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)

No Gal. the majority of the colored manga images CAN'T be used as portraits. 16:26, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

What did you say about nothing Obscuring them? 17:20, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Don't forget the awful angles 17:25, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Also this, this and this. The Satori portrait is really horrible. 17:47, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, so all the evidence is on the table. Let's vote on this already. I don't want to read through a hundred more "this sucks", "no, this sucks". 18:53, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

I think many colored manga images look pixelated due to the printing/scanning process. There, I said it. I like anime images because the coloration is more consistent and there are less shadows. I don't mind the inconsistent coloring for infoboxes, but I think portrait images should be more distinct. 18:56, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

So does everyone agree that anime images should be preferred except for RARE cases when the manga version better than the anime version? 19:06, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Yes. 19:08, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and as long as any skin tone is realistic, it's not a "different color scheme". 19:19, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

..No Staw. It has to be polled. Plenty of people have said on this forum that the manga is better.

And yeah, it's a different color scheme. There's a big difference between pale and tanned. 19:22, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

It's never going to be exactly the same color. Luffy's straw hat will always have a SLIGHTLY different shade of yellow between the manga and the anime. It's unavoidable. It's not a different color scheme, it's just a different tone given in the anime. In fact, if you want to get really official, the ACTUAL colors are black and white. That's how the manga is presented. 19:27, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Now hang on. I can't agree to "anime images shoud be preferred except for RARE cases". That just allows edit wars to continue. Anyone will add a manga picture and say "it's better in this case." We didn't agree on anything.

I propose our policy on portrait images should be "always use the anime unless individually decided in the image's talk page first." That will reduce acccidents, I think. 19:30, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

No, the colors are what Oda decides when he draws them in color. It's black and white because it isn't feasible to print manga in color yet. 19:31, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

The Manga Portraits are better to use over the anime, as they featured the colour scheme given to them by Oda, not Toei. All manga portraits that are used have better quality and aren't as pixilated. We should take this to a vote to decide, what to use. -- 19:32, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, Besty's right. We should also just poll if skin tone is an important difference. 19:36, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

We should use the best image, be it anime or manga, period. @JSD, skin tone is obviously an important difference if it is significant. The problem is that people don't seem to agree about which degree is significant… This can only be decided on a case-by-case basis. We cannot poll this on a general scale.

Yeah. We should always use the clearest option. Frontal, normal lighting, least obscuration, best quality etc. 19:41, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

You beat me to it Awaikage. I agree with what you said above. If we abide by all that (as we should) I have no problem with any inconsistencies between manga and anime on the same template. MasterDeva (talk) 20:10, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Oda changes the skin colors of his character literally every [http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130121064124/onepiece/images/c/ce/Chapter_578.png chapter. It] isn't a new official colorscheme every time. 20:11, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Those skin colors are all the same, they're just tanned in some.

Oh, you're right. A tan doesn't make a difference, it's all the same skin tone. 00:34, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_tanning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanin#Humans

No, I'm not being sarcastic. I am genuinely agreeing with you. I don't think a tan changes a color scheme. 01:56, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

It's not even really a sun tan. It's more likely just lighting. Sometimes peoples' tones look darker or lighter in some places. 02:30, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

OK, this is just going to go on, and on, and on. Time to make a poll. 02:34, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

There should be one more option. "Use which image suits best". It sounds vague, but sometimes the anime never comes with a decent portrait. And other times, neither does the manga. 02:40, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

I just withdrew my vote, because I realized that you have to be active for three months in order to vote. I joined this wiki on January, but I have been active on this wiki for only about two weeks. So I can't vote right? 10:48, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

No, you can vote. It shold say registered user. The poll isn't open yet though. 12:47, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

To answer Sff way up a bit, I agree that we'll need to talk about what is a "significant difference", but there are users here who seem to think that ANY difference is "significant" so we should poll that to make sure we don't get caught in that same argument again and again. This should be a separate issue from the current poll.

As I said above, anime tends to have clearer lines drawn and consistent coloration when the portrait is good. And I think manga versions are frequently pixelated, even though it's nice to have Oda's drawings, they are less useful for portraits, where the lines of the face and the pose (and frontal qualities) are more important than art style. I feel like the way the poll stands now, it will do nothing to settle those arguments. 20:23, May 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * About the significant differences: I'm curious to see how you'd poll this?

