You must be logged in to view this image. (learn more)

Description

From source:

"> (Ask) Does he vibrate? < by Bunnybits on Inkbunny"

I posted this PIC

And I got asked "Can he vibrate too?"

The answer is clearly yes :P

(The picture mentioned: post #2792660 )

  • Comments
  • I can see that a lot of effort went into animating this. Amazing. That imgflip watermark really adds to the overall "feeling" of the video.

  • Reply
  • |
  • 11
  • Dunno 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

  • Reply
  • |
  • 11
  • m3g4p0n1 said:
    Dunno 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.

    Just got flagged. It doesn't disappear until it's deleted.

  • Reply
  • |
  • 2
  • shinyluxi0 said:
    Just got flagged. It doesn't disappear until it's deleted.

    I know, just explaining for the janitor or admin that comes through and see this.

  • Reply
  • |
  • 2
  • m3g4p0n1 said:
    Dunno 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.

    Agreed, worse animations went approved. Maybe the imgflip thing can make it rejected, but it can be fixed with PS.

  • Reply
  • |
  • 2
  • I 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.

  • Reply
  • |
  • 1
  • 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.

  • Reply
  • |
  • 0
  • 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.

    I'm pretty sure, not entirely sure tho.

  • Reply
  • |
  • 1
  • 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.

  • Reply
  • |
  • 1