad, but the comics are at least amusing, especially this one

Palcomix3D coming soon.

fox_whisper85 said:
Superior? You mean how the admins on InkBunny get all asshurt about their AUP and how any 3D that isn't original, even when the source are cited (like say, the work I do on FA, DA, etc), it's against the rules

They enforce their rules, so I don't see how this is a sign that they are bad.
I mean, it's their site, if they want to only allow pictures of a specific type than that has nothing to do with the quality of the team itself.
Also, any sexual art between furries and humans is forbidden, which was likely the bigger factor why your stuff got deleted.

aurel said:
dude, you just pwned yourself <_<

I did? How?

aurel said:
well, unless you are writing text in Morse code, you cant have one dimensional text.
And even if you do.. no one will consider Morse code "text".

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/one-dimensional

See definition 2.

NotMeNotYou said:
They enforce their rules, so I don't see how this is a sign that they are bad.
I mean, it's their site, if they want to only allow pictures of a specific type than that has nothing to do with the quality of the team itself.
Also, any sexual art between furries and humans is forbidden, which was likely the bigger factor why your stuff got deleted.

Nope, nothing has been deleted, and I avoid humans in all the things I upload on there. It's the anthro furry models on SFMlab, Facepunch, FA, DA, that they don't allow, even without humans. You know the stuff that's furry on furry? Yeah, not allowed either, unless I've misinterpreted their AUP.

If unoriginal characters aren't allowed in 3D, they shouldn't be allowed in drawing either, like say MLP, Starfox, etc.

aurel said:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/one-dimensional

See definition 1.

:<

aka, aurel rekt by weird definitions nobody uses.. gg

looks like your vocabulary is one-dimensional

alirezatm said:
Even better. Look at this

REKT XD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIgfiSzCy1o

treos said:
see journal here

They should do like SexyFur does with its small legal army and ghosted watermarks...lol.

thank god the majority of their comics are god awful

I consider it a loss.
Sure, many of the comics were awful. But some had favcounts in hundreds. So clearly Palcomix wasn't universally hated.

No lie, I kinda liked them. Sure the dialogue and plot was atrocious at times but it still kept me entertained :V

ThatBIackGuy said:
When you're the only site with enough of a backbone to accept it, yes. But ya know what, sure, I mean who cares about stuff like artistic freedom? We should all just draw and post the same overly humanized anthros, sarkledog ferals, and low effort pony/lion king oc's. After all art shouldn't be a medium where a person can create what they please, no, they should all adhere to a select group of individual's moral views.

Don't be that guy who overblows thing. Things don't have to be all big, dramatic and moralistic.

• Inkbunny is technically superior, and also UI-wise superior
• It's full of cub. This is a statement of fact, not moralizing. I don't think (drawn) scat porn is immoral, but that doesn't make me want to look at it either.
• The userbase is not that different from FA in overall wankiness level

These are all simple, mundane reasons why a person might choose to have minimal or no presence there. It's much like how not everybody uses open source software -- 'free, technically superior and easy on the conscience' are good qualities, but people have other requirements too.

I haven't seen a single high quality artist who uses Inkbunny as anything but an FA mirror to drive more traffic to their FA/other site of choice. The only exception is generally artists whose content would otherwise be banned elsewhere, IE cub. This gives the site a horrible "pedo-haven" type image that many artists and art-viewers don't even want to touch.

To make matters worse, anything up on their "popular" section on the front of the site is always shit-tier quality cub/scat fetish drawings pretty much 24/7.

For some reason I am not surprised at all that Palcomix, an artist I never really paid any attention to, made their home there.

savageorange said:
Don't be that guy who overblows thing. Things don't have to be all big, dramatic and moralistic.

• Inkbunny is technically superior, and also UI-wise superior
• It's full of cub. This is a statement of fact, not moralizing. I don't think (drawn) scat porn is immoral, but that doesn't make me want to look at it either.
• The userbase is not that different from FA in overall wankiness level

These are all simple, mundane reasons why a person might choose to have minimal or no presence there. It's much like how not everybody uses open source software -- 'free, technically superior and easy on the conscience' are good qualities, but people have other requirements too.