Best way to do it is to poll every image. 22:17, May 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * Won't that take too much time and effort? It's just better to vote for either the anime version or manga version. 02:31, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

no, we could probably do a whole bunch of them together and it wouldnt take that long and would be relatively easy, also how come only users with at least 3 months experience can vote in the poll-- 02:36, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Best quality image is the way to go. SeaTerror (talk) 02:56, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

Can somebody add to the poll an option of best quality? 02:58, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

that would be option number 4 would it not-- 03:04, May 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * Then one of the other options should be taken out. The thing that matter most about images are the quality and detail regardless whether it's manga or anime. 03:14, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

No. That definitely wouldn't be option 4. What I said should be on the poll regardless. SeaTerror (talk) 22:28, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

To answer Sff's question, I would poll it like this:


 * In cases where skin tone is different in the anime/manga, should the manga version be used by default?


 * Yes, manga version should always be used.


 * No, it should be discussed to see if it's a substantial difference.

Or something along those lines. 02:06, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Bump. And is someone really gonna tell me that this is more detailed than this just because it was drawn by Oda? And we really need to lock all the portraits in question that are being edit warred over until this forum is over. 00:24, May 7, 2013 (UTC)

Not all anime images are better than manga images and not all manga images are better than anime images. Some anime images have better quality and detail while some manga images also have better quality and detail. It's best if we just choose images according to the best quality and detail. It's the quality and detail that matters the most. Not whether it's anime or manga. 07:26, May 7, 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I been doing my part to try to keep up with this shitstorm. Alot of good anime images started to get taken down, and I went out of my way to try and update these manga portraits with good quality profile shots. But everytime its either Klobis or Galaxy fighting me. It's either not 'current' when the details still stand unchanged, or, it's not the right skin shade. I mean, excuse my french but who gives a flying f*ck over some character that might look abit more pale in the anime than he did drawn some years ago on paper. The details still hold up, and stuff changes along the way. Not every anime picture will look as good as the manga, but just because Oda drew it first does not mean its better. Bottom line, quit screwing with the formula. It's been fine for awhile now, leave it alone. Genocyber (talk) 08:52, May 7, 2013 (UTC)

Genocyber, calm down. This may give you another reason to get banned. Btw, I've voted against banning you. 08:55, May 7, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Geno on this (though he should calm down a bit). The "not canon" and "manga/Oda = quality portrait" stuff is getting annoying. The manga pics should only be used when they're actually better than the anime images. And sometimes they are, sometimes they're not. No need to replace all the anime pictures just because the skin color is a shade darker or lighter than in the manga. 09:10, May 7, 2013 (UTC)

Just replace the bad quality images that have a lack of detail. 09:11, May 7, 2013 (UTC)

If everybody agrees that an image that's simply better be used, then this whole forum, and movement to get rid of it all, should have never started. Why did it start, again? 05:10, May 8, 2013 (UTC)

Because people started changing perfectly good anime pictures to crappy manga ones for reasons like "not canon", "for the sake of respecting Oda" and "wrong skin tone". 06:57, May 8, 2013 (UTC)

Because there are some people who are biased about anime and manga images. 07:54, May 8, 2013 (UTC)

Oda is when it comes to some characters' color schemes. We can't always finalize everything. 14:51, May 8, 2013 (UTC)

We can if he only draws them once. Anyways, that Arlong color scheme is still different from the anime. 15:23, May 8, 2013 (UTC)

Different from the anime? It's different from itself! Oda never draws his characters with the exact same skin twice. Who is to say which one is correct? 17:16, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

You know, I don't even think Oda himself cares what colors they are. If he did, he wouldn't be so inconsistent. Let's not worry so much if a person's skin tone isn't EXACTLY the same. They're white in the manga. They're white in the anime. They're white. Stop being so specific. 01:35, May 13, 2013 (UTC)

This discussion was made mostly because there were just 10,000 edit wars occurring about the same topic. We needed a centralized discussion.

And it seems we're all pretty much in agreement that neither anime or manga should always be used, and we should use the image that's better suited to be a portrait, which makes the poll below useless. The actual debate here seems to relate to whether or not small changes in color scheme are important. We should poll that.

