This one was forgotten in the pool, but I don't know how to place it at the appropriate spot, so someone else will have to do it.
You go to the pool in question, pool #28648, find the post ID for Step by Step 17 Part 2's first image, given this is the second one (post #12229297), and then when you click to edit the pool, you search the page for that ID. Then you put this post's ID right after it with a space.
You go to the pool in question, pool #28648, find the post ID for Step by Step 17 Part 2's first image, given this is the second one (post #12229297), and then when you click to edit the pool, you search the page for that ID. Then you put this post's ID right after it with a space.
Another option is to use the Order feature. It lets you see all the images at once and drag them into different positions. So if you don't want to deal with numbers, you can memorize the image that's supposed to come before or after it, then drag it to the correct spot.
I'm not 100% sure, but I think it's AI generated or AI assisted. Wise's ear doesn't make any sense and his thumb is merging with his hand; Belle's right nipple also has a weird shape. Their pupils and the tips of their hair look weird too.
These are shared as PNG files or "Scene Cards"which contain everything like character positions, posing, lighting, animation, camera settings and other stuff. Other users can then drop in their own models using Character Cards.
If you search Twitter for anna anon scene you'll come across several familiar animations.
These are shared as PNG files or "Scene Cards"which contain everything like character positions, posing, lighting, animation, camera settings and other stuff. Other users can then drop in their own models using Character Cards.
If you search Twitter for anna anon scene you'll come across several familiar animations.
I think so yeah, the animation is created by one party and then used as a base by someone else. If someone uses a drawing from someone else it also gets tagged as such. Tags and references added to the relevant posts. Not going to add parent/child relationships though because that gets messy very fast.
By danbooru standards? Non-visible signs of genitals or gender-specific secondary attributes should warrant it 1other or androgynous if the exact character was not known. This is Bridget (Guilty Gear).
By danbooru standards? Non-visible signs of genitals or gender-specific secondary attributes should warrant it 1other or androgynous if the exact character was not known. This is Bridget (Guilty Gear).
not how it works either. 1other applies when either a. the character is completely obscured such that it's impossible to figure out their gender, or b. the character is canonically confirmed to be of indeterminate gender and there are no sex characteristics visible.
ergo, if this picture was an original character removed from all context, it would be 1girl. the only reason it's not is because character counters are canon tags.
I don' think that word means what you think it means.
where's the misunderstanding? bridget's transness is not lost on me but the matter of the fact is that our tagging consensus says that unless she walks into frame, turns to the camera and says "by the way, i got sex reassignment surgery yesterday", she's 1boy. it's just about the stupidest thing ever but hey, i'm just here to explain how it works.
Leave a comment