The right one seem to appear as the lower quality version...could just be my eyesight though.

Though looking closer, the left one seem to have been shrinked atleast 400 pixels, hmm... ;3

you can definately tell that one is smaller and one has finer lines but thats all they look practically identical. maybe less than 400 though..

are the ears differant, the left pictures right ear looks smaller then the right pictures right ear

What's funny is that the one on the right has bad compression in the thumbnail but looks better in full view.

So it's like opposite day depending on the view. One view looks better than the other, and then in full view it reverses.

Sexyfur on the left FA on the right. o.o

the lines aren't as clear on the one on the right then the left.

I have pink eye right now... so they both look blurry! Your secret is safe with me!! xD

PS: Please look at the full-view image, not the squashed thumbnail.

-from the Department of Redundancy Department

I beleive you meant the "bureau of unnecessary repetition and pointless redundancy office"

can't tell the differect between them myself though.

I'm thinking the one on the right.

I'm not one of the whiners (obviously), but my eyes say sharper image on the right though with some subtle artifacts on the eyebrow/hair transitions. Left is just slightly blurry.

I see artifacts on the one on the right sir, it shows up on the shading by her collar and parts of her hair, especially in that chunk on the viewer's left. Most of the grey/blue is causing artifacts due to compression. You can see some artifacts in her yellow hair. The interesting thing about the compression is that it made the blacks, sharper because of loss. On the left it looks more blurry.

I haven't seen either full-size image yet, but I definitely see a lot more artifacts in the one on the right. Looking closely, it's most noticeable around the eyes, eyebrows, and collar.

Also, I'm assuming the reason for the slight blurriness in the image on the left is because it was resized to be larger to match the scale of the image on the left. That'd account for the blur in the left image. I just hunted down the image here on FA and found it's smaller than this.

Urgh, I mean the image on the left looks like it was rescaled to match the size of the image on the right. I don't know how I put left twice.

left looks compressed. check the nose, on the right its sharp, on the left it looks a bit fuzzy. i guess.

Twins, AWESOME.

One on the right is slightly sharper.

The right one are smaller in size than the left one.

I may just be fooling myself, but the right side looks like it has more contrast...

i actually agree with that
the left side, the darks are lighter and the lights are darker.

THere is none.

None that one should complain about.

None that should go and bitch

people like finding bugs where there is none to find.

THere pretty, the two versions.

Quit complaining and enjoy the art =P

They are the same… Who the hell is whining? The only difference is the resolution.

Looking closely, I admit to enlarging them, the one on the left stays sharper while the one on the right starts to show fuzz.
The shading on the right will start to break up into dots.

The one on the right is either lower quality or poorly compressed. There are artifacts and compression errors all along the outer border of the pink square, and a few more peppering some of the shading and tone changes. The edges aren't as sharp as in the image on the left, most noticeably in the purple outlines on the ears.

But considering the fact that the headshot portrayed here is scaled roughly 40% larger than JE's post, that means the one on the right is probably the lo-res FA version, while the one on the left is from the original on Sexyfur.

I've been staring at the screen for too long. *sees spots*

right has artifacts

The one on the right is the compressed one, there's artifacting in the eyes.

But you can only tell if you have a well-trained eye to artifacting and image compression anyway, so it doesn't matter.

nope cant see anny differense.

The right one is slightly paler, thus altering the color slightly - copy and paste the little ringlet of the collar and compare directly. Does it really matter though? Who is going to snub such a gorgeous pic? Will hafta track them down and punish them!

Right side's faded.

Right, thank you Photoshop Levels.

the one to the right

the one to the right is a little more blury but its not like it matters

I've bitched about FA silently shitting on submissions... So they fixed it by documenting that it shits on your submissions. Some fix.

The one on the right has a crappier quality, though it is only that noticeable when you zoom all the way in to look at it.

I'm gonna say that the right one is the "better quality" one, even though they both look so much alike it shouldn't matter!

There is only a subtle difference.

I'm sure I missed some drama, who said what?

The one on the left seems a little fuzzier, but that's it.

Can't say I really care, but there ya go.

I'd like to point out the "fuzz" was something I did in purpose as one version was sharper that the other. Other than that both versions are identical in quality, just the Sexyfur one is substantially larger. (In fact, the FA one does have artifacts the Sexyfur version doesn't)

And I mean to point that out to the people who mentioned said fuzz as possible loss of quality. I shouldn't hit the enter button so quickly.

lol... now I am not even sure which version is what... and I am who drew them

yeah seriously tho I cant tell them apart i mean maybe my eye sight and mind sharpness are down there with the rest of the un-washed masses but i did flip a coin... and the coin says its the one on the right <.<

Actually the one to the right looks like a copy of a copy. You can lose quality by making a copy then making another copy out of that copy that you just made. The same results can happen if a live trace Adobe illustrator had some excess noise. Been there. Done that. :p

Oh yeah. It can be fixed to some extent if you fiddle with the contrast and brightness in photoshop.

Squee!! I took the challenge and fixed it! But I was wrong on the brightness. It took some filter fiddling but it worked :D.

