Warriors Wiki talk:Charart

=For Approval= Take it to the approval page

=Tweaked= Take it to the tweak page

=Discussion=

Official Art
Apologies if the discussion has already been made in the past, but I really believe that we should account for the official art in this project. I mean, the official art was made for a reason. It's the publisher/artist's depiction of the character (and it's technically part of the book, so it should have some sort of canonicity). If the art is inconsistent with the book descriptions I think it should warrant an alt.

Thoughts? I was originally going to post this under the PC discussion but I found that it was more related to PCA.

Ive actually always wondered why we don't do alts for characters shown differently from their written descriptions. Especially when some of them are portrayed incorrectly consistently (Firestar being shown as solid most times despite being confirmed as a tabby especially). 18:51 Fri Aug 17

Wasn't there an alt for Bluestar based on her BP art at some point? Or am I just misremembering things?

Anyways, I do agree that the official art should be accounted for in PCA. However, things could get a little messy on deciding which characters to tweak/redo and which characters to give alts to. So, honestly, I think we should make alts for all characters that have official art, unless the official art and the pixels are similar enough. If anyone wants to expand on my idea or point out its flaws, feel free to. 00:32, August 18, 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Branch^^ The German wiki does that as well - makes alts for how characters appear in official artwork. After all, it is officially released material, just like the books. 19:26, August 18, 2018 (UTC)

I think Branch's idea is plausible. It doesn't make sense to completely ignore the official artwork as if it weren't there. I think it should apply to book covers as well.

Just being hypothetical here, but why not keep the art we have and replace it with the official art as charart? 12:19, August 19, 2018 (UTC)

At one point we made alts for official art. If we want to do that again I don't believe we actually deleted the images? We can use put them back in the page, probably with a toggle. 16:30 Mon Aug 20 2018

The main problem with outright replacing charart with official art is that most of the official art doesn't accurately reflect book descriptions. I think we should make a toggle, as Raelic suggested.

Honestly a toggle for the charart/written descriptions and the official art is probably the best idea. Especially for characters who are very constantly showned in a way that differs from in-book descriptions. 14:25 Tue Aug 21

So then what would the toggle for the main image be? I imagine the alt would be "according to official artwork," but what about the other? 16:09, August 22, 2018 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the main would be the in-book/written descriptions like it already is. 17:27 Wed Aug 22

Any other comments? We do not have a lot of opinions... I would like to hear more thoughts from more people before we conclude this. 20:23, October 14, 2018 (UTC)

I agree with the concept of adding a toggle to the charart section for official art. Several users have complained about how our chararts don't match the official art, and this way it appeases both sides: an official depiction and an artistic depiction based on the character's official description.  SPO OKY FI RE  00:36, October 17, 2018 (UTC)

I agree we should have a toggle - we could just have the toggle called "Artistic design" and "Official design" or something of the like. 00:38, October 17, 2018 (UTC)

I originally thought that it would be a good idea to list at least one of the official artwork pieces in the charcat toggle as well, perhaps replacing the charart, but I do not know what the rest of you think. If that is an unpopular opinion, what about the portrayals? Sometimes they are very inconsistent - for example, Firestar is portrayed rather differently in various covers - he has no stripes in some, stripes in some, a white muzzle in another, and is different shades of ginger in all portrayals. Jayfeather is portrayed without pupils in The Ultimate Guide, but has pupils in Eclipse and The Sight. Bramblestar is portrayed with a pale chest in his manga appearances, and his coloring is different in the cover appearances as well. Lionblaze has several different colorings as well, and he is portrayed with a literal mane at the end of Crowfeather's Trial. Leafpool looks completely different on both The Forgotten Warrior and Twilight, and I could go on. But basically, tl;dr, there are so many inconsistencies in the official art. What do we use? Do we use actual pixel art for the toggles, the covers for the toggles, which designs do we decide on? 00:55, October 17, 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps we could use the most recent portrayal (for example Firestar in The Last Hope (?)). It kind of makes sense, after all.

