My damn stuff gets deleted randomly again and all they say is "Does not meet minimum quality standards" even if the damn vid was uploaded weeks ago and the damn models are HD and the stupid render is in 256, no one of the staff admins EVER answer any PM and my works just desapear again and again and again. here is one of the deleted videos, now tell me if it is really that bad... http://www.naughtymachinima.com/video/22578/argo

https://e621.net/forum/show/211002

This might be relevant.

how can that be relevant.

Are you still using second life models?

Siral_Exan said:
Are you still using second life models?

Those are Second Life models in the video, I've seen poorer quality things approved, I would ask a mod via PM.

Edit: Mods are busy, but they shouldn't not answer PMs IMO

I DO NOT USE FUCKING SECOND LIFE MODELS how many times do i have to say it i just use SFM i never used SL or any other god damn program, just SFM!!!!

the models are the same of here https://e621.net/post/show/1093649/3d_-artwork-animated-argonian-breasts-butt-canine- then WHY DELETE MINE???????

fox_whisper85 said:
Those are Second Life models in the video, I've seen poorer quality things approved, I would ask a mod via PM.

Edit: Mods are busy, but they shouldn't not answer PMs IMO

"...I've seen poorer quality things approved..."

That is past tense, though. We all have seen poor quality things accepted, but it is present tense that matter. Provide poor quality posts (that ain't auto-accepted. Knotty's got through under the radar) that are recent, and bring those up as points.

Otherwise, 3d model videos normally look bad (specifically non-custom models) and second life is worse than SFM or et cetera. I've had users agree with me on the prior before.

Siral_Exan said:
"...I've seen poorer quality things approved..."

That is past tense, though. We all have seen poor quality things accepted, but it is present tense that matter. Provide poor quality posts (that ain't auto-accepted. Knotty's got through under the radar) that are recent, and bring those up as points.

Otherwise, 3d model videos normally look bad (specifically non-custom models) and second life is worse than SFM or et cetera. I've had users agree with me on the prior before.

i do NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT use SL models i NEVER used SL models ill NEVER use SL models, how can i make my self more clear?? those are NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SECOND LIFE MODELS hope is clear now.

SumerianDragon said:
i do NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT use SL models i NEVER used SL models ill NEVER use SL models, how can i make my self more clear?? those are NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SECOND LIFE MODELS hope is clear now.

The point stands that they look like second life models, as someone had agreed with me. Like I said, custom models look the best, and you should try to use those. I don't have other suggestions, though, but Mario69 can help you. They're the ones that agreed with me prior (as in before this), and they are a savant with animations. Hit 'em up in IRC or message them.

the quality refers to overall artistic quality of the content. not rendering settings, resolution or model source.

Mutisija said:
the quality refers to overall artistic quality of the content. not rendering settings, resolution or model source.

Compared to? Can you provide context, preferably to all four of your listed, to prove your point?

I stand adamant in my 3d model source argument: you slap a skin over a shitty model source, like TF2 models or SL, what comes out of it will be of lesser quality. If you make or find a better model, you won't have such problems. Either that, or get a fitting skin, but furry logic counters that. Tails, claws, protruding heads, all those should be made on a model, the aforementioned TF2 ones won't fit.

Siral_Exan said:
The point stands that they look like second life models, as someone had agreed with me. Like I said, custom models look the best, and you should try to use those. I don't have other suggestions, though, but Mario69 can help you. They're the ones that agreed with me prior (as in before this), and they are a savant with animations. Hit 'em up in IRC or message them.

As someone with a Bachelor's in Digital Entertainment and Game Design, with formal training in 3d Modeling, animating, and texturing, as well as quite a bit of experience with SL and its models I can absolutely safely say that those do not, in any way, look like SL models.

This isn't done in SL and those models are definitely not SL models. The jiggle physics and weight painting are too good, the bodies mesh FAR too well with themselves, and there are no noticeable seams that there always are with SL models.

Yet I also don't believe this is a particularly high quality animation. In my opinion animations of this length are too short and shouldn't be allowed at all as they offer no actual content, yet that's just my opinion and it's totally irrelevant.

What isn't my opinion, however, is that these are, in no way, SL models. That while animations like https://e621.net/post/show/1093649 are allowed so, too, should his be.

It's just as good as the above one, and just as good, if not better, than many others that have rather recently been approved such as the following.

https://e621.net/post/show/1129808
https://e621.net/post/show/1129801
https://e621.net/post/show/1127519

etc, etc, etc.

AnotherDay said:
As someone with a Bachelor's in Digital Entertainment and Game Design, with formal training in 3d Modeling, animating, and texturing, as well as quite a bit of experience with SL and its models I can absolutely safely say that those do not, in any way, look like SL models.

This isn't done in SL and those models are definitely not SL models. The jiggle physics and weight painting are too good, the bodies mesh FAR too well with themselves, and there are no noticeable seams that there always are with SL models.

