I agree in the opinion that I don't like the "HQ" term. I would wish to rename it too. But we would be more open to previous MQ/HQ then. Besides MHQ/HQ is easier to rate (in my opinion) then LQ/MQ and there we had the most problems with.
I can see your point and I agree with you. However, it would be really unfair for groups like Japflap and Shannaro (and Inane etc.) who spend lots of days cleaning every spot of every page, if their release is just going to be called "Scan" or so I think that's the only problem with removing HQ.
You dont get to remove HQ.
First of all, it's really rewarding to get that tag after you've actually given of your time to do somethin GOOD (and i insist on the word GOOD. maybe i shoudv written great?)
Second of all, it's really insulting to HQ groups, that spent a LOT OF TIME doing REAL HQ. (like Japflap, Shannaro, Kefi, RIP-RUSH ...); Especially when an uglier Edited Manga comes up with a HQ tag on it; that is what depressed me the most when RUSH did HQ release of OP.
Also, as for some more standards i've seen; in HQ, please DONT redo ALL the action lines, some just look really computer generated (ie. straight lines that wont EVER fit in ANY manga, and are darker than the action itself, thus not emphazing the action, but put it in a 2nd plan.. or oblique action lines remade into one straight lines instead of a triangle.)
And solid gray should NEVER be used ~ it's ugly; pattern looks way better :/ (call me whenever you see a manga with solid gray ~ for those, of course Edited Manga should use solid gray as well, as the mangaka intended it to be)
As for MQ/LQ: please remove the blured scans that went throught a watercolor filter from the MQ standards: some really makes you wanna stick a pencil in your eyes, up to your brain, and turn it all over the place. Why should it be removed?
1) It's worse than the original raw. Having a pink raw is even better than seeing this. Manga is not a watercolor painting (= super blured).
2) It removes a lot of original detail from the lineart <= NEVER EVER do that. even in LQ.
3) I dont have a 3, but i'm tired and wanna go to bed and a list never goes without a number 3 doesnt it?
Finally something else we're considering: We could also have Manga Editors up a sample page of their scan and post links (not thumbnails since they would be considered spoilers as well as it would take up too much space to have so many posted). Details for this still need to be worked out, but if we get enough support for this idea, we will look into implementing it.
I think the new system is better than old, the sample page idea is good, and I like also mod's rating . However I think you can improve the system, but I had to admit that it's difficult to improve the system without creating some confusion. Maybe you can considerate to use a few level ( for example LQ1, LQ2, MQ1, MQ2, HQ1, HQ2 ) because according to actual system, this images are all rated as MQ
but I think there's difference between this two, starting from the gray pattern.
I dunno how, but if you reach to fix this gap, your system will be better then actual.
To have a Edited Manga, you NEED to have edited the JAPANESE RAW. Insert the translations and whatnot. BUT, the big thing is they are "duh-things" and does not take a half-wit to realize that they ain't the same.
The thing is that, BECAUSE there are GUIDELINES as to what is LQ/MQ is, then it leaves no room for any criticism.
Silveril made a REALLY good point. SOME Manga Editors filter the scans to remove the white grains but in DOING SO, they make it REALLY BAD! AS IN... ughhh... I regard myself as strongly opinionated and my standards are from having seen A LOT of Edited Mangas. I know what is SLQ/LQ/MQ-/MQ/MQ+/HQ/SHQ and the fact is that the guidelines gives a BIG ASS LOOPHOLE that crapped up, nuked up, pixelized stuff get into categories that some of the elites hold (A.K.A. Rush's One Piece/ Evil_Genius' Berserk [THOSE ARE HQ!!! XD]) but there is NO COMPARISON.
Leaving it as it is may be convenient, but in my opinion, it is high time that we realize that the guidelines should be abolished and let the personal impressions of the rater have its say.
I don't see any problem with the current system. Its the same every week, the first 3-5 scans are LQ and then either late in the day or the next day we see the MQ's and the first HQ isn't out for a while. As far as I can tell you can almost always tell the quality by the release date.
Personally I think that the release date of the scan should be the only thing shown with the exception of camshots and HQ's.
For example: (from the Naruto 290 release)
Edited Mangas:
Knives - (Camshot) 05:00PM est, March 14, 2007
overjojojo - 05:30PM est, March 14, 2007
r_ray52 - 09:00PM est, March 14, 2007
Pwned Hokage - 12:05AM est, March 15, 2007
Nytrogyn - 05:36AM est, March 15, 2007
JapFlap - (HQ) 12:00PM est, March 17, 2007
obviously I made up the times and dates and don't and I used the names of the Manga Editors in the order that they appeared in the origional post. Don't assume that Knives actually did a camshot scan etc. I think this way no one would be insulted and it still has a bit of a ranking system.