I think we should use the Ultimate Guide for the main official art. It is fairly recent and it is a comprehensive source for all of the important characters in Warriors. After all, it is called the Ultimate Guide. :)  SPO OKY FI RE  16:03, October 17, 2018 (UTC)

I'm all for to have a toggle for official artwork chararts. I like Hawkey's idea to use the Ultimate Guide. It seems like a safe base line to use. And are we doing this for all blanks (kit, apprentice, warrior etc) for each character shown with an official artwork, or just the "main" blank, such as Firestar's leader image since he's mostly known as the leader of ThunderClan idk. 20:47, October 17, 2018 (UTC)

I think we could do official artwork chararts for the ranks they were shown in. For example Into the Wild shows Firestar as an apprentice so he should get an apprentice image based on the official artwork. And as for replacing existing charart I don't think it should be done because the official art doesn't reflect how the character's appearance is described in the books.

On a side note too I think "artistic design" is misleading because it sounds like it's a fan's own interpretation of the character without evidence from the book. I think a more fitting name for the toggle would be something like "in-book description" vs "official depiction". And a problem with doing chararts for official art on the new book covers is that the lighting is very tinted. It'd be impossible to accurately colorpick off of those. Perhaps we should just have a toggle for the actual official art and the charart?

I agree with Fox. My vote is to do a toggle between the official art and the charart, but not alter the chararts to look like the official art.  SPO OKY FI RE  14:30, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

I guess the main question now is whether we should make new chararts with patterns the same as the official art. Now that I think about it, if we have a toggle with the official depiction won't it be sort of pointless to make new chararts?

pixels for matching the official art would be pointless. people can just refer to the official art if they want to see how it is canonically. and no, we shouldn't alter our chararts to match the official art, because that's also pretty pointless. 20:17, October 26, 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. Though by the same vein, I think we should also remove alts regarding manga art because readers can just refer to that too.

A toggle with official art and chararts sounds like a good idea to me. Not in favor of making new chararts to match the official art, as skt explained above.

23:03, November 12, 2018 (UTC)

Any more thoughts on this? We seem to have a mix of valid opinions here. It seems the consensus as of now (please correct me if I am misinterpreting anything) is to have a toggle (or something related) between the actual official images presented on the covers/artwork and the in-book description character art that we create, and to not create new artwork since the designs would be shown in the toggle. This consensus sounds like something for PC now, but anything else? 03:56, November 24, 2018 (UTC)

while this is up if we do create a toggle, what do people think about th eorder in which images should be taken? something like TUG > cover art > those black and white field guide images > manga. if a cat didnt have say, TUG art, it'd default to cover art, and so on. 21:05, November 27, 2018 (UTC)

I support the idea of having the official art in a toggle in the infobox, but I think that even if we establish an order for what images we use, we should leave it flexible to make sure we are using the images that best match their canonical description. For example, in the proposed order, Hollyleaf's TUG image would be the one used, but it is inaccurate because it shows her with yellow/amber eyes, so in that case I think we should skip it and use one of the cover art images that correctly show her with green eyes. Also, I know people want to use TUG as a baseline, but I feel like some of the lighting and some of the angles that the cats are shown from are kind of weird in TUG and that it might be better to use cover art, but that's just my opinion. 21:05, December 1, 2018 (UTC)

i'm for that but i'm not sure if eye colour alone should be used to make the decision to move to the next rank, since it's pretty generally minor and there's cats like flametail that have mistakes in all of them. 22:46, December 1, 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree to eye color should be pretty low on the concerns for choosing an image and definitely factors like fur color and pattern should be higher. All I'm saying is that while it's good to set out an order, I think we should also take things on a case by case basis. Like with Hollyleaf in particular, it doesn't make sense to use the amber eyed image when she's always described with green eyes and all of her other official art has her eye color correct, but in other cases (especially where eye color is inconsistent in the books or there are other mistakes in the images), it would be better to disregard it. 23:20, December 1, 2018 (UTC)