Yet I also don't believe this is a particularly high quality animation. In my opinion animations of this length are too short and shouldn't be allowed at all as they offer no actual content, yet that's just my opinion and it's totally irrelevant.

What isn't my opinion, however, is that these are, in no way, SL models. That while animations like https://e621.net/post/show/1093649 are allowed so, too, should his be.

It's just as good as the above one, and just as good, if not better, than many others that have rather recently been approved such as the following.

https://e621.net/post/show/1129808
https://e621.net/post/show/1129801
https://e621.net/post/show/1127519

etc, etc, etc.

well ty, and i know my vids are kinda short, but come on we have vids of 1 and 2 sec so i dont see the problem, and the point of this kind of animatios is look like loops kind of animated gifs, but that doesnt matter right now, the point is, my stuff keeps getting deleted and there is not much i can do about it as not a sinlge staff member ever answers any kind of message.

Siral_Exan said:
Are you still using second life models?

Sometimes it's OK to say that you aren't fully aware of the situation or just say nothing. There haven't been second life involved here at all and it should be clear that video linked is not from second life.

Mutisija said:
the quality refers to overall artistic quality of the content. not rendering settings, resolution or model source.

Most of the time low technical quality is given a pass, but if the artwork looks like it was screenshotted from game running on lowest possible settings available, that will also get deleted for not meeting minimum quality. This is similar to how photos need to at least look like they were scanned using scanner, the post still needs to have at least acceptable quality for format it is using.
If you are actually rendering something in 3D, there shouldn't be any reason for the end product to be 480p image with aliasing, pixelated shadows, bad texture filtering and all that nonsense.

However this isn't completely related to issue here as render quality was absolutely fine. Even if the videos were 480p letterboxed 4:3 which is not ideal.

From looking at this, I do see that I personally deleted couple pictures from artist and admins deleting several more in last couple months. I would imagine if they have been going trough the approvals, seeing how single artist is uploading material that they had to delete a ton already, that they are just going to flip their assumption that upcoming stuff is also bad.

One thing I would like to say is that stuff under 3D_(artwork) tag does seem to be approved bit too easily and I have been trying to get much more strict with approvals I handle. If someone is using models that are available online, use them on free and easy to use software, they should be judged for their other values instead. If going by the current quality standard levels, I have to say I agree with AnotherDay: there's not much difference when it comes down to other accepted videos here, outside being 480p letterboxed 4:3.

"Everyone else uploads stupid crap, So my crap should be allowed too!" is perhaps the stupidest argument ever.

A lot of my uploads were deleted for the same reason a week ago. My only reason to why is because they were scanned pictures of drawings and that person thought they were photos of pictures, but even if that would be the case, those "photos" would have been good looking and well framed enough to look just like actual scans.

My issue on that matter is how inconsistent it is, because by pure logic, those should be completely fine and allowed since there's this traditional_media tag being used, and some of them were approved while the big majority were denied from someone else less than a day it was uploaded.

The funny part is post #1128373 was approved by the same person who rejected them.nope my memory failed me hard here So if these were completely fine but not mine, my only good guess would be that lack of shading constitutes a lack of quality standard for traditional media, which sounds, pretty stupid

Neitsuke said:
So if these were completely fine but not mine, my only good guess would be that lack of shading constitutes a lack of quality standard for traditional media, which sounds, pretty stupid

I don't see why you would conclude that such a thing is stupid. I regard both of the linked drawings as mediocre and wouldn't vote for the approval of either, but the inclusion of shading on the second one does show more clearly the artist's grasp of form.

If you find lineart only art mediocre, then that's fine, some people need fancy backgrounds and shaded colors on what they see to deserve artistic values.

But this isn't the problem, again, if this is really the case, then o please explain me how 95% of the_weaver's stuff is considered artistic enough to be completely fine being uploaded here. Is it because the lines are colored ? That would constitute enough art merits ?

Again, the problem lies on lack of consistency. If e621 doesn't consider doodles/non-shaded sketches to have enough artistic merits, then they shouldn't pick and choose like that and be more black and white about what is art with enough artistic merits or not

Neitsuke said:
If you find lineart only art mediocre, then that's fine, some people need fancy backgrounds and shaded colors on what they see to deserve artistic values.

That's not what I said (I'm a minimalist, so it's actually a kind of hilarious thing to accuse me of).
You can definitely show form with lineart, even without line weight variation, but pic 1 mostly doesn't do so.

But this isn't the problem, again, if this is really the case, then o please explain me how 95% of the_weaver's stuff is considered artistic enough to be completely fine being uploaded here. Is it because the lines are colored ? That would constitute enough art merits ?

Weaver's stuff is strongly focused on composition and TBH he's quite good at it. That said there are a few pieces of his (solo pics, usually) that I don't really get why they pass quality standards.

