Again, I don't like having to make all these posts anymore than you enjoy reading them, considering how often it happens.

As of lately, a lot of my art has been deleted for not meeting "minimum quality standards". I'm not a spectacular artist by any means, but I feel they meet at least minimum standards of quality. I know what all of the guidelines for uploading are, but I don't see how my art isn't complying to those guidelines. They don't break any of the rules, so I don't see the problem. At the same time, none of my old art, which is considerably worse, was ever deleted for not meeting quality standards, which almost is like turning the knife.
I just want to know what I'm doing so wrong, and equally importantly, a basic idea of how to fix it. It's in a way discouraging, because in my opinion, not meeting minimum quality says a lot more about your skill as an artist than meeting minimum quality standards. I don't want to keep uploading things thinking they're of high enough quality, only for them to be deleted.

Here are some of my art that I have tried to submit.
http://pre15.deviantart.net/3ee3/th/pre/f/2017/061/2/6/26bd838c8875a9da93a13d80187d8141-db0ydqn.jpg
http://pre08.deviantart.net/ec24/th/pre/f/2016/319/5/6/original_sonic_characters_3_by_duckhunt_dog-daoivla.jpg

Thanks.

Are you going to do this every time something of yours is deleted?

BlueDingo said:
Are you going to do this every time something of yours is deleted?

No, of course not.

The site doesn't have specifics on that rule, some may pass some may not.

Ask the person who denied your post why it was deleted.

If they ignore you then it's safer to just not post here and try other sites like FA or DA.

I think a safe way to judge whether or not a piece of art is "worthy" enough to be on the site, is to imagine a whole page of it on the posts index and then comparing it to how it all normally looks like.

You put less detail into those two than your normal ones. Some bits of the anatomy came out a bit wobbly as a result.

Furrin_Gok said:
You put less detail into those two than your normal ones. Some bits of the anatomy came out a bit wobbly as a result.

Okay, the anatomy, but what about it in a general way of speaking. (It's probably consistent throughout my art)

But yeah, isn't it kinda to be expected that they have less detail, seeing as they're only character/species designs? Though the majority of art I've submitted is in that same vain..

Duck_Hunt_Dog said:
Okay, the anatomy, but what about it in a general way of speaking. (It's probably

But yeah, isn't it kinda to be expected that they have less detail, seeing as they're only character/species designs? Though the majority of art I've submitted is in that same vain..

Not really. Your approved images aren't so wobbly. The eeveelutions image has bad anatomy all over the place, wile the sonic characters has a few bad faces. Ratte's reason for deleting might be different than what flaws I'm seeing, though, so contact her about it.

Pro tip : Draw using SAI, [sketch wiggly colored outlines of recognizable characters] and then have 0 worries about your art getting deleted for being low quality.

Also what in the hell is going on now. I've recently noticed some really neat, clean looking art from an artist who posts his own work here, and they all got deleted for this same reason (edo_nova status:deleted) A shame there isn't any source at all to prove how silly this is getting

Actually, found the source, here's an example of what was uploaded http://www.furaffinity.net/view/22526486/

i recommend drawing in bigger size. i mean instead of cramming 947856 really tiny drawings in one paper, draw one or two things in much larger size. drawing too small with even a slightly too dull and poor quality pencils tend to make it look very bad and it easily makes anatomical mistakes stand out.

Neitsuke said:
Pro tip : Draw using SAI, [sketch wiggly colored outlines of recognizable characters] and then have 0 worries about your art getting deleted for being low quality.

Also what in the hell is going on now. I've recently noticed some really neat, clean looking art from an artist who posts his own work here, and they all got deleted for this same reason (edo_nova status:deleted) A shame there isn't any source at all to prove how silly this is getting

I've deleted those. Upscaled photo backgrounds (up to 8x zoom or more), upscaled drawn artwork, bad editing (one had left over colors from what I assume are the base that was traced over).

If those are actually traced official artwork (Only have seen the Gastrodon) Then actually, makes a lot of sense. I really, really hope this isn't the case

Neitsuke said:
If those are actually traced official artwork (Only have seen the Gastrodon) Then actually, makes a lot of sense. I really, really hope this isn't the case

I didn't go base hunting but the background was an mlp stable, the character was Midna but had some traces around the border of RD's color scheme. As such I am greatly suspicious of those.

I quickly looked for the Gastrodon and, I cannot see any proof that has been traced whatsoever. The official arts don't match with the pose and how the neck is turning around.

I get that he's using stock backgrounds, but some artists actually do that without any sort of repercussions, heck I was doing that 2 years ago at the time when I was a poor excuse of an artist and my pictures were doing fine.

After looking more at his gallery, it does seem like some pictures are at least, very reference heavy, but I don't think all of them are the case, like Celesteela, but I'm probably missing something.

I don't know if that's possible, but adding more info on the deleted field would really help, because for cases like these, it really felt like they were deleted for an absolutely different reason than being traces

NotMeNotYou said:
I've deleted those. Upscaled photo backgrounds (up to 8x zoom or more), upscaled drawn artwork, bad editing (one had left over colors from what I assume are the base that was traced over).

You deleted them for something that wasn't even the focus...? Ouch. The characters themselves at least looked good. Would they have been approved if it simply had a white background?

Neitsuke said:
I quickly looked for the Gastrodon and, I cannot see any proof that has been traced whatsoever. The official arts don't match with the pose and how the neck is turning around.

I get that he's using stock backgrounds, but some artists actually do that without any sort of repercussions, heck I was doing that 2 years ago at the time when I was a poor excuse of an artist and my pictures were doing fine.

After looking more at his gallery, it does seem like some pictures are at least, very reference heavy, but I don't think all of them are the case, like Celesteela, but I'm probably missing something.

