That's what I thought too. Well it can't be helped. After all danbooru is weird place with their own unique rules compared to other boorus.
Well, disallowed only means that they are generally forbidden. If some Approver thinks that it still passes, then it could pass. But nude filters are certainly not the habit, nor should they probably become one
Well, disallowed only means that they are generally forbidden. If some Approver thinks that it still passes, then it could pass. But nude filters are certainly not the habit, nor should they probably become one
Third party edits in general are discouraged. To an extent, the admin wants Danbooru to be an "archive"/"database" of anime images, especially since originals can be taken down or deleted. Third party edits are therefore looked down upon, especially nude filters, which often clash with the art style of the original artist.
Third party edits in general are discouraged. To an extent, the admin wants Danbooru to be an "archive"/"database" of anime images, especially since originals can be taken down or deleted. Third party edits are therefore looked down upon, especially nude filters, which often clash with the art style of the original artist.
To be short, they're "photoshop" editing not from the artist himself/herself
I've gone ahead and re-approved this. On closer examination, this isn't a photoshop and would better fit the description of derivative work. While it is based on a trace of the original, there are drawing differences between the two images that would indicate that there was a lot more effort put into this than a crude vector trace and simple crude copy/paste of genitals on top of the original.
I suppose if it's like that then kurashima tomoyasu wouldn't be considered the artist, would he? It's based on his work (even though he never drew this particular piece) so one would have to wonder if it even deserves his artist tag.
It's a good derivative work, no doubt, it's just that the artist tag should be attributed to the person who redrew this, not the one whose work this was derived from. I see it in much the same vein as many of araragikoyomis work, since we don't tag all of his derivative works with kantoku.
I suppose if it's like that then kurashima tomoyasu wouldn't be considered the artist, would he? It's based on his work (even though he never drew this particular piece) so one would have to wonder if it even deserves his artist tag.
It's a good derivative work, no doubt, it's just that the artist tag should be attributed to the person who redrew this, not the one whose work this was derived from. I see it in much the same vein as many of araragikoyomis work, since we don't tag all of his derivative works with kantoku.
EDIT: Tentatively set up for now.
Wouldn't dual artist tagging be a good way to tag derivative works though? I feel like both the re-drawer and the artist who made the original piece deserve credits for this. If the picture is childed to the original piece then there's no question about which artist did what either, since only the original artist will be credited on the original.
