what is too realistic?

https://booru.allthefallen.moe/static/terms_of_service

"As long as 3D content is not made to look realistic (modeled to look like real humans), it can be approved"

That said, I'm wondering if we can talk about the standards of what realistic means, because I'm not sure we have a consensus as to that meaning.

My upload at https://booru.allthefallen.moe/posts/337429 from vaesark for example was deleted for being "too realistic", but I can clearly tell this is not a real girl.

Realistic clearly is not being applied as "indistinguishable" or even "nearly indistinguishable", so what exactly are the criteria?

tyciol said:

https://booru.allthefallen.moe/static/terms_of_service

"As long as 3D content is not made to look realistic (modeled to look like real humans), it can be approved"

That said, I'm wondering if we can talk about the standards of what realistic means, because I'm not sure we have a consensus as to that meaning.

My upload at https://booru.allthefallen.moe/posts/337429 from vaesark for example was deleted for being "too realistic", but I can clearly tell this is not a real girl.

Realistic clearly is not being applied as "indistinguishable" or even "nearly indistinguishable", so what exactly are the criteria?

everything´s been answered here:

https://booru.allthefallen.moe/forum_topics/135

That doesn't really have any more information than the rules themselves.

"modeled to look like real humans" is still a vague idea.

EVERYTHING is "modeled to look like" to one degree or another, some are just closer than others, so I think we need to discuss how "close to real" something is, and how it is we neutrally evaluate that.

tyciol said:

That doesn't really have any more information than the rules themselves.

"modeled to look like real humans" is still a vague idea.

EVERYTHING is "modeled to look like" to one degree or another, some are just closer than others, so I think we need to discuss how "close to real" something is, and how it is we neutrally evaluate that.

mmd is okay, but human looking models made with sfm, cmd, koikatsu, playhome, daz3d are absolutely forbidden...
Browing the booru for 3D content should give you a good idea. I'll admit it's not that easy to know where to draw the line. We have to abide the laws which is why this limitation exists in the first place. There used to be examples in the rules, but I just didn't really think about adding them this time. I suppose I could give it a shot.

Art produced by the artist Dampfnudel linked to would be deemed "too realistic" (https://www.pixiv.net/member.php?id=25867890)
3D Art of Clementine that I've seen this far is also too realistic.
The image you linked would also be against the rules.
Art produced by mantis-x is an example of what is allowed. Basically take a look here: https://booru.allthefallen.moe/posts?ms=1&page=1&tags=3D

As for those who know how this particular rule works by now, I have to ask to flag any uploads you think is questionable or you think shouldn't belong on this board. Rules have changed in the past, and the initial uploads when the booru was made also included some 3D content that'd be against the rules today.

if you don´t want to read properly, then it´s not my fault... this topic/thread i linked explained everything...

tyciol said:

https://booru.allthefallen.moe/static/terms_of_service

"As long as 3D content is not made to look realistic (modeled to look like real humans), it can be approved"

That said, I'm wondering if we can talk about the standards of what realistic means, because I'm not sure we have a consensus as to that meaning.

My upload at https://booru.allthefallen.moe/posts/337429 from vaesark for example was deleted for being "too realistic", but I can clearly tell this is not a real girl.

Realistic clearly is not being applied as "indistinguishable" or even "nearly indistinguishable", so what exactly are the criteria?

Dampfnudel said:

mmd is okay, but human looking models made with sfm, cmd, koikatsu, playhome, daz3d are absolutely forbidden...
Browing the booru for 3D content should give you a good idea. I'll admit it's not that easy to know where to draw the line. We have to abide the laws which is why this limitation exists in the first place. There used to be examples in the rules, but I just didn't really think about adding them this time. I suppose I could give it a shot.

