Oct 24th: Did you know that as of this news update, 30.8k posts have been uploaded by 5.2k verified artists? Read our Artist Verification page to learn how to get faster approvals and a verified checkmark on your posts.
Adobe Flash has reached end of life, and no longer works in browsers. Please see this thread on the forum for details on how you can continue to play this file.
Keyboard shortcuts are disabled on this page because it contains flash.
You must be logged in to view this image. (learn more)
I could have removed the watermark, had I know it would be an issue, but it's not obstructing any part of the artwork so it didn't cross my mind.
But even if I uploaded it as a superior version, a version without the watemark would be one that has never been uploaded by the original artist, so I think that would cause another issue of "not being fit as an official replacement". =/
I think it could be considered an edit, but I'm not quite familiar how edits fall under the rules yet.
m3g4p0n1 said: I could have removed the watermark, had I know it would be an issue, but it's not obstructing any part of the artwork so it didn't cross my mind.
But even if I uploaded it as a superior version, a version without the watemark would be one that has never been uploaded by the original artist, so I think that would cause another issue of "not being fit as an official replacement". =/
I think it could be considered an edit, but I'm not quite familiar how edits fall under the rules yet.
Edits are considered more like disruptive edits, such as recolors, or comics with different dialogues, etc.
m3g4p0n1 said: I could have removed the watermark, had I know it would be an issue, but it's not obstructing any part of the artwork so it didn't cross my mind.
But even if I uploaded it as a superior version, a version without the watemark would be one that has never been uploaded by the original artist, so I think that would cause another issue of "not being fit as an official replacement". =/
I think it could be considered an edit, but I'm not quite familiar how edits fall under the rules yet.
Don't alter images from the source. Those are considered third party edits and should always be deleted in favor of original.
Artist in here was definitely dum and had absolutely no idea what they were doing tho.
I'm not messing with the tags, but the sister Amelie has green eyes. The mom is the one with yellow eyes. Going by the description it's meant to be the sister, not an aged down mom.
You must be over the age of 18 and agree
to the terms of service to access this page.
By default a limited blacklist has been applied hiding content that is commonly objected to. You may remove
items from this blacklist by using the blacklist menu item.
joerilen
MemberAh yes....the "fuck like rabbits" joke
FooxFox
MemberI can see that a lot of effort went into animating this. Amazing. That imgflip watermark really adds to the overall "feeling" of the video.
m3g4p0n1
MemberDunno what to say, that's how it was when I grabbed it before the source was deleted .3.
I judged it to not be low-effort since it's a finished drawing, with proper artistic value.
Sure, the resolution is crap, but the meme/fun context of why it exists is, in my view, valuable enough to be archived.
Edit: By the way, it's 360x360, while the uploading guidelines says Small images: Anything below 200px in either direction is likely to get deleted.
Updated
ShinyLuxi0
MemberJust got flagged. It doesn't disappear until it's deleted.
m3g4p0n1
MemberI know, just explaining for the janitor or admin that comes through and see this.
ShinyLuxi0
MemberAgreed, worse animations went approved. Maybe the imgflip thing can make it rejected, but it can be fixed with PS.
jeff willis
Member(jackhammer noise)
Honigkuchenpferd
MemberI was a bit confused why this got flagged.
Then I found this part in the guidelines: "Images with third party watermarks (think iFunny, 9gag, etc.)."
So if there was no watermark, I think it should pass. I can't see anything else wrong with it at the moment.
m3g4p0n1
MemberI could have removed the watermark, had I know it would be an issue, but it's not obstructing any part of the artwork so it didn't cross my mind.
But even if I uploaded it as a superior version, a version without the watemark would be one that has never been uploaded by the original artist, so I think that would cause another issue of "not being fit as an official replacement". =/
I think it could be considered an edit, but I'm not quite familiar how edits fall under the rules yet.
ShinyLuxi0
MemberEdits are considered more like disruptive edits, such as recolors, or comics with different dialogues, etc.
I'm pretty sure, not entirely sure tho.
Mairo
JanitorDon't alter images from the source. Those are considered third party edits and should always be deleted in favor of original.
Artist in here was definitely dum and had absolutely no idea what they were doing tho.
Bxnnii Toy
MemberAnd yet, my name is Bunny.
T bund
Blockedhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GGfz-o5khc
Lodin
MemberI see we have a person of culture
thatkidfromcod
MemberA seggs
Kyuubinaruto18
MemberI'm not messing with the tags, but the sister Amelie has green eyes. The mom is the one with yellow eyes. Going by the description it's meant to be the sister, not an aged down mom.
Login to respond »