Danbooru

galge.com tag, watermarks

Posted under General

Watermarking TOS is for third party watermarks that were put on after the fact. So if an artist puts on a watermark, or the site puts one on, if that's the only source there is, that's fine.

In most cases galge.com wallpapers are exclusives, at least I think?

As for the tag, I guess a pool is better.

スラッシュ said:
Watermarking TOS is for third party watermarks that were put on after the fact. So if an artist puts on a watermark, or the site puts one on, if that's the only source there is, that's fine.

How strictly should we enforce this? I just flagged some things for having third party watermarks (post #640107, post #656419) but they were reapproved. Personally, I don't think they should ever be allowed.

evazion said:
How strictly should we enforce this? I just flagged some things for having third party watermarks (post #640107, post #656419) but they were reapproved. Personally, I don't think they should ever be allowed.

I'd say that the quality of those images outweighs the watermark, though tracking down a non-watermarked version of them should be encouraged.

Fencedude said:
I'd say that the quality of those images outweighs the watermark, though tracking down a non-watermarked version of them should be encouraged.

This. Be cautious about scale of the watermark to the image, if you have to hunt for the watermark and we don't have a non-watermarked version I wouldn't worry about it. If the watermark is huge like deviantart's I would weigh the picture's quality against the obtrusiveness of the watermark. If an unwatermarked version appears don't be afraid to unapprove.

RaisingK said:
Curses. I was skimming through all the Len/Rin images on pixiv looking for post #656419

For the record (and this is off-topic but I wanted to point it out anyway), saucenao.com indexes all pixiv images using the iqdb engine, you could've just used that to find the original.

1