Unknown Residence Blank
Are we changing the meaning of this blank to apply to everyone, then? Because when we made these blanks, they were originally only meant for the ghost cats/purgatory cats from A Vision of Shadows (including more recently: Pebbleshine and Ashfoot). We need to have that discussion before anything is posted on the approval page, because the blanks as we currently have them don't apply to anything other than the ghost cats (which we'll need to change the file names for those ANYWAYS, depending on the outcome here), so if we start making them for characters like Jake, Ravenpaw, ect, we'll need to officially change the intent behind these blanks. ​​​​​

I honestly didn't originally know that they were solely for the AVoS ghosts, I saw Riin reserve one and figured they were meant for other characters as well. I don't see why they couldn't have the intent for other characters. They are named Unknown Residence and since Jake, Scourge, etc. have the affiliation of that it would make sense to give them that as well. Minkclaw Winter is coming. 04:09, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

That's my bad for reserving early, whoops. But I do agree they should be considered "unknown residence" as well. 04:11, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

I'm personally of the mindset that the unknown residence blanks should be reserved for any unknown afterlife. The blanks were created because the "rank" holds significance like StarClan and the Dark Forest. It's a destination. Cat purgatory. A place for good kittypets. All afterlives. Neither StarClan or Dark Forest, but somewhere present and mingling around. As for the actual "unknown residence" cats...I don't think they should have this blank. For the infobox, I'm all for it. But as a rank, I disagree. The thing with an "unknown residence" is just that. It's unknown. We don't know where the cat ended up. They died, but they didn't end up in StarClan, the Dark Forest, or some form of alternative afterlife. No one knows, hence why it's "unknown".

However, some of them, such as Tom, Jake and maybe Ravenpaw (might have to look at the cite closely), could have this blank imo. They've been confirmed with the cites (again, might have to double check) to be present in some sort of afterlife. I think for the sanity of creating blanks with one or two cats in it, those three aforementioned should get the "unknown residence blank". Cats like Tigerstar, Spottedleaf, and Scourge should not have one since they just died (again) and went nowhere...somewhere unknown even to the authors. That's just my interpretation.

tl;dr cats who have been confirmed to be in some sort of afterlife that's not StarClan or the Dark Forest, should get it, but cats who died and the authors have confirmed they have no died and don't know where they went, should not get it. 04:23, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

use the blanks for both, just rename purgatory cats to ghost.png. 04:25, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

I don't think Jake and Ravenpaw and them should have these blanks... I think they were meant solely for the cats who were stuck between the real world and the afterlife. Not knowing a cat's residence vs. a cat actually being described with no true residence are completely different things. So I think they should just be for the ghost cats.  JOLLY  FIRE  06:00, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

Scourge is the only cat to be confirmed not in any official residence I think, (though Vicky's comment was incredibly vague) while, Ravenpaw and Tom have been confirmed to be in an else where residency. To expand on my comment from before, I believe cats with unknown residencies should get the blank since StarClan, the DF and soon Endless Hunting will have afterlife blanks, I think it'd be fair to give cats with a confirmed sort of afterlife blanks as well. I agree with David's idea of just renaming the files/titles but using the blanks for both, since they're all described to be in some form of afterlife. 06:19, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

I agree with them getting the blank, we can rename the files like was suggested above.

16:08, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

I also agree with them using this blank. 16:26 Sun Nov 25

Just to be clear (since this is something I was confused with at first reading some of the comments), this would not be for typical deceased Clan cats who which we don't have a confirmation of a post-death residence, correct? (such as Briarlight) The general idea here seems to be for those who have some kind of afterlife confirmed- I want to make sure everyone's on the same page here, so we don't get more arguments in the future. ​​​

I agree, I think it'd only be okay with cats to have a confirmed unknown residence much like Ravenpaw, Scourge, Jake, etc. With a cite that is. Minkclaw Winter is coming. 20:20, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

