Forum:Manga vs. Anime for portraits

Currently, there are many edit wars over whether anime or manga versions of portraits should be used. This is being argued in so many different places that it needs to have a centralized discussion. I am not entirely familiar with where every one of those arguments have been, but I know this is a hot-button issue and that it needs a forum. 14:17, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
As far as different color schemes/appearances in manga vs. anime, in the case of characters like Robin, her page makes it obvious that the manga uses different colors, and that has never stopped us from using anime images for her elsewhere. (Though that argument will become useless when an HQ version of Z comes out)

The other thing I've seen is changing the version of the portrait because the other version has no source. While I think it's bad when an image has no source, I think it should only be replaced when the replacement is actually a better image. Keep in mind, I only mean this for sourceless versions that were uploaded before the stricter guidelines about sources, and if a new sourceless version is added, that shouldn't be allowed no matter how good. It should be ok to revert to a sourceless version, as we can always find the source for it with some work once finding sources becomes a more involved project here. 14:17, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

I think the way we're changing these portraits now, we're being WAY too strict about it. Like if even your color tone is a little off, it's apparently "non-canon". But having those portraits there exist so people can see the character in sort of a visual list thing. It's the same character, and if there's no major change, then there should be no problem. 14:30, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Ι was planning to make this forum myself. Galaxy keeps replacing anime pics with terrible manga images for no reason and without discussion because "anime isn't canon". And he also uploads AWFUL portraits because the current pics are unsourced. I personally am against both those "changes" he makes and we really need a rule about those thing cause we should aim for quality even when an image is unsourced.

P.s there is a HQ version of film Z out to download it. 14:36, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

I want to also point out if we're going to make portraits the manga because "it's canon", then we need to make every other image in this site, that's not exclusively anime, a manga. But that would be a serious downgrade in our part, wouldn't it? There's nothing wrong with the anime images. 14:42, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

That's what I told him on chat. 14:55, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Not really Nada, since manga panels aren't colored, and therefore we use the anime if they're the same.

We should use Oda's images when he colors them (volumes, calendars, log books, etc). They're consistent, don't have faulty animation, and are drawn by the same man, and always will be drawn by the same man, while the anime is drawn by various animators, and some of them are good at drawing the characters, but most are just awful. We should use colored manga portraits just for the sake of respecting the author, and the fact that they're "usually" superior. I'm not talking about uploading side view images, and if they're too small, then fine, we should use anime. Obviously, we wouldn't use black and white portraits over anime images, and only colored, frontal, and not too small colored images. 16:13, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Gal.

When it comes to images, my personal belief is that we should stick with the image that looks the best. As far as "consistency" goes, that's not very true. If we have a template with a bunch of manga images and a couple of anime images, that's inconsistent. And there aren't very many characters that actually got colored in the manga. Whoever draws it seems like an unimportant factor, because it's still the same character. Sometimes they put a little more detail into it than Oda. When it comes to respecting the author, I really don't think you realize how much Oda appreciates the anime. He's praised it quite a bit, and it seems he's like one of those fanboys who would just love it to death even if it sucked. I'm sure if he saw us using anime images, he would have no problem with it. Finally, we shouldn't take any priorities when it comes to judging images. If it was a major color change, I could understand. But if it's simply something minor (lighter skin tone, slightly blonder hair then the already blonde), then we should just look at what image is "better". 16:31, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Like I said, we can use anime if it's a clearly higher quality image, but if they're the exact same, or the manga is clearly superior, why not use the one drawn by the man who made the manga himself? Slight color scheme differences do matter though, since it's still a difference. Would much rather not speculate on how much Oda likes the anime either, since we can never truly know his exact thoughts without asking. 16:37, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Slight color schemes like skin tone really don't seem that important. So what if they're a little different? The anime is NEVER going to have the exact same colors as the manga. That's sort of an unavoidable rule in animation. It's never going to be perfect. They're the same character and they're the same race; let's not be super narrow about it. 16:41, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Most of the time, we don't even know the character's skin tone compared to the manga, because Oda hasn't colored them yet. Even more of a reason to use manga colored images though, because as you said, anime will never have the same colors. It's best to use the color scheme that the author himself came up with when possible. 16:43, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Just to point out, major color differences, like Vander Decken, are ones I can understand keeping the manga over. His skin in both medias are two completely different colors, so the manga is best for it. Different skin tones like Kalifa's is a very minor problem. They're both pretty much the same color. She's a white blonde. They're the same character, and I doubt many people, including Oda, have a problem with it. 16:46, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Kalifa is tanned in the manga. That is technically a completely different scheme. 16:47, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, in the cover of Volume 34, her skin tone is similar to the anime's (not that the second wasn't anyways). Since manga is higher priorities to Color Walks, her anime image is fine. It's still a very minor difference anyways, and should not be accounted for. 03:39, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

But the talk decided... 09:40, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Since there are too many anime images, if we keep using anime ones, edit wars will never end. Using manga images in principle is the solution to the problem. --Klobis (talk) 11:37, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Klobis. Can you explain to me exactly how using manga over anime will reduce edit wars? For every portrait with multiple anime shots, there are multiple manga shots.

If any of you read our image guidelines on portrait images, it says that we're not looking for the best quality image, but just any image that can represent the characters without obscuration. All the manga images that I see are partially covered up or at a weird angle, because their part of a larger drawing rather than a simple depiction of one character. 13:49, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

What Ryu said. Manga images are good but are almost never suitable for portraits cause they are always at wrong angle and are rarely frontal. 13:53, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

There are less colored manga shots than anime shots. "Almost always", says Staw, but from the selection we've had so far, all of them have been mostly frontal and nothing has obscured them. Nada, the color walk images come from color spreads. Chapter 377's is the one that depicted Kalifa with that skin tone. 14:46, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

She has skin color. The color is skin. The anime isn't an 'incorrect color scheme', it's skin. 15:31, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

It's completely pale vs. tanned. It's a different color scheme. 15:36, May 2, 2013 (UTC)