Posted under General
So these posts weren't approved
post #3168864
post #3168888
post #3168895
post #3168883
post #3168917
post #3168872
although these posts I uploaded on the same day were approved and their quality are pretty much the same and also by the same artist
post #3168902
post #3168905
post #3168907
post #3168913
post #3168914
post #3168910
May I know what is the problem with the ones that didn't got the approval?
post #3174630 didn't get approved but post #3157809 did (same author, same quality) and I wouldn't know why.
I didn't add a lot of tags (still learning what tags to use), maybe that is the reason?
post #3177796
post #3178586
post #3178590
Would someone mind explaining to me what's wrong with these, and the uploads I posted here last time?
Kyoriku said:
So these posts weren't approved
post #3168864
post #3168888
post #3168895
post #3168883
post #3168917
post #3168872although these posts I uploaded on the same day were approved and their quality are pretty much the same and also by the same artist
post #3168902
post #3168905
post #3168907
post #3168913
post #3168914
post #3168910May I know what is the problem with the ones that didn't got the approval?
It's worth noting that the ones that were approved were all approved by the same person on the final day before deletion - in other words there were probably quite a few people who passed over these images and there's a good chance that if this person had not approved them then they would have been deleted as well.
The approved ones do seem to be better, though. For instance, in post #3168864 look at the difference in body shape between the blonde girl and purple haired girl. That's more than a simple difference between stocky and skinny, and their proximity only makes it stand out more. In post #3168888 the redhead's legs are dodgy. post #3168895 and post #3168917 have dodgy hands as the most focal parts of the whole image. For post #3168883 the mass of effects just creates a mess. None of these things would be fatal by themselves, but on artwork which is already very borderline (simplistic lines, questionable proportions and the odd bit of dodgy perspective and odd poses here and there as well) they could well make the difference between approval and rejection, and the approved images don't have these problems (the dodgy hand in post #3168905 can be at least partially explained by the fact that she is wearing gloves).
As far as I can tell, post #3168872 is merely very simplistic. It might have had a better chance of approval were this part of an actual series rather than appearing to be the first page of something the artist then never continued.
---
DragonKnightGX said:
post #3177796
post #3178586
post #3178590Would someone mind explaining to me what's wrong with these, and the uploads I posted here last time?
I can't see the second one due to it being shota.
The "breaks the rules" feedback for the first probably relates to it being neither anime style nor anime related. This is one of those things which isn't actually against the rules but is held to a higher quality standard, which this picture doesn't even come close to meeting.
As for the third one, if you can't see what's wrong with it I advise you to go and look in a mirror.
---
Public_name said:
post #3174630 didn't get approved but post #3157809 did (same author, same quality) and I wouldn't know why.
I didn't add a lot of tags (still learning what tags to use), maybe that is the reason?
Honestly, it's a decent picture, but it isn't the same quality as post #3157809 - in various areas where the latter stands out for its quality, the former is merely okay. In particular the edges between skin and background or between hair and skin are considerably better in the latter than the former. The artist has a very realistic style, which in turn means that anything that looks fake only stands out more - the skintone (particularly around the shoulder area) looks plastic and the ends of the hair also look fake - like someone's taken a photograph and drawn hair on top of it. It's somewhat ironic that this image has been added to the "beautiful hair" pool when from my perspective that's the weakest part of the entire image. Pardon me whilst I remove it from that and add it to the far more fitting "beautiful eyes" pool instead.
Tags would not have made a difference to whether an approver who saw the image approved it or not, although being well tagged may have made it more likely for approvers who don't use the mod queue to have spotted it in the first place - 8 is quite a low number of disapprovals for something that has been deleted these days.
---
godgun213 said:
...
explaned to me why this do not get approved.
Too many posts. No thanks.
skylightcrystal said:
It's worth noting that the ones that were approved were all approved by the same person on the final day before deletion - in other words there were probably quite a few people who passed over these images and there's a good chance that if this person had not approved them then they would have been deleted as well.
The approved ones do seem to be better, though. For instance, in post #3168864 look at the difference in body shape between the blonde girl and purple haired girl. That's more than a simple difference between stocky and skinny, and their proximity only makes it stand out more. In post #3168888 the redhead's legs are dodgy. post #3168895 and post #3168917 have dodgy hands as the most focal parts of the whole image. For post #3168883 the mass of effects just creates a mess. None of these things would be fatal by themselves, but on artwork which is already very borderline (simplistic lines, questionable proportions and the odd bit of dodgy perspective and odd poses here and there as well) they could well make the difference between approval and rejection, and the approved images don't have these problems (the dodgy hand in post #3168905 can be at least partially explained by the fact that she is wearing gloves).
