I'd very much like to flag for deletion. It's low-res that seems to be hiding behind a hoax. The art fits on 1332*1084 = 1.4Mpx rectangle, but there are artifact-level smudges outside of it, making autocrop stop at 3.3Mpx. Bad photoshop job?

yrumddldluxduzrf said:
I'd very much like to flag for deletion. It's low-res that seems to be hiding behind a hoax. The art fits on 1332*1084 = 1.4Mpx rectangle, but there are artifact-level smudges outside of it, making autocrop stop at 3.3Mpx. Bad photoshop job?

I think there are various ideas.
My opinion is that as long as published in public picture is over 1.6M, that is fine with that.

If the size of the picture is strictly limited to the size of the drawing, then a standing picture with a white background, such as post #956280, has to be checked every time it is posted.
I don't think it's necessary because it's too much work.

In addition, surrounding area of the picture are specified as transparent in alpha channel, so there is no point in making an issue about the colour.olour.

hiroimo2 said:
I think there are various ideas.
My opinion is that as long as published in public picture is over 1.6M, that is fine with that.

If the size of the picture is strictly limited to the size of the drawing, then a standing picture with a white background, such as post #956280, has to be checked every time it is posted.
<...>

Thanks for input.

Many of tranparent_png specifically are simply game resource rips, having the same picture dimensions. A template rectangle with sprites that come from somewhere and get arranged in uniform fashion so that similar height characters would look consistent etc. Only the character sprite changes from one file to another, so it's hard not to limit the art component to that sprite. The rest is padding. To recognize the padding as legit part of the art or not, the 1.6 Mpx rule doesn't specify (it's also hard to understand how long ago the rule came into effect. I only looked through images from the last two years, flagged quite a few on the similar grounds). If the padding is a simple background, I lean to let them be, though I'd consider if it's a wallpaper, whether the background is animesque or if the foreground objects make up very small fraction of the image (maybe some 20 %).
Otherwise, the spirit of the rule gets violated. Clean-cut it's too small, but slap it on a large transparent sheet - suddenly it's viable now.

I'm not vehemently against allowing such things. The fact I flagged several images was kind of forcing the issue. Let the guys in charge decide and I'll go from there.

hiroimo2 said:
<...>
If the size of the picture is strictly limited to the size of the drawing, then a standing picture with a white background, such as post #956280, has to be checked every time it is posted.
<...>

GIMP "Crop to content" function works on white backgrounds too. Now I have to fight a new urge, thanks. :E The post you quote has effectively the size of 861*1560 = 1.34 MPx.

Currently it's fine as soon as the "padding" is original (as in, that's how these resources are extracted from game data) and not being ridiculous (subjective to mod's decision).

Please don't flag posts before a new consensus is reached.