Page 1 of 1

Something I've always wondered...

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 4:17 pm
by Hiko
Ok, this may seem kinda dumb of me but...

Every once in awhile I'll see someone over at the image board post a link to a "textless version" of a picture. But the thing is...the image always has text on it! Is it just me, or does anyone else think that "textless" should mean, "without text?" Whats the deal?

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:06 pm
by anonymous_object
Hmmm, not sure. Do you have any examples?

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:38 pm
by Hiko
Here ya go: http://e-shuushuu.net/image.php?mode=vi ... e_id=87237
The textless version of this picture has been disabled. But, I did see it before, and it did have text on the picture. So let me see if I can format my question a little better...
Why do people post a link to a picture (with text on it), and call it a "textless version," when it has text on it?

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:44 pm
by wrexness
Without being able to see what dancu's thinking, I believe his use of "textless" actually means "textless version of:", but that's just a guess.

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 8:27 pm
by Hiko
wrexness wrote:Without being able to see what dancu's thinking, I believe his use of "textless" actually means "textless version of:", but that's just a guess.
Right, textless...textless version of...they're both the same thing. I just want to know why they refer to it as a textless version of the picture, when it (the picture) obviously has text on it.

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 8:44 pm
by wrexness
Hiko wrote:
wrexness wrote:Without being able to see what dancu's thinking, I believe his use of "textless" actually means "textless version of:", but that's just a guess.
Right, textless...textless version of...they're both the same thing. I just want to know why they refer to it as a textless version of the picture, when it (the picture) obviously has text on it.
There's no need to get snippy at me because you're confused. I offered you a possible explanation. When you say/type the same thing over and over, occasionally you shorten things up and assume everyone knows what you're talking about. This could be such a situation considering how often we have newer/better versions of previously posted pictures put up. I didn't make the post so I can't say for certain, but taking a snarky and sarcastic tone with someone just trying to clear up some confusion isn't going to help.

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:38 pm
by Fuwari
I believe it is indeed a method of shorthand. Translation:

(The image that I am writing this post upon is the) textless (version of): http://e-shuushuu.net/image.php?mode=vi ... e_id=86732

Similarly, we say:

(The image that I am writing this post upon is a) repost (of): etc.

After all, it is not the first image that is a repost, but the current one.

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:41 am
by Hiko
wrexness wrote:
Hiko wrote:
wrexness wrote:Without being able to see what dancu's thinking, I believe his use of "textless" actually means "textless version of:", but that's just a guess.
Right, textless...textless version of...they're both the same thing. I just want to know why they refer to it as a textless version of the picture, when it (the picture) obviously has text on it.
There's no need to get snippy at me because you're confused. I offered you a possible explanation. When you say/type the same thing over and over, occasionally you shorten things up and assume everyone knows what you're talking about. This could be such a situation considering how often we have newer/better versions of previously posted pictures put up. I didn't make the post so I can't say for certain, but taking a snarky and sarcastic tone with someone just trying to clear up some confusion isn't going to help.
No no...I wasn't trying to be snippy or sarcastic. I'm very sorry if I came across that way. And I also understand that I did kinda repeat myself, and that I was being redundant...uggh...I can never write out exactly what I'm trying to say...Anyway, I really do appreciate your help, and I hope you don't think any less of me because of my previous post! :)

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 8:31 am
by anonymous_object
While we're on this topic, many of these "textless" are lower quality or poorly done. In this case, it's pretty obvious. I disabled the textless and enabled the previous version.

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:08 am
by AngelLily
It's exactly as Fuwari says. In the example you posted, Dancu was indeed a bit unespecific, though we mods get what he meant, cause we're the ones who get to disable the image. But it's usually:

(This image is a) Textless version of: link. Example.

The same for reposts.

(This image is a) Repost (of): link.

And as anony said, some images were poorly detexted, and the text version sometimes is superior.