The other thing I mentioned in my first post which has been neglected is what we do with sourceless versions of images. As I said above, we should be allowed to revert to them as long as the version was uploaded before the stricter image guidelines were enacted (~ August, 2012). We should still be able to use the best image possible, even if there is no source provided for it yet. 15:21, May 13, 2013 (UTC)

The unsourced images should not be used. It doesn't matter that they were already unsourced, since they still break the rules. Just poll that too, so we can get this over with. The current poll is basically useless. 15:26, May 13, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree with Galaxy. 15:29, May 13, 2013 (UTC)

Galaxy is wrong since exists for a reason. SeaTerror (talk) 17:51, May 13, 2013 (UTC)

Unsourced Images must get replaced/deleted. 18:33, May 13, 2013 (UTC)

Ooooor. You could get a source. 02:19, May 14, 2013 (UTC)

I don't think that we should delete unsourced images. We should mark them with the No Source template, and when a user adds the source to it the template can be removed. 02:59, May 14, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, not thinking polling the skin thing is a good idea. It's best to leave everything to the talk page, since there are special cases. 05:28, May 14, 2013 (UTC)

Does anyone agree with me? 08:33, May 14, 2013 (UTC)

We should poll the skin tone thing at a basic level, like I said above. We need to make sure that the rules state that ANY skin tone change does not mean manga must always be used. This argument will appear on every talk page if we don't poll it now. And with a poll like that, we will still have to discuss it for every image, but at least the discussions will be more clear.

As for images with no source provided, I know users like Galaxy are able to find the source rather quickly, but I feel like he won't get the source if he favors the other image. To me, that seems like the wrong way to handle things. We need to allow the wiki to use the best image possible, and since most sourceless images are low-quality anyways, this isn't normally a problem. But when the image is good, we should allow it. 13:25, May 14, 2013 (UTC)

Leaving it to the talk is the best possible choice. We can't poll based on such an opinion. The talk page needs to decide if the skin tone is different enough.

As for sources, why would I find the source of a worse image. 14:23, May 14, 2013 (UTC)

Finding the source for each image is effective as it is a fair argument for every side, and it's something to revert to when it's an edit war. It's unfair to get rid of the old one because the new one is sourced, while both are being debated. Plus finding the source for each image is good for archiving and information purposes. 16:03, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Nada on sources. And like I've said 1000 times in this forum, we need to poll the skin tone issue. Gal, I agree that every single issue with skin tone should be discussed on the talk page to decide if it's different enough. All I'm saying is that the poll needs to make a clear rule that we at least have the option to use anime when the color is different. Without that clear rule, I think users will just always state that any color difference is significant. I don't understand how you're not getting this.

And I'm scrapping the poll below. 16:26, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

Bumping this. Something needs to be done, these constant editwars are just pissing off everybody. 07:13, May 21, 2013 (UTC)

Poll
This poll will decide our stance on manga vs. anime portraits. You must have 300 edits to vote, and have been a registered user for 3 months. The poll never opened, Poll options are below.

1. Use colored manga images for every portrait, regardless of the quality.
 * xxx

2. Use anime images for every portrait, regardless of the quality (with the exception of major color scheme differences)
 * xxx

3. Use manga colored images only when color schemes are different.
 * xxx

4. Let the talk page decide (Poll or Majority)
 * 1) xxx

Canonicity and Portraits
As an entire wiki, we've forgotten what portraits are for.

Portraits exist to identify a character in a gallery template on this wiki.

That's it. That's all they exist for. Since I've realized this, I've also come to a bigger revelation:

It doesn't matter if a portrait is "canon" or not.

Because we're a wiki, we have tons of images of characters that are "canon", so why must portraits be yet another one of those? All we need to do is identify the character, not make a fuss about whether their skin is just a little more tan in the manga.

"But Caesar Clown isn't pale in the manga!" you shout. Well, click on Caesar Clown right now, and what to do you see? His Anime infobox, where he's comepletely pale. And his appearance section makes the important distinction that his anime color scheme is different. The majority of pictures of Caesar on the wiki feature his "non-canon" color scheme. In fact, there are only a handful of images (like 3 or 4) that actually feature Caesar's "canon" color scheme. So in terms of the wiki's own pictures, the anime color scheme is actually more easily identifiable. The difference in the two color schemes is noted on his page, and displayed by his infobox pictures and gallery.

