AAAAAAAAAAND, regardless of whether it was enlarged or not, that was way over the jaggy line'd-ness we'd accept anyways.

But I do genuinely believe it was drawn smaller and then blowed up.
Agreed. I do genuinely believe it was drawn smaller and then blowed up. Disgracefully so haha (boo artist... but also cool artist since they draw good like)
90% is upscaled.

The artist did most of the work, then upscaled to double size, then added some finishing touches to the background and then saved to JPEG.

Even if that weren't the case, that's way too severe for simple aliasing. You could clearly see blocks of 2x2 pixels throughout nearly all of the image.
ok then, I lost it, the 2x2 i got, but in areas that have only 1 pixel ?, the 10% of the image?, but anyway, I give up.

It's not 1, is 4 pixel, that explains.
Yeah, it's kind of like comparing this (original) with this (upscaled not using waifu2x but the old fashioned way were it gets pixely)

That's the tea ^^
I think he used another technique, neither "old fashioned" nor waifu2x, or only in some parts of the image, I say it because of the end of the lines in the hair that you showed me, does not look like the one I uploaded, but it is because the original also looks like this, so in the end it must be that.
I wonder why this is deleted? I was trying to upload it today but I have a feeling Arsy was the one that deleted it himself...
I think that he thought that it had too many of artifacts. I uploaded it cropped and cleaned already anyway.
I think you only uploaded the nipple version. I might upload a less artifacts safe one tomorrow (or you can do it).
mattiasc02 said:
I think you only uploaded the nipple version. I might upload a less artifacts safe one tomorrow (or you can do it).
Ah sure, you can do. Was too lazy to upload the other one too. Well but the other version is not safe though.
Was the reason why post #310967 was deleted because it was too generic? And ok I will admit the foot behind the shoe didn't have much depth to it.
mattiasc02 said:
Was the reason why post #310967 was deleted because it was too generic? And ok I will admit the foot behind the shoe didn't have much depth to it.
It was a nice drawing, there just wasn't much going on. It was too much of a closeup, really.
*cries like a little baby*

B-but it was part of the cute pantyhose set :3. But it’s ok :)
Eh. T'was boring. Not much more can be said about it.
post #313024

But I uploaded it 22 hours ago T.T Lol just say it don't look good be hoenst
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh THAT'S where it went. My B.

I'm not undeleting it though. Not unless someone else approves the other one.
Ok then... *waits for Zolxys, or some other mod*

otaku_emmy said:
I'm not undeleting it though
muh-muh-muh-muh-meanie! *my broken hato* :p

No one seems to care about ram...
I just tend to not like manga/comic styled panels is all. As wallpapers.
Figured. Me and Kamenitza LOVE those tho.

But to each their own.
mattiasc02 said:
No one seems to care about ram...
Well, I always prefer a lot of ram.

Post #318194

Can a mod undelete? The deletion was a mistake. Dreista just uploaded the one with the ugly artifact-texture.
post #274493

Why was it deleted?
We have pleanty of dakimakuras with a closed version and the full version.

Post #319135
I was too rush.
The png, I wanted to replace with, has artifacts so the jpeg is better.
Could a kind mod please undelete it?
BattlequeenYume said:
post #274493

Why was it deleted?
We have pleanty of dakimakuras with a closed version and the full version.
Because that's the full image at a higher res? We don't usually keep smaller versions containing less detail. It's the same reason Cait's art gets replaced all the time. It's not "zoomed in", it's just less of the art.
Okay...
somehow it wasn't clear to me that we make a difference in cropped and zoomed in.
Thanks for undeleting the other image though.