Quote:
Originally Posted by schnytzal
[b]Sorry for the lengthI'm trying to understand the guidelines, I find them very subjective.
|
You
should find them subjective, because they
are subjective. There's no equation for pro pics, unless they are absolutely known to be from a specific pay site. To paraphrase Potter Stewart's famous quote, "I know them when I see them". That said, 99% of them (and I stand by that number) have a specific look that I've tried my best to identify and describe in this thread, thereby laying out the guidelines I personally use to decide when to delete pics for being "pro" when I don't know for certain that they came from a pay site (but can reasonably assume that they did).
Quote:
Originally Posted by schnytzal
All of that said, let me see how I understand the guidelines:
Anything that is known to have come from a pay site will be deleted, regardless of whether the poster is aware of its origin.
Anything watermarked will be deleted, regardless of whether the website that watermarked them actually owns the rights to the pictures.
Anything that looks too much like a pro series, even if it can't be proven to be, will be assumed to be and be deleted, unless an adequate explanation of the pics' origins are given, or they are illustrative of something being discussed.
Is that it? Do I understand yet? Or is there something else I need to know?
|
Sounds about right.
Fango