Post #265563

Did someone deleted it manuell bc the text ist different then usual.
Just curious.
All deletions are manual, there are also no "canned" messages. The reason for deletion is manually entered for each image or group of images.
The post you reference was not approved in 3 days, probably because of the fingers, which are crudely drawn with straight lines - not up to the level of the rest of the drawing. (Well that is why I did not approve it.)
I was refer to the text: Not approved in three days.
It's usually wrote like this: not approved for 3+ days.
I was curous bc of the difference.
And the not approved thing is automatically, or not? Thought I read that somewhere in the forum, it is for not spam the side with those images.
  • There is no automatic deletions or automatic messages.
  • The mod that entered the message typed "three" instead of "3" - just a personal choice at the time.
Also there are abrupt edges in that image.
Oh okay I thought there would be a automatic feature for those who getting not approved. Okay got it thank you :3
May I ask the reason why post #266000 doesn't get approved?
For some reason, the line work doesn't look as good. It appears to be crayon shading, but the smaller image - since it's smaller, I suppose - doesn't have that graininess. There's an overall graininess to the larger image that isn't as glaring in the smaller version.

Did it come from his Patreon?
otaku_emmy said:
For some reason, the line work doesn't look as good. It appears to be crayon shading, but the smaller image - since it's smaller, I suppose - doesn't have that graininess. There's an overall graininess to the larger image that isn't as glaring in the smaller version.

Did it come from his Patreon?
The source said it, yes.
So that's why I was wondering.
I think it's just coincidence that post #266298 is twice the size of the image posted in pixiv, it does not seem to have been used waifu2x, and the waifu2x tag, I think the user just copied and did not notice, what the mods think?
Wait, I already deleted a post where someone used waifu2x on that image to make it twice the size after you had ALREADY uploaded it at 1.6x upscaling.

But I guess it's like a Patreon type of deal. They posted a lower resolution version on Pixiv.
I already dealt with this before checking the forums. Yes, that waifu2x tag was incorrect. That post has a fair amount aliasing, but it is the original.

The pixiv version has downscaling artifacts in the linework and waifu2x didn't handle them well even at 1.6x. So I'd say the original is certainly better.
post #266989
I upscaled it a little with waifu , Removed the font. Improved the Quality. And improved a few places in the picture with Photoshop.

- Why am I doing the work at all?
We have a zero tolerance policy on unnecessary upscaling. The original resolution is 1200x740. Our minimum is 1000x700. You've been here long enough to know that. You should also know that we don't allow or approve images that have been waifu'd when the resolution met our requirements in terms of size.

I have no problem with you removing the text. You just upscaled it when you shouldn't have.

If you want to upload the textless, "fixed" image again (as I did see the flaws you were referring to) but at its original resolution, then I will transfer the votes to that post for you.
otaku_emmy said:
We have a zero tolerance policy on unnecessary upscaling. The original resolution is 1200x740. Our minimum is 1000x700. You've been here long enough to know that.
Thank you. I'm not interested anymore.
The two reasons we delete unnecessarily waifu upscaled images:
  • To prevent the site from being flooded with upscales of existing images.
  • Waifu upscaling can degrade as well as improve an image. If the image is above our recommended minimum, it should not be upscaled.
Two exceptions:
  • Images at the absolute minimum 1000x700 resolution up to the minimum recommended size are usually judged more strictly vis-a-vis quality and if the image has not been already uploaded and approved, waifu to upscale to the minimum recommended size is not automatically forbidden. However images at or above the recommended minimum should not be waifu upscaled:
    • 1024x768 pixels (4:3 Ratio)
    • 1280x720 pixels (16:9 Ratio)
  • A detexted, cleaned and photoshopped retouched image can be considered a new image and waifu again is not automatically forbidden - provided it was not already above the recommended minimum size.
Given that this image falls within the second category, I think it can be accepted.
But why not just leave the image at its original size? 1200x740 is by no means small. It's above our minimum. So he could have just cleaned it, fixed it, and removed the text without making it larger. It didn't need to be bigger. Especially not as large as he made it.