As far as I can tell, post #3168872 is merely very simplistic. It might have had a better chance of approval were this part of an actual series rather than appearing to be the first page of something the artist then never continued.
I understand most of this, though for post #3168864 it's quite true to their official build (post #1043269 and post #1043276) but if that's not ok then I guess it can't be helped. Thanks for the explanation.
DragonKnightGX said:
Legit what's wrong with it?
The girl's shoulders are at a really weird angle, and her hand also seems to be in the wrong place for where the arms are pointing.
The girl's chest (and I'm not talking about the breasts) bulges out a lot in a way that suggests an arched back while the lack of detail on her back leaves no indication that the back is curved at all - even though it should be very strongly curved in order to make that head angle possible. This leaves her head looking like it's at a 90 degree angle to her back, and turned sharply as well. Said head also looks too far forward from the neck.
What even is that longer line on the girl's back? The shorter line should have another opposite it, which it might do but it's way too far over if that's what the thing behind her head is supposed to be.
The ribs (?) on the boy are too low down to be at that angle. If they're supposed to be abs instead then there should be more to them as that isn't the point at which abs would be the most visible. Also if his chest is pronounced enough to give that sort of shading in the middle there should be some at the bottom as well.
Compare the collarbone/shoulder distance on the right side of the boy with that on his left side. One is almost twice as big as the other.
Compare the guy's crotch to the girl's pubic regions. Where the heck is he sticking it? It seems that his penis would be going into the upper part of her right butt cheek. Again some questionable sizes of various anatomical parts on the girl around here.
Why is the a bit of the boy's skin that is in the shaded area of his neck (which in turn is inconsistent with the position of the light source suggested by other shading like that around his fingers) shining?
Plus a distinct lack of detail everywhere, both with the lines and with the shading.
---
@Kyoriku - looking at that one again it's not actually as bad as I had thought the first time (although still noteworthy) - what I thought was a bit of the blonde girl's body is actually part of the purple-haired girl's arm. However, this only serves to make her hand position rather questionable instead.
archaist said:
Yet another Rumia T-pose that’s ok, I guess, but not good or interesting enough to catch anyone’s fancy.
Right, there is no way I can answer all the unanswered queries but Il try going backwards.
DragonKnightGX said:
Would someone mind explaining to me what's wrong with these, and the uploads I posted here last time?
Shota really isnt that popular, and this shota boy has problems. His nipples are to low. His foot is drawn very simple. Its honestly hard to tell if his penis belong to him or the girl. His stomach is swollen, not something anatomically wrong but it doesnt look good. The girl has crazy thin lower legs. Shading is rather basic.
godgun213 said:
post #3177916
post #3176723
post #3175762
post #3174216
post #3174215
post #3173666
post #3173616
post #3172018
post #3171977
post #3171989
post #3171972
post #3171959
post #3171928
post #3173634explaned to me why this do not get approved.
Like Skylightcrystal said these are to many posts to answer at once, try picking a few examples and apply what you learned to other posts.
Eyes should be in the centre of the head height wise (not counting big hair) and stay horizontal, not slanted. post #3173666 post #3171959 post #3177916 and post #3175762 all have eye problems.
Shading and lighting is of in most of your posts, again in to many ways to comment on individually. Many images have an "amateurish" feel to them. The bold linework certainly doesnt help.
Posts where the character is just standing there arent very popular on Danbooru anymore. There needs to be some kind of action or setting to make approvers notice them. Even if the one standing is a kaijuu.
Traditional art is harder to get right than computer art and post #3171928 and post #3171977 have lots of little flaws that the artist couldnt correct.
The Transformers post would be good enough if it was higher resolution and didnt have the watermark. I like post #3174215 despite its bold linework and photo background. I might appeal it later.
So I just got a post deleted for the first time stating that 10 moderators didn't like it enough to approve it. I'd appreciate some feedback as to why this happened as I try to be somewhat selective in my uploads and getting to know what was wrong would help me.
I'm talking about post #3181089.
