I went to sleep and suddenly overnight my animations all disappeared without any sort of warning. I didn't figure it was an admin's doing because all of the posts were already approved and were of decently high quality of pixel animation.
Most of my animations had high counts of favorites, in some cases over 200, which I know doesn't really matter if they aren't quality, but I'm having trouble figuring out why they were all removed?
Thanks!

BuiTheBuizel said:
I went to sleep and suddenly overnight my animations all disappeared without any sort of warning. I didn't figure it was an admin's doing because all of the posts were already approved and were of decently high quality of pixel animation.
Most of my animations had high counts of favorites, in some cases over 200, which I know doesn't really matter if they aren't quality, but I'm having trouble figuring out why they were all removed?
Thanks!

Did you try contacting the person who took them down?

Thirtyeight said:
Did you try contacting the person who took them down?

The posts were completely deleted, I have no way to know who took them down. At least, I don't think I do.

I was actually asking why those were approved to begin with, but today it was other janitor that was asking the same and I told them to get rid of them if they also deem that way.

I can understand it can seem extremely shitty when stuff gets approved and then later on deleted, but even staff makes mistakes sometimes and this was one of those mistakes.

Upvotes, favorites, etc. does not count towards approval. I have deleted a lot of things with tons of upvotes and favorites earlier. We also wouldn't need manual curation if the liked stuff was the one to stay.

Problem with those were artistic quality. Those were extremely low framerate animations using official sprites from games with some extremely slightly modified assets thrown in. These did have tons of pornographic value for those familiar with the game, which isn't relevant for approval. Also should've technically count as edit, which we have seperate quality standards for.

BuiTheBuizel said:
The posts were completely deleted, I have no way to know who took them down. At least, I don't think I do.

If you go to your profile, clicking deleted posts gives you post IDs and deletion reasons, clicking post ID brings you to the deleted post page which also lists who handled deletion.

Yeah, those should not have been approved to begin with.

BuiTheBuizel said:
The posts were completely deleted, I have no way to know who took them down. At least, I don't think I do.

Go to your profile, click the number of deleted posts and you'll get a list of them. Click the post id and you'll get to the post. at the top of a deleted post's page is the deletion message, containing reason for deletion and who deleted it
example

Mairo said:
I was actually asking why those were approved to begin with, but today it was other janitor that was asking the same and I told them to get rid of them if they also deem that way.

I can understand it can seem extremely shitty when stuff gets approved and then later on deleted, but even staff makes mistakes sometimes and this was one of those mistakes.

Upvotes, favorites, etc. does not count towards approval. I have deleted a lot of things with tons of upvotes and favorites earlier. We also wouldn't need manual curation if the liked stuff was the one to stay.

Problem with those were artistic quality. Those were extremely low framerate animations using official sprites from games with some extremely slightly modified assets thrown in. These did have tons of pornographic value for those familiar with the game, which isn't relevant for approval.

If you go to your profile, clicking deleted posts gives you post IDs and deletion reasons, clicking post ID brings you to the deleted post page which also lists who handled deletion.

Ah, okay! Thanks, Mairo, that seems fair. Yeah, I just figured since they were already approved there was already a consensus that they were all fair.

Now, I do have a question about what you mean by the low framrate bit, most of my animations were done in 100ms or 10 frames = one second. Too me, that doesn't seem like a very low framerate at all.

That in mind, are they being taken down for being edited assets from other games, or are they being taken down because that frame rate is still too low? Or, does it have something to do with them being pixel animations?

Thanks for the speedy reply!

BuiTheBuizel said:
Ah, okay! Thanks, Mairo, that seems fair. Yeah, I just figured since they were already approved there was already a consensus that they were all fair.

Now, I do have a question about what you mean by the low framrate bit, most of my animations were done in 100ms or 10 frames = one second. Too me, that doesn't seem like a very low framerate at all.

That in mind, are they being taken down for being edited assets from other games, or are they being taken down because that frame rate is still too low? Or, does it have something to do with them being pixel animations?

Thanks for the speedy reply!

Pixel_art is fine so long as it meets quality standards

The animations were not only low framerate, but were very minimally edited sprites ripped directly from the game with very little change to them. These factors combined, imho, made it really not of high enough quality to be approved.

BuiTheBuizel said:
Ah, okay! Thanks, Mairo, that seems fair. Yeah, I just figured since they were already approved there was already a consensus that they were all fair.

Now, I do have a question about what you mean by the low framrate bit, most of my animations were done in 100ms or 10 frames = one second. Too me, that doesn't seem like a very low framerate at all.