Neitsuke said:
If you find lineart only art mediocre, then that's fine, some people need fancy backgrounds and shaded colors on what they see to deserve artistic values.

Not me. You'll see proof of this below.

Neitsuke said:
But this isn't the problem, again, if this is really the case, then o please explain me how 95% of the_weaver's stuff is considered artistic enough to be completely fine being uploaded here. Is it because the lines are colored? That would constitute enough art merits ?

Every time I see the_weaver's stuff, I wonder how exactly it keeps getting accepted. This isn't even on the same continent as this.

post #976983 post #39342
[/quote]

.. Both of those are bad.
The latter is bad in a more sophisticated way, but still pretty bad.

(Neitsuke: the latter of BlueDingo's linked pics does demonstrate how you can show a lot of form with just overlapping line. But once you add a bit of line weight things start to read a lot clearer. eg. post #464557 is pretty basic but looks a lot better than your first linked pic.)

Yeah, I know that there is always better art and techniques, I know that the lines are a little shaky. But again, that shouldn't be a big issue. I know a lot of art with those so horrible "artistic deficiency" like color overflow and not perfectly cleaned up lineart evn of digital art, and those little artistic details were never an issue on what's considered lack of artistic merits or not. There is a huge difference between not perfectly smooth lineart but still looks good overall, and just plain doodles.

By the way, this so better picture is actually a digital artwork, not on paper, of course it's easy for it to look cleaner than actual drawing on paper

savageorange said:
.. Both of those are bad.
The latter is bad in a more sophisticated way, but still pretty bad.

This tells me you simply don't like the art style and would call it bad regardless of its quality level.

savageorange said:
eg. post #464557

That's a sketch. We're discussing line art.

What art style? Stiff?
(weaver's pic is (probably too) loose and has character, Axer's is tight and lacks character. These are both committing classic, well known artistic errors.)

Neitsuke said:
There is a huge difference between not perfectly smooth lineart but still looks good overall, and just plain doodles.

Sure, there is a lot of technique problems that are forgivable if the whole looks good. I think that's why so much of Weaver's stuff gets approved.

(BTW: the example pic I linked actually has a bunch of technique problems. I picked it because it had similar problems -- poor pen control -> shaky lines -- but read a lot better nonetheless)

BlueDingo said:
That's a sketch. We're discussing line art.

Seems you don't understand the definition of line art as well as you thought you did.
(where I got that pic: line_art pokemon order:score. There's lots of other weighted examples if you don't like that one, eg post #156964)

savageorange said:
Seems you don't understand the definition of line art as well as you thought you did.

There is a difference between line art and sketches.

Also, mistags happen.

savageorange said:
(where I got that pic: line_art pokemon order:score. There's lots of other weighted examples if you don't like that one, eg post #156964)

I like post #1130698 more.

BlueDingo said:
There is a difference between line art and sketches.

And would you say that the pic I linked falls into a different category than Neitsuke's? I really wouldn't. They each could be viewed as sketches or somewhat shaky lineart.

Also, mistags happen.

Agreed that that does not fit the definition. We don't seem to have an .. 'inked'/ 'line weight' type tag that would help find non-monochrome works that nevertheless emphasize line.

I like post #1130698 more.

.. As a drawing that is reasonably comparable to neitsuke's examples in either setup, execution, or general competency level? I don't see that.

savageorange said:
And would you say that the pic I linked falls into a different category than Neitsuke's? I really wouldn't. They each could be viewed as sketches or somewhat shaky lineart.

You mean post #1125233 and post #156964, right?

There's a difference between shaky lines with accidental intersections and overlaps (above) and drawing several lines on top of each other (post #464557). Those two are in the same category, that third one isn't.

savageorange said:
Agreed that that does not fit the definition. We don't seem to have an .. 'inked'/ 'line weight' type tag that would help find non-monochrome works that nevertheless emphasize line.

That depends on what you mean by "non-monochrome works that nevertheless emphasize line". If you mean multiple line colors, line_art -monochrome would work if there weren't about 20 pages of images missing the monochrome tag. If you mean images like post #384904 which are colored in, they usually fall into a different category since they're colored in and no longer just lines.

Would a colored_line_art tag work for those, or would that be too prone to mistagging?

savageorange said:
.. As a drawing that is reasonably comparable to neitsuke's examples in either setup, execution, or general competency level? I don't see that.

That one wasn't meant to be comparable. I was just having a go at how you worded that post.

impossible not to read OPs posts outside of the "YOU FRICKING FRICKS" kid's voice lmfao

OT quality is subjective to everyone. The mods do their best to decide what they see as meeting the par. They seem like nice chaps so just have a chat with them if you're upset about something. The way you were reacting (and presumably others), is it really any wonder why they're slow to respond to PMs? Like damn bro chill, that was more NO NO NO NO NO NO NO's and mindless shouting than I'd expect from a Youtuber. And that's saying sum shit man

One thing I forgot to write about in my message and this is mostly for OP.

