Posted under General
Not long ago, I asked someone to make a photoshop of #515388 that removed a certain bodily function, and they did so. I'd like to upload it as a child post of that one, but I can't figure out how to do so, nor can I find any such info on the help pages. Is it something you have to be a paid member to do?
EDIT: For some reason, the pic won't show up as a link, so: post #515388
Updated by 0xCCBA696
Uploading a smaller (but still high quality) version of posts that only have ludicrously huge versions is fine (though should not be used as a way of padding upload count...), but actually editing the image is very iffy. Especially if its just being done because you don't like the fetish in it. Doing it for your own purposes is fine, but it should not be uploaded here.
Actually, I meant something along the lines of post #477938 to post #477980. Photoshop made the child post that picture more appealing than it's parent.
Mr_GT said:
Actually, I meant something along the lines of post #477938 to post #477980. Photoshop made the child post that picture more appealing than it's parent.
To me, that's a little like painting eyebrows on the Mona Lisa. You might think it'd look better that way, but if the artist wanted it that way then that's how he would have drawn it in the first place.
If you don't like an artist's work then just move on; there are thousands of more pictures to choose from here.
Why do you assume that I hate the artist's artworks just because I find the altered image slightly more appealing than the original? I never mentioned anything that sounded like I hate his/her art. I use him/her as an example to demonstrate that fixing flaws & restorative measures within Photoshop had positive effect on a picture. Now had it have a positive effect on that picture, I don't know. Do like the original or the altered image more?
Mr_GT said: Actually, I meant something along the lines of post #477938 to post #477980. Photoshop made the child post that picture more appealing than it's parent.
It is not the responsibility or the right of a danbooru user to take it upon themselves to "correct" an image they don't like. They can do whatever they want for their personal collection, but it does not belong on danbooru.
If the original is fucked up badly enough in some way, it shouldn't be here in the first place. That simple. If it's just not to someone's taste, they can ignore it. Not edit it themselves and reupload their personal version.
And Granola, I would love to nuke most of the photoshop tag but there's a lack of agreement on that one.
jxh2154 said:
And Granola, I would love to nuke most of the photoshop tag but there's a lack of agreement on that one.
I know you are reasonable.
That said, its just an extension of a bigger quality issue on danboou. Off-topic and poor quality posts get accepted more often than not. Example: post #516201
The attempt to self-moderate by using the unapproval system is a joke; some staff insist on reapproving off topic and crappy pictures. Example: pool #846 (hard translated into FINNISH) which was unapproved, reapproved, and then deleted only when I asked someone from the staff to do so.
I know that this isn't the right thread for this, but it really grinds my gears.
Granola said: The attempt to self-moderate by using the unapproval system is a joke; some staff insist on reapproving off topic and crappy pictures.
I'm not sure what the actual statistics are, but I know I've personally only ever reapproved a handful of unapprove-flagged images. Maybe 5, out of hundreds? But true, I have no way of knowing what other mods are doing.
I will say that there's a massive amount of stuff that does not make it through the queue. A quick glance at page 100 of status:deleted shows that over 2000 have been rejected in the past 5.5 weeks. Granted many more went through but that's because the bulk of uploads are coming from contributors.
So I think in general it's got issues of course, but there *is* a lot of crap being successfully weeded out.
Unapproved posts have a special mark on them that say "Deleted after sitting 3 days in the moderation queue".
I've watched this system ever since it has been put into place and I've only seen maybe 50 posts out of hundreds actually get deleted. I check status:deleted every day to see if the posts in there get deleted and most of them are back on the site.
I can only wish that there would be some statistics backing me up so that I know my claims are justified.
Granola said: Unapproved posts have a special mark on them that say "Deleted after sitting 3 days in the moderation queue".
Hmm. I can't give great stats but looked at the most recent 100 pages of deletions, and counted 135 occurrences of "Unapproved in three days after returning to moderation queue". Roughly 5.4% of the most recent 2500 deletions. The vast majority are standard mod queue 3 day deletions. Easily over 90%, particularly if you exclude bulk deletions by artist request.
You could add a couple to that 135 that got outright deleted after being flagged without waiting three days, and thus have a different message - I've done this with blatant TOS violations like extreme guro and nude filters. However I don't know how many that would add. Probably not enough to significantly change our conclusions.
Now, the thing is the recent deletions list is not timestamped so I'm not sure how much time 100 pages represent. A quick estimation from status:deleted is that 2500 images were deleted in the last 6.5 weeks, however my understanding is that that search orders by uploaded-date, not deleted-date, thus it's not a 1:1 correlation with the deletion list. Hopefully it works as ballpark, though?
The other missing variable is how many images were unapprove-flagged in the last 6.5 weeks. Without that, I have no idea what percentage of those images are being reapproved.
My own experience is that unapprovals make up a relatively small proportion of the queue. However, these days I tend to moderate the entire queue every two days or so, rather than check it in small visits every few hours. So it could be that the majority of flagged images are being approved before I see them.
I did notice that I saw proportionately less "Unapproved in three days after returning to moderation queue" deletions in the most recent 25 or so pages of the deletion listing. So either less things are being unapproved lately or more of them are being reapproved. Again, I can't be sure.
jxh2154 said:
The other missing variable is how many images were unapprove-flagged in the last 6.5 weeks. Without that, I have no idea what percentage of those images are being reapproved.
I am eager too see this variable as well. I have requested a "status:reapproved" ticket on trac so that evidence can be shown.
