2012 winter prem set dye details

The reason why I replaced the images of the gloves was because the trim was white. Although the gloves are white by default, they can be dyed a different color. This also applies to the individual items from the Sailor Set and the Halloween Vampire Set.

But there's a difference, the other sets have an image gallery for the colors they come in at first. The 2012 set does not have it so it shouldn't be applied to it unless the image gallery is added.

Okay, image gallery aside, does the policy not state "Do not use a black or white color scheme. Even if only one part of the item is dyed black or white, we don't want it"? The fact is that the images you uploaded of the gloves (and all other parts of the set) have white on them. Mind you, the white can be dyed to a different color. There's a difference between not being able to dye a part and not wanting to dye over a default color.

I understand that, but for premium wear, we were told that default color was allowed. Recently, for some premium wears, we were given an image gallery, though, for the default colors to go into the gallery, and non-original colors to go onto the page instead. For the 2012 winter wear, this gallery wasn't made yet, which means the images that have default color are allowed there until the gallery is made and the images are moved.

Why not just make the gallery then? I'll go figure out how to.

I have to chime in for a minute, because techincally, those other sets mentioned came in specific colors for ALL who acquired them from the cards. The 2012 Winter set came in an assortment of colors based off of the features you selected, so it shouldn't have an image gallery for the 'default' colors. I just thought I should point that out. So with taking that into consideration, the images need to be changed because they contain white on the clothing which violates the image policy.

The bottom line is that there was white on the gloves, so I uploaded images that didn't have white trim and were slightly more zoomed in(a bit besides the point, but if you want to get technical...) Either way, the images that you uploaded originally would've been replaced (if not redirected) if/when the gallery is added, so reverting it the first time back to your images was a bit redundant.

Alright, although I still don't understand this :/

So would that mean every item in the set minus those gloves you uploaded need new icons and pictures?

• sigh*

I'll start tagging...

Well I honestly really don't think it would since they came that way for everyone..but okay :/ apparently not

I would say that even though the fur lining on all of the items is originally white, it is a dyeable part so I'd think that they'd need to be changed. If it wasn't able to be dyed I'd say otherwise.

Also, I forgot about the boots during my first post. Those could have an image gallery, because I believe everybody's boots were the same colors when they used their card. I know mine, and my three friends all recieved the same boots from our cards. I'm not entirely sure if that's the case with the boots, but I do know that I seen a lot of people with the same colored boots as the ones I got.

I have a question. Are there any details that are hidden by the fur being white? After all, the purpose of the "no white or black" rule is because those two colors can hide details in the outfit. If there are no details being hidden, then we should use some common sense and use the original coloring of the item since that is the color most players are likely to see the item in, even if it can be died.

Judging by the new female gloves that were uploaded, I'd say that there are a lot of tiny details that you can't see while the fur is left undyed. Put the images side by side, and you can tell how much the details of the fur are left out when it's left in the original color.

The boots that I got were greyish originally. Also, the details on the trim of the gloves are also present on the wear and the boots if you dyed them a different color.

Oh okay. So then that means that all of the boots didn't come in the same color then. I wasn't really sure if they did or not, which means that I was just unlucky with the boots I recieved...

Also, since I feel like the above post was about my previous reply, I will share this picture with everybody. [1] If you can sit there and say that the details in the new picture, compared to the previous picture, show the same amount of details in the pictures for ALL of the other items in this item's set, then obviously I have wasted precious time out of my own life to sit here and comment on such trivial matters. I'm out.

Um not quite itachi. When I said that the detail on the trim of the gloves are also present on the wear and the boots, I meant that if you dyed it to something other than white, the same details on the gloves I uploaded would also be there, meaning that there is a noticable difference between the two...o-o;

Itachiphan, the thing I'm saying that there appears to be some people who are replacing/removing images just because they contain black or white while completely forgetting the whole point of why black and white are not desirable colors. If there are no details being hidden by the black or white color, then it doesn't need to be replaced. This actually goes for all other colors too. If a particular color is hiding details in the item, then the image should be replace with one dyed a color that shows the details.

Wouldn't it be better to set a strong standard of absolutely no black or white in images, than get entangled in a web of explanations and justifications? At least with the current policy, there can be no second guessing. The probability of black or white hiding details is higher than not, and I'd rather not have to explain constantly to uploaders why someone else's picture is allowed to be black, but theirs isn't.

No. If you cannot explain why an image should not contain black or white beyond "it's black" or "it's white", then it shows that replacing the image is probably not necessary.

I agree with most of what Oneris is saying. But I'm going to assume he/she meant to include the exception regarding items that come in specific colors, such as items from gachas, event, etc. If anything, the policy should outline that black and white is only acceptable in the image gallery of items, and only if it's a preset color. So if it can be dyed, it shouldn't be black or white if it's going to be used as the display image on the item's main page.

@Farix, with the current policy, it's stated pretty bluntly that a why isn't really necessary. What you're saying would mean revising the image policy, which I think is necessary regardless of our point of views on the subject regarding black/white on items. The policy should be used as an outline, but I've seen quite a few issues come up from the current one (besides this one).