Something that has been weighing on me a while now so I figured I'd just let it off my chest. I don't expect anything to change nor am I asking for any kind of sympathy. This is just to alleviate my own anxiety because I am an abnormally anxious person.
There's a couple of things that bother me but to simplify, I'll just say quality standards. I hate them, I hate seeing them, I hate hearing about them, and worse I'm a hypocrite because I have them.
There's a reason I'm posting this, even though I never post anything like this. I don't like talking about me, but this came all because a post of mine was deleted off of here for the first time, (petty I know) and it's happened before other places so why does it matter now? Simple because I wasn't expecting it. I just posted it and left for a bit to watch a youtube video before coming back to see it gone.
Now I don't know why it was taken down, all I got was a 3 word reason "Irrelevant to site" which confused me. I'd made pictures of the same kind that were approved, the subject matter, the species, the style, etc. So I'm not sure what I'd gotten wrong. I decided to search around for a method of appeal or contact or anything really, but after a wasted hour of reading through sight rules I found nothing. At this point my anxiety was getting to me so I decided to give up and move on.
The same thing has happened to me before on other sights, though that was due to the aforementioned quality standards. I try to post to the sight only to find that my art doesn't meet quality standards. Try and get ANY sort of feedback and find nothing useful.
Now I'm not saying my art is great by any means, on the whole I'm the kind of artist who thinks their art sucks no mater what, but when one gets approved and another doesn't and I get absolutely no feedback at all, I have no idea what to think. Positive feedback, negative feedback, any feedback at all would help. I can't improve, I can't fix the problems, I'm just stuck wallowing in my own self inflicted anxiety feedback loop. It seems that all posting my art ever seems to do is make me want to make less of it lately.
Anyways, sorry for wasting the time of anyone who read this far. I just wanted to know if there's anyone else out there who gets frustrated about things like this or if it's just me overreacting because I'm just a nervous wreck.

Search using: xscar10 status:deleted

Found this: https://e621.net/post/show/1206405/black_hair-breasts-clothed-clothing-feet-female-gr

You can see the person who deleted the post, and you can send them a question asking for more detail as to why it was deletedd.

It was deleted because it just looks like a green human with big hands. Human-only content is not allowed unless it's a page from a nonhuman-focused series or comic.

Ratte said:
It was deleted because it just looks like a green human with big hands. Human-only content is not allowed unless it's a page from a nonhuman-focused series or comic.

Well humanoid yes, but not human. Zombie. But that's not the point of the rant, the rant is about almost never receiving feedback and how demoralizing it is. I didn't mean to cast aspersions on you personally.

xscar10 said:
Well humanoid yes, but not human. Zombie. But that's not the point of the rant, the rant is about almost never receiving feedback and how demoralizing it is. I didn't mean to cast aspersions on you personally.

No, human. Other than green skin there's nothing to differentiate it from being a human. Humanoids need to have nonhuman features in order to be accepted. And if it isn't obvious, no, skin color does not count.

Ratte said:
No, human. Other than green skin there's nothing to differentiate it from being a human. Humanoids need to have nonhuman features in order to be accepted. And if it isn't obvious, no, skin color does not count.

Well, green skin, large arms, bolts in the neck, red eyes, I was trying to make a Frankenstine's monster girl. I guess I didn't do very well. That being said, I don't mind it being taken down that much, really it's not that important.

wolftacos said:
Search using: xscar10 status:deleted

Found this: https://e621.net/post/show/1206405/black_hair-breasts-clothed-clothing-feet-female-gr

You can see the person who deleted the post, and you can send them a question asking for more detail as to why it was deletedd.

Thanks man. :3

xscar10 said:
green skin

Skin color doesn't matter.

xscar10 said:
large arms

That also doesn't matter. Look at that dumb "monster hands" trend.

xscar10 said:
bolts in the neck

Some metal sticking out of a place doesn't really matter either. Consider things like piercings, dermal implants, etc.

xscar10 said:
red eyes

Eye color doesn't matter.

Traits need to be nonhuman traits, not just exaggerated human traits or different-colored human traits.

