https://e621.net/post/show/972149/Female-female-female-cat-warriors_-cats-artist-syl http://rule34.paheal.net/post/view/1639499#search=user_id%3D166694 I've seen stuff that looks 1000x worse and was kept on this site.

The worse looking stuff usually has other redeeming qualities like humor.

NotMeNotYou said:
The worse looking stuff usually has other redeeming qualities like humor.

I feel like if I can jerk off to it it's good enough for the site. And from reading the comments on rule34 others agree.

Dutchnoob said:
I feel like if I can jerk off to it it's good enough for the site.

I can jerk off to a spreadsheet. Does that make it good enough to upload?

BlueDingo said:
I can jerk off to a spreadsheet. Does that make it good enough to upload?

Yes, of course.

I've seen much worse porn on the site though. Legit drawn porn, no jokes or anything.

Tell me, does this look like better quality? https://e621.net/post/index/1/dashiathebunny

Dutchnoob said:
Tell me, does this look like better quality? https://e621.net/post/index/1/dashiathebunny

Yes.

Dutchnoob said:
Tell me, does this look like better quality? https://e621.net/post/index/1/dashiathebunny

This one looks great.

Clawdragons said:
Yes.

Eye test. Now.

Dutchnoob said:
Eye test. Now.

For having an opinion; should you get checked for one too?

Dutchnoob said:
Tell me, does this look like better quality? https://e621.net/post/index/1/dashiathebunny

The line work is simpler but at least the overall style is fairly neat and consistent. Yours looks like the line art and the coloring were done by two different people.

• The line art might be passable but contains some proportion errors and open sections.
• The colouring is rough, messy, blurry and goes outside the lines in some places.

Dutchnoob said:
Tell me, does this look like better quality? https://e621.net/post/index/1/dashiathebunny

Very much so. Clean and sharp lines, decent anatomy (unlike your hilarious placement of various body parts), colors / fur patterns aren't just smudged over multiple layers, I can't even begin to describe what you did with the eyes.

NotMeNotYou said:
Very much so. Clean and sharp lines, decent anatomy (unlike your hilarious placement of various body parts), colors / fur patterns aren't just smudged over multiple layers, I can't even begin to describe what you did with the eyes.

"Your" imnnot the artist

my problem is, people indeed have different tastes. The content is allowed, and I, and other people, don't dislike how it's drawn. Where do we draw the line at what's acceptable and not?

Dutchnoob said:
my problem is, people indeed have different tastes. The content is allowed, and I, and other people, don't dislike how it's drawn. Where do we draw the line at what's acceptable and not?

You don't. Staff does.

Dutchnoob said:
Where do we draw the line at what's acceptable and not?

Taken directly from the all knowing Uploading Guidelines.

Quality standards:

• All submissions need to display a solid grasp of artistic principles
• All submissions need to be presented in a legible / readable format
• the chosen medium (image, video, flash) needs to be of a high quality
• traditional media needs to be either scanned in properly or photographed with impeccable lighting and contrast
• edits of images need to be at least on the same level of quality as the original

Ratte said:
You don't. Staff does.

But all people have different opinions on what's good and what isn't! Admins too, I'm sure. What one admin deems unacceptable one might deem acceptable, and all admins should follow the same rules.

Dutchnoob said:
my problem is, people indeed have different tastes. The content is allowed, and I, and other people, don't dislike how it's drawn. Where do we draw the line at what's acceptable and not?

we draw the line here: https://i.imgur.com/H779Npw.gif

Dutchnoob said:
But all people have different opinions on what's good and what isn't! Admins too, I'm sure. What one admin deems unacceptable one might deem acceptable, and all admins should follow the same rules.

It is possible to apply some objective criteria on what is good and what is bad, which reduces the chance of personal opinion swaying the decision.

BlueDingo said:
It is possible to apply some objective criteria on what is good and what is bad, which reduces the chance of personal opinion swaying the decision.

Makes sense, but there is none that I can see. Sorry for sounding a bit abrasive in the title. I always sound angry when I'm not.

Do I need to make https://e621.net/forum/show/219027 larger, or?

Dutchnoob said:
Eye test. Now.

Wow. You sure are abrasive, aren't you?

Fine. Allow me to explain.

The image of cats linked in the original post has some major, glaring flaws.

First of all, the anatomy is broken. Legs are different lengths, body parts connect oddly. The first image is probably the biggest offender - how is that torso supposed to connect to the rest of the body? And her feet... It's not the worst I've ever seen, but it's not good either. Also of note, the vulvas would barely look identifiable as such were it not for the placement.

The linework is incomprehensible as well. In the top image, why does the line that corresponds to the underside of her right arm continue all the way to the line on her back? Why does the black-and-green cat, second from the top, have a horizontal black line on her tail?

The biggest issue, however, is the coloration. I shouldn't be able to see the exact details of the tool that was used... The nipples are just single-click dots of color on the breasts, the coloration flows across lines on the body to separate body parts, and I don't even want to get started on the completely incomprehensible use of the blur-tool on the third image from the top. It is honestly rather difficult to even look at.

There also seems to be no attempt even at a consistent style. Some areas seem to be flat-colored, some look to have attempts at shading... Some details are completely defined by color alone, others are outlined in black. It looks really jarring when the vulva is outlined in black, and the anus is just a splotch of color. Likewise, the mouth is outlined, but the eyes are color-only?

There is also zero sense of composition. Just four images stacked on top of each other. That's not a deal-breaker by itself, but worth mentioning.