Yes this is purely for cats who have been confirmed on their afterlives, so Jake, Scourge, Tom and Ravenpaw. Cats like Briarlight and others who have not been confirmed to have an afterlife should not get a blank since we don't know where they are and their is no confirmation of where they are in general. Cats who have a confirmed and specified afterlife should get a blank and cats who have died but have not been seen/confirmed in an afterlife should not. Not knowing where they are and them being in different afterlives are two different things, in my opinion. 20:41, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

What about Tigerstar, Spottedleaf, Brokenstar, and Hawkfrost? 20:47, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

They're just gone. The cats that died twice will never make another appearance and have no residence.  JOLLY  FIRE  20:48, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

That comes in question, should there be a no residence blank? 20:48, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

I think that cats that die 2 times should get a blank, and cats with unknown residence should get one, and Scourge... he... uh... is gone. IDK what to do about him. ~RAR =^.,.^= Im spoopy kittan! 02:19, November 26, 2018 (UTC)

Well all Vicky said about Scourge is that because he doesn't believe in StarClan, then he's not in the Dark Forest or any Clan-affiliated afterlife. I think Scourge can be up to interpretation.

I don't think there should be a "no residence" blank, since how can we give a blank to a cat that doesn't exist anymore? It's like Hawkey and others said; they're poof, gone. They don't exist anymore. It is different from an afterlife because some cats still exist after they died. Cats such as Tigerstar and Spottedleaf don't. On the topic of Scourge, I don't think he qualifies for this blank in the definition we're going by. Looking at the Erin Hunter Chat 3 (where the cite says it is), Scourge has no concept of afterlife, and he didn't go to the Dark Forest or StarClan...so my interpretation is that Scourge is just like Tigerstar and Spottedleaf: gone. He doesn't exist anymore. He didn't believe in any afterlife, so he didn't go to any after he died. 02:40, November 26, 2018 (UTC)

The cats that died twice like Spottedleaf among others wouldn't get a blank, I think it was said that they'd keep their last image blanks? Minkclaw   Winter is coming.  02:51, November 26, 2018 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure. I do agree with that, since they have no affiliation whereas cats with an afterlife technically do. I think only Jake, Tom and Ravenpaw should get an unknown blank since they at least have been confirmed to be in an afterlife, just an unspecified one.

I disagree with using the blank for cats like Jake, Tom, and Ravenpaw. Cats like Jake and Ravenpaw are actually in the afterlife, in the skies, and can and have visited StarClan even though they themselves live in different skies, as opposed to the ghost cats, who are trapped on earth until whatever unsettled business they have is taken care of and then they join StarClan. I really don't think we should equate these two situations, which to me seem rather different, by using the same blank. 21:27, December 1, 2018 (UTC)

If Jake has visited StarClan, shouldn't there be a reference/citation that he has thus giving him the StarClan cat rank? I don't see why they can't have both as well. Minkclaw   Winter is coming.  00:02, December 3, 2018 (UTC)

I think the cite was only that Tallstar travels outside of StarClan to visit Jake iirc.

^ Cite here. It only mentions Tallstar visiting Jake outside of StarClan, rather than Jake going into StarClan.

Official Art Chararts
I started to add them to the list of cats needed charart but I'm sure I missed a ton and I'm not sure of the policies on which warrant alts and which don't.

I think they should get alts if the official art either a: depicts them as something different than the description we have for them (AKA white paws, paler parts, tabby vs not, etc.) or b. if the official pattern is something totally different than the chararts (such as Tawnypelt and Sol's tortoishell patterns, Tallstar being black with white patches on the official art, etc.). 15:59, December 4, 2018 (UTC)

Chararts don't matter in this case, since that's just how we see them. Written descriptions are what's important. If they match the printed description, they should not get alts (Tallstar and Smudge come to mind).

