The flag reason proposes that the stomach doesn't exist, and yet simultaneously implies the hidden waist as being too small for the hips.
With both the stomach and waist blocked off from our PoV by the breasts, how can one confidently determine the former to not exist and the latter to be too small?
And, yes, this kind of pose is possible for real people. We have multiple posts that utilizes straight on shots of this variety to focus on the chest and hips. Not being able to see the torso and neighboring components in these kinds of postures should not be a difficult concept to grasp.
Furthermore, considering the overall lining, colouring, composition and lack of issues with anatomy that we can see, I don't understand how this image warrants being flagged.
The flag reason proposes that the stomach doesn't exist, and yet simultaneously implies the hidden waist as being too small for the hips.
With both the stomach and waist blocked off from our PoV by the breasts, how can one confidently determine the former to not exist and the latter to be too small?
And, yes, this kind of pose is possible for real people. We have multiple posts that utilizes straight on shots of this variety to focus on the chest and hips. Not being able to see the torso and neighboring components in these kinds of postures should not be a difficult concept to grasp.
Furthermore, considering the overall lining, colouring, composition and lack of issues with anatomy that we can see, I don't understand how this image warrants being flagged.
The reference you've provided contradicts your argument, though. You can clearly see the curvature of the model's stomach in the area below her breasts, which meets with her crotch. Larger breasts notwithstanding, the artist clearly made this character's crotch visible, but did not shade the area in front of it in a way that would imply proper perspective.
The hips are also exaggerated in a way that looks proportionate to a pear-shaped body, but if you consider that her upper body appears larger because she's leaning forward, the implied proportions she would have standing straight are less pear and more wedding cake.
For what it's worth, I do think this looks a lot better most of the posts that have been flagged in the last couple days, and the composition makes it much more difficult to spot the flaws right away. But they are there, and trying to deny them solely to deny the flag by proxy doesn't quite help. Acknowledging artistic mistakes promotes growth.
I don't know how purging images for mistakes 'promotes growth' but I would support a bad_perspective or bad_proportions tag, since that would definitely acknowledge the issues you've pointed out.
I don't know how purging images for mistakes 'promotes growth' but I would support a bad_perspective or bad_proportions tag, since that would definitely acknowledge the issues you've pointed out.
I don't have any particular opinion on whether this post stays or not. It looks about average to me. I just think analyzing a post's flaws and merits is worthwhile for more than just flagging, since some artists lurk here too.
I don't know how purging images for mistakes 'promotes growth' but I would support a bad_perspective or bad_proportions tag, since that would definitely acknowledge the issues you've pointed out.
The reason that the deletion system exists is so that a standard of quality can be maintained. The gray area where the anatomy is bad enough to warrant adding the tags but not bad enough to warrant deletion is very small. If you honestly just want danbooru images to never get deleted, just browse gelbooru, since their bot mirrors danbooru posts.
The reason that the deletion system exists is so that a standard of quality can be maintained. The gray area where the anatomy is bad enough to warrant adding the tags but not bad enough to warrant deletion is very small.
I think this image is within that grey area where the error is not glaring enough to warrant deletion though.
Honestly, I think most of the quality check flags that are filed on a daily basis are accurate and make sense to me. But every once and a while I come across ones that are being overly critical, use spectacular weasel words or are too harsh over a minor flaw.
I think this image is within that grey area where the error is not glaring enough to warrant deletion though.
Honestly, I think most of the quality check flags that are filed on a daily basis are accurate and make sense to me. But every once and a while I come across ones that are being overly critical, use spectacular weasel words or are too harsh over a minor flaw.
It doesn't help your case when only 9 of the 27 posts you've contested flag reasons in the comments on are currently approved.
It doesn't help your case when only 9 of the 27 posts you've contested flag reasons on are currently deleted.
I'm not sure why my participation in other areas of the site having any bearing here, since the merits and flaws of each illustration have nothing to do with the track records of the users who are discussing image quality.