I'd prefer an eraly camshot over a late MQ of HQ anyday. generally I'm happy with the first or second scan.
I'm supposed to be away right now, but I couldn't help but peek in here to read what everybody had been saying about the subject (a matter of much conversation among the globals/admins in the last month, as you can imagine...)
This is one of the reasons I love this community so much though, just about everybody has something insightful to say.
I was an advocate of the "new system" we proposed because I felt that it wouldn't alienate as many people. But after reading what you guys said here, especially considering the (+/-) system, I gotta say I like that idea.
And although people may be used to Low Quality, Middle Quality, High Quality, I can understand why Manga Editors might see red after seeing their work rated as LOW Quality. I think being more politically correct here is a lot more desirable than clinging to a system we're used to.
So I'd like to see new names for these rating as well. Or maybe we could just do it like this (speaking from a reviewer's perspective, it doesn't have to be 'stars')
Edited Manga by ... - (1 star)
Edited Manga by ... - (2 stars)
Edited Manga by ... - (3 stars)
Edited Manga by ... - (4 stars)
and so on...
And we can decide on what qualifies to be 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 stars. 1 Star Edited Mangas would probably mostly be cam Edited Mangas though. I think Manga Editors wouldn't react as hostilely to their work being called LQ as they would 2-stars, but I'm sure there'd be exceptions. Ah well. Can't please everybody. But somebody did hit the nail on the head here when they posted saying we're Mangahelpers for a reason. We probably do have to get detailed on stuff like this.
I'll let ya guys discuss this more and I'm sure the mod staff will decide on something. In the meanwhile I'm heading back to the shadows for the time being ^^;
Wouldn't that be biased, ddadain? The guidelines are needed as a standard for the raters to follow. Ratings based on impression only would not solve any conflict between the Manga Editor and the rater if the former is still not happy with the rating given to him/her/them. They won't have any solid proof to back up anyone's claims that something deserved to be called LQ while the other argues that it's MQ. Instead of abolishing the guidelines altogether, we want to know if you guys have ideas on how to modify the current rating unless a lot of you are for retianing the current system or abolishing it at all.
that would be a bit biased, as ayah said.
but for the way i rate Edited Mangas (and i guess it is the same for the other raters, but can't be sure as i ain't them) works like this:
- taking a look
- rating on opinion
- searching for stuff to back it up
- correcting rating a bit if necessary
- making final rating based on everything previous to this point.
so the guidelines are just there to ensure the raters go along the same line or can't be unfair about some points. Though i got to point out that usually the final rating doesn't differ from my opinion; I still think the guidelines are useful to the raters and Manga Editors (to know what gives them the rating)
On one hand, you have a totally filterized Edited Manga. Too dark, lineart blurry and edges look dull, overleveled, crappy typesetting, BUT the grays (if they still exist) are uniformed [because of filtering], the blacks are mostly uniformed [because of filtering]. If the guidelines were followed, which are:
MQ:
- Blacks are mostly black & No white grains
- Rotated
- Size appropriate
- etc.
then the rater would HAVE to mark is as MQ, although it really is (in terms of many things) worse than the RAW itself. *Citing some Bleach & Naruto MQs to be more specific*
On the other hand, we have a Edited Manga which has white grains on the blacks, but the lineart is VERY much intact and is CLEAN LOOKING, White is White. Leveling is appropriate. Redrawing done. Editting modeled like the early phases of HQ Edited Mangas. But, since there are white grains, it's LQ.
I don't want to specifically point out releases o_o Although it usually happens with Naruto and Bleach Edited Mangas, FOR CERTAIN. It would be insulting the rater and the Manga Editor o_o which I wouldn't want to do.
SO...
Why impression-marking?
- Other things APART from the editing can be put into consideration.
- It gives freedom to the raters. [Like actually allowing them to cross reference the other batches of LQs before puting a much better scan with the lot]
- It won't allow any contest (IMO) since it's the PERSONAL opinion of a designated rater. Different from being DEFINITIVE, but serves a gauge ONLY.
If I had to choose I would say keep it as it is because the new system is a bit complicated. However, I really like the idea that the rating reflects the amount of time that was put into it, which would benefit all those Manga Editors who release weekly and as quickly as they can.
I really dont think the amount of time spent on the Edited Manga is FAIR.
I mean, i know some Manga Editors can do an HQ in the same amount of time i would do a good MQ.. see what i mean? it doesnt reflect the quality of the scans!
Of course i would be pissed to get downgraded; but it wouldnt be fair to the one who made a better Edited Manga to have the same grade as me, just because he put the same time in it, would it?