The deletion reason had nothing to do with the artistic quality, but the content. The quality is otherwise ok.

Ratte said:
Skin color doesn't matter.

That also doesn't matter. Look at that dumb "monster hands" trend.

Some metal sticking out of a place doesn't really matter either. Consider things like piercings, dermal implants, etc.

Eye color doesn't matter.

Traits need to be nonhuman traits, not just exaggerated human traits or different-colored human traits.

The deletion reason had nothing to do with the artistic quality, but the content. The quality is otherwise ok.

Well, alright. That's your opinion I get it, you think she doesn't look inhuman enough. That's fine, it's hard to make a zombie not look human in the first place. I'm ok with having failed to get that across.
I wasn't trying to say deletion reason had anything to do with the artistic quality, I was trying to say I have a problem with my own quality standards and the lack of feedback. And even that's only a problem because of my personal anxiety issues.

There isn't much feedback we can give in a deletion reason.

Ratte said:
There isn't much feedback we can give in a deletion reason.

I know, I wasn't asking you specifically for any. I was venting to try and get rid of some of this anxiety, that's why this was posted in off topic instead of art or general.
Quite frankly now I feel worse about wasting your time.

xscar10 said:
I know, I wasn't asking you specifically for any. I was venting to try and get rid of some of this anxiety, that's why this was posted in off topic instead of art or general.
Quite frankly now I feel worse about wasting your time.

You haven't wasted my time, don't worry about it.

I think the problem with critiquing art is that it's based on personal preference. So take this however you like, I went through your work and here are my thoughts on it.

First and foremost, your art creates an uncanny valley effect. There are too many human traits and little to no animal traits. For me personally, it looks as if a human is wearing a mask or even a suit in most of your drawing. Body proportions don't vary between species, which creates that weird suit illusion.

The skull is a big problem, as it's 100% human with a muzzle slapped onto it. That works for animal_humanoid, not so much for anthro. There needs to be a mix or even just adopting the species of choice skull shape as the base.

I really liked https://e621.net/post/show/1054183, as most of it blends together well. Because of the unique skull, a lot of the facial features were streamlined to fit the skull and that makes it look natural. While the figure is still human, it blends well enough to be overlooked.

I think this character in general weirds me out the most. https://e621.net/post/show/1156216 It's that mask/bodysuit illusion that throws me off. It could be due to the hairline and ear location, seeing as the skull is human, having the ears where a human's would be creates that animal_humanoid look.

So, that's my thought on your art at least. Hope it helps.

TheoryAnon said:
I think the problem with critiquing art is that it's based on personal preference.

while it's true that all fans have their own innate biases based on how they grew up, what they were exposed to, and their overall view of the world, there are certain inalienable rules of art that have grown up over the centuries, which the experienced appreciator may point out and apply to the failures of any given piece.

it's pretentious of me to judge art unsolicited. most critics will focus on technical things like anatomy, to a bizarre degree, without considering the intent of the artist and the sincerity of the work.

i find the best artists don't try to be perfect - far from it. the best ones, like the best writers, create as they speak, allowing ideas that have never existed before to exist, instead of cynically trying to copy what already exists in the real world like what we traditionally think of as "good art".

TheoryAnon said:
First and foremost, your art creates an uncanny valley effect. There are too many human traits and little to no animal traits. For me personally, it looks as if a human is wearing a mask or even a suit in most of your drawing. Body proportions don't vary between species, which creates that weird suit illusion.

The skull is a big problem, as it's 100% human with a muzzle slapped onto it. That works for animal_humanoid, not so much for anthro. There needs to be a mix or even just adopting the species of choice skull shape as the base.

I really liked https://e621.net/post/show/1054183, as most of it blends together well. Because of the unique skull, a lot of the facial features were streamlined to fit the skull and that makes it look natural. While the figure is still human, it blends well enough to be overlooked.

I think this character in general weirds me out the most. https://e621.net/post/show/1156216 It's that mask/bodysuit illusion that throws me off. It could be due to the hairline and ear location, seeing as the skull is human, having the ears where a human's would be creates that animal_humanoid look.

