Posted under General
taeheonkim said:
post #3270323
post #3503178
post #3503190
post #3503191
post #3503194
post #3503197
post #3503222
post #3503224
post #3503225
post #3503227What’s wrong with these?
post #3503222 has a problem with anathomy, with her legs in particular. In post #3270323 she has a crooked head, but I don’t think it matters. In the rest everything is fine, you should ask to reconsider the removal.
Elfaleon said:
Really thin waist. I know that's in line with the official style, but the rest of picture isn't - and the mismatch doesn't really work that well. Even discounting that the image is pretty average.
It's a little bit sketchy and blurry in places - but I think those are within parameters. Honestly I probably would have let this through.
One of the feet is slightly odd, but I also don't think that's enough to pass it over. I'd put this one at a solid borderline too. Male focus unfortunately doesn't grab as much attention.
Thanks for the feedback!
Sorry for bothering (again) but I wonder why post #3504009 got deleted...
Why the post #3504772 was deleted? It follows the same pattern of all other swing holic covers (who are kept)
Any reason why some of horosuke's recent posts were sent to the deletion pool? Not like any of these are all that different from their typical art style or if they being of an explicit nature kept any of their other recent paizuri related art from getting post approval. The first 2 are larger file size parents of existing child posts anyway...
post #3505465
post #3507788
post #3507787
Any reason why these posts from Shellvi was not approved?
Why were these two images not approved? The one picture of Amu Hinamori was the highest score I ever got.
I honestly don't understand why some of my posts just didn't get approved -- specially since some are by artists that have been approved in the past and the quality is no different from the approved stuff.
post #3507266
post #3504461
post #3477627
post #3464255
post #3441496
I'd like to ask about post #3500595 and its child post #3500597 since I think both are of comparable quality to the artist's other uploads and so far seem to be the only illustrations by him that were deleted.
Also, post #3496880 and post #3500592 seem high quality enough to me.
Updated
What's wrong with post #3504010?
So what's wrong with this particular picture post #3511517 while the other post by the same artist didn't get deleted?
vivoleko01 said:
Legs look like stubs (I guess the artist didn’t get the perspective right) and with no background or even ground, everything seems to be floating in some kind of void.
Is something wrong with those two? Simliar ones got approved and I don´t think they´re bad.
Too Western?
Runty said:
Too Western?
IMO, yes.
The artist also went kind of overboard with the pose. While the arched back is theoretically possible for a very flexible person, it makes the pose look extremely unnatural. Also not sure why the torso gets narrower above the waist; the bottom of her ribcage looks deformed in an uncomfortable way that would usually require an overly tight corset (which is obviously not present).
No brownie points for the third party source either.
kittey said:
IMO, yes.
The artist also went kind of overboard with the pose. While the arched back is theoretically possible for a very flexible person, it makes the pose look extremely unnatural. Also not sure why the torso gets narrower above the waist; the bottom of her ribcage looks deformed in an uncomfortable way that would usually require an overly tight corset (which is obviously not present).
No brownie points for the third party source either.
I tried a reverse image search, but got no hits.
post #3154064 if this one got deleted because of its size than keep in mind that post #2897844 & post #3146413 are similer size.
post #3414196(parent & child)
What’s wrong with these?