Portraits exist for our use as a wiki. So why must we use "canon" portraits on articles that don't even make the distinction about the shown character's appearance? Through the use of our own images that we have, we can easily use a non-canon image, and it won't be the end of the world, as our own content will inform the reader of what is canon or not.

In many cases, the most easily identifiable image will be one that is a "non-canon" color scheme. What's more identifiable, the appearance of a character from several images of the anime with a "non-canon" color scheme, or an an image from Color Walk 5? To the average reader, it's the anime image, by far.

So take all of this into account, put your own personal bias about what images you like more and ask yourself "What is best for the wiki?" I think what's best for the wiki is that we use the best available image, regardless of color scheme. A good portrait should be frontal, have good quality, nice colors (not always canon), and have a neutral facial expression. I don't think we should ignore all of those qualities just because a character's depiction in the anime has different color eyes. 18:43, June 20, 2013 (UTC)

Filler and movie images should not be used. It doesn't matter if an image is slightly off like a missing necklace though. SeaTerror (talk) 19:02, June 20, 2013 (UTC)

If they're well-drawn, I don't see why we couldn't use a movie or filler image. It's just their face, so their outfit shouldn't matter. And then there's Movies 8 & 9 which are representations of canon material... If it's well drawn, and has all the qualities of a good portrait, we should use it. That's the bottom line. 19:23, June 20, 2013 (UTC)

I completely agree. There's no reason not to use an image just because it's a different color. It's the same character, and it's likely the most recognized by everybody. I'm fairly certain if you ask random OP fans what Nico Robin's eye color is, the majority will say blue. And there's nothing wrong with that. It's not an evil doppelganger because her eyes are different.

Another thing is we're not an official Wiki. We are not in any way affiliated with any official productions of One Piece. We don't need EVERYTHING to be 100% official. If it's information, yeah it should be official. But something like images? It's not like they change the story.

One more question I have about people who choose to revert because of "canon" colors...why? What reader cares about what color they are? Do you think Oda visits the Wiki regularly and says "I hope the Wiki keeps my vision to the dot"? No, he doesn't. Even if he did visit this Wiki, I don't think he would care that we have Robin's eyes as blue, just like he doesn't care that the anime has her eyes as blue. As an encyclopedia, we aim to inform the READERS. We aim to inform a POPULATION. We aim to inform the FANBASE. We do NOT aim to inform Toei. We do NOT aim to inform Shueisha. We do NOT aim to inform any official sources. It doesn't matter if the color is exactly the same. If the image looks good, use it. If it doesn't, don't use it. It's basic knowledge. It makes perfect sense. Please somebody explain to me what benefit we would have to use an image, which on a design standpoint looks much worse, just because it's a little closer to how the author draws it, even if it's something so minor as an eye-color? 20:03, June 20, 2013 (UTC)

I disagree. Portraits must be the correct color, because the other color isn't really the character at all. This is Oda's series, and Toei is adapting it, but they aren't the original colorists. Sometimes they get it right, and it's fine, sometimes they color a character who hasn't been colored in the manga yet, and it's fine, but if they color somebody differently then they appear in the manga (and they had no excuse for Caesar), then it's best to use the image that is actually what the character looks like. In the infoboxes, we don't allow outfits from color spreads, filler episodes, and other non-canon stuff, so why should portraits be any different? The best possible recognition is a character where all their features are exactly how the author depicted them. Sometimes, the colored manga images aren't suitable for portraits, such as portrait. Going to Caesar Clown and automatically seeing the anime image is due to how the template is set up. (We need to find a way for users to set their preference somewhere, but that's another issue).