I guess that doesn't matter though.

I'm better off not even paying attention to what Gnarf uploads, really. I'll just continue to make sure the ratings and sources are right.
Most people are using widescreen HD computer monitors today, which are 1600 × 1200 or 1920x1200 or even higher. I just checked my smart phone and its screen resolution is 1440 x 2560 (I actually thought it was only 1200x1920 ??)

The recommended minimum was based on the typical monitor resolutions at the time the faq was written. Now that most monitors are widescreen HD compatible, the faq is showing its age. Not that I would recommend to raise the absolute minimum resolution at this time.
I think it'd be a terrible idea to ever purge and/or stop accepting smaller images. Not everyone can use the wallpapers that are over 1900x1200. I know my computer can't fit ones that big.

We already limit what people can upload a lot compared to other boards.

As far as your point goes, a person could still upscale any image posted here for their own personal use so there's no need to require larger images.
I was not clear - I never ever suggested purging grandfathered images - that would be terrible, or even changing the minimum requirements for image size. There is a lot of good art still "out in the wild" that would be excluded if we did so! I find some really nice images, but alas at 800x600 resolution ;(.

What I wanted to point out - is that the upload guidelines state:

There is some flexibility in this guideline, as the site does host images that are below the mentioned resolutions. Images below the minimum [recommended] resolutions are allowed if they are nearly perfect in terms of technical (objective) and aesthetic (subjective) quality, as determined by a Moderator.

Therefore, there is an incentive to waifu2x images below those resolution recommendations, especially if the image is being photoshopped, detexted, cleaned, or otherwise modified.

There is further incentive to waifu2x these below recommended resolution because many people now have widescreen HD monitors, which have higher resolutions.

Therefore moderation should be more flexible with respect to waifu2x on original images below the recommended size, because our guidelines encourage it. But there should be zero tolerance for uploading a waifu2x'ed image that is already in konachan's library.
Post #266115

Since when are censored images gonna replaced with uncensored ones?
There are so many censored ones that are here even though there are uncensored ones from the same image.
Dunno, but it says:

This post was deleted. Reason: replaced with higher res.
So, the uncensored/censored wasn't much of a reason.
Shizko said:
Dunno, but it says:

So, the uncensored/censored wasn't much of a reason.
The same goes for this.
Many uncensored ones are in an higher res than the censored ones but they stay anyway.
  • The uncensored resolution of the image in question is 20x higher.
  • Censored images generally start out as uncensored original images.
  • A censored image of higher resolution should not replace an uncensored image.
  • A clean .png image of the same or higher resolution will replace a .jpg image.
The replaced post #266115 was a much lower resolution jpg image replaced by a higher png image, that happens to be uncensored, as such, probably the original.
The primary reason we normally keep both is that the uncensored version is normally an edit. Replacing the original with an edit is something we normally wouldn't do, though we do when the artist truly messes up and a quality fix is uploaded.

But in this case, the uncensored higher res post isn't an edit. It seems Emmy found a high res original which just happened to be uncensored. In such a case, it's up to the mods whether to keep both or not. Though with such a large difference in res/quality, I'm not surprised she chose to delete the small one.
Aaah, yes that makes sense.
Thank you, Zolxys and thanks to the others too.
was there anything wrong with post #228087 ? Too many artifacts or s'um?
This thread normally concerns itself with the recently deceased, not the long since completely decomposed... Post #228087 was posted nearly two years ago and deleted for "not being approved in 3 days".

To me, the image looks a bit blurry and blotchy - overly quantized color resolution. The line work is not crisp. The image has a very flat appearance to it. (IMO)
Also an entire Pokieman was cropped out.

It's usually never a good idea to crop an image that you know wouldn't look right being cropped. The kind where you can clearly tell something/someone key is missing.
Post #268362

Explicit loli.
No it isn't.
You can't see a crotch or something like this was it would be tagging it like explicit.

Edit: *Sigh* Okay my bad I got only eyes for the one in the middle. I'm sorry. That makes me crazy :(