Remember that e6 is not your private gallery. This is public booru.
I'm searching "sumeriandragon status:any hassource:true" and I'm getting zero results, meaning that for this artist deletion on e6 means nobody will ever get to see those posts ever again. I mean, even the video link on first post is dead now. With majority of low quality deletions, artwork is still available for everyone, just simply not here. Also they are usually easy to find as deleted posts do preserve source and artists have wiki pages with links to their galleries.

Tumblr, Twitter, FurryNetwork, Inkbunny, Weasyl, Furaffinity, SoFurry, Pixiv, Deviantart, Patreon, etc. there are literally so many sites you could even have trouble what to choose from, then you decide to post into only site which has risk of your work getting deleted.

Neitsuke said:
Yeah, I know that there is always better art and techniques, I know that the lines are a little shaky. But again, that shouldn't be a big issue. I know a lot of art with those so horrible "artistic deficiency" like color overflow and not perfectly cleaned up lineart evn of digital art, and those little artistic details were never an issue on what's considered lack of artistic merits or not. There is a huge difference between not perfectly smooth lineart but still looks good overall, and just plain doodles.

By the way, this so better picture is actually a digital artwork, not on paper, of course it's easy for it to look cleaner than actual drawing on paper

As I wasn't one handling the posts, I can't say exact reason for deletion, but I'm looking at some of these and to me it seems the problem is that they are really clear photos. Something being sketch is usually fine and there are really sketchy sketches here, but photos are not fine.

Most clear thing you can see on those posts is that lighting is just awful and there is general softness. Photos of traditional media are sometimes accepted if they are exceptionally well taken (background is solid color, no visible paper edges, sharp, high resolution, etc.) but overall they are usually removed on sight.

This has been mentioned actually several times on uploading guidelines:

Good things to upload:
- High quality photographs (or scans) of traditional artwork

Bad things to upload:
- Low quality submissions: low-quality photographs of traditional media (invest into a scanner, people!)

Quality standards:
- 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

So if I would go according to these, those deleted posts of traditional media would hang just in the line of either deletion or approval and bad lighting would make it tilt more towards deletion.

It is not uncommon for scanners to make some brighter areas on scans, and if they even were to be pictures of pictures, those look really good for what they are, I met scanners that would do a worse job. Not everybody has access to two light stands for the lighting to be perfect, and again, I only notice two pictures having some questionable light contrasts that I uploaded, everything else is more than fine.

Compare those to something like post #821310 where the actual quality of the picture (Not the art) is really bad and granulated, but this seems to be just fine and acceptable. Again the problem isn't how I'm mad because I'm getting pictures deleted, but the lack of consistency of what is considered low quality or not

notawerewolf said:
impossible not to read OPs posts outside of the "YOU FRICKING FRICKS" kid's voice lmfao

OT quality is subjective to everyone. The mods do their best to decide what they see as meeting the par. They seem like nice chaps so just have a chat with them if you're upset about something. The way you were reacting (and presumably others), is it really any wonder why they're slow to respond to PMs? Like damn bro chill, that was more NO NO NO NO NO NO NO's and mindless shouting than I'd expect from a Youtuber. And that's saying sum shit man

Im bored of ask nice, im tired of asking again and again and again and again in the best damn maners and ya know what? 1 year and not a single answer, NOT A SINGLE, so, im not gonna chill ANYMORE i want to have a nice chat but ya know what? i can´t and you know why i can´t? BECAUSE THEY NEVER ANSWER not in forums, not in post, not in PMs so what am i supose to feel? MMMMMM? IM UPSET FUCK!

SumerianDragon said:
Im bored of ask nice, im tired of asking again and again and again and again in the best damn maners and ya know what? 1 year and not a single answer, NOT A SINGLE, so, im not gonna chill ANYMORE i want to have a nice chat but ya know what? i can´t and you know why i can´t? BECAUSE THEY NEVER ANSWER not in forums, not in post, not in PMs so what am i supose to feel? MMMMMM? IM UPSET FUCK!

Dood please, Flipping out is never a good idea.
I can promise you, You 'Will' get banned if you do.

I know untimely I can't stop you from doing something but dood
Just Ask yourself, What does flipping out ever solve;
Getting mad and lashing out will never solve the problem.
It didn't work out for Digital Homicide, It won't pan out well for you ether.
~ ~)

Edit:
Notkastar->Notska

Notska said:

Dood please, Flipping out is never a good idea.
I can promise you, You 'Will' get banned if you do.

I know untimely I can't stop you from doing something but dood
Just Ask yourself, What does flipping out ever solve;
Getting mad and lashing out will never solve the problem.
It didn't work out for Digital Homicide, It won't pan out well for you ether.
~ ~)

Edit:
Notkastar->Notska

Ya you are right, i´ll sit here and let ppl do whatever they want, because the rules are for idiots right? i´ll let them delete my stuff just cuz they dont like it, sounds fair to me.

