As the title says, we want some feedback on our new and shiny uploading guidelines.
The goal for that wiki page is to give new and old users a comprehensive overview of what are good uploads and what likely won't be approved.

Most of that page is just finally in writing what we have enforced for over a year now, with only two new additions: We will no longer approve photographs that are not of traditional artwork or manipulated to turn the human(s) into furry characters. This means no more photos of plushies, statues, dakimakura, etc. etc.

I'm sad to see statues on the list, since that excludes a lot of ones that seem relevant. Such as beth_cavener_stichter.

How about adding mosaic images? By mosaic I mean the ones such as...
post #86668 post #484201
...which are software-generated and take no effort to make. ^{_{Not to mention that those are a total pain to tag.}}

Qmannn said:
What's the stance on images advertising commission prices and other products? I figure that the answer's most likely no, but I just wanted to be sure.

Would it be appropriate to add that information to the artist's wiki page instead or is it not allowed at all?

Ads are missing. Depends on the ratio of ad to image, as long as the actual advertising isn't detracting from the image it's okay. If it's a YCH advertisement with large letters over the entire image and the image looks like this or worse it won't be accepted.

Genjar said:
I'm sad to see statues on the list, since that excludes a lot of ones that seem relevant. Such as beth_cavener_stichter.

How about adding mosaic images? By mosaic I mean the ones such as...
post #86668 post #484201
...which are software-generated and take no effort to make. ^{_{Not to mention that those are a total pain to tag.}}

Those are low quality images like screenshots and other stuff, I guess we could make it more clear by giving them their own mention, but we already deleted those for quite some time now for quality reasons.

Statues sadly had to go to make sure we have as little exceptions as possible.

What about my traditional paintings or furry art? I know that most times scanning in and uploading art from a sketch book is accepted, but those are sketches, not paintings. And most "painted"-looking art styles are accepted too, so that said I'd like to so the same thing, except my art is actually painted on canvas, not styled to look like they are.

Before my painted art was kind of shoddy and not done well, and so was deleted for "does not meet minimum quality standards", but I never really figured out what exactly is considered the 'standard for minimum quality' so I just didn't upload any more.

Though to be honest, I now recognize that my paints were not so good back then, but my art skills have significantly improved since then and it takes me months at a time to paint things now to make them actually look as good as they do, but I still have refrained from uploading my pieces here because I am still not sure if they are acceptable dispute to the fact that they are actually scanned in from the canvas they are painted on before I upload them, and not just styled that way with some stupid, cheesy-looking filter.

The reason I ask is because I'm currently working on a peice with Treehugger(mlp) posing in reference to a recent episode of mlp.

Pretty easy list to understand and remember.

With 200px pixel art may fall bit short, however most of the time when I see pixel art under 200px it's full of complains how hard it is to see and then they are usually reuplodaded upscaled to 2x/3x without filtering/nearest neighbor.

EDIT: Speaking of upscales, maybe they and filters should be mentioned in the guidelines just in case? Because I have seen people gone literally insane when they realized waifu2x, handling it like it's miracle which turns any SD jpg image into HD.

Qmannn said:
What's the stance on images advertising commission prices and other products? I figure that the answer's most likely no, but I just wanted to be sure.

With some scenarios, advertisement is only possible way to have artwork on the site. This includes dakimakura designs, game and vr projects, cover or sample pages of comic on sale, images artist made specifically to be advertisement which contain artistic value themselves, etc.
I would personally still want to be able to see the art regardless it being an ad and ads are actually one form of art in themselves:
post #651223

Advertisements and distracting watermarks are usually pretty well tagged in any way so if someone does not wish to see advertisement with their precious adblocks in place and all, they can blacklist them. And if the artist themselves want to anger people by having huge patreon logo as censoring, hate is all on them for a reason at that point:
post #883365 post #877386
(do not know who made patreon_censored tag, when there's already patreon and censored tags which works better)

Looks pretty good, not really anything that stands out in a negative way.

New update: I added both ads and mosaics into the list.

Test bump.

Qmannn said:
Would either one of these photographs of a painted 3DS qualify for high quality photos of traditional art?

https://www.furaffinity.net/view/19445853/
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/77339564/20160321_233338.jpg

I'd say yes.