Art produced by the artist Dampfnudel linked to would be deemed "too realistic" (https://www.pixiv.net/member.php?id=25867890)
3D Art of Clementine that I've seen this far is also too realistic.
The image you linked would also be against the rules.
Art produced by mantis-x is an example of what is allowed. Basically take a look here: https://booru.allthefallen.moe/posts?ms=1&page=1&tags=3D

As for those who know how this particular rule works by now, I have to ask to flag any uploads you think is questionable or you think shouldn't belong on this board. Rules have changed in the past, and the initial uploads when the booru was made also included some 3D content that'd be against the rules today.

if you don´t want to read properly, then it´s not my fault... this topic/thread i linked explained everything...

one question. but how can you ban the 3d drawings in koikatsu and daz3d. don't you know that those 3d drawings made by koikatsu are not realistic drawings. the koikatsu drawings are of characters in manga and anime form. not realistic. and the drawing made by daz3d there is an artist who does not make the drawing in realistic form. the drawing looks like anime form but less realistic. well in some it has anime form or cartoon from another country. and also splatoon form and some from animal crossing. like this artist (https://www.pixiv.net/users/8288778)

Dampfnudel said:

Art produced by the artist Dampfnudel linked to would be deemed "too realistic" (https://www.pixiv.net/member.php?id=25867890)
3D Art of Clementine that I've seen this far is also too realistic.

Wait, why are you referring to yourself in the 3rd person?

Clementine is one of the more confusing examples since the TWD game used an almost cartoonish comic style when compared to stuff like Last of Us which seems more realistic.

Art produced by mantis-x is an example of what is allowed. Basically take a look here: https://booru.allthefallen.moe/posts?ms=1&page=1&tags=3D

I guess I'm wondering if we could find some way to define the key differences between work like AB's and work like MX's in words.

Like we tend to rely on 'know it when you see it' but people have varying degrees of intuition for those comparisons.

if you don´t want to read properly, then it´s not my fault... this topic/thread i linked explained everything...

You did not identify what key phrase on that page you were talking about.

I notice the first post by thatenemy now says "Updated by Dampfnudel about 10 hours ago" so it appears you changed something since I last looked, though I'm not sure what.

"realistic is now allowed" and "can't look like real humans" seem like clear enough ideas, but as pedantic and Clintonesque as this might seem, it really depends on what you mean by "like" because EVERYTHING (even furries) look "like" humans, it's a question of what % of deviation we're referring to.

It's not "photorealistic" or "indistinguishable" (that's be something like >99.99% similar) so do we mean >99.9% or >99% or >90%, for example?

That's not to say I could look at something and actually assign it such a number, I'm just using it to express how there isn't really a discrete way to categorize.

I guess I'm thinking something mathematical like "3D must be drawn anime-style where the width of the eyeball must be at least twice the width of the mouth" or something along those lines establishing what the parameters of "cartoonishness" would be.

tyciol said:

Wait, why are you referring to yourself in the 3rd person?

i just copypasted because of the lack of time..

I notice the first post by thatenemy now says "Updated by Dampfnudel about 10 hours ago" so it appears you changed something since I last looked, though I'm not sure what.

just added "(including 3D) in the title

[qoute]
"realistic is now allowed" and "can't look like real humans" seem like clear enough ideas, but as pedantic and Clintonesque as this might seem, it really depends on what you mean by "like" because EVERYTHING (even furries) look "like" humans, it's a question of what % of deviation we're referring to.

It's not "photorealistic" or "indistinguishable" (that's be something like >99.99% similar) so do we mean >99.9% or >99% or >90%, for example?

That's not to say I could look at something and actually assign it such a number, I'm just using it to express how there isn't really a discrete way to categorize.

I guess I'm thinking something mathematical like "3D must be drawn anime-style where the width of the eyeball must be at least twice the width of the mouth" or something along those lines establishing what the parameters of "cartoonishness" would be.

[/quote]just think a bit like "fbi" or "cia" in the search for cp and you know what it means....
in the past, lolibooru.moe accepted deepfakes of children mixed with 3D and this was what finally nuked this site.... think about it...

Yeah but we're not talking about Tom Cruise playing golf here, stuff's being called realistic that isn't deepfake.

One of the weird dilemmas is that if someone is doing a trace of art based on something real, those who don't look at real basically couldn't know since there's no basis for comparison.

personally i posted something that looked too real but didnt think much of it cause it was kinda fake looking and kinda real looking. some one flag it after a double take i decided it was too real looking and had it perma deleted via mod request. generally i dont post 3d much cause imo it doesn't appeal to me unless it looks like a western cartoon. so in general if its 3d it basically should looks as cartoony as possible imo. but everyone had their opinion.