Danbooru

taste about images?

Posted under General

Hi to community,

I'd like to know... is an uploaded image judged by a single moderator, or multiple moderators? Is it the decision of a person, or does discussion occur?

Just an example about an image I uploaded yesterday, which was deleted for being "poorly drawed".

http://umt.s21.xrea.com/image/ht_48.jpg
(posted at post #156054)

As for me this image is very nice, but taste is not universal. I'm just confused because some images from the very same author, in the same style, of the same character (Kokoro from Kokoro toshokan) already exist on danbooru, like this one post #66621

So in this case, the moderator was probably a huge fan of Kokororo-chan and had (very) high standards on this matter.

cheers to all members!

Updated by niefong

I don't think the iage you linked was poorly drawn enough to be deleted. Whoever marked it or deleted it was in the wrong (in so much as my opinion counts).

There's tons of pictures that are drawn worse than that that still make it through the moderation queue...

I had a whole batch of high-quality Final Fantasy (mostly FF7) porn by Hebameki deleted yesterday because it was "poorly drawn" -- though to be fair, it's not like we don't have enough FF porn already.

Updated

gsimon said: Just an example about an image I uploaded yesterday, which was deleted for being "poorly drawed".
http://umt.s21.xrea.com/image/ht_48.jpg

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that image and I can only imagine it was deleted by accident? I'm not sure why it would have been deleted.

I guess I'm one of the more easygoing mods though, I don't delete unless I have a really good reason, and I understand that art is more or less subjective. Other mods are stricter on quality, which isn't inherently bad, but yes it does mean there's some luck of the draw in who sees your image and decides.

I do think this image was quite far from any "poorly drawn" threshold however, no matter how you look at it. Perhaps the only iffy part about it is the hands...?

jxh2154 said:
There's absolutely nothing wrong with that image and I can only imagine it was deleted by accident? I'm not sure why it would have been deleted.

As matter of fact, it wasn't an accident as the moderator gave an explicit reason "I hate doing this, but this image is an insult to Kokoro. Poorly drawn." .

Too bad the rejection of an image is not a discussed process between several persons (to lesson the bias on personal taste). But such a system may be too complicated to implement and time-consuming to use.

gsimon said: As matter of fact, it wasn't an accident as the moderator gave an explicit reason "I hate doing this, but this image is an insult to Kokoro. Poorly drawn."

Well, it's not my place to second-guess other mods I guess, but I disagree.

Too bad the rejection of an image is not a discussed process between several persons (to lesson the bias on personal taste). But such a system may be too complicated to implement and time-consuming to use.

Yes, far too complicated and time consuming. The list gets huge as is (imagine if there was no 16 per day limit!) and having to take everything to committee would just slow it down far too much.

I don't think it would be much more complicated than the score system. Could just be a duplicate of the score system but only for mods, and when the picture reaches +2 or -2 it would get rejected or approved.

I think it would be good for there be some sort of objective way of determining a image's worthiness. Obviously rule-violations and technical issues ('aerisdies' watermark, JPEG Artifacts) are clear vetoes. But when as the OP notes, other sourced images from the same author in the same style get the green light it becomes very difficult to tell whether something has passed some sort of arbitrary line of drawing quality.

Maybe a rubric or list of guidelines could be developed so that posters and mods would at least be on the same page when it comes to judging images? This is obviously harder to develop than propose, but without some sort of deterministic way to distinguish good pictures from bad, these sort of disagreements are likely to continue.

Sunfox said:
If an image has a watermark in the corner (such as 'aerisdies'), would erasing it using a photo modification program be of any help?

Not much. You will remove the watermark (BTW not the proper term as it is not hidden) but the resulting image will suffer from even more compression artifacts. I don't think it's a good practice.

Better find the original image... that is the one without 'aerisdies' added in the first place. :)

Sunfox said:
If an image has a watermark in the corner (such as 'aerisdies'), would erasing it using a photo modification program be of any help?

In theory, probably, although it would still usually leave photoshop crap behind, but in practice it would do little. Aerisdies, and several other 3rd party image hosts murder their images by compressing them way way too heavily. Compare an image from Aerisdies, and the original and you'll see what I mean.

There's also a correlation between sites that watermark and sites that see fit to butcher their images. So in general if it comes from a site like that, just don't post it. If you know enough to find the original you're better off finding and posting that.

EDIT: What gsimon said...

1 2 3