We should figure out which are valid and which aren't, and if something's not valid, it should be taken off the list. My fear is having someone make a charart then get declined due to lack of reasoning because I put it on the list. Since the list is only going off my assumptions, I think we should narrow down which cats actually need one and which cats just have a slight alteration. I was going into the list with an idea of "if it doesn't match the current design then I should write it down," and didn't take the written description into account. —

Talking on discord with others, we thought it'd be a good idea to put up a vote to nominate which chararts you think need an alt image based off their official art. It'd be in the style of how you nominate a tweak or redo and would be voted on by everyone. Does anyone oppose this or have comments? —

I agree. It would come to more conclusions without arguing and everyone’s opinion can be heard. 17:24, December 4, 2018 (UTC)

Honestly this is a bit confusing. Are we creating chararts for the ultimate guide depictions only? or does this also include cover art, etc.?

From what I know of, both are up for question. —

If we're including the ultimate guide depictions (from the recent approvals and tweaks I assume this is the case), I don't see a reason why we shouldn't do cover art as well.

And the problem is we can't assume what rank the images were in. For example, we can't say that Silverstream was a warrior/queen in that image. That would be an assumption.

Kittypet Blanks
Hi everyone! I believe the kittypet blanks need to be redone next, and I already know that several other people agree. Their heads are twisted at a very awkward and unnatural angle, and some of their facial features can be improved as well. What are everyone's thoughts? 15:22, December 4, 2018 (UTC)

Yes please, they need to be redone or at the very least tweaked. —

theyre fine. theres nothing significantly wrong with them, and we dont need to redo every single blank. 17:05, December 4, 2018 (UTC)

We've had this discussion before earlier this year, and the consensus was undetermined and to wait until we weren't as busy to discuss again. I'd say we're too busy with the tunneler, tribe of endless hunting, and to-be blank to consider potentially talking about redoing the kittypet blank, not to mention making chararts for the official art. As for my opinion, like david said, I think they're fine. Sure the head placement is wonky and there are some anatomy issues, but just about every blank has some. I think the kittypets blanks are fine. 17:13, December 4, 2018 (UTC)

I definitely agree we are too busy to take them on right this second, but I think we should go ahead and discuss them in general. There's no harm in reaching a consensus. When everything slows down, we can go ahead and start the blank redo process then, if it is approved. 17:23, December 4, 2018 (UTC)

I agree with that ^ I personally have thought they've needed alterations since they were first approved myself, since the head is really anatomically incorrect. If anything, they at least deserve a tweak to fix the posing, if not a complete redo. Cats facing that direction generally turn their entire body to face backwards, not just their head, so I think it should be addressed. I think there's no harm in discussing this further or redoing the blanks so that they're updated. These blanks are 9 to almost 10 years old after all. —

I'm not saying there's nohing wrong with discussing it. the above is my input on it, and I agree with what vec is saying. 17:45, December 4, 2018 (UTC)

I think they're fine. Some of the other blanks are worse off in terms of anatomy.

I honestly think they're fine the way they are. Minkclaw Winter is coming. 04:44, December 5, 2018 (UTC)

hmm yeah, these kinda would have snapped neck if a cat were to pose like this in real life, which is a major issue. I do agree with redoing them for that, among other things people've mentioned. We're too busy now, but I do believe it wise to discuss it now. Theoretically by the time a discussion, vote, blank vote, blank approval got through, a process which usually takes a few months at minimum, we'll be wide open. 22:16, December 5, 2018 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, another reason given for not redoing this blank was that it would be a ridiculous number of images to completely rework. And this reason was enough for the disagreement with redoing the warrior blank, which also has a lot of anatomical issues. I'm not opposed to fixing anatomical problems, btw, but that is genuinely something that was a concern before when this topic was brought up. 23:16 Wed Dec 5

I agree with both of you, but also I think that having a ridiculous number of images to redo may be a positive thing. Everyone in PCA loves making chararts, and most people wouldn't mind having more art to do. Nobody would have to scrape from the bottom of the barrel again for a really long time. 23:19, December 5, 2018 (UTC)

^ That is true! I agree heavily with Spooky here as well. By the time we get to these blanks it could quite possibly be after TBC rush... We should shoot to redo these blanks during a PCA dead time like the months in between books, same with the Warrior blanks in question if that ever gets discussed again. —