Uh, these weren't approved. I think they have decent quality.
post #3185294
post #3185292
post #3185288
post #3185283
post #3185282
post #3184888 with variant post #3184889
post #3184703 with variant post #3184704 (these two has lower resolution but they have no text)
post #3183008 (this is a joke pose from the game)
post #3185920
post #3186175 variant post #3186176
post #3186181 variant post #3186182
Updated
*sigh* More deleted posts. And these two looked like SURE FIRE HITS. What's wrong with them?
DragonKnightGX said:
*sigh* More deleted posts. And these two looked like SURE FIRE HITS. What's wrong with them?
Lack of shading on the fairies
Dodgy arm proportions (I bet the bit of your arm just below the elbow isn't double the size of the bit just above like the larger fairy's is), and either that or bad foreshortening (or, more likely, both) on the girl's left arm too
The big fairy's legs are doing something weird
The worst thing (for me at least), though, is the fact that the upper parts of the girl's mouth come above the level of the lower parts of her eye.
Lack of shading on the girl in front.
The girl behind's elbow is at an angle which is inconsistent with its position in relation to the rest of her body.
The girl in front's legs seem to be slightly shifted to the side from where they should be and her face is slightly out of alignment with her head. Neither of these things are badly out, though, and this is an image that is (IMO on the wrong side of) borderline rather than outright bad.
AnGer-dono said:
So I just got a post deleted for the first time stating that 10 moderators didn't like it enough to approve it. I'd appreciate some feedback as to why this happened as I try to be somewhat selective in my uploads and getting to know what was wrong would help me.
I'm talking about post #3181089.
Its kinda small and they have a weird outline that sets them apart from the background. Still it did end up getting approved on appeal.
Kyoriku said:
Uh, these weren't approved. I think they have decent quality.
post #3185294
post #3185292
post #3185288
post #3185283
post #3185282
post #3184888 with variant post #3184889
post #3184703 with variant post #3184704 (these two has lower resolution but they have no text)
post #3183008 (this is a joke pose from the game)
post #3185920
post #3186175 variant post #3186176
post #3186181 variant post #3186182
Dont ask for so many images if you want answers. Il critique some of them for you but in the future keep it to a few posts at a time.
First of Danbooru is an art repository that allows pornographic art but sexually explicit images are less likely to be approved than other images.
post #3183008 Jokes are only funny if you get them and this is really bad art tbh.
post #3185294 His left hand is huge and malformed. His nose looks weird. Solo male characters are unfortunately less likely to get approved.
post #3185292 I get that its supposed to be raining but her face is kinda fuzzy. Her arm looks like it has an extra shoulder joint. Her boots are bent in a weird way.
post #3185282 Character is just standing there on a white background. Image is kinda small compared to many other we get these days. Interesting clothing design though.
post #3184888 Best of your explicit stuff. Still shes got balloon boobs and no nose so it fails for me and apparently 11 mods.
post #3185920 No nose and her left hand is of. Nonetheless I would have approved this if I had the power.
post #3185288 Got nothing really. Appeal.
Thanks for the reply.
ion288 said:
Dont ask for so many images if you want answers. Il critique some of them for you but in the future keep it to a few posts at a time.
post #3184888 Best of your explicit stuff. Still shes got balloon boobs and no nose so it fails for me and apparently 11 mods.
post #3185920 No nose and her left hand is of. Nonetheless I would have approved this if I had the power.
post #3185288 Got nothing really. Appeal.
I know that explicit arts has lesser priority, but I do think the artists draw them well so I just have to ask. I will pay attention and keep it to a fewer number of post in the future.
post #3184888 well she has a nose which is the white streak on her face, but I guess that's a no-go. Also, the other ones I uploaded from the artists are pretty similar albeit they also have noses still didn't get approved so was kinda confused.
Need a heads-up on post #3189593.
A previous poster said it had bad proportions on the right arm, but if you take the time to watch a volleyball match, the pose is part of the wind-up for a spike.
Nitramy said:
Need a heads-up on post #3189593.
A previous poster said it had bad proportions on the right arm, but if you take the time to watch a volleyball match, the pose is part of the wind-up for a spike.
Her forearm is going into her palm. Her hands are poorly drawn. I get that hands are hard to draw but we dont give points for effort.
@kyoriku: No nose is in no way forbidden. Its just a small error that combines to make a post less appealing.
Il give you a critique of post #3186181 to: His dick has a weird colour and pussy dosnt "work" like that. Shading is quite simple making her neck look flat. Variations of this motif has been done thousands of times, I think the mods are just tired of girl getting fucked in the reverse cowboy position by faceless male.