Ps. The scaled down one is the one on the right.

after saving it to my computer and zooming in even farther id say the right one is more pixelated.

though there pretty damn close to each other. >^w^<

Well the one on the right has artifacts, however which one is which I wouldn't want to guess.

I'd assume the FA version has the artifacts because FA likes to resize and compress images...that can be fixed though if you click the Edit link after uploading the picture, changing the submission file and selecting the same file again...that uploads in full size.

There's an ever-so-slight discoloration on the right side, though I never would have noticed without being told one of them was compressed. I had to look HARD to find it.

The right one is the JPG file.. It was though to notice without zooming in.. But you can see it in the eye. The eye on our left (her right eye). See the big highlight, on our left there is a tiny black line.

Compare this tiny black line on the left image with the one on the right, and you can see that the right one is is slightly more faded away with its surrounding colors (which is a typical for a JPG save image to do).

Left: Uncompressed JPG
Right: Compressed JPG

THough they are much the same, the one on the right has less quality pixel for pixel than the one on the left. SO the left one is the better of the two.

From what I can spot, the left one appears to be the higher quality image.

Lol. Left one is lower qual?
XD Then again, I never complained in the first place.

right...no doubt

Right one. You can see compression marks in the eyes.

right one seems a little blurred.

HD fags go buy a PS3, art is beautiful no matter what, so what if there's a few compresison artifacts, your eyes will dry from staring at the screen all day long, if you want detail in porn go find a real partner

The right one looks more distorted than the left one.
That is my vote.

Meh, good enough for government work :P

yeah hate to say it but the difference in noticeable by comparison side by side. if you weren't comparing the two, it would be hard to tell the difference, it's scant. but the one on the left is much richer

The image on the right, definitely. The colors aren't as smooth and there's more than a few places where you can see some compression issues. For me it's most noticeable under her lip, where the artifacts are red on white, and around the collar and on the neck, where she used thin contrasting lines to edge and detail. Not exactly horrific differences, admittedly, but you did ask.

Oh god I cant stop laughing.

Damn there's a lot of comments!

And yeah, left has higher quality. And Jessica is on SexyFur too?

I wonder when people will realize that he's never going to tell us which is which.

Oh wait a minute. The one on the right is compressed and the one on the left isn't. The green in the eye is a little fuzzed out.

Not sure which came from where, but the one on the right is definitely compressed.

The one on the right -is- sharper, but in this instance I actually favor the subtle diffusion of the colors in the left-most example.

Yeah, one on the right is compressed more, one on the left is obviously the resized one.

The one on the right has softer edges to me but when you get right down to it they're both decent quality so what's the big deal?

Wait, I think that's the point you were making.

the one with the tits.

So...I gotta ask, what sorta point you trying to make? FA sucks because of bad compression? Sexy has SUPER high quality images? If so, you get what you pay for, no? If not, then what IS your point to posting it here.

Who's the original artist?

Nah, some dimwit started crabbing that "Bernal is a rotten scumbag and he rapes the image quality with lousy compression"

Hey Evil Art Nazi, well, there is ONE case i know of that I would have to agree where this is true. When i was a member of sexyfur, one of your wallpapers was horribly compressed & it did indeed look like shit. the files are "surfbunny_02_desktop_C_1600x1200" & "surfbunny_02_desktop_M_1600x1200" While the C version was great, the M was HORRIBLE!! By far the worst image on Sexyfur ever! This is about the only image that i can see where you did indeed butcher the crap out it. I dont know if you replaced this image with a fixed version since i was last on sexyfur. & aside from the images sometimes being to small, the rest have been quite good.

SOMEBODY CALL THE WAAAAHMBULANCE!!!

I've noticed this as well, but I'm not one to complain about such things. Just happy to see the goods. ^_^;

PS Jessica Elwood is the original artist.

Danke^.^

Well the left one I think was blown up and the right one has the slight chop I see with lower quality files. But if Jessica says that's on purpose then the only thing I"m sure of is that right = good, left = bad

They look exactly the same peope. If there are differences, they're incredibly subtle and I'm not willing to stare at them both for 10 minutes to discern them. Sheesh...

one on left was blurred before saving, one on right has way more artifacts :V

one of these kids is dead!

right side does appear to have some fuzzy artifacts on it. Especially around high contrast areas like the collar.

could it be as simple as the one on the right being very, very slightly darker than the left?

Left one: JE
Right one: SexyFur

The image on the right has very slight .jpg degradation, while the one to the left has softer lines, most notably around the glasses and eyes. I have a very sharp monitor and DVI connection, though. I imagine on most monitors it's not a big deal.

What are trying to imply with this? That we should pay SexyFur for only slightly better quality?

No, you should do it for the fate of mankind.

Imma fox hehe, I could care less about the humans =P

The Right image has worse artifacts than the one on the left. then again, this is a JPG file & its going to have artifacts regardless of left or right. if you want people to compare, your going to need to post it using a LOSSLESS image format.