It doesn't matter if Oda doesn't check the wiki. We're supposed to be accurate, and displaying the wrong colors is not accurate. And really, there are plenty of post timeskip Robin images drawn by Oda, so if the current one isn't suitable, search the cover pages and find the best alternative. Either way, the bottom line should be that color schemes DO matter, as long as they are significant enough (,, and . 17:37, June 21, 2013 (UTC)

Except those actually do not matter. SeaTerror (talk) 18:30, June 21, 2013 (UTC)

But Galaxy, the portraits exist for the organizational purpose of the wiki, not as an important piece of showing a character's correct color scheme. Those kinds of distinctions are meant to be made on a character's article, and they do not need to be made on pages like Scientist, or Punk Hazard, etc. The portraits only need to be in line with our own images and infomation, and it is not required that we keep them perfectly in line with Oda's coloration. 19:19, June 21, 2013 (UTC)

Portraits exist for the recognition of the character. If the character is colored wrong, then it's not the same recognition. Portraits should be how characters actually appear in the series, with manga taking priority over anime in cases of color. 19:24, June 21, 2013 (UTC)

So by that logic we should only be using black and white manga images. SeaTerror (talk) 19:25, June 21, 2013 (UTC)

Why does it need to be the "official" recognition? I can recognize Robin with blue eyes, I can recognize Garp with gray hair, I can recognize any character with any minor alteration. If the image looks good, we use it. I really don't think anybody cares or even notices insignificant details such as hair being white vs. gray. Even Oda himself is inconsistent with colors, as I've pointed out earlier with Arlong. Being too hung-over on minor details to use images that are clearly more attractive is NOT the direction we should go. Don't look at portraits as parallels with the manga; look at them as images from the overall One Piece franchise. Look at the franchise as a whole, and these portraits do their job right. 21:40, June 21, 2013 (UTC)

No SeaTerror, that's not the same logic. Oda colors certain characters, and when he does, those are the color schemes.

Attractiveness is still a matter of opinion. I believe that the manga images are more attractive, and that the anime images aren't. Most of them are fine, including the Robin and Garp ones, that are better drawn then the anime alternatives. I'm looking at them like this because even though we cover the franchise as a whole, we should show what the character actually looks like in a portrait, with every detail there. The anime's color schemes are not what the character looks like, but the manga's are. 21:55, June 21, 2013 (UTC)

How the characters "look" is very broad, especially since the manga itself depicts them differently. Even Robin had blue eyes before. If the manga uses multiple color schemes, why can't we? 22:04, June 21, 2013 (UTC)

Because he later remedied that error. I've never seen Oda change a color scheme, and then change it again afterwards. It's simply a matter of appreciating the author of the work, and using images that he himself approved. My reason for using manga mostly above was "It's drawn by one man, always consistent, and not drawn by hundreds of different Toei employees over the years". 22:06, June 21, 2013 (UTC)

" Portraits should be how characters actually appear in the series" That is definitely the same logic. The series is ONLY in black and white. Oda has never once colored the characters outside of cover pages and color walks. SeaTerror (talk) 18:19, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

Chapter 1, as well as few of the Orange Town Arc chapters were colored. The world of One Piece is in color. The only reason it has to be produced in black and white mainly is because of the cost of printing the colored pages. If you seriously think the one piece world is a world without color (which is silly, seeing as how they say things such as "look at that blue object!"), then I'm not sure if you're just trolling. 18:23, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

But the characters are still the same. Heck, we use anime images over manga anyways when they're better, so what's the point? Do you really think Oda minds every character's color to the dot? To the point where white hair depicted as gray is unacceptable? We're still appreciating his work by having this Wiki even exist. We're still appreciating his work by letting manga prioritize over anime. We're still appreciating his work by letting his characters present themselves as best as possible...except we don't do the latter. Because even if a portrait was frontal, detailed, attractive, square, not distorted, high quality, and even up to date, we wouldn't use it because one part of them is slightly off-color than how the manga depicted. That's ridiculous. 18:09, June 25, 2013 (UTC)

Look, we could argue on and on about this really.

There's no real way to actually poll this forum. We know there are cases where people will say that manga is better, and some cases where people will say the anime is better. Polling this would be weird, since it would ultimately decide if we should actually use manga portraits at all.

Leave the polls to their respective talk pages, and see what users think there, since it can only really be done a case by case basis. 18:19, June 25, 2013 (UTC)

We should have a poll since most of the edit wars come from you doing stupid reasons such as "OMG THAT'S NON-CANON!!!!111" SeaTerror (talk) 18:29, June 25, 2013 (UTC)