To clarify, a sequence of posts like this collection passes moderation because it's a "natural progression" even though it's one base picture right?

Yes.

leomole said:
To clarify, a sequence of posts like this collection passes moderation because it's a "natural progression" even though it's one base picture right?

What the heck? I thought those kinds of sets got all but four deleted.

Mario69 said:
Pretty easy list to understand and remember.

With 200px pixel art may fall bit short, however most of the time when I see pixel art under 200px it's full of complains how hard it is to see and then they are usually reuplodaded upscaled to 2x/3x without filtering/nearest neighbor.

EDIT: Speaking of upscales, maybe they and filters should be mentioned in the guidelines just in case? Because I have seen people gone literally insane when they realized waifu2x, handling it like it's miracle which turns any SD jpg image into HD.

With some scenarios, advertisement is only possible way to have artwork on the site. This includes dakimakura designs, game and vr projects, cover or sample pages of comic on sale, images artist made specifically to be advertisement which contain artistic value themselves, etc.
I would personally still want to be able to see the art regardless it being an ad and ads are actually one form of art in themselves:
post #651223

Advertisements and distracting watermarks are usually pretty well tagged in any way so if someone does not wish to see advertisement with their precious adblocks in place and all, they can blacklist them. And if the artist themselves want to anger people by having huge patreon logo as censoring, hate is all on them for a reason at that point:
post #883365 post #877386
(do not know who made patreon_censored tag, when there's already patreon and censored tags which works better)

You know a web-developer can stop someone enterally from entering a/their website if the person has a type of ad blocker installed?

I don´t know if this is the right place to this question but anyway,here are:I´d like know if I can upload a fanfic with characters from webcomic Sabrina Online.

B.Naughty said:
I don´t know if this is the right place to this question but anyway,here are:I´d like know if I can upload a fanfic with characters from webcomic Sabrina Online.

As long as it's a furry comic, of high enough quality, and not from an artist on the DNP list (or pay content), then yes, you can upload it.

Unfortunatelly,I don´t know how to draws,not make comics either.My work will be have only text.If some other member wants make a comic from it,I will love this!

NotMeNotYou said:
As long as it's a furry comic, of high enough quality, and not from an artist on the DNP list (or pay content), then yes, you can upload it.

Can I put a fanfic that have only text?

B.Naughty said:
Can I put a fanfic that have only text?

No, we're strictly about visual works.

NotMeNotYou said:
No, we're strictly about visual works.

Two questions more:
1)Here is possible join with someone to make a story having my fanfic as script?Of course,each one will have the suitable recognition.
e.g:anyone will make the comic will put their name saying that done the drawings,and I will be nominated as the script author.
2)Do you know some site that admit furry porn written fanfics?

B.Naughty said:
Two questions more:
1)Here is possible join with someone to make a story having my fanfic as script?Of course,each one will have the suitable recognition.
e.g:anyone will make the comic will put their name saying that done the drawings,and I will be nominated as the script author.
2)Do you know some site that admit furry porn written fanfics?

1) The writer can be credited as artist.
2) http://furrynetwork.com, furaffinity.net, www.sofurry.com/, inkbunny.net,...

B.Naughty said:
Two questions more:
1)Here is possible join with someone to make a story having my fanfic as script?Of course,each one will have the suitable recognition.
e.g:anyone will make the comic will put their name saying that done the drawings,and I will be nominated as the script author.
2)Do you know some site that admit furry porn written fanfics?

To answer the second question, try http://www.furaffinity.net/search/. You may even find the answer to the first, but that relies on a bit of luck.

Furrin_Gok said:
To answer the second question, try http://www.furaffinity.net/search/. You may even find the answer to the first, but that relies on a bit of luck.

Thanks by idea!I will make this.

PSA: I just updated this.

Link

Notable additions:

• Quality standards at the bottom
• spiel at the top that the DNP List and Posting Abuse are complementary to the guidelines and need to be minded as well
• spiel about old submissions and that we won't judge them under current standards
• spiel about humans, fancy humans, and human non-humans ("gems", zombies, ghosts, etc.)