I am not a particular fan of Dashiathebunny's work, but at least individual images have a clear style that they are going for. The anatomy isn't broken. There is some sense of perspective. The coloration and linework are easily comprehensible. There aren't glaring overflow errors. The characters are on-model and generally properly proportioned. There is a sense that the composition of the image was thought about ahead of time, and it makes sense as a whole image.

In my opinion, the biggest issue that Dashiathebunny has is that the color choices aren't particularly good. That could use a fair bit of work. And the meshing of various techniques could use a bit of work as well, though it's by no means as jarring as in the cat image discussed above.

I reiterate: Yes. Dashiathebunny's work is far better.

I'm sorry if that comes off as rude, but at the same time, you don't seem to have any problem being rude yourself, so I'm not too fussed if my critique rubs you the wrong way.

NotMeNotYou said:
Do I need to make https://e621.net/forum/show/219027 larger, or?

72pt italics with animated flames please.

BlueDingo said:
72pt italics with animated flames please.

https://i.imgur.com/S6LkhzC.gif

This entire post does not meet my minimum quality standards.

That font though? I'd fucking fap to that.

really bad art even worse than when I tried to upload

Dutchnoob said:
https://e621.net/post/show/972149/Female-female-female-cat-warriors_-cats-artist-syl http://rule34.paheal.net/post/view/1639499#search=user_id%3D166694 I've seen stuff that looks 1000x worse and was kept on this site.

I've had paid commissions that I've uploaded here that were far superior quality to this image and they got deleted for the same reason. And in retrospect, they were pretty shitty compared what I uploaded here that's been approved.

Fact is, it's up to the admins, not you, whether or not the art stays or whether it goes. Get used to it.

I've looked at that picture and the coloring is atrocious. That and the contrast between lineart and coloring work is that big

Really gives me the impression that work was traced on SAI (I can clearly see the lineart having the same "smoothness" as if the linetool was manually used) then was randomly colored with random use of brush, like how colors were just stripped-blurred together

Chaser said:
https://i.imgur.com/S6LkhzC.gif

Please tell me the joke is that there's nothing there, because there's nothing there.

Furrin_Gok said:
Please tell me the joke is that there's nothing there, because there's nothing there.

No? It's just not loading for you.

Ah, flashbacks to my rant about upload standards. Those were the days...

You've inspired me to purge hundreds of images.

I don't see what the problem is here. If you like something that e621 doesn't, just keep it to yourself and enjoy it.

OP linked pic:

1-3: ok...

4: o_O you're kidding...right? nipple dots, sharp outlines, what i assume is some pencil lines, blurred lines and colors and... when did smeared streaks become an art form? it's like you took an eraser or something and rubbed it up and down on the left cats arms, waist, and part of the right leg.

sorry to say but unless e621's quality standards dropped a LOT suddenly, i highly doubt this would ever go undeleted.

I'm not a fan of shaming art in any circumstance, but I can't abide this kind of topic without my input.

I've seen stuff that looks 1000x worse and was kept on this site.

The community of e621 has a twisted idea on what qualifies as secondary value - value other than the artist's talent or render quality, such as humor or profundity.

It's this puerility that allows utter trash like post #378180 to persist.

Tell me, does this look like better quality? https://e621.net/post/index/1/dashiathebunny[/quote]
First off, by saying this you are essentially shaming an artist who has nothing to do with the issue.

Secondly, absolutely yes.

• My immediate and main issue with the cat image is that five of them have been crammed into a single image at a massive resolution. Eugh.
• None of the cats have any sort of background, even a flat color. The white is blinding. In contrast, Dashia's artwork consistently uses background colors (however simple) that improve the image clarity or composition.
• Dashia's artwork shows defined and fairly consistent anatomy, though it is not entirely correct, and many lines. The cats are ambiguous messes of crayon scribbles that lack proportion or even identifable form. Very glaringly, they have no necks and their eyes look like smudged paint on that fucking faceless cat from Animal Crossing.
• The fourth image, with two grey cats, chooses to texture their legs and other fur with what appear to be wild brushes Gaussian blurred within their stroke widths. It looks dreadful.
• Furries forgive some quite awful anatomy, but only if the privy parts look good. These absolutely do not.

Eye test. Now.

Here are some samples of my artwork:

post #881889 post #1037605 post #1036891 post #1099944 post #821852

Do I pass the test?

FibS said:
The community of e621 has a twisted idea on what qualifies as secondary value - value other than the artist's talent or render quality, such as humor or profundity.

It's this puerility that allows utter trash like post #378180 to persist.

Ignoring the political implications, post #378180 has clear artistic merit, so you've failed one of my tests at least.

Lance_Armstrong said:
Ignoring the political implications, post #378180 has clear artistic merit, so you've failed one of my tests at least.

Yes, we've been through this before, you can say it as much as you want but it won't make it any truer.

FibS said:
Yes, we've been through this before, you can say it as much as you want but it won't make it any truer.

You can say otherwise as much as you want, but it won't make it any less true.

Just as beauty, artistic quality is in the eye of the beholder. This is why there's disagreeance over what is allowed and what is not, and why it ultimately falls to our admins and who happens to be approving at the time.

FibS said:

The community of e621 has a twisted idea on what qualifies as secondary value - value other than the artist's talent or render quality, such as humor or profundity.

It's this puerility that allows utter trash like post #378180 to persist.

Clear lines, simple and stylized design, incredibly easy to read what is going on. This is a perfect example of an effective cartoon, regardless of content.
So yeah, that comic displays that the artist is very much a master at his craft.