That in mind, are they being taken down for being edited assets from other games, or are they being taken down because that frame rate is still too low? Or, does it have something to do with them being pixel animations?

Thanks for the speedy reply!

10 FPS is extremely low in general. Sometimes traditional animation does go below it, but even those are usually at least 12 FPS and higher and considering that this is game assets moved around, that's really extremely low FPS. Consider that games themselves usually run either 30 or 60 FPS, so if your aim is to match the games aesthetic. ~16 FPS is where brain starts to see the animation as individual frames rather than animation.

Even if the framerate was higher, the thing as whole did feel extremely soulless, it was moving around couple assets on set background element, this feels like something I did as kid with Windows Movie Maker and MS Paint.

They were primarily taken down because you were essentially editing exsisting game assets. Our guidelines do not allow game asset rips and edits like this are handled based on edit quality standards.
uploading_guidelines#quality -> Edits
So what this means that we are judging what you did with the game assets, not the animation as whole because the assets will look great by default, them being taken from official nintendo game after all. Also considering the size of the assets being really small, the pixel animation of those is not extremely hard or demand immense talent.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Pixel_art is fine so long as it meets quality standards

The animations were not only low framerate, but were very minimally edited sprites ripped directly from the game with very little change to them. These factors combined, imho, made it really not of high enough quality to be approved.

My question would be why they were approved then? If I remember correctly, several different people approved my animations, so they all thought it was high enough quality.

I know you guys are above that, or at least I'm pretty sure you are, and I do respect that authority that you have here. Is there any way to appeal this, though? Even though the sprites are ripped, I spend hours actually animating them, a lot of work goes into them.

As stated, I respect both of your opinions on the matter, but if there is any way I could appeal at least a few of them, I'd like to. If not, then that's fine as well, I understand.

BuiTheBuizel said:
My question would be why they were approved then? If I remember correctly, several different people approved my animations, so they all thought it was high enough quality.

I know you guys are above that, or at least I'm pretty sure you are, and I do respect that authority that you have here. Is there any way to appeal this, though? Even though the sprites are ripped, I spend hours actually animating them, a lot of work goes into them.

As stated, I respect both of your opinions on the matter, but if there is any way I could appeal at least a few of them, I'd like to. If not, then that's fine as well, I understand.

They were most likely approved by mistake and shouldn't have been approved to begin with, I'm sorry to say. My apologies

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
They were most likely approved by mistake and shouldn't have been approved to begin with, I'm sorry to say. My apologies

Well, that sucks quite a lot. Thanks for the help, pal.

BuiTheBuizel said:
Well, that sucks quite a lot. Thanks for the help, pal.

Yeah I'm sorry about that. :(

I hope you at least have a good day, and we're here to help you with anything in the future

BuiTheBuizel said:
My question would be why they were approved then? If I remember correctly, several different people approved my animations, so they all thought it was high enough quality.

I know you guys are above that, or at least I'm pretty sure you are, and I do respect that authority that you have here. Is there any way to appeal this, though? Even though the sprites are ripped, I spend hours actually animating them, a lot of work goes into them.

As stated, I respect both of your opinions on the matter, but if there is any way I could appeal at least a few of them, I'd like to. If not, then that's fine as well, I understand.

increasing labour time (the amount of hours spent working on something) does not guarantee an improvement in quality or artistic value. you can end up with a phenomenon known as diminishing returns. labour must be coupled with accumulated relevant knowledge in order for it to be more productive (and reach the point of diminishing returns much later).

why do people, on average, tend to prefer simple uncoloured sketches that take less labour time to produce than low-resolution pixel art animations that use ripped sprites? it's a multifaceted question, but i think the most important point to understand is that labour time is not the only variable that determines artistic value.

BuiTheBuizel said:
My question would be why they were approved then? If I remember correctly, several different people approved my animations, so they all thought it was high enough quality.

As has been said, we're human and we do make mistakes sometimes. I think I initially looked past them just because I wasn't familiar with them as being game sprites. :) I don't think I've played a pokemon since gold and silver :)

I know you guys are above that, or at least I'm pretty sure you are, and I do respect that authority that you have here. Is there any way to appeal this, though? Even though the sprites are ripped, I spend hours actually animating them, a lot of work goes into them.

As stated, I respect both of your opinions on the matter, but if there is any way I could appeal at least a few of them, I'd like to. If not, then that's fine as well, I understand.

I'm really sorry.

