@shinyumbreon :(
Literally all I am trying to do is explain the thought process behind specific traits and details, and potential reasons that could have led to this sort of art, nowhere am I implying that people who point out these things are in the wrong or that they are bad for pointing things out. I am as neutral as I can be regarding this. Error reports are important, I report them through tickets and through the database system all the time. I am not the only one who is explaining why specific elements are not errors, that is literally the only thing I am doing here; no attitude, no taking sides, no purpose other than pointing at the "consistent inconsistency". There are tons of errors and I have not mentioned them because people are correct and they need to be fixed, and it would be silly of me to go and point them out since other people have mentioned them prior to this. My statements are a huge minority compared to the actual amount of errors that need to be addressed and fixed. I am only explaining why some things are not errors, are intentional or could be intentional, and there have been numerous things in the past that have been proven not to be errors despite the fact that people said they were. They were pointed out by the Staff, correcting alleged corrections is not an unusual occurrence.
On Stained - I have not mentioned in-species inconsistencies. Those, just like you said, are errors. If a male has the trait and the female one doesn't, that is an error. However, different gene traits on different species occur frequently and they have been proven to be intentional most of the time. Great example: Underbelly on Coatl and Nocturne - no other species apart from Bogsneak, Nocturne and Coatl have accentual parts on other parts of their bodies. I specifically said that the ear not being coloured in is intentional and that is consistent across all species, although thank you for pointing out the thing about horns, that was an error on my part, I apologise! I will go and edit that right away.
On Arcane Primal - Arcane Primal on male Veilspun has specifically been made like that to show more of it, having to cover the horn due to the fact that Veilspun faces are portrayed from the profile which means there is less available base to put the Primal on. The rest of the Primal, if it was portrayed exactly like on numerous other species, would have been underneath the mane which would make the eye type, which is a special eye type, smaller and therefore it would make people angry. The part of the eye type on the horn is intentional. You can clearly see the same on a male Imperial who has a similar head shape
Edit: also, yes, you are absolutely correct when it comes stray Arcane lines that go outside of the dragon lineart. That might be an error and that should be deleted, unless that was intentional since both male and female Veilspun have an external glow. The stray lines that go over the mane is another error. I was specifically referring to the part that goes over the ear and the horn because otherwise, the eye type would have been way too small. Yes, the overall design is the same across all species but it is unique in placement and size because they need to fit it on each head differently. The size on Gaolers was tackled by adding a much larger portion to the nasal bone compared to the rest of dragons, while male Veilspun have a longer swirl that spreads on their horns. The thing I am referring to is not an error, not the stray lines.
Regarding Crackle - I said "most likely" therefore I am not implying that it is intentional but there is a possibility.
Regarding lineart thickness - once again, I did not mention severe lineart inconsistencies or double layered lineart anywhere as that is a problem and I am pointing out things that are most likely not errors. I am 100% aware of Iridescent lineart and they addressed it, saying that will be fixed once they have evalued and redone Iri/Shim. In this case I was specifically talking about Stitched & Patchwork, and slight differences between moderns and Ancients happen frequently due to how the genes are portrayed and who is drawing said genes. For example: Giraffe and Daub on Gaolers look different than on every modern simply because the Staff needed to make the genes appear more busy due to the fact that Ancients cannot wear apparel which is one of the main reasons why the genes on Ancients are particularly complex most of the time. Yes, unintentional lineart thickness and improper layering are errors and they need to be fixed, I didn't mention those anywhere
Regarding colours - you point out the swirls - that is a bug. Nowhere did I mention that the swirls weren't a bug :( I am specifically pointing out the fluidity of Starmap and Constellation because they happen very frequently, and sometimes among other genes too. Great example: female Fae Alloy in which Alloy has a different accentual hue and it was an artistic choice, as mentioned by Undel. Same goes for Iridescent and Shimmer and their different hues which have been mentioned by the Staff in the past that they are an artistic choice due to the nature of iridescence in organisms. That does not mean some things might not get potentially tackled.