So, that's my thought on your art at least. Hope it helps.

Interesting. I hadn't heard that before. But to answer, Yes, there are more human traits than animal, and that can make it seem odd I didn't really intend for it to be 50/50, which is probably why it has that feeling. It's closer to a 80/20.

As for the skulls that actually was intentional oddly enough, since I always want to make the face more human for both ease of recognition and because I'm generally more comfortable drawing human skulls.

With the raptor I as mostly just experimenting with the head on the long neck, and decided it had turned out nice. It was mostly a fluke that it turned out so well.

And lastly the rotty she in general is mostly for drawing something I enjoy while I relax so I don't usually try to do anything too terribly new, save for a new pose or shading etc. So I can see why her design would be the most lazy.

Thanks for the feedback by the way. It's very much appreciated. :3

fewrahuxo said:
while it's true that all fans have their own innate biases based on how they grew up, what they were exposed to, and their overall view of the world, there are certain inalienable rules of art that have grown up over the centuries, which the experienced appreciator may point out and apply to the failures of any given piece.

it's pretentious of me to judge art unsolicited. most critics will focus on technical things like anatomy, to a bizarre degree, without considering the intent of the artist and the sincerity of the work.

i find the best artists don't try to be perfect - far from it. the best ones, like the best writers, create as they speak, allowing ideas that have never existed before to exist, instead of cynically trying to copy what already exists in the real world like what we traditionally think of as "good art".

Well I agree for the most part, at the same time I don't want to fall pray to the trap of subjectivity. I don't want to be like all those "modern art" exhibits, putting up anything at all and just saying "you just don't understand".

It's why I don't like most of the postmodernist movement. There is a line you cross at some indistinct point between to ridgedly trying to replicate the real world and too lazily doing as you please.

There has to be some sort of objectivity or there isn't any way to actually improve. Which then leads to the opposite problem of being so objective that you might as well just take a photo. While I'd rather be too objective than subjective that leads me to exactly the problem I have now. ^^;

k

And now one gets deleted for the actual quality standards. Perfect just perfect.

xscar10 said:
And now one gets deleted for the actual quality standards. Perfect just perfect.

=/

xscar10 said:
And now one gets deleted for the actual quality standards. Perfect just perfect.

that doesn't look too low quality to me. simple with flat colors but still a decent pic overall.

treos said:
that doesn't look too low quality to me. simple with flat colors but still a decent pic overall.

It can look good, but I'm more willing to argue that the anatomical inaccuracies, both to the race and in general, is what got it deleted. I don't want to list the inaccuracies, yet, I'm far too tired to delve into detail.

Siral_Exan said:
It can look good, but I'm more willing to argue that the anatomical inaccuracies, both to the race and in general, is what got it deleted. I don't want to list the inaccuracies, yet, I'm far too tired to delve into detail.

I can personally relate to you. There is art on this site that goes WAY below the quality standards, some of which I really enjoy anyways, regardless of quality... But when I submitted my OWN art which was several times better quality, and several times the better detail, it was denied posting due to the quality standards. It took a lot of REAL work, and it wasn't digital. For one of them, you'd have to pay close attention to really notice that it was on paper. And there are some drawings on this site (that I think are actually really hot) that are clearly as Day, drawn on paper. Yet my art exceeded better quality than theirs as well. So then I was very confused, and then given a lot of bullshit excuses. I was also unusually sensitive about this as well. And I normally don't act that way, which was like 'Twilight-Zone-weird'.

treos said:
that doesn't look too low quality to me. simple with flat colors but still a decent pic overall.

Thanks man. :3

Siral_Exan said:
It can look good, but I'm more willing to argue that the anatomical inaccuracies, both to the race and in general, is what got it deleted. I don't want to list the inaccuracies, yet, I'm far too tired to delve into detail.

Well I haven't seen anyone explain what anatomical problems. So you'd be the first.

xscar10 said:
Well humanoid yes, but not human. Zombie.