SumerianDragon said:
Ya you are right, i´ll sit here and let ppl do whatever they want, because the rules are for idiots right? i´ll let them delete my stuff just cuz they dont like it, sounds fair to me.

But flipping out isn't any better is what I'm saying.
It hurts your credibility severely and just leaves a bad mark on you as a creator all together.

Look, what happened was messed up and to be honest it's happen to me more then once. Yes I wanted an answer and yes I even made a thread on getting one
https://e621.net/forum/show/191418
Hell, I was even in the same spot you where; about to do something (Re-upload) that would have ended real bad for me. But I didn't. I took it as a L and moved on so I could post other things up to pare and you can do the same dood!

Instead of looking at like as one things they didn't approve, take it as an opportunity to get even better at what you do. Kind of like:
"What they don't think it's good, Well I'll make something 10 times better really show them what I can do!"

Summed up:
This is a turning point for you dood,
You could just flip out anyway and call it quits on E621; Burning down the golden gate bridge. Letting your rage define you.

or

You can completely turn this on it's head and come out of this with a whole lot more then what you came in with.

The choice is yours and yours alone man, Just though I'd lay things out in black and white for ya.

Notska said:
But flipping out isn't any better is what I'm saying.
It hurts your credibility severely and just leaves a bad mark on you as a creator all together.

Look, what happened was messed up and to be honest it's happen to me more then once. Yes I wanted an answer and yes I even made a thread on getting one
https://e621.net/forum/show/191418
Hell, I was even in the same spot you where; about to do something (Re-upload) that would have ended real bad for me. But I didn't. I took it as a L and moved on so I could post other things up to pare and you can do the same dood!

Instead of looking at like as one things they didn't approve, take it as an opportunity to get even better at what you do. Kind of like:
"What they don't think it's good, Well I'll make something 10 times better really show them what I can do!"

Summed up:
This is a turning point for you dood,
You could just flip out anyway and call it quits on E621; Burning down the golden gate bridge. Letting your rage define you.

or

You can completely turn this on it's head and come out of this with a whole lot more then what you came in with.

The choice is yours and yours alone man, Just though I'd lay things out in black and white for ya.

well, ya are right in a point, rage is not gonna solve a shit but ask nice or being polite wont do it either, ill do a way better animation and just upload in a diferent site, ìm even thinking on make my oun tumbrl

SumerianDragon said:
ìm even thinking on make my oun tumbrl

Shouldn't you have done that first?

SumerianDragon said:
well, ya are right in a point, rage is not gonna solve a shit but ask nice or being polite wont do it either, ill do a way better animation and just upload in a diferent site, ìm even thinking on make my oun tumbrl [/quote] Sounds like a great idea man ╹‿╹) (Making your own Tum art profile) The posting rules on Tums is a lot more lax then here and there just might be more people there to check out your work there too! Just remember to set your profile to 'mature' lolz ◠‿◠) [quote]"BlueDingo":/user/show/213725 said: Shouldn't you have done that first? [/quote] You really can start anyway really man, I mean I started on DA ->FA ->Tums then Here. ~ w ~)

Notska said:
Sounds like a great idea man ╹‿╹)
(Making your own Tum art profile)
The posting rules on Tums is a lot more lax then here and there just might be more people there to check out your work there too!
Just remember to set your profile to 'mature' lolz ◠‿◠)

You really can start anyway really man,
I mean I started on DA ->FA ->Tums then Here.
~ w ~)

When it comes to videos on tumblr, there's minor issue:

From tumblr docs:
"One caveat: We're not in the business of actually hosting sexually explicit videos, so don't upload them using our post form. You can, however, embed anything in a Tumblr post as long as it's lawful and follows our other guidelines."

I have seen tumblr accounts being nuked over this.

However you can link to external sites and embed. Many artists using tumblr mirror the content to sites like gfycat and webmshare, altough using third party site to host content can vanish over time. Sites that do allow explicit video content and are popular are inkbunny, furrynetwork and twitter. Then sites like furaffinity, sofurry and weasyl requires videos to be flash or gif.

As for where to start and where to post your stuff, there is really good reason why posts here have "source" field, this site is not personal gallery so in perfect world every post would have source. I will and always have said for artists who post only here to register some site, not only because of possibility for deletion but also for easier following of artists etc. Post all your stuff on site where you have complete control over your content, because even if it doesn't qualify here for one reason or another, there will always be someone who likes it and this way it will be available for them.

Mario69 said:
When it comes to videos on tumblr, there's minor issue:
I have seen tumblr accounts being nuked over this.

However you can link to external sites and embed. Many artists using tumblr mirror the content to sites like gfycat and webmshare, altough using third party site to host content can vanish over time. Sites that do allow explicit video content and are popular are inkbunny, furrynetwork and twitter. Then sites like furaffinity, sofurry and weasyl requires videos to be flash or gif.