NotMeNotYou said:
Quality standards at the bottom

i'm sure a lot of artists, new or not, will be glad to see this addition to that page.

NotMeNotYou said:

PSA: I just updated this.

Link

Notable additions:

• Quality standards at the bottom
• spiel at the top that the DNP List and Posting Abuse are complementary to the guidelines and need to be minded as well
• spiel about old submissions and that we won't judge them under current standards
• spiel about humans, fancy humans, and human non-humans ("gems", zombies, ghosts, etc.)

could you please clarify what you mean by "solid artistic principles"?

Just kinda get the impression that you are upping quality standards to the expectation that the artist is a master at their craft and anyone with even the slightest imperfection will no longer be allowed. just want clarification on this.

Ruku said:
could you please clarify what you mean by "solid artistic principles"?

Just kinda get the impression that you are upping quality standards to the expectation that the artist is a master at their craft and anyone with even the slightest imperfection will no longer be allowed. just want clarification on this.

We didn't increase or change anything with the quality standards. "Solid grasp of artistic principles" simply means that the upload in questions needs to look decent, e.g. that the artist knows the basics of art (anatomy, perspective, color theory, shadows / shading, and how those interact with each other) and can apply those in their creations. It doesn't need to be perfect, not everything needs to be present in the image, but it does need to be visible that the artist knows what they are doing.

Yet another update (that was long overdue).

Split of human relevancy into its own section called Humans and e621, and added anchors to all section for simple linking.
This means [[uploading_guidelines#good]], [[uploading_guidelines#bad]], [[uploading_guidelines#quality]], and [[uploading_guidelines#humans]] now work and directly link to the corresponding section.

No other changes.

The new guidelines specify anatomical changes to make a human site-relevant. How about clearly fake animal ears? I think that was allowed under previous guidelines.

Animal body parts make humans site-relevant. How about nonhumans? Do horsecock tentacles count? Is a toaster with car ears relevant to the site?

Thanks for bearing with me exploring the minutiae.

leomole said:
How about clearly fake animal ears?

A human wearing costume items is still a human.

I don't get point of the other questions:

• Non-humans are already allowed.
• Tentacles are already allowed.
• Animate_inanimate is already allowed.

What about humanized?
Canonically furry characters drawn as humans, either to show how they would look like as humans or just for the sake of it.

https://www.furaffinity.net/view/4120280/
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/4120313/
(only the furry page is a part of the comic)

https://sakimichan.deviantart.com/art/Nick-n-Judy-637462608

I think it was looked down upon because MLP community abused the crap out of it, but that's a very specific case.
And lots of MLP art actually makes it through the rules with wings or hooves on humans.

https://www.furaffinity.net/view/21713525/

Either way, I think it should be mentioned in the guidelines.

It doesn't matter who the character is or what the character usually is. If it's a pure human in that particular image that image will be deleted. On the other hand if it's a human with hooves or wings it's no longer a pure human and will be allowed like all other humanoid/nekomimi.

Do remember that we treat all images in a vacuum (unless it's a comic or image sequence, those are judged as one for approval or deletion only) as such it absolutely doesn't matter what else there is outside of that image. If it's a pure human it will get deleted, if it's a humanoid with animal traits it will be approved.

leomole said:
The new guidelines specify anatomical changes to make a human site-relevant. How about clearly fake animal ears? I think that was allowed under previous guidelines.

Costumes haven't counted in the past two years, as such nothing changes. Non-humans are what's relevant and the section is supposed to make that clear. Animated objects (including cat-toasters or normal living toasters) are still relevant.

Then why was this declared irrelevant? It has a humanoid in the top right corner, a cat in the bottom left corner and an animated object at middle right, three things which are allowed.

NotMeNotYou said:
Costumes haven't counted in the past two years

OK thanks.

Wodahseht said:
Animate_inanimate is already allowed.

I mean what if it's literally a toaster with cat ears. Does that make it animate? Because I assume no, it's an inanimate object that won't get approved even if it has cat ears and/or tail.

Also what makes these posts site-relevant? They look human only to me. I think post #1062754 has nonhuman genitalia but the others I don't understand.

leomole said:
OK thanks.