To be honest, I think you're the last person who should be bringing other peoples' past actions in these matters. Not since you lost your temper at the approval processing and sent hostile DMs to approvers for undeleting your flags. I can't say I've taken my disagreements that far nor have I ever had a spectacular streak of that magnitude.
I'm not sure why my participation in other areas of the site having any bearing here, since the merits and flaws of each illustration have nothing to do with the track records of the users who are discussing image quality.
To be honest, I think you're the last person who should be bringing other peoples' past actions in these matters. Not since you lost your temper at the approval processing and sent hostile DMs to approvers for undeleting your flags. I can't say I've taken my disagreements that far nor have I ever had a spectacular streak of that magnitude.
1. This isn't another area of the site. I stated a fact about your comments where you contest flag reasons, which is what you did on this very post. 2. I was never hostile towards any approvers. I never sent any hostile DMs to approvers. If you can prove otherwise, then go ahead, but please refer to this before making false accusations against me. 3. I'm no-bumping this since the comments are not a place for you to start a grudge match.
Squishy said: I'm not sure why my participation in other areas of the site having any bearing here, since the merits and flaws of each illustration have nothing to do with the track records of the users who are discussing image quality.
tbh if I see the same person appealing bad anatomy posts in the appeals page over and over again, at some point I'm just going to ignore all of that person's appeals without even bothering to check the picture.
tbh if I see the same person appealing bad anatomy posts in the appeals page over and over again, at some point I'm just going to ignore all of that person's appeals without even bothering to check the picture.
One should also question someone's judgement if they keep appealing and defending multiple posts without anything happening. It's quite annoying to talk everytime against the same person.
Also upvoted the comments here. It helps no one when we make comments hidden since it destroys the reading flow.
1. This isn't another area of the site. I stated a fact about your comments where you contest flag reasons, which is what you did on this very post.
You haven't actually made any points about the images or my comments besides: 1. sharing condescending platitudes about quality 2. a thinly veiled attempt in telling me to get off the site 3. trying to undermine the weight of my words by bringing up my track record when you yourself haven't exactly had the most glowing score (8 out of 28) with regard to this area of the quality control.
2. I was never hostile towards any approvers. I never sent any hostile DMs to approvers. If you can prove otherwise, then go ahead, but please refer to this before making false accusations against me.
I didn't know who you were until I bothered to check why you were showing up in all recent discussions I was a part of until I checked and saw this. Whatever it is you sent people to receive a hostile response back via DM, it probably wasn't friendly.
That you've sent a DMail to me over flagging issues in the past with the same aggressiveness pretty much seals it. Same tone, same passive aggressive hostility and inability to address arguments besides attacking people you disagree with.
It's also clear that someone has been going through my profile starting yesterday and reflagging old appeals, based on the reports, wording and timing of the anatomy tagging in the exact same timeframes. So if you take issue with 'history checks', don't be surprised.
3. I'm no-bumping this since the comments are not a place for you to start a grudge match.
Just so you know, I have no personal issues with you.
However, I am entitled to calling people out on their hypocrisy when they try calling the kettle black when they are pretty much a pot themselves. Were it anyone else remarking about my success rate or their approach on the matter as an approver, I would have no problems with it.
If anyone is making this into a grudge match, it is certainly not me for one spicy out call post, but rather the person who is making repeated attempts in analyzing me instead of the image, well after the discussion should have ended. I've pretty much ignored your attempts to lord over me about being my better about judging quality and trying to get rid of me to an ad-infested cancer site, however I think it's fair for me to scrutinize you over the same thing you're scrutinizing me over without breaking any etiquette.
ceres might not have DMed me but he did write some insulting feedback in my profile that he seems to conveniently omit, probably because it's since been deleted by a mod for being so bad. I can't help but roll my eyes at this argument, especially given that ceres went so far as to changing his name after the incident almost as if he knows he did wrong.
Unsurprisingly as soon as he was cut some slack some of my old images are flagged again, almost as if someone had gone back to their old shenanigans.