As for where to start and where to post your stuff, there is really good reason why posts here have "source" field, this site is not personal gallery so in perfect world every post would have source. I will and always have said for artists who post only here to register some site, not only because of possibility for deletion but also for easier following of artists etc. Post all your stuff on site where you have complete control over your content, because even if it doesn't qualify here for one reason or another, there will always be someone who likes it and this way it will be available for them.

^
Listen to this dood, The peep knows his stuff ╹‿╹)
(Didn't even about that tid bit about tums till now)

But yeah, Like how Super Mario 69 said what I said but exceedingly better lolz. 621 isn't the best place to host your art and having a backup/main host site where more peeps can see your work is the way to go man. ◠‿◠)

I would suggest Pixxxels as a place to dump your content and link to it as needed.

https://pixxxels.org/

They used to be just Postimage, But had to split into separate feeds for adult and non-adult material to get around some cloudflare pricing stupidity.

FoxFourOhFour said:
I would suggest Pixxxels as a place to dump your content and link to it as needed.

pixxxels.org/

They used to be just Postimage, But had to split into separate feeds for adult and non-adult material to get around some cloudflare pricing stupidity.

huh, never heard of that site before.

o_O so...it's basically just a file hosting site? even after making an account real quick, theres pretty much nothing there at all aside from uploading.

hm, this website, Pixxxels, is...about as basic as it gets.

edit: CURSE YOU HTTP/HTTPS!

well, i have acounts on naughty machinima and inkbunny, but inkbunny don´t allow humans in the site and most of my works got humans, i´ll try and make my own tumbrl and see if i can make some changes on my DA account.

SumerianDragon said:
well, i have acounts on naughty machinima and inkbunny, but inkbunny don´t allow humans in the site and most of my works got humans, i´ll try and make my own tumbrl and see if i can make some changes on my DA account.

IS this some new rule because I've seen stuff with humans all over that site.

FoxFourOhFour said:
IS this some new rule because I've seen stuff with humans all over that site.

When porn is involved, humans can't be shown. This is to avoid legal complications, "easier to avoid this grey area."

Furrin_Gok said:
When porn is involved, humans can't be shown. This is to avoid legal complications, "easier to avoid this grey area."

especially when the humans in question are underage. wouldn't want MORE stupid child porn witch hunts, would we? cause that can and does happen. especially when it comes to the sort of people who are incapable of differentiating fiction and fantasy from reality.

treos said:
especially when the humans in question are underage. wouldn't want MORE stupid child porn witch hunts, would we? cause that can and does happen. especially when it comes to the sort of people who are incapable of differentiating fiction and fantasy from reality.

That is neither an issue nor pertains to the matter of such investigations. Any image depicting the violation of a juvenile character, fictitious in nature or otherwise, is strictly criminal by US Code Title 18; 1466A. Something cannot be a witch hunt when it seeks exactly what it intends to.

"Any person who knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that—

depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
is obscene; or

depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and

lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to penalty."

I agree with current law on the matter. If you weren't already aware, all fictional depictions of underage molestation are criminal if you live in the US.

notawerewolf said:
whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;

What about intersex and asexual?

I do remember a place of text in this whole What is child porn law that describes what kind of material is considered child porn or not, and it specifically states that it has to be realistically human-like, so a sculpture of a real child, a 3D model of one and a drawing of a realistic looking child are what is considered child porn, but not some piece of hentai with Izumi Konata. That's at least for the US, Canada and particularly Australia are more severe and in terms to what's child porn or not.

Also for DA, I have no idea if they changed their terms, but a long time ago, nudity was allowed, as long there weren't any sexual act or body fluids

notawerewolf said:
That is neither an issue nor pertains to the matter of such investigations. Any image depicting the violation of a juvenile character, fictitious in nature or otherwise, is strictly criminal by US Code Title 18; 1466A. Something cannot be a witch hunt when it seeks exactly what it intends to.

"Any person who knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that—

depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
is obscene; or

depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and

lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to penalty."

I agree with current law on the matter. If you weren't already aware, all fictional depictions of underage molestation are criminal if you live in the US.

i'm pretty sure that applies primarily to irl underage people and not fictional characters be they human or not such as cartoon characters. and in the case of 3d models, it has to look like a real person (not exactly easy given how crappy 3d looks in general in regards to porn).

if underage fictional characters were included then e621 could not legally host images of characters such as huey_duck and his 2 brothers or a large (majority?) portion of aogami's work here.

also, obscenity. iirc that varies from state to state and is therefore subjective to the judge's (whichever one it happens to be) own judgement of if the work in question is or isn't obscene.

long story short, if it isn't CP of an actual irl human child but rather a picture of a fictional character, human or otherwise, that someone drew then it's not really CP and thus not really illegal (unless i missed something though in that case i'd prefer an admin correct me).

why else would e621 be able to host pics with cub porn AND pic with underage humans present? if it was illegal for them to do so then you bet that content would get nuked ASAP.

