At least Island, possibly Small Country level+ is REALLY ugly (Sparkle's Bijuu level Revisions: Part 1)

[MinatoSparkle]

This makes it sound like there are multiple statements supporting such a size for Konoha / the explosion, when there's just the 1 Forest of Death statement. You don't get a lot of measurement of consistency with just one statement / result.

It's actually twice, in the manga and databook. And regardless, it aligns most closely with author intent if it's a blatant value with no assumptions or pixel scaling needed

And if you have a problem with "inconsistent visuals", shouldn't the most inconsistent visual be regarded with greater skepticism?


I doubt Kishimoto has specific energy values in mind at all when drawing feats... And while we can obviously never tell exactly what Kishimoto is thinking, the greater amount of consistency among the other calcs compared to the other calc which, in terms of data, is a statistical outlier, does give me some confidence in knowing what Kishimoto generally intended for the village.


To me, it makes no sense. The proponents of the calc made by Arc7Kuroi depend on Kishimoto's art to some extent, clearly; you have to believe that Kishimoto keeps some internal consistency in mind in order to pixelscale between the partially-seen Forest of Death and the explosion on the panel.... but you seemingly vehemently believe that no internal consistency should be regarded when it comes to literally any other refernece point? How is this not precisely cherry-picking what is convenient and flat-out rejecting everything that is inconvenient?

Large landmarks and ant sized houses/rocks are not comparable

 

[LordTracer]

Personally if you ask me I think averaging said results is best. I don't believe any one calculation holds more weight or value than the other not only that but the profiles will look less cluttered than what we have now

I’m also in favor of averaging the results.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

I’m also in favor of averaging the results.

That's not really the topic of this thread, it's smthn to decide in a CGT I think

 

[Ghostimuscrime]

This makes it sound like there are multiple statements supporting such a size for Konoha / the explosion, when there's just the 1 Forest of Death statement. You don't get a lot of measurement of consistency with just one statement / result.

And if you have a problem with "inconsistent visuals", shouldn't the most inconsistent visual be regarded with greater skepticism?

what narrative purpose would several statements of kishimoto saying the same thing achieve? are writers supposed to believe their audiences are so forgetful they need to be reminded of things?


a single unconflicted statement would be far more consistent because it is a explicitly written word of god value, visuals change every single time you draw, its hard to keep the proportions accurate to everything else, you can ask IRL artists, its not easy to do that, its not like a 3D generated game where sizing is explicitly under author control

if naruto was 8 years old in one panel the next panel is gonna have him also as 8 years old, the intended number cannot change, the sizing can definitely change because you never put focus on the little details like that in a battle shonen manga, if its not made with pixelscaling in mind then you should never argue using visuals as the defeater at all, the stated numbers fit our needs better for accuracy's sake


so even a single unconflicted statement would be infinitely more sound and consistent than several ever changing structure sizes, not to mention the previous 2km size of konoha you get from visuals is contradicted by konoha hosting a giant forest within itself, having tens of thousands of non combating civilians which necessitates a much larger area per population density methods, large number of people being considered a minority per the shinobi column, there is more to a structure than how big you can pixelscale it by pitting humans or rails beside it, its not that simple, the things we use for consistency are actual intended and supported values, the visuals dont provide an author intended value so theyre eternally inferior to the other method

but the thing is, Konoha is fully upgraded to 63 km, I should not have to argue this, you should engage in a crt fully submitting to that as the truth instead of repeating the same flavor of an argument in a different setting, like how many times do you wanna keep debating the same thing over and over again?

I doubt Kishimoto has specific energy values in mind at all when drawing feats... And while we can obviously never tell exactly what Kishimoto is thinking, the greater amount of consistency among the other calcs compared to the other calc which, in terms of data, is a statistical outlier, does give me some confidence in knowing what Kishimoto generally intended for the village.

if all of those conflict with more controllable and more explicit values then all of them are to be over-ridden, simple

To me, it makes no sense. The proponents of the calc made by Arc7Kuroi depend on Kishimoto's art to some extent, clearly; you have to believe that Kishimoto keeps some internal consistency in mind in order to pixelscale between the partially-seen Forest of Death and the explosion on the panel.... but you seemingly vehemently believe that no internal consistency should be regarded when it comes to literally any other refernece point? How is this not precisely cherry-picking what is convenient and flat-out rejecting everything that is inconvenient?

