Close
This post was deleted. Reason: low-res. MD5: 94bf1c7ef7d72ba8f7a11037f0336cef


Edit | Respond

The original source for this png was Pixiv, but since then it's got deleted.
Jpg version still available through Twitter:
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1115696649035309056
I want this decision reconsidered as well as it's child post: post #933290. This is not low-res, this is narrow, because it's a dakimakura. The vertical resolution is over 2000 pixels. I don't know if the rules allow to put side-by-side the two halves so the it would come out to be 2100x1400 similar to something like this: post #860296 which would also be "low-res" if the two halves were posted separately.
dick_dickinson said:
I want this decision reconsidered as well as it's child post: post #933290. This is not low-res, this is narrow, because it's a dakimakura. The vertical resolution is over 2000 pixels. I don't know if the rules allow to put side-by-side the two halves so the it would come out to be 2100x1400 similar to something like this: post #860296 which would also be "low-res" if the two halves were posted separately.
It's still less than 1.6 million pixels (700x2,100 = 1,470,000), so either try to get a side-by-side (digital) version like what you mentioned, a larger digital version, or a physically scanned version (no restrictions on minimum amount of pixels).
If the two halves were posted separately they are posted separately. Side-by-side versions if they exist are not made by the original artist and I can put them side-by-side myself. Maybe that scan exception to a digree should be made for dakimakura too.