He does have a point though, InkBunny'a acceptable upload policy is utter garbage compared to other sites, and is far more restrictive but...I see the same art on FA I do over there; the staff on IB don't seem to be as active or bother to care when people have valid concerns regarding said AUP.

savageorange said:
Don't be that guy who overblows thing. Things don't have to be all big, dramatic and moralistic.

• Inkbunny is technically superior, and also UI-wise superior
• It's full of cub. This is a statement of fact, not moralizing. I don't think (drawn) scat porn is immoral, but that doesn't make me want to look at it either.
• The userbase is not that different from FA in overall wankiness level

These are all simple, mundane reasons why a person might choose to have minimal or no presence there. It's much like how not everybody uses open source software -- 'free, technically superior and easy on the conscience' are good qualities, but people have other requirements too.

And yet that's exactly what the whole issue always boils down too. Someone's big, bombastic, moralistic views that say "something" isn't allowed somewhere. Whether it be advertisers suddenly threatening to pull funds, or artists whining because they can't type a few lines in the blacklist.

Ozelot said:
I haven't seen a single high quality artist who uses Inkbunny as anything but an FA mirror to drive more traffic to their FA/other site of choice. The only exception is generally artists whose content would otherwise be banned elsewhere, IE cub. This gives the site a horrible "pedo-haven" type image that many artists and art-viewers don't even want to touch.

To make matters worse, anything up on their "popular" section on the front of the site is always shit-tier quality cub/scat fetish drawings pretty much 24/7.

For some reason I am not surprised at all that Palcomix, an artist I never really paid any attention to, made their home there.

Well, it sure is nice to see you have all your biases in check. I have a good feeling you've never actually been to the site for that matter, you more than likely just base everything off whiny journals other artists make, especially if you think things like scat make it to the front page. Though I guess when someone like you frequents a site where marco inflated sparkledog snuff makes the front page you're just used to expecting nothing but "bad" art.

fox_whisper85 said:
He does have a point though, InkBunny'a acceptable upload policy is utter garbage compared to other sites, and is far more restrictive but...I see the same art on FA I do over there; the staff on IB don't seem to be as active or bother to care when people have valid concerns regarding said AUP.

Actually they're policy is fairly lenient, with one of the only major rules being no human related porn. But I guess any site that rejects "your" art is just the lowest form of website, right? I mean it can't possibly be because it's quality doesn't meet up to standards considering the means and methods you're using.

ThatBIackGuy said:
Well, it sure is nice to see you have all your biases in check. I have a good feeling you've never actually been to the site for that matter, you more than likely just base everything off whiny journals other artists make, especially if you think things like scat make it to the front page. Though I guess when someone like you frequents a site where marco inflated sparkledog snuff makes the front page you're just used to expecting nothing but "bad" art.

lmfao

Ozelot said:
lmfao

I know right? All of your opinions and views on issues are so laughable left field. Who could resist a chuckle?

ThatBIackGuy said:
I know right? All of your opinions and views on issues are so laughable left field. Who could resist a chuckle?

faaaaaart

ThatBIackGuy said:
And yet that's exactly what the whole issue always boils down too. Someone's big, bombastic, moralistic views that say "something" isn't allowed somewhere. Whether it be advertisers suddenly threatening to pull funds, or artists whining because they can't type a few lines in the blacklist.

Well, it sure is nice to see you have all your biases in check. I have a good feeling you've never actually been to the site for that matter, you more than likely just base everything off whiny journals other artists make, especially if you think things like scat make it to the front page. Though I guess when someone like you frequents a site where marco inflated sparkledog snuff makes the front page you're just used to expecting nothing but "bad" art.
Actually they're policy is fairly lenient, with one of the only major rules being no human related porn. But I guess any site that rejects "your" art is just the lowest form of website, right? I mean it can't possibly be because it's quality doesn't meet up to standards considering the means and methods you're using.

And here I was trying to have a billowy mound of mashed potatoes like Uncle Phil on The Fresh Prince of Bel-air was trying so hard to eat.

Trying to get back on topic.
PC wasn't the best, but they weren't the worst either.
Press [X] to pay respects.

I didn't see it ccccccuuuuuuummmmmmming.

I can't believe it took so long for someone to work that into this discussion.