It's like when you take an exam:
We all get 1 hour to do the test. But, some will do better than the other... thus get a better grade! That's just how it goes : it's FAIR.
So if some Manga Editors have trouble with the rating for the Edited Manga they made, just because they spent time on it; Next time, think about those who spent as much time on it, but did something actually BETTER. Would it be fair for them to get the same rating as you did?
Now i believe that the problem is making a difference between all those kinds of LQ and MQ.. (I think the rating for HQ is appropriate.. which is normal i guess since i was part of that group who made those ratings XD)
Anyway.. How about differencing those:
I liked the one where you posted a sample of a page (perhaps the title one so people dont get spoilered) (inside spoiler tags) and let people decide for themselves.
Failing that, strict specifications should be made for each Q (LQ, MQ, HQ or whatever gets decided on) and you should write in your post how/if you met those specifications eg redrawn frameborders, solid blacks, clear lineart, redone grays (if its from a jump raw) etc
I agree with Silveril that the amount of time used up should not be a factor.
We SHOULD NOT encourage people to waste their time trying to get a fairly BAD RAW to MQ quality because it's a waste of their time [Individual Manga Editors // and when I say bad, I mean BAD]. Anyways, most HQ groups has their own RAWs that are much higher in quality than the public raws (Kylara's raws are great BTW, but the power settings of each raw seems different *_*) thus saving them time editing.
Anyhow, I know my suggestion is very... controversial. I agree that changing it to that extent would possibly cause pandemonium XD
Instead, we can have:
~ Cam-Scans = SLQ
~ Filtered-Scans = LQ
~ Satisfactory/Average-Quality (editing done, NOT THROUGH FILTER / The better "LQ" scans) = SQ
~ Good-Quality (MQ meaning NOT TOO FILTERED AND NOT JUST BECAUSE the blacks ARE FILLED IN) = MQ
~ HQ [No need revision for this one, it's obvious when something is HQ :P]
~ SHQ *VERY HIGH QUALITY* [Reference are Rush/"current"Timcanpi scans/Evil Genius/Scum-scans]
Yup, I vote for this one, what you guys think... Can't really think of anything for the new ratings in between the current LQ and MQ O_O Suggestions?
However, I agree with those whom had said a Cam-Q or SLQ or something like that.
Or more levels? Though that can get very confusing. Like: LLQ, (M)LQ, HLQ, LMQ, (M)MQ, HMQ, etc.
Anything too complicated can be confusing, for everyone (or just for me).
But there should be some in betweens, because from some of the posts I've read, the current system doesn't seem completely fair.
L/MQ? M/HQ?
SHQ for those really good Edited Mangas done by groups and individuals.
Whatever the admins? decide, the rules does seem to need some adjusting.
There could be rules that are excepts to the rule that make scans that really should belong in MQ (but in LQ) belong in MQ. Whether a scan should really belong in LQ or MQ could be determined by comparing to other scans qualities.
The problem is the grey areas(between the ratings), and I don't have a solution to it.
A sample would be good. But make it the first page or cover, because posting any other page would be too big of spoiler. (If there are no specifications of what page they can post, they can post major spoilers, like character deaths, For example.)
So nothing too complicate and/or confusing. Easy to understand names.
(I know little about the rules for the scans, so... And sorry if I'm not really clear about my opinions, or were not much help. ^^'')
only 38 voters uptil now... that hardly counts as an opinion...
Anyways, the current system is based on comparing Naruto manga scans. Which is plain wrong because you can't compare one manga with another.
Naruto is much much much easier to clean than say, One Piece. so you can't rate a Edited Manga based on amount on work put into it.
But any system will be inevitably flawed because many will be biased towards "big" groups. I put big in quote because in reality they don't have that many people. there's Japflap for naruto, KEFI/NULL for One Piece.
when there are few Manga Editors or groups doing a certain manga, they are more likely to get high ratings. I.e. their scans are less likely to suffer the same scrutiny as less well known groups. The raters might go like. "Oh, group X did that? must be HQ then"
an example of how this flaws the system: Evil Genius for Berserk. strictly going by the current system, all their releases would get MQ ratings. I don't know if they do releases in higher quality though.
It is understandable that at 2 am in the morning, when you are cleaning a complicated scene, you tend to rush things a bit. I can find flaws in the HQ example pages put in the first post. But the guy who cleaned it probably thinks it's perfect. (note i think that masashi's drawing style is crap to begin with)
Many very good Edited Mangas get a MQ because of ninny details. And it depends on personal appreciation too. I find that the lines in japflap's scans are thick and somewhat pasty in places. Others will find the lines in my scans to be faint(?).
Now i can't really complain about the bias towards certain groups. because I do get favors from time to time.
the current system doesn't work because it is based on unrealistic rules.