Zombies are to humans as zombie dragons are to dragons. If a zombified dragon is still considered a dragon then so to is a zombified human still considered a human. Killing something then bringing it back to life (sort of...) doesn't change its species.

BlueDingo said:
Zombies are to humans as zombie dragons are to dragons. If a zombified dragon is still considered a dragon then so to is a zombified human still considered a human. Killing something then bringing it back to life (sort of...) doesn't change its species.

Except the fact that there is a zombie category.

xscar10 said:
Except the fact that there is a zombie category.

Which applies to all zombified creatures, not just humans.

post #20244post #189186

BlueDingo said:
Which applies to all zombified creatures, not just humans.

post #20244post #189186

Yes but also including human zombies.

xscar10 said:
Yes but also including human zombies.

And like I said before, a zombified human is still a human. An image only containing human zombies is an image only containing humans and will be deleted because of that.

BlueDingo said:
And like I said before, a zombified human is still a human. An image only containing human zombies is an image only containing humans and will be deleted because of that.

Yet many many pictures containing just that made it through.

xscar10 said:
Yet many many pictures containing just that made it through.

Any recent ones? Anything uploaded years ago is exempt from the current rules via the grandfather clause.

BlueDingo said:
Any recent ones? Anything uploaded years ago is exempt from the current rules via the grandfather clause.

Most recent one was 1 month ago.

xscar10 said:
Well I haven't seen anyone explain what anatomical problems. So you'd be the first.

I think it's a mix of proportions and how certain body parts (such as the feet and eyes) are drawn.

xscar10 said:
Most recent one was 1 month ago.

Also, it's generally helpful when someone asks you about examples, that you answer with specific links. Such as (NSFW) post #1185540.

JAKXXX3 said:
I think it's a mix of proportions and how certain body parts (such as the feet and eyes) are drawn.

Also, it's generally helpful when someone asks you about examples, that you answer with specific links. Such as (NSFW) post #1185540.

Feet I can see, but eyes?

xscar10 said:
Feet I can see, but eyes?

on the female character the other eye is literally half of the other eye's size. even with perspective its not supposed to be like that.

I have to be on the highest allottable dosage of anxiety medication to be able to live a decent standard of life. I fully get how awful even small things like you describe could be blown up to someone with genuine anxiety or traumatic-stress disorder.

That said:
-pm a mod if you have a question about mod actions. that shit absolutely does nothing but clutter the forums and comes across like an attention-grab
-if you have anxiety disorder to the level that art of yours being deleted for irrelevance makes you "stuck wallowing in my own self inflicted anxiety feedback loop", you've got serious mental deficiencies you aught to attend to.
-good on you for realizing you're hypocritical about quality standards. taking a failing grade at some point in your long evolution of life as a bullet to the dick is asinine. be glad you live in a time where you can draw fetish porn and get genuine criticism/a kick to the ass if you aren't quite measuring up.

Ledian said:
on the female character the other eye is literally half of the other eye's size. even with perspective its not supposed to be like that.

I understand what you mean, but I don't see it. Which might just be worse.

notawerewolf said:
I have to be on the highest allottable dosage of anxiety medication to be able to live a decent standard of life. I fully get how awful even small things like you describe could be blown up to someone with genuine anxiety or traumatic-stress disorder.

That said:
-pm a mod if you have a question about mod actions. that shit absolutely does nothing but clutter the forums and comes across like an attention-grab
-if you have anxiety disorder to the level that art of yours being deleted for irrelevance makes you "stuck wallowing in my own self inflicted anxiety feedback loop", you've got serious mental deficiencies you aught to attend to.
-good on you for realizing you're hypocritical about quality standards. taking a failing grade at some point in your long evolution of life as a bullet to the dick is asinine. be glad you live in a time where you can draw fetish porn and get genuine criticism/a kick to the ass if you aren't quite measuring up.

- It was essentially an attention grab, so it should come across that way.
- I have sought help, and go to a doctor monthly.
- Diagnosing an issue and resolving one are different, sadly. I recognize the bullet ahead of time but it still feels the same when it lands.