BlueDingo said:
What about intersex and asexual?

I don't think either definition of Asexual would apply here. One definition rules out porn completely (reproduction), and the other is a sexual orientation best explained at another time.

kamimatsu said:
I don't think either definition of Asexual would apply here. One definition rules out porn completely (reproduction), and the other is a sexual orientation best explained at another time.

Since when is porn about reproduction? Porn is about sex and you can have sex with an asexual, though they probably wouldn't enjoy it much.

Anyway, I was just taking a jab at the inclusion of that statement because it leaves a potential loophole in fictional porn.

Neitsuke said:
That's at least for the US, Canada and particularly Australia are more severe and in terms to what's child porn or not.

17-year-old faced 10 years in prison and being labeled a 'sex offender' for possessing his own nude selfies

That's a loophole law, that would be the same in Canada and Australia, the deal over there is what's considered child porn is more broad and includes human-like cartoon characters

BlueDingo said:
17-year-old faced 10 years in prison and being labeled a 'sex offender' for possessing his own nude selfies

"Seventeen-year-old Cormega Copening, who took the photos of himself when he was 16"

so, someone under the age of 18 takes nude pictures of themselves makes said person a sex offender. that is some fan-fucking-tastic logic right there! wtf is wrong with people? as long as he isn't going around sharing or selling the pics or something then what makes this any worse than what someone does in the privacy of their own bedroom?

the stupidity of some laws is shocking sometimes.

better article at The Guardian bigger with more info.

BlueDingo said:
Since when is porn about reproduction? Porn is about sex and you can have sex with an asexual, though they probably wouldn't enjoy it much.

I meant that one definition means the species itself doesn't have sex because it doesn't require it to reproduce as a whole.

As for the other definition, in terms of individuals, I am aware you can have sex with an Asexual, as well as the lack of enjoyment. Very aware.

treos said:
so, someone under the age of 18 takes nude pictures of themselves makes said person a sex offender. that is some fan-fucking-tastic logic right there! wtf is wrong with people? as long as he isn't going around sharing or selling the pics or something then what makes this any worse than what someone does in the privacy of their own bedroom?

the stupidity of some laws is shocking sometimes.

Sometimes, the letter of the law is taken a little too strictly and fails to notice when the perpetrator and victim are the same person. At least he didn't send it to anyone because they would've been arrested too.

I wonder if there are any cases of people being arrested for stabbing themselves?

kamimatsu said:
I meant that one definition means the species itself doesn't have sex because it doesn't require it to reproduce as a whole.

As for the other definition, in terms of individuals, I am aware you can have sex with an Asexual, as well as the lack of enjoyment. Very aware.

I'm pretty sure the law doesn't (or shouldn't if it does) take gender identity into account with laws like this, so only the first definition of asexual would matter here. It would also only apply to human(oid)s so you won't get arrested for hoarding yoshi porn anytime soon.

BlueDingo said:
I'm pretty sure the law doesn't (or shouldn't if it does) take gender identity into account with laws like this,

Asexuality isn't a gender identity. It's a sexual orientation. It's based on who you find sexually attractive (in this case, nothing at all).

treos said:
i'm pretty sure that applies primarily to irl underage people and not fictional characters be they human or not such as cartoon characters. and in the case of 3d models, it has to look like a real person (not exactly easy given how crappy 3d looks in general in regards to porn).

if underage fictional characters were included then e621 could not legally host images of characters such as huey_duck and his 2 brothers or a large (majority?) portion of aogami's work here.

also, obscenity. iirc that varies from state to state and is therefore subjective to the judge's (whichever one it happens to be) own judgement of if the work in question is or isn't obscene.

long story short, if it isn't CP of an actual irl human child but rather a picture of a fictional character, human or otherwise, that someone drew then it's not really CP and thus not really illegal (unless i missed something though in that case i'd prefer an admin correct me).

why else would e621 be able to host pics with cub porn AND pic with underage humans present? if it was illegal for them to do so then you bet that content would get nuked ASAP.

Ihe law in question actually pretty explicitly states that it applies to cartoons and that it doesn't matter if the subject is real or not. It isn't a very well enforced law, likely for a few reasons including apathy towards it, lack of knowledge about it existing, it being difficult to find evidence of, and it being an obscenity law, but there are cases of prosecutions through it. The first one actually involved lolicon hentai and a guy who already had a record of possession of photographic child porn. There is another case of a comics collected arrested under the same law who did not possess photographic child porn.
https://www.wired.com/2009/06/email-obscenity/
https://www.wired.com/2009/05/manga-porn/

regsmutt said:
Ihe law in question actually pretty explicitly states that it applies to cartoons and that it doesn't matter if the subject is real or not. It isn't a very well enforced law, likely for a few reasons including apathy towards it, lack of knowledge about it existing, it being difficult to find evidence of, and it being an obscenity law, but there are cases of prosecutions through it. The first one actually involved lolicon hentai and a guy who already had a record of possession of photographic child porn. There is another case of a comics collected arrested under the same law who did not possess photographic child porn.
www.wired.com/2009/06/email-obscenity/
www.wired.com/2009/05/manga-porn/

e621 is hosted here in the US (i don't remember which state). if it's illegal for them to host pics with underage characters (human or otherwise) taking part in sexual activity then the staff would've removed said content by now yet they don't.