Now a system where reader opinion would make the rating, something like a poll or using the "rate thread" menu(on the top right) will be biased too.
on thursdays when raws come out many visitors will be more than happy to give a camshot Edited Manga an excellent rating just because they got their manga fix.
so to sum it up:
nothing works.
and i think you are taking this waaaay too seriously.
How about no rating at all unless the Manga Editor him/herself gives a rating.
eg.
I come in with my superb Edited Manga and start a thread in "latest Edited Mangas" called "One Piece 666 by NBST"
Now the moderator who sees that just adds the link to the RTS thread WITHOUT rating it.
I like my scan the way it is. don't put an ugly label on it. Since i didn't put one there it means that I don't want one.
Now the next week I come in with my superb Edited Manga and start a thread in "latest Edited Mangas" called "One Piece 667 HQ by NBST"
Now the moderator who sees that rates it first using some reasonable and flexible guidelines(yet to be defined) and then ads it to the RTS thread.
that way everyone gets a fair chance. The new guys who do "lower quality" can put no quality label and will get an equal chance to be read.
the guys who have proved their worth will be read because they have a sort of fan base who will know that they will like what they download.
And now ladies and gentlemen, the flexible guidelines:
I noticed that most of you considered only the image quality. But why not instead consider a Feel Good factor. ie the image quality+ the typesetting style+ any other factors like translations notes and such.
When you read the Edited Manga you don't need to stress yourself trying to scrutinise the images following some idiotic guidelines that are ruining your fun (yes i consider them to be idiotic, sue me... or kiss me).
read it honestly and rate as it as you feel it.
meaning that some Edited Mangas might get rated as "not bad" or "good but could use some work"
and other as " really good" or "awesome!" or even "HOLY SHIT I love you guys!, your quality is great and your translation rocks my world and your side notes are teh ownage!"
but this is just a suggestion.
edit -- I should mention that statistically, critics have on average shorter lifespans. It's useless trying too hard to put a label on something.
I'm not Manga Editor myself, but I don't think it's good to say for example how you said "much easier to clean". Every manga is hard to clean, and that doeasn't mean, that via the title must be ranking..
How about no rating at all unless the Manga Editor him/herself gives a rating.
I'm not Manga Editor myself, but I don't think it's good to say for example how you said "much easier to clean". Every manga is hard to clean, and that doeasn't mean, that via the title must be ranking..
oh trust me. I am a Manga Editor. It's ridiculously easy. ok, not quite ridiculously but more relatively.
it depends on the raws you get. But when you get a Ultra High quality of teh death raws like the ones Kylara provides, it's still almost a joke.
Masashi has adopted a new drawing style since roughly Kakashi Gaiden. It feels like textbook drawing style... the kind that you would learn in art school when doing still lifes.
you can notice it in many of his frames. He has superb still scenes with awesome quality of detail.
but as a result the number of lines in most of his other scenes are simplistic... and there's very little text too.
He draws huge frames taking half the page at times with only a close shot of a character's face. That is easy to clean.
My opinion is that this new drawing style is crap. It's ruining the manga. and Tsunade and Anko look like barrels. They used to be sex symbols dammit!
Now Oda.
His style is a bit messy. I defy anyone to find a frameborder that is actually rectangular. (it might occur but that would be completely random).
It's messy. thrown together, lively, awesome. I love it.
It's much harder to clean than Naruto because there's more detail in any scene, more movement, more characters doing many many things. and they talk a lot.
lots of sfx. so i have to translate a lot more of sounds. AND the women are sooo sexy. and are very often in compromising situations:
note: this image is from a Edited Manga i never finished.
sure, i see a point in using a simple manga as baseline comparison but the raters apply those rules too strictly, most other series would never go beyond MQ.
And maintaining a huge effort like RUSH did is impossible for long periods of time. Any group trying to do what they did would die out as quickly. unless their members have no life apart from manga... hey, that might work.
But you could be right. I shouldn't be talking about how easy or difficult a manga is. The rest of my team already think my speed is scary.
On topic.
the raters could put spoiler tags on the RTS thread's first post just after the links of each Edited Manga and write a few words on the quality. So it wouldn't be a rating more like a mini review on the overall quality.
If needed more that one quality review can be submitted.
There's been an update to our forum rules to broaden crediting/sourcing to all series news/announcement, etc. Please read HERE
Oscars Contest 2023 is LIVE! Click HERE for a chance to win your Oscar!
It's back! MH presents a celebration of manga/anime culture; Mangahelpers Awards 2022 is NOW LIVE!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
I think that's the only problem with removing HQ.
I'd prefer an eraly camshot over a late MQ of HQ anyday. generally I'm happy with the first or second scan.