I mean what if it's literally a toaster with cat ears. Does that make it animate? Because I assume no, it's an inanimate object that won't get approved even if it has cat ears and/or tail.

Also what makes these posts site-relevant? They look human only to me. I think post #1062754 has nonhuman genitalia but the others I don't understand.

Not sure if that exsample would count since that just seems to be a regular toaster with fake cat ears put on with no life in it but a good fairly good exsample would be living_aircraft...also adding that animal features are not necessarily required, something like this would coant http://www.diszine.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/The-Brave-Little-Toaster-300x239.jpg

Concerning that group of images, they kinda fall in the grey area of humanized anthros, in this case my little pony characters that in canon series have been depicted both feral,anthro and human...

Ruku said:
Concerning that group of images, they kinda fall in the grey area of humanized anthros, in this case my little pony characters that in canon series have been depicted both feral,anthro and human...

I would've thought they'd count as discoloured humans which isn't allowed (a different skin color does not make a human relevant), except for the charizard one which looks like a human in a costume. Also, wouldn't EG version of MLP characters fall into the discoloured human category since they are canonically human?

BlueDingo said:
I would've thought they'd count as discoloured humans which isn't allowed (a different skin color does not make a human relevant), except for the charizard one which looks like a human in a costume.

Not if they are from a series where they are naturally feral, then it counts as humanized but as said before my little pony has been human in canon on their most recent spin off so this franchise is rather tricky as is probly why no one bothered with those. Note that this is what I take the rules as, would still wait for staff to verify^^

leomole said:
I mean what if it's literally a toaster with cat ears. Does that make it animate? Because I assume no, it's an inanimate object that won't get approved even if it has cat ears and/or tail.

NotMeNotYou said:
[...]
Animated objects (including cat-toasters or normal living toasters) are still relevant.

If it's a literal toaster with cat ears taped to it or a cat-face drawn on it it's irrelevant. If it's a living toaster (as in Disney's Beauty and the Beast kind of living toaster) it's relevant.

leomole said:
Also what makes these posts site-relevant? They look human only to me. I think post #1062754 has nonhuman genitalia but the others I don't understand.

These shouldn't have been approved. They're brightly colored humans thus irrelevant.

Thanks for clarifying, I understand it now.

NotMeNotYou said:
These shouldn't have been approved. They're brightly colored humans thus irrelevant.

Is there a way to flag these posts for deletion?

leomole said:
Is there a way to flag these posts for deletion?

NMNY already cleared those specific ones. But if you mean in general, I'd personally recommend first step being to send message to approver pointing out posts and why you think there was a mistake...we all make them, especially if in a rush or trying to clear out a lot of pending images. Just be polite, please?

Definitely shouldn't flag if reason isn't one of the listed reasons though...that just confuses things since janitor/admin reviewing is usually looking specifically for the issue flagged - and can end up with someone trying to point out a valid issue getting in trouble for misuse of site tools. :/

leomole said:
Is there a way to flag these posts for deletion?

You aren't allowed to flag for relevancy. As Wodahseht said, contact the janitor in question or alternatively any of the admins.

Wodahseht said:
send message to approver pointing out posts and why you think there was a mistake

NotMeNotYou said:
contact the janitor in question or alternatively any of the admins.

Okay, mistakes are rare but now I know what to do, thanks.

And another update.

This time a section about ads has been added.

Advertisements:

Acceptable ads are those with artistic and entertainment value that far outweigh their nature to sell goods or services. Ads that only advertise goods and services are not acceptable and the uploader or artist will need to purchase advertisement space here instead.

• YCH auctions, censored patreon images, or other censored paysite previews are almost always unacceptable, thus expect these to get deleted
• advertising your patreon or paysite in form of a signature on any given image is perfectly fine
• advertising your patreon or paysite in the description of art you have created / commissioned is also perfectly fine

This is still somewhat under construction, so if you have any feedback (especially on the wording) it'd be greatly appreciated.

NotMeNotYou said:
This is still somewhat under construction, so if you have any feedback (especially on the wording) it'd be greatly appreciated.

The new section for advertisements seems perfectly fine.