i'm sick of telling people that fiction is not the same as irl child porn. mainly because people like you simply refuse to acknowledge the difference between the 2 (one concerns real people irl, the other concerns fictional characters that aren't real irl) and instead insist that works of fiction are equally as bad as irl child porn which is in now way true.

take it up with the admin as to why such content is allowed on this site. tell them why hosting that stuff here is illegal here in the US.

treos said:
e621 is hosted here in the US (i don't remember which state). if it's illegal for them to host pics with underage characters (human or otherwise) taking part in sexual activity then the staff would've removed said content by now yet they don't.

i'm sick of telling people that fiction is not the same as irl child porn. mainly because people like you simply refuse to acknowledge the difference between the 2 (one concerns real people irl, the other concerns fictional characters that aren't real irl) and instead insist that works of fiction are equally as bad as irl child porn which is in now way true.

take it up with the admin as to why such content is allowed on this site. tell them why hosting that stuff here is illegal here in the US.

The admins have made a decision on it and I don't actually give a shit enough about it to debate it. I just wanted to clarify that the law being cited did reference cartoons and that enforcement involving cartoon drawings has happened. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ That's all I have to say on it.

treos said:
i'm sick of telling people that fiction is not the same as irl child porn. mainly because people like you simply refuse to acknowledge the difference between the 2 (one concerns real people irl, the other concerns fictional characters that aren't real irl) and instead insist that works of fiction are equally as bad as irl child porn which is in now way true.

take it up with the admin as to why such content is allowed on this site. tell them why hosting that stuff here is illegal here in the US.

I'll take defensive strawmanning for 500, Alex. I don't mean to derail this already nettlesome topic further, but way to take a post of relevant, dry information and slap an opinion onto it. If you legitimately took regsmutt's list of law enforcing a ban on fictional child molestation as "I think child porn irl is just as bad as shotacon!!", you likely need glasses.

Problem is those "cited laws" are not cited laws, but cited court cases. I've looked at it a while ago, maybe 2 years now, and the law did have a section that described what is considered child porn material or not and like I said before, it has to be realistically human, everything else isn't child porn.

That and "the admins have made a decision" doesn't make at all, since they're enforcing people to be 18 years old, which is by far easier to be avoided by the laws for lack of proof and implications (They can't technically monitor who's 18 or not) yet they clearly are banning people for that, but not doing anything for "child porn" where the material is by far easier to find and prosecute e621 for it if the law was actually against cartoon characters too ?

And i uploaded 3 more vídeos and Guess what? They got deleted too!!!! Looks like they are just deleting whatever i post now

SumerianDragon said:
And i uploaded 3 more vídeos and Guess what? They got deleted too!!!! Looks like they are just deleting whatever i post now

i'd look to see why but you gave no sources.

treos said:
i'd look to see why but you gave no sources.

Because this site is their only source, meaning when their stuff gets deleted, it's nowhere on the internet. But I will summ it up with single puush for you: https://puu.sh/ufkiw/30fdb942f6.png

Just a heads up, complaining that your stuff gets deleted, doesn't magically make them get prioritized over the quality standards.

Also I said this to other user via dmail: I try to keep left panel away and only look at the post itself when determining the quality. If you try to hide behind that they are only getting deleted because they were uploaded by you, you are wrong.

E: also don't try to make score higher, there was 2 videos, not 3.

SumerianDragon said:
And i uploaded 3 more vídeos and Guess what? They got deleted too!!!! Looks like they are just deleting whatever i post now

i recommend that you take it as sign and consider trying to improve your stuff

Mario69 said:
Because this site is their only source, meaning when their stuff gets deleted, it's nowhere on the internet. But I will summ it up with single puush for you: https://puu.sh/ufkiw/30fdb942f6.png

well... i can tell that's renamon (the gloves or whatever those are called) but... oh boy...

the textures on their own might be ok.

what type of lighting is that? or is that a result of a deformed 3d model?

not sure what's wrong with the left leg (right side of the pic) but there's clearly some clipping going on.

o.O should, what i assume is, the vagina look as if it's stretched downwards?

certainly not going to meet minimum quality.

Geometry clipping and folding into itself is never a good sign.

BlueDingo said:
Random edit: ://i.imgur.com/EsMvSNK.png

lol well played, mr. cleverbot.