@zippysqrl  
Haha, I’m actually male but I’ll take your reference of “ladies” as a complement. I do get tired of my Y chromosome sometimes.

Given I appear to have set off an argument I swear my comment was only due to the misspelling of Cadance :)

@下げ髪  
@Parcly Taxel  
Ladies, please.  
what you’re arguing about are differences in preferences for vectors, that means neither of you are right or wrong, neither of your methods/products are “prefered” just different.
 
If you both did commissions, you’d both get people commissioning you, 2 parties of vector lovers, perhaps with significant overlap for people indifferent about differences in style and just an overall love for vectors in all forms.

@下げ髪  
@Parcly Taxel  
Did I really just find this in my feed? xD

@Parcly Taxel  
I disagree completely. For me it is the exact opposite. The more detail a vector has and the more faithful to the original it is the better its quality. If a vector of a detailed image lacks said detail it is only a low quality reproduction and I am not impressed. It is simple to make a vector with little detail. I specifically made mine to match the original in every detail I could. Also do you think those 30 hours were consecutive? I could say my vector took a month to make if those 30 hours were spread out enough. I assume that during the 3 or so weeks you spent on yours you did other things such as sleep and eat?

@下げ髪  
@Parcly Taxel  
ur both beautiful :[

@下げ髪 The criteria for good vectors are much different from other types of pictures. First, simplicity of contours and minimisation of object count are preferred, which meant that many irregularities present in the original image were smoothed out with my vector. I believe my own vector contains only around 300 shapes; I haven’t counted but I’m sure it’s less than a thousand. This is because vectors need to be rendered as fast as possible on web pages and any excess in objects only slows the renderer down.
 
You say your vector took 30 hours; I took a whole two weeks to draw the pony herself without the shading and another week (three months later) to add the shading. That was when I still found vectoring rather new; even now I estimate the entire process would take one and a half weeks for me.
 
In short, your vector tries too hard to be realistic while mine balances that with the necessary constraint of sleekness.

@Parcly Taxel  
You do realize mine is a true vector as well, as in not a “quick and dirty trace”? It took 30 hours and is comprised of 1,034 shapes. One of the reasons I made mine was yours was not good enough.

@stryke  
 
I remember this as another quick-and-dirty trace of Cadance Uses Lick. For comparison, my hard-won vector is below.  

Shurely some mistake?