I am probablly wrong, never been good at these things, but i will gamble on the left one

First off I'll have to start by saying that these twats don't know what they're talking about when they whine about the quality of your art. I saw the goddammed painting of the Last Supper in Italy and it was faded as an emo kid's pair of girl jeans; but still it's an amazing piece of artwork.


I'd say that the one on the right seems to have the little watery, dotty quality problems as some of my photoshop colors did when I saved them as a .GIF rather than a .JPEG off the bat (either that or it's an image that was compressed in the program before it was sharpened/saved.


BUT with the image on the left, (if you look at her glasses) the quality is a little bit skewed in terms of sharpness. So I guess it's really a trade-off of whether you want a crisp, watery picture or a dulled, smooth picture depending on which way you want to do it.


I guess I'd have to say (as a non-super genius in the realm of digital art) that the one on the left I believe to be the compressed version. :)


-MF

I actually have the one fucking answer none of these dweebs have yet thought of. The answer is,

WHO FUCKING GIVES A FLYING RAT'S ASS?!

You, sir, win an all-expense-paid trip to your current location!

I hereby declare the point to this whole exercise is just as you explained, with some further notes for the unwashed:
The image on the left is from JE's post here. The one on the right is from SF. The one on the left has fewer artifacts, the one on the right is slightly sharper. The one on the left is 1/3 smaller, but the one on the right is 1/2 the file size of the one on the left, because it's optimized to load quickly, which is the point of browsing porn.

If you want high-res superduper lossless prints with zero artifacts, then buy them from Jessica and support her art habit. If you want quick-satisfaction splacktasticness with a few pixels where you shouldn't bother noticing (give me a fucking break-- there is T&A there and you are looking at pixel artifacts? What in goddamnratturdsonofabitchfuckstickholyhell is your disorder?????), get them from the website and support her art habit. Either way, support her art habit.

FUCK YES!!! I FINALLY FUCKING WON SOMETHING!!!

But I have to agree. And it makes me roffle harder than an audience listening to George Bush trying to pronounce "polyamorous" that not only do people care about that stupid shit, but that there are a bunch of dullwits actually trying to discern the differences here.

And as far as wondering what the problem is with people who ignore curvaceousness on women and focus on pixellation...well, I can explain that fairly easily; you're drawing porn for the fucking furfandom. With some of the crazy shit you see from said fandom...well, I need explain no further.

They are almost but not quite identical to my eyes. When I look at the upper edge of her right ear (our left, her right), I see that the line delineating the ear from the white background is more definite on the image on my left compared to the one on the right. I've got no complaints about either, though.

What would the filesize be if it had been saved as a lossless PNG? Many drawings have PNG file sizes that are reasonable, and PNGs have lossless compression whereas JPGs are irreversibly lossy. Unfortunately, PNGs of my photomorphs are usually in the megabyte+ range, so I have to save them as JPGs.

as a few others have pointed out, does it really matter? they look the same to me.

Hi there!
In my opinion, I think the original or best image with no so much compression is the right image. You only need to see artline to know it.
By the other hand, the left looks blured maybe of because it was saved with more compression. Or maybe is re-saved using a web size image again.

I vote the left as the lower quality. You can see it in the eyelashes, on the left they're thicker, and on the right they seem more refined.

Haha, win.

No, fail, you actually paid attention to nearly unnoticeable differences in picture quality. :<

No, you fail for wasting your time responding to the post of a bored furry. :D

ZOMG!! FIVE SECONDS LOST?! WAAAH.

as a fellow artist that likes to both color and shrink images I can tell the image on the left has barely noticeable blurr and mild quality loss while the one on the right is still flawless like the original earlier pic but both got reduced to do this picture comparison therefore without seeing the full view it's hard to notice to the untrained eye

Left one blurred
Right one sharper but slightly pixilated.

Haven't been in sexyfur for a long time though. While both images are okay, I'd say both images were less than perfect quality; which is kinda what you expect on a pay site.

artifacts in the right image are easily visible on a lcd at a slight angle from below, but otherwise looking at it normally looks fine, however people with high contrast or messed up settings might see it.

One of these kids is DEAD!!!
XD

the left one have a lil blur effeckt =3
you see it on her nose and glasses... but that is the only different I could see =/

I'd say the one on the right from sf, and the one on the left from fa.

..One of these kids is dead?

idk.

It's the one on the right that is compressed! You can tell most below the mouth.

wow, people sure are picky

Wouldn't it be easier just to use PNG?

The one on the right is more pixelated.
Its is the compressed version.
So
Right is sexyfur
left is furaffinity.

I'm thinking it's the one on the right. It's sure as hell not something worth bitching about though, either way.

I would say the one on the right. I can see a very VERY mild discoloration (which usually occurs due to compression) in the eyes. I will say this though, if you're not actively looking for it, it's VERY hard to tell the difference. If anyone's complaining about it, they should shut their pie holes and just be glad they can see it.

the image on the right is about 2% narrower than the one the left. I can see it in the bare shoulders, there's less whitespace on the right.

having them next to each other like this, if you wanted to. you could do one of those 3d images if you cross your eyes a little - stare-e-os :)

I like the one of the right better, the image seems sharper to me.