Regarding Glimmer - again, I am not claiming that it is 100% not an error as it might as well could be, I am just speaking from artistic experience. The nail parts could totally be errors, all I said is that it might be purposeful but I clearly said that I am not sure and that it might even get edited later, just like the pelvic bone on Fae that the Staff was not planning on changing but they decided to change it simply due to the fact that people were mentioning it. I even pointed out that the rogue streaks of Glimmer on feet are definitely errors so I am not sure where the problem lies
Regarding Capsule - just because it looks awful to you does not mean it looks awful to everyone :( I don't know if it's obvious enough but I am not referring to the possible incorrect lineart colour but the remaining liquid in belly creases, and that looks intentional. I will admit that I am not actually entirely sure what people are even referring to so I'm open to feedback simply because I just don't see any errors. But, once again, that is exactly the reason why I was not making claims about anything else other than the increased Capsule details and fluid remnants
Regarding Tiger - I again said 'might be' therefore I was not implying anything, I was just explaining the possibility of something being intentional. I also pointed out the sudden stop of the lines and that it might be an error therefore I don't understand why I need to explain this once more. The same less-covered area can be seen on female Wildclaw, female Imperial (which would explain why it's like that on the male), but I still do not exclude the possibility of it being fixed or addressed in the future
Regarding Lionfish - you mention Noxtide. Not even once have I mentioned Noxtide in the post. There are numerous errors with Noxtide that exist, such as on Pearlcatcher males with the non-coloured areas, and on Skydancers. I mention Lionfish which has the same accentual colours appear slightly differently on different species specifically due to the poses of said individuals. The accentual gradients on different poses are just the way the genes were drawn.
Regarding Stitched and Patchwork - I once again even mentioned that there is a possibility it will get changed in the future. Yes, it is an inconsistency, I said that as well, and it needs to be addressed, but what I said is that it's not an integral error or a rogue element, I am not saying that it is not a slip-up
Literally all I am trying to do is explain the thought process behind specific traits and details, and potential reasons that could have led to this sort of art, nowhere am I implying that people who point out these things are in the wrong or that they are bad for pointing things out. I am as neutral as I can be regarding this. Error reports are important, I report them through tickets and through the database system all the time. I am not the only one who is explaining why specific elements are not errors, that is literally the only thing I am doing here; no attitude, no taking sides, no purpose other than pointing at the "consistent inconsistency". There are tons of errors and I have not mentioned them because people are correct and they need to be fixed, and it would be silly of me to go and point them out since other people have mentioned them prior to this. My statements are a huge minority compared to the actual amount of errors that need to be addressed and fixed. I am only explaining why some things are not errors, are intentional or could be intentional, and there have been numerous things in the past that have been proven not to be errors despite the fact that people said they were. They were pointed out by the Staff, correcting alleged corrections is not an unusual occurrence.
On Stained - I have not mentioned in-species inconsistencies. Those, just like you said, are errors. If a male has the trait and the female one doesn't, that is an error. However, different gene traits on different species occur frequently and they have been proven to be intentional most of the time. Great example: Underbelly on Coatl and Nocturne - no other species apart from Bogsneak, Nocturne and Coatl have accentual parts on other parts of their bodies. I specifically said that the ear not being coloured in is intentional and that is consistent across all species, although thank you for pointing out the thing about horns, that was an error on my part, I apologise! I will go and edit that right away.
On Arcane Primal - Arcane Primal on male Veilspun has specifically been made like that to show more of it, having to cover the horn due to the fact that Veilspun faces are portrayed from the profile which means there is less available base to put the Primal on. The rest of the Primal, if it was portrayed exactly like on numerous other species, would have been underneath the mane which would make the eye type, which is a special eye type, smaller and therefore it would make people angry. The part of the eye type on the horn is intentional. You can clearly see the same on a male Imperial who has a similar head shape
Edit: also, yes, you are absolutely correct when it comes stray Arcane lines that go outside of the dragon lineart. That might be an error and that should be deleted, unless that was intentional since both male and female Veilspun have an external glow. The stray lines that go over the mane is another error. I was specifically referring to the part that goes over the ear and the horn because otherwise, the eye type would have been way too small. Yes, the overall design is the same across all species but it is unique in placement and size because they need to fit it on each head differently. The size on Gaolers was tackled by adding a much larger portion to the nasal bone compared to the rest of dragons, while male Veilspun have a longer swirl that spreads on their horns. The thing I am referring to is not an error, not the stray lines.