obviously we are gonna depend on that to an extent but we draw the line on nitpickery stuff, within an art piece there will be explicit stuff and some minor elements, we only scale using the explicit general idea and ignore the minor things because those are bound to face inconsistencies


two pictures of naruto as a child with differing heights, what is blatant and undisputable about it? both images will carry a boy with whiskers and blonde hair, sharing bodily characteristics of the popular shonen character even tho multiple art pieces can vary a lot we can take the conclusion that both of them are naruto with maximum certainty, but what shape was his ear? if that is in conflict we dont consider it as end of the world because its a minor part of the overall piece, it the same reason hokage rock isnt a defeater to konoha's size, because konoha is the bigger picture, thats whats emphasized by the piece not the size of individual buildings, in this scenario the other ends simply get over-ridden in presence of superior evidence placing their structure at larger levels

Some things are more explicit and obvious and some things like normal building size aren't cared about by a 50 year old man whos having to write a script, draw and share with editors every single week and being enough caught up in his work to the point of missing his own honeymoon I don't believe you can dishonestly try to use those non important aspects of the art that he doesnt care about to attack the important parts like that sorry

 

[Testarossa002]

what narrative purpose would several statements of kishimoto saying the same thing achieve? are writers supposed to believe their audiences are so forgetful they need to be reminded of things?


a single unconflicted statement would be far more consistent because it is a explicitly written word of god value, visuals change every single time you draw, its hard to keep the proportions accurate to everything else, you can ask IRL artists, its not easy to do that, its not like a 3D generated game where sizing is explicitly under author control

if naruto was 8 years old in one panel the next panel is gonna have him also as 8 years old, the intended number cannot change, the sizing can definitely change because you never put focus on the little details like that in a battle shonen manga, if its not made with pixelscaling in mind then you should never argue using visuals as the defeater at all, the stated numbers fit our needs better for accuracy's sake


so even a single unconflicted statement would be infinitely more sound and consistent than several ever changing structure sizes, not to mention the previous 2km size of konoha you get from visuals is contradicted by konoha hosting a giant forest within itself, having tens of thousands of non combating civilians which necessitates a much larger area per population density methods, large number of people being considered a minority per the shinobi column, there is more to a structure than how big you can pixelscale it by pitting humans or rails beside it, its not that simple, the things we use for consistency are actual intended and supported values, the visuals dont provide an author intended value so theyre eternally inferior to the other method

but the thing is, Konoha is fully upgraded to 63 km, I should not have to argue this, you should engage in a crt fully submitting to that as the truth instead of repeating the same flavor of an argument in a different setting, like how many times do you wanna keep debating the same thing over and over again?


if all of those conflict with more controllable and more explicit values then all of them are to be over-ridden, simple


obviously we are gonna depend on that to an extent but we draw the line on nitpickery stuff, within an art piece there will be explicit stuff and some minor elements, we only scale using the explicit general idea and ignore the minor things because those are bound to face inconsistencies


two pictures of naruto as a child with differing heights, what is blatant and undisputable about it? both images will carry a boy with whiskers and blonde hair, sharing bodily characteristics of the popular shonen character even tho multiple art pieces can vary a lot we can take the conclusion that both of them are naruto with maximum certainty, but what shape was his ear? if that is in conflict we dont consider it as end of the world because its a minor part of the overall piece, it the same reason hokage rock isnt a defeater to konoha's size, because konoha is the bigger picture, thats whats emphasized by the piece not the size of individual buildings, in this scenario the other ends simply get over-ridden in presence of superior evidence placing their structure at larger levels

Some things are more explicit and obvious and some things like normal building size aren't cared about by a 50 year old man whos having to write a script, draw and share with editors every single week and being enough caught up in his work to the point of missing his own honeymoon I don't believe you can dishonestly try to use those non important aspects of the art that he doesnt care about to attack the important parts like that sorry

I get your point. I really do. I was about to send something similar regarding how we treat bijuu sizes
However, