post #2552535: It’s censored while the already approved post is not.
This is a revision by the artist. And what's more important, the image is more than 2 times larger (305 KB vs 131 KB), which means much lesser compression.
Edit:
Mikaeri said:
post #2708601 -- Anatomy is off... in multiple places
Anatomy of the spider girl? She is not supposed to follow normal human anatomy in the first place. Or is there something else?
Btw, this reminds my about a case when goo_girl post (post #1549814) was deleted for bad anatomy. Which is just hilarious, because she can reshape at will and is not bound by human anatomy rules.
This is a revision by the artist. And what's more important, the image is more than 2 times larger (305 KB vs 131 KB), which means much lesser compression.
Show
insert headache/facepalm here...
Filesize is NOT a good indicator of post quality. Do not ever, ever think that it is. It is a terrible mistake to make. I just showed you a diff in forum #133588 and now you've shown me it's worse in two respects. Not only is it bigger (which means more poorly compressed, perhaps a recompressed edit) but it also has censoring.
Supposedly karutamo picked a higher level of lossless compression in clip studio and upped those to his site instead, and before I upped those I actually did metadata dumps and image diffs of each of them. The ones from his personal site have more metadata, better compression.
This is a revision by the artist. And what's more important, the image is more than 2 times larger (305 KB vs 131 KB), which means much lesser compression.
Mikaeri said:
Filesize is NOT a good indicator of post quality. Do not ever, ever think that it is. It is a terrible mistake to make. I just showed you a diff in forum #133588 and now you've shown me it's worse in two respects. Not only is it bigger (which means more poorly compressed, perhaps a recompressed edit) but it also has censoring.
I’m not too sold on that difftool thing. I prefer to load both images as layers into an image editor, zoom in at ~400% into an area with probably many compression artifacts and then toggle the topmost layer on and off to compare the images.
In this case, I can see no difference in artifacts. That means that the larger, censored image is a recompressed version of the smaller, uncensored one, probably to include the censoring and probably less compressed to not make the existing artifacts worse.
Edit: To clarify: I don’t think the difftool is bad or unreliable. I just prefer fiddling with layers myself because it’s immediately obvious which side of a difference belongs to which image, whereas the difftool only tells me whether or not there are differences.
I’m not too sold on that difftool thing. I prefer to load both images as layers into an image editor, zoom in at ~400% into an area with probably many compression artifacts and then toggle the topmost layer on and off to compare the images.
In this case, I can see no difference in artifacts. That means that the larger, censored image is a recompressed version of the smaller, uncensored one, probably to include the censoring and probably less compressed to not make the existing artifacts worse.
Mmh, perhaps. I find difftools nice since they allow easy visual comparisons much quicker than if I opened Photoshop/GIMP/Krita to do it as such.
Anyways, yes you are correct, which is why I mentioned it is perhaps a recompressed edit (he edited and saved jpg -> jpg at 100% without using his original project file), to prevent further jpeg compression artifacts.
Didn't I send you a message days ago to fix your Pawoo sources? I'm an approver that happens to be fairly gracious to uploaders that give notable care to their own uploads, but the first was fine. Meh (I see a bunch of errors/flaws), but fine.
Second looks... awful. That'll be a deletion, 99% sure.
How about this? I will just re-upload the same images from pixiv (which I should've done in the first place). The 4 posts from pawoo that are incorrect
How about this? I will just re-upload the same images from pixiv (which I should've done in the first place). The 4 posts from pawoo that are incorrect
It's not that the posts from pawoo are incorrect, it's that you need to change the image link to the page link after uploading to make trackbacks easier.
It's not that the posts from pawoo are incorrect, it's that you need to change the image link to the page link after uploading to make trackbacks easier.
Filesize is NOT a good indicator of post quality. Do not ever, ever think that it is. It is a terrible mistake to make. I just showed you a diff in forum #133588 and now you've shown me it's worse in two respects. Not only is it bigger (which means more poorly compressed, perhaps a recompressed edit) but it also has censoring.
I know perfectly well that larger filesize doesn't necessarily indicate higher quality. But in this case the larger version was from the artist himself. In such situation it was only natural to assume that he used original file to produce new version, rather than edit the one he previously uploaded.
And just like Kittey, I don't consider comparison by a difftool to be particularly reliable. But the method he described is reliable. After rechecking it myself I admit that I was wrong regarding this post.
But in this case the larger version was from the artist himself. In such situation it was only natural to assume that he used original file to produce new version, rather than edit the one he previously uploaded.
Sometimes you can't trust artists to keep files integral. Some are same resolution with more artifacts + higher filesize, among other things, and yet those still get re-uploaded from time to time.
And just like Kittey, I don't consider comparison by a difftool to be particularly reliable. But the method he described is reliable. After rechecking it myself I admit that I was wrong regarding this post.
Your thoughts on difftools aside (as all I use them for are hard comparisons of pixel changes), it is still clear that yours is obviously worse, regardless of the methods used.
I get that uploading revisions is a recent trend now, which is nice a few respects, but if you want to make it a focus you have to read md5 mismatchTHROUGHLY. I will not spare much grace towards 'glory' posts, as in revisions that are just straight out worse without care from the original uploader.
EDIT: Mentioned some extra stuff in forum #133436 -- first part might be worth a quick browse.
I get that uploading revisions is a recent trend now, which is nice a few respects, but if you want to make it a focus you have to read md5 mismatchTHROUGHLY. I will not spare much grace towards 'glory' posts, as in revisions that are just straight out worse without care from the original uploader.
Maybe you should check the upload date of that post? I wouldn't call it recent. Also, I do not care about trends and I seldom upload revisions. Lastly, I do put care in my uploads. This was the only time I uploaded new version that turned out to be worse. And when I do upload new/better versions, I do my best to tag them better than the old ones.
If you wanted to make a general comment on the issue, then that's fine. But your current response makes it look like you are criticizing me for no good reason and trying to act like a moderator.
Maybe you should check the upload date of that post? I wouldn't call it recent. Also, I do not care about trends and I seldom upload revisions. Lastly, I do put care in my uploads. This was the only time I uploaded new version that turned out to be worse. And when I do upload new/better versions, I do my best to tag them better than the old ones.
If you wanted to make a general comment on the issue, then that's fine. But your current response makes it look like you are criticizing me for no good reason and trying to act like a moderator.
It isn't recent (the upload you're talking about), but considering the fact that it (uploading revisions) 'is' a recent trend makes me think otherwise that revisions are easy pickings to pass the queue for (as sometimes you can even leave the pre-revision unchilded and trick a queue mod into approving it).
Your recent comments have shown to me that you have a misunderstanding about the way quality works regarding image and file integrity. If we have that cleared up (and it seems that we do), that's fine, and I have no more to say on the matter. But given you've gone as far as to calling a difftool unreliable as a quality check (as all it shows is pixel value changes) and trying to back up something on a matter you don't fully understand shows me you're just trying to dodge bullets here.
I pray you don't make the same mistake, and I think you understand that at least as much. I'm not trying to act like a moderator as much as I am expressing my fair bit of annoyance at users that do this. This doesn't really go towards you in particular.
EDIT: This is going OT, so I hope we're done here. Get used to seeing more diffs, anyway, because I do them often for integrity checks. I don't have nearly enough time everyday to open up my image editor for images (that might even be of different resolution), just to see what has changed.
I'm not sure, is this a correct place to ask about, but... post #2785192 Is the quality is appropriate? And if yes, should it be reuploaded in it's original resolution? Because at that time I couldn't see the original.
I'm not sure, is this a correct place to ask about, but... post #2785192 Is the quality is appropriate? And if yes, should it be reuploaded in it's original resolution? Because at that time I couldn't see the original.
You need to make habit of always using the bookmarklet to upload. This will fetch the highest available size.
I do not find the quality satisfactory. The most glaring thing is her legs. they seem to be one contiguous limb without a hip or groin joining them to her body at all. They also don't seem connected to her upper body. From the perspective it looks like her torso should be reversed and closer to the viewer. It very well could have be drawn as two people. Her face is pleasant but those errors are too much for me.
Since you uploaded a deviantart sample I'll be able to replace the image. That's never a guaranteed however and more of a grace since another user could upload the correct size and yours would be deleted.
You need to make habit of always using the bookmarklet to upload. This will fetch the highest available size.
But I always use. Perhaps, I did it wrong this time. Will know, thanks. But I though I must open image in new tab. And <<On the right side, there should be a link to the URL labeled "Download". If it's not there, zoom into the picture as much as possible and copy the image URL from there.>> As I said — there was no "Download" button, so I zoomed and opened it in a new tab.