Regarding Crackle - I said "most likely" therefore I am not implying that it is intentional but there is a possibility.
Regarding lineart thickness - once again, I did not mention severe lineart inconsistencies or double layered lineart anywhere as that is a problem and I am pointing out things that are most likely not errors. I am 100% aware of Iridescent lineart and they addressed it, saying that will be fixed once they have evalued and redone Iri/Shim. In this case I was specifically talking about Stitched & Patchwork, and slight differences between moderns and Ancients happen frequently due to how the genes are portrayed and who is drawing said genes. For example: Giraffe and Daub on Gaolers look different than on every modern simply because the Staff needed to make the genes appear more busy due to the fact that Ancients cannot wear apparel which is one of the main reasons why the genes on Ancients are particularly complex most of the time. Yes, unintentional lineart thickness and improper layering are errors and they need to be fixed, I didn't mention those anywhere
Regarding colours - you point out the swirls - that is a bug. Nowhere did I mention that the swirls weren't a bug :( I am specifically pointing out the fluidity of Starmap and Constellation because they happen very frequently, and sometimes among other genes too. Great example: female Fae Alloy in which Alloy has a different accentual hue and it was an artistic choice, as mentioned by Undel. Same goes for Iridescent and Shimmer and their different hues which have been mentioned by the Staff in the past that they are an artistic choice due to the nature of iridescence in organisms. That does not mean some things might not get potentially tackled.
Regarding Glimmer - again, I am not claiming that it is 100% not an error as it might as well could be, I am just speaking from artistic experience. The nail parts could totally be errors, all I said is that it might be purposeful but I clearly said that I am not sure and that it might even get edited later, just like the pelvic bone on Fae that the Staff was not planning on changing but they decided to change it simply due to the fact that people were mentioning it. I even pointed out that the rogue streaks of Glimmer on feet are definitely errors so I am not sure where the problem lies
Regarding Capsule - just because it looks awful to you does not mean it looks awful to everyone :( I don't know if it's obvious enough but I am not referring to the possible incorrect lineart colour but the remaining liquid in belly creases, and that looks intentional. I will admit that I am not actually entirely sure what people are even referring to so I'm open to feedback simply because I just don't see any errors. But, once again, that is exactly the reason why I was not making claims about anything else other than the increased Capsule details and fluid remnants
Regarding Tiger - I again said 'might be' therefore I was not implying anything, I was just explaining the possibility of something being intentional. I also pointed out the sudden stop of the lines and that it might be an error therefore I don't understand why I need to explain this once more. The same less-covered area can be seen on female Wildclaw, female Imperial (which would explain why it's like that on the male), but I still do not exclude the possibility of it being fixed or addressed in the future
Regarding Lionfish - you mention Noxtide. Not even once have I mentioned Noxtide in the post. There are numerous errors with Noxtide that exist, such as on Pearlcatcher males with the non-coloured areas, and on Skydancers. I mention Lionfish which has the same accentual colours appear slightly differently on different species specifically due to the poses of said individuals. The accentual gradients on different poses are just the way the genes were drawn.
Regarding Stitched and Patchwork - I once again even mentioned that there is a possibility it will get changed in the future. Yes, it is an inconsistency, I said that as well, and it needs to be addressed, but what I said is that it's not an integral error or a rogue element, I am not saying that it is not a slip-up
[/url] 
Some highlight lines do not cover all of the creases on Veilspun like they do on other species, but that's about the only thing I have noticed. On adult males, there are leftover liquid remnants while the little lines on both adults and the hatchling appear to be reflections on the glassy surface of the Capsule belly. They occur on numerous other species but they are lines instead of blotches that exist on Veilspun. Drawing glassy surfaces and liquids is extremely hard, I do not blame them for trying out different techniques.
[Pre-orders] M & F bane accent