However, I believe that the overall guidelines could be more effective with visual examples of 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable' images to help clarify the differences for new users. Including these examples on the uploading guidelines page itself may produce unnecessary clutter, a link to a wiki entry of "uploading guidelines: visual examples", or something similar, would be better.

On the topic of guidelines and the wiki, I think something should be do to make forum #169987 (currently linked in the howto:source page) easier to find. Even though I know about it, I often have trouble finding it. I think that adding a link to it in the uploading guidelines would also be very helpful.

NotMeNotYou said:

PSA: I just updated this.

Link

Notable additions:

• Quality standards at the bottom
• spiel at the top that the DNP List and Posting Abuse are complementary to the guidelines and need to be minded as well
• spiel about old submissions and that we won't judge them under current standards
• spiel about humans, fancy humans, and human non-humans ("gems", zombies, ghosts, etc.)

I know this was 4 months ago but could you please clarify about the steven universe thing? Are the considered human now?

ThatOneNerd said:
I know this was 4 months ago but could you please clarify about the steven universe thing? Are the considered human now?

Any character that visually appears as a human (even if a brightly colored human) will be considered human for the purpose of the uploading guidelines.
This means that as long as those Steven Universe gems look like brightly colored humans they are not relevant enough to stay. If they have visible anatomical features that separate them further from humans than their skin color does then they will become more relevant and might be allowed on their own.

Ok thanks!
(somehow I didn't expect you to respond)

ThatOneNerd said:
I know this was 4 months ago but could you please clarify about the steven universe thing? Are the considered human now?

Here are some examples of steven universe posts I would find relevant:

post #1153069 post #1149175 post #1128238 post #1098512 post #1097102 post #1095049 post #1091378

If the only way a photograph will be accepted is if it's "So good it looks like it was taken by a scanner anyways," why even mention photogrpahs being allowed?

Sure, a single extra image being deleted over this at worst is going to up my deleted count to the fourth needed to lower my upload limit from a whopping 72 to a still whopping 71, big whoop, but still, if I could know before hand that it's going to be deleted, I could save us all some time and effort by just not uploading it. Some users may be clinging onto that hope of reaching a limit of eleven, only to drop instead to nine.

Furrin_Gok said:
If the only way a photograph will be accepted is if it's "So good it looks like it was taken by a scanner anyways," why even mention photogrpahs being allowed?

Sure, a single extra image being deleted over this at worst is going to up my deleted count to the fourth needed to lower my upload limit from a whopping 72 to a still whopping 71, big whoop, but still, if I could know before hand that it's going to be deleted, I could save us all some time and effort by just not uploading it. Some users may be clinging onto that hope of reaching a limit of eleven, only to drop instead to nine.

A good enough camera will set you back about $200 and the lighting requirements can be achieved by either having a clear day or investing into some basic LEDs.
"Impeccable" quality does not mean unachievable, it's just not able to be done by a phone under someone's dimmed kitchen lights.

A low end flatbed scanner is a better idea, setting you back $60-80 retail, maybe $30-40 on sale, or free since people throw out printers with attached scanners.

http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-cheap-scanner/
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2373832,00.asp

I imagine if you already had a phone with a good camera, as they are getting better every year, then you could buy two clamp light fixtures for $8-10, a 2 pack of daylight LED bulbs for $4-10, and some kind of smartphone tripod for $10.

New Update: Addition of a small elaboration of edits and bases under Quality, as well as a small addition of auctions under bad things to upload.

• Advertisements: Low quality ads or ads without artistic value
• If the image has only a small part of it advertising something (like a footer with the patreon link) then it is very much welcome here
• Adoptables/character auctions, YCH auctions, or any other types ads for auctions are not permitted

Edits

• edits of images need to be at least on the same level of quality as the original
• low effort edits (adding stories, changing text, bucket fill coloring, cutting out parts, etc) are not allowed
• Translating speech bubbles from any language into english is permitted, however.
• We only accept an english translation and the original language, we will not host additional translations
• Coloring "bases" (template images) are not permitted if they haven't been performed by the original artist of the base
• we will only accept up to 5 version of any given base

NotMeNotYou said:
[...]

*versions

fewrahuxo said:
*versions

FUCKixed.