I don't know if that's possible, but adding more info on the deleted field would really help, because for cases like these, it really felt like they were deleted for an absolutely different reason than being traces

If they had been deleted for being a trace, they would have that as a reason. Again, quality is the key here, bad upscaled backgrounds, upscaled and thus heavily aliased line work, bad editing.
Also using the grass brush that comes with Photoshop.

Furrin_Gok said:
You deleted them for something that wasn't even the focus...? Ouch. The characters themselves at least looked good. Would they have been approved if it simply had a white background?

Some of them would probably have been approved, but definitely not all of them.

Neitsuke said:
Pro tip : Draw using SAI, [sketch wiggly colored outlines of recognizable characters] and then have 0 worries about your art getting deleted for being low quality.

or use Krita, which is like SAI only it works everywhere and is open-source ^jokes

Furrin_Gok said:
Not really. Your approved images aren't so wobbly. The eeveelutions image has bad anatomy all over the place, wile the sonic characters has a few bad faces. Ratte's reason for deleting might be different than what flaws I'm seeing, though, so contact her about it.

Yeah, it was for the same reasons. I just don't get what's wrong with me that I'm not seeing these flaws when they're so rudimentary to others...

Duck_Hunt_Dog said:
Yeah, it was for the same reasons. I just don't get what's wrong with me that I'm not seeing these flaws when they're so rudimentary to others...

You normally draw anthro characters, it's possible that the feral legs aren't your forte. As for the faces... It's not really all that obvious when looking for specific little things. It's just, I look at the character and I see something 'off' about it.

Duck_Hunt_Dog said:
Yeah, it was for the same reasons. I just don't get what's wrong with me that I'm not seeing these flaws when they're so rudimentary to others...

People aren't born able to see their own flaws as easily as another person's... I believe there was a study about that, but I don't have the links to prove it, just the rudimentary learnings passed along.

honestly i don't see why you would be rejected when they look just fine to me. i have my doubts anybody is looking at your work from a traditional "art critic" point of view, but instead basing an opinion from what they traditionally consider to be "good art", which isn't fair to you, because you do make good art, though i can't change why your art keeps getting deleted.

fewrahuxo said:
honestly i don't see why you would be rejected when they look just fine to me. i have my doubts anybody is looking at your work from a traditional "art critic" point of view, but instead basing an opinion from what they traditionally consider to be "good art", which isn't fair to you, because you do make good art, though i can't change why your art keeps getting deleted.

Ahahaha. No. You have no idea what you're talking about at all.

As for the whole OP: I have offered to help you and you have declined those offers. If you don't like that a place has quality standards before posting, either check with someone to see if they're worthy of approval (you know, like I offered) or simply don't post. I have pointed out the issues I see that you readily ignored because you didn't like it. That's on you, not the one(s) deleting your posts.

Ratte said:
[...]

Ratte, has laughing at somebody ever made them agree with you?

fewrahuxo said:
Ratte, has laughing at somebody ever made them agree with you?

Whether or not you agree with me has no bearing on whether or not you are wrong, like now. You make quite a heavy-handed assumption that is, uh, wrong.

I offered help, it went ignored, they posted something, both another staffmember and I agreed the post should be deleted, here we are yet again because we don't like quality standards. Rinse, repeat.

Ratte said:
[...]

maybe I am wrong; i'm not against that. in fact, it would be in my interest to be right most of the time, so that nobody would have to inform me of such. editing a booru doesn't give me any claim to being right, especially against someone with much more experience in both drawing and editing.

it so happens that most people aren't as experienced in those things, and have to base their opinions on what they've been exposed to before, namely the proper_art that shows up in museums, and the official_art that companies like putting out. in most cases, these are what we would consider traditionally good pieces.

i don't argue with the quality standards, no. if their work isn't up to par for the booru, i have no say in that. but i don't believe the artist is a bad one, and i enjoy seeing what they create, no matter how discouraged they may be in part of their work being deleted.

fewrahuxo said:
maybe I am wrong; i'm not against that. in fact, it would be in my interest to be right most of the time, so that nobody would have to inform me of such. editing a booru doesn't give me any claim to being right, especially against someone with much more experience in both drawing and editing.

it so happens that most people aren't as experienced in those things, and have to base their opinions on what they've been exposed to before, namely the proper_art that shows up in museums, and the official_art that companies like putting out. in most cases, these are what we would consider traditionally good pieces.

i don't argue with the quality standards, no. if their work isn't up to par for the booru, i have no say in that. but i don't believe the artist is a bad one, and i enjoy seeing what they create, no matter how discouraged they may be in part of their work being deleted.

Then you can visit their DeviantArt. Taking deletions personally is really pointless when I delete several things from several people every day.

If your art is constantly hovering around the minimum quality standard, maybe you should stick to DA/FA? The goal of those websites is to allow artists to publish, share and improve their art. The goal of this site is to archive high quality furry art.

Ratte said:
As for the whole OP: I have offered to help you and you have declined those offers. If you don't like that a place has quality standards, before posting, either check with someone to see if they're worthy of approval (you know, like I offered) or simply don't post. I have pointed out the issues I see that you readily ignored because you didn't like it. That's on you, not the one(s) deleting your posts.

I didn't understand what you meant when you had said it, and I wanted multiple opinions, so..

I'm not taking it personally. I'm just making sure I'm not carrying these problems throughout my art because if so, then it's probably going to be deleted by the likes of you. Getting a somewhat vague answer to what's the problem only sort of helped, as even if you say "it's the anatomy", that doesn't particularly give me the information I need to be able to correct it. I'm not gonna keep asking you alone for something in that vain, because it's not something that only you can answer, and you're a busy person, so just asking through the forums was more beneficial to me.

Oh yeah, thanks for that, Furrin Gok. Now I see what you meant.