I don't think I've ever seen canine foreskin

glenndogamer said:
I don't think I've ever seen canine foreskin

I call it the foresknot

If you're gonna copy-paste the upper arm for each frame at least edit the shoulder line lol.

petresko said:
If you're gonna copy-paste the upper arm for each frame at least edit the shoulder line lol.

Welp now I can't unsee it

xanderg said:
I call it the foresknot

I can only read that as "for snot"

The Pre-cum wet leaking is gorgeous

full animation at Twitter source

What is it with animators doing this constantly? Twitter is not video hosting site, stop posting content exclusively there and destroy the quality in the process.

mairo said:
What is it with animators doing this constantly? Twitter is not video hosting site, stop posting content exclusively there and destroy the quality in the process.

Creator only posted the full animation on there Twitter and E6 doesn't support MP4 and I didn't feel like converting it to WEBM. and the MP4 is less compressed than WEBM anyways.

howlfei said:
Creator only posted the full animation on there Twitter and E6 doesn't support MP4 and I didn't feel like converting it to WEBM. and the MP4 is less compressed than WEBM anyways.

That's my point, Twitters MP4 files are absolutely garbage quality, yet artists keep exclusively posting their animations there and nowhere else. If this was posted to e.g. newgrounds or filehost, then there would be zero trouble.

Also no, that's huge missinformation.
If you export MP4 using h264 and WebM using VP9 at same bitrate, WebM has far less compression artifacts and higher overall quality. Google "h264 vs VP9" and your answer is most likely that VP9 looks identical with half the bitrate required (aka you get identical quality with half the filesize). This is why websites like Netflix and Youtube use VP9 WebM as default format because it's fully free to use and they can lower bitrate while keeping quality compareable to MP4. I could easily fit 11 minutes of 2K video into 100MB without it looking distractingly compressed at post #3232209 thanks to how much more efficient VP9 is.

Problem is that most people only know how to export to h264 MP4, so they end up converting that into VP8 WebM using online converter, so it's already worse quality thanks to being converted from MP4 and then on top of that the compressions stack so you get these awful looking webm files and get to conclusion that the format sucks. I guess that's one reason why the next successor to VP9 WebM, AV1 is using MP4 as filetype, because of this general public mental image of webm files, so they will get webm files, just called MP4 in future (similar to how all moving images are "GIF" even though the fileformat no longer is GIF 90% of the time, but rather MP4, WebM or WebP).

So the problem here is that there's only twitter copy available and twitter uses so low bitrates with MP4 h264 that it's even worse to deal with (and quality is actually worse from telegrams similar conversion which many people complain also sucks). Reason they use MP4 instead of WebM is because this way they can serve Apple users without needing to host both fileformats. Would have to crank up the bitrate during conversion to keep up the quality and it would still look awful.

This wasn't entirely about this specific post either, but in general because it seems like this has definitely been a trend and it just makes me pull my hair out more and more often.

mairo said:
That's my point, Twitters MP4 files are absolutely garbage quality, yet artists keep exclusively posting their animations there and nowhere else. If this was posted to e.g. newgrounds or filehost, then there would be zero trouble.

Also no, that's huge missinformation.
If you export MP4 using h264 and WebM using VP9 at same bitrate, WebM has far less compression artifacts and higher overall quality. Google "h264 vs VP9" and your answer is most likely that VP9 looks identical with half the bitrate required (aka you get identical quality with half the filesize). This is why websites like Netflix and Youtube use VP9 WebM as default format because it's fully free to use and they can lower bitrate while keeping quality compareable to MP4. I could easily fit 11 minutes of 2K video into 100MB without it looking distractingly compressed at post #3232209 thanks to how much more efficient VP9 is.

Problem is that most people only know how to export to h264 MP4, so they end up converting that into VP8 WebM using online converter, so it's already worse quality thanks to being converted from MP4 and then on top of that the compressions stack so you get these awful looking webm files and get to conclusion that the format sucks. I guess that's one reason why the next successor to VP9 WebM, AV1 is using MP4 as filetype, because of this general public mental image of webm files, so they will get webm files, just called MP4 in future (similar to how all moving images are "GIF" even though the fileformat no longer is GIF 90% of the time, but rather MP4, WebM or WebP).

So the problem here is that there's only twitter copy available and twitter uses so low bitrates with MP4 h264 that it's even worse to deal with (and quality is actually worse from telegrams similar conversion which many people complain also sucks). Reason they use MP4 instead of WebM is because this way they can serve Apple users without needing to host both fileformats. Would have to crank up the bitrate during conversion to keep up the quality and it would still look awful.

This wasn't entirely about this specific post either, but in general because it seems like this has definitely been a trend and it just makes me pull my hair out more and more often.

This is why I am the weather forecaster and not the tech guy. I knew none of this other than what a quick internet search pulled up about WEBM, WEBP, MP4, GIF, etc.

Only if there was a cum segment...

vivacatu said:
Only if there was a cum segment...

There is if you go to the their Twitter in the sources below