turtles
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Poll

How far would you like to see the revamp go?

No revamps, please!
Just streamline the keywords.
Streamline the keywords and remove low-quality patches
I'll post what I think shortly.

Author Topic: Need Your Opinions- Patch Archive Update  (Read 836 times)

Offline Narnia

Need Your Opinions- Patch Archive Update
«: March 27, 2012, 10:33:41 AM»
It has been about a year since the Patch Archive was mass-updated to fix broken patches, remove low quality patches, and update keywords. We have grown a lot in that year and it's looking like the Patch Archive is due for some spring cleaning!

At the least we would like to update keywords so search terms will turn up more patches. This will be done to some extent either way simply because our Archive has begun taking shape more and could use this update to improve navigation.

Also during the year a few low quality patches have crept back into the mix of patches. In this case low quality means "bad MS paint mouse art" or "I can't tell what that is supposed to be" and is not dependent on style. While Spring Cleaning is going on, should these low-quality patches also be deleted?

The only low-quality patches that will be spared if deletion is OK are any uploaded within the last month as it's past the year cut-off and the Randomism patch as that patch is intentionally very low quality. It's an April Fool's prank patch.

What do you think, guys? Should we delete low quality patches or leave them in for completion sake?
"The views expressed in this message are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect those of the Furcadia Art Zone, Dragon's Eye Production, or Furcadia."

 
        

Offline Sync

Re: Need Your Opinions- Patch Archive Update
«Reply #1: March 27, 2012, 07:10:33 PM»
could i have an example of what is considered a low quality patch?
i just wanna know where the bar is before putting in my vote.

Offline Calib

Re: Need Your Opinions- Patch Archive Update
«Reply #2: March 29, 2012, 12:00:46 AM»
could i have an example of what is considered a low quality patch?
i just wanna know where the bar is before putting in my vote.
Anything worse than the following patches will be deleted.


The first has very inconsistent shading. The second has basically no shading. The anatomy is poor and the body positions are awkward on them both. Overall it's a redline nightmare. To be honest, these are borderline on the "keep" side. I'm tempted to delete them both if deleting is decided on. What do you think?

"Do it yourself" patches will be spared as long as they're OK line-wise. Finishing your own art can be fun and you can always fix up their lines! However, when something that poor quality is marked as "final" or, worse yet, "do not edit" it's a whole different story.

Once such low-quality art was common because it was all we had. The husky is an ancient Swiftkill patch: the patch that launched a thousand feral dreams. However, we can and often do make nicer patches now and should spread them where possible.

The following two patches are anime and "finish it yourself" feral wolf/husky, respectively, and are firmly on the "keep" side of the spectrum. They aren't incredible, but they are better than the two shown earlier and I can see them possibly being used by others. We aren't going to become super-elite here, but having nicer patches stay is the goal.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2012, 12:27:24 AM by Calib »

Offline Sync

Re: Need Your Opinions- Patch Archive Update
«Reply #3: March 29, 2012, 09:57:38 AM»
okay, i agree with removing things like that first port thing. the second avatar i'd spare though if edits were allowed because i believe it could easily fall into the "do it yourself" category, simply because there is no shading. i feel i could do something with it now if i ever had the urge to make a feral dream, anyway.

so i voted for removing low quality and redoing tags. will probably take away my ancient stuff butttt that's okay since they weren't even good enough for me to use lol.

Offline Calib

Re: Need Your Opinions- Patch Archive Update
«Reply #4: July 04, 2012, 01:10:48 AM»
Slow cat is slow.

I've started work on the patch archive update! I will post as sections are finished.

Patches that do not meet the quality standards mentioned in this post are going to be deleted in order to maintain a high quality standard for our patch database. If someone wishes to re-upload a deleted  patch with the problems fixed, feel free!

If I missed something that should be deleted, please let me know.

I'm also updating the search terms to remove redundant terms (like "portrait" on something in the portraits section) and adding better descriptive words. 

Current "Keeper" Standards"

I raised the standards a little from last year to help weed things out a little. Of course, if I can't tell what it is or if it looks like it was scribbled by a toddler (and isn't Randomism) it is going to be deleted, but this year patches will also need to have the following....

Portraits:
Finished!
Must have decent anatomy.
Must remap without weird incorrectly remapping sections.

I'm grading a lot harder on the second one than the first because where anatomy is a longterm skill that takes time to learn, anyone can click a few times to see how a portrait remaps. Not checking your remaps before uploading is lazy and a mark of low quality. Portraits that don't have great shading but still remap correctly and were otherwise OK on anatomy were kept.

For example, this portrait was deleted due to incorrect remapping along the hair and headband.



Avatars Working
Must remap or have good shading if nonremap
Must have passable "animation" for motion

This means that unless a patch is marked "finish it yourself" or otherwise is unfinished and does not alow the avatar to remap, it goes. Exceptions will be made for well-shaded nonremapping avatars because the lack of remapping is intentional and meant to create an effect. Lack of shading on a finished non-remaping avatar is lazy and denotes poor quality.

Items Not there yet
Must be at least reasonably isometric
Should have some shading

The first is more important than the second. Ever walk into a dream that was full of "cardboard standouts" instead of trees and furniture? Eeek! Yes, this is harsher than last year, but items have turned out to be a popular enough category to be able to handle a more strict standard.

Walls Not there yet
Should be either functional or able to function with some changes to item positions

I'm aware that not all patches are complete or pretty among the walls, but some people don't need complete or pretty so there is some leniency here.  If I missed any, please let me know!

Floors finished
They're fine. :)

Mixed Not there yet
I plan to categorize these soon! I may weed out especially weak files using item standards.

 

anything