I will post some guidelines with image documentation in the future, consider this thread a work in progress at the moment.

Also, here is an example of a bad old image of mine that I would not accept as sufficient quality to post in /gmod/.

1. No visible UI elements unless specifically used to enhance the image.

Come on. Come. On. How hard is it to wait the few fucking seconds for any UI popups to go away? Hell, this image even told the user EXACTLY how to get rid of them! Forget the fact that the posing is shit, focus on the fact that the user couldn't take the time to turn off the hint boxes and retake the image. Does that really say that they put any effort into making something for others to enjoy?

Still, there could be some reason to have UI elements onscreen, so we should account for that. However, there is no excuse for being too lazy or impatient to get rid of them in a normal image.

2. No obvious construct maps.

There is almost nothing worse you could do to make your models and poses look completely out of place than to put them in gm_construct, gm_flatgrass, or any other type of map designed for building contraptions. If you're going to have a naked Spy and ScoutMama posing, put them somewhere that actually makes sense for them to be naked and posing! There is a difference between drawing attention to your models through removing distractions in the background scenery, and NOT HAVING ANY BACKGROUND OR SCENERY.


3. Unless done for a specific purpose, don't pose your models like shit and call it art.

Look at that Spy's back. LOOK AT IT. Does that look like a pose anyone would take, at any point in their lives? Short of having their lower half placed into a medieval torture device and their upper half pulled away from it at a 90 degree angle, I'm fairly certain no one would, nor would most people find this an enjoyable thing to look at. Obviously there will be differences in opinion between mods, but we absolutely need to establish a very minimum of acceptable quality such that /gmod/ as a whole can improve. We do have a help thread in /gmod/, and /workshop/ doesn't have to be just for assistance with 2d art.

Can there be a guideline against bad photoshopping/paintovers? 'Cause that shit gets pretty ridiculous too.

>>171
If you've got an example of it, please post it here for posterity, as well as because I'm not quite sure what you mean.

Alright, I think I gave it enough time to sit around. Time to move this out to the public and get some opinions from the rest of the community on it.

Things I want to see from the community in following posts:
1. New rule ideas or tweaks to existing rules such as /fanart/'s ruleset, so that they would fit /gmod/.
2. Productive discussion, with visual examples, on what level of quality the community will accept in /gmod/.
3. A lack of rage and flaming, from or toward, anyone whose images get used as examples, or anyone who simply sucks at using Gmod. This is not a thread to shit on people directly, only works they have done that are incontestably bad, such as the two I used as examples above in Proposed Guidelines. If you are terrible, I suggest you take it to /workshop/ and improve your skills rather than get mad.

Today's image is just to show off another of my simple old scenes that actually look decent, done in maybe an hour on dustbowl.

For the love of GMod, set your directX level to 9. https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Mat_dxlevel

Personally I cannot stand the muddy colours dx8 craps out on the tf2 characters. My eyes will skip right over your picture.

On a slightly related note, how about a separate Gmod board for dick-related images? Since we've got /fanart/ and /afanart/, it would only be fitting.

>>829
this.

>>829
so basicly why dont we give me my own gmod board.

ok sure

>>832
are you the only one posting gmod pr0n on the other board?

>>824
I think it would be a cool idea if there was a tutorial thread and a sauce thread where we'd share gmod models and stuff related to tf2.

>>822
can anyone post examples?

Oh yea, I forgot. We could have a tutorial for re-skining and modeling models too.

>>838
quite the opposite

>>838 >>839
Tutorial thread and source threads for /gmod/ both sound good and easily doable, I'll make an effort to have those up and running based on /workshop/'s own threads at some point soon.

>>829
I can't say for certain whether an /agmod/ would be available, that's up to Kumori. Still, I personally am in favour the idea.

>>832
Yes Hydra, we are also making a board where only you can make posts as well as images, and everyone else's posts are wordfiltered into "blah blah blah" since there is no need for any commoners in your domain.

>>840
Oh.

sooooo... are you guys (mods) going to change anything on /gmod/ or should we start doing the threads?

>>849
Kumori's been rather busy of late, so I can't say we've got any official word on what's happening yet. Consider the changes to be in hiatus for now, but I still encourage more discussion on them, what you do and don't like, etc. We haven't had nearly as much as I expected, to tell you the truth.

>>850
Hum... So let's see what we have.
A tutorial thread (posing/editing), a source thread, a texture and modeling tutorial too I guess...
We could have some kind of project too, as a rp done with gmod? That would be interesting, I've done it before on tumblr and it was fun because it was interactive and challenging~
Also, a critique thread, maybe?
There's not much else to say I think... hum.

>>862
Sounds good then. If you're all waiting for a verdict here, I would suggest getting the threads you want started properly, and if any issues arise then I'll try to get it taken care of. All that I'm actually waiting for in terms of official stuff from Kumori is whether or not I can delete the shittiest quality stuff off /gmod/.

>>864
Alright, I'll try to start a couple threads then.