If you wanted to appeal any of them, you could, but if all the sprites and backgrounds are ripped, I'm not sure you'll succeed. :(

That said, you did really nice work! Manipulating sprites is not easy work.... and I want to encouraged you to try to take the next step. You've spent a lot of time staring at pixel sprites.... try drawing one of your own! Feel free to take inspiration from your favorite sprites, but don't copy. You're already making fantastic art... jsut take it a step further! :D

I also want to say thank you for getting cool about this. A lot of peopel get really upset and yell and it's very refreshing to have someone being polite about it.

SnowWolf said:
As has been said, we're human and we do make mistakes sometimes. I think I initially looked past them just because I wasn't familiar with them as being game sprites. :) I don't think I've played a pokemon since gold and silver :)

I'm really sorry.

If you wanted to appeal any of them, you could, but if all the sprites and backgrounds are ripped, I'm not sure you'll succeed. :(

That said, you did really nice work! Manipulating sprites is not easy work.... and I want to encouraged you to try to take the next step. You've spent a lot of time staring at pixel sprites.... try drawing one of your own! Feel free to take inspiration from your favorite sprites, but don't copy. You're already making fantastic art... jsut take it a step further! :D

I also want to say thank you for getting cool about this. A lot of peopel get really upset and yell and it's very refreshing to have someone being polite about it.

I really appreciate that, thank you. Of course, that's sorta been the plan all along to start making all my own stuff.

The reason I've gotten as good with pixels as I have is that I've been playing with these pre-existing sprites for the longest time to try and figure out how to move them around and get actual animations to work. Basically, they've been my tools for practicing before working on my own stuff, sorta like training wheels, I guess.
You're right, though, it is about time that I start moving stuff along.

And of course, being aggressive about stuff like this doesn't solve anything. This is nothing to start ruining people's day over.

Thanks!

Mairo said:
10 FPS is extremely low in general. Sometimes traditional animation does go below it, but even those are usually at least 12 FPS and higher and considering that this is game assets moved around, that's really extremely low FPS. Consider that games themselves usually run either 30 or 60 FPS, so if your aim is to match the games aesthetic. ~16 FPS is where brain starts to see the animation as individual frames rather than animation.

Just wanted to give some input here. I apologize in advance as they are completely detached from the other points of the topic though.

10fps (100 ms per frame) is the closest that can be held as some sort of standard for pixel animation nowadays. Not approving pixel art by using that as a major reason would be the same thing as not approving it because the native resolution is low and you can see the pixels in the image

Of course context is always important and every piece should be judged by itself. You can have beautifully animated pieces that are animated at 60fps, but we often see the limited framerate as one of the aesthetic considerations of the medium itself.

Striving for the "common knowledge" animation basics is alright, I'm just trying to say that often taking a hard number like "animation should usually be made on twos and in 24fps" is kinda missing the point and might end up ignoring a lot of cool stuff that actually looks awesome, all of that for a quite arbitrary reason.

It's like saying that one of the cons of a piece of artwork is that it's not in a 16:9 resolution, or saying that a pixel art illustration is of an inferior quality because it was crafted in a 480x272 canvas and then displayed at 400% of it's original size

Again, just trying to share the worldview of someone who has been working with the medium for several years now. I'd love to share some more detailed information if needed. God knows I've stumbled quite a bit when working with this kind of stuff, so I can hopefully help to prevent other people from having the same misconceptions that I held for so long

mabit said:
Just wanted to give some input here. I apologize in advance as they are completely detached from the other points of the topic though.

10fps (100 ms per frame) is the closest that can be held as some sort of standard for pixel animation nowadays. Not approving pixel art by using that as a major reason would be the same thing as not approving it because the native resolution is low and you can see the pixels in the image

Of course context is always important and every piece should be judged by itself. You can have beautifully animated pieces that are animated at 60fps, but we often see the limited framerate as one of the aesthetic considerations of the medium itself.
...

Yes, if we were talking about traditional level pixel animation, then 10 FPS could easily pass, especially if there's tons of details put into the movement.

Context really does matter. In here we are talking about moving in-game character sprite on in-game background asset 24 pixels at the time with 4 FPS, later there are 10 FPS parts, but it's mostly switching between two slightly modified 26x26 sprites: https://www.furaffinity.net/view/29474182/

Mairo said:
Yes, if we were talking about traditional level pixel animation, then 10 FPS could easily pass, especially if there's tons of details put into the movement.

Context really does matter. In here we are talking about moving in-game character sprite on in-game background asset 24 pixels at the time with 4 FPS, later there are 10 FPS parts, but it's mostly switching between two slightly modified 26x26 sprites: https://www.furaffinity.net/view/29474182/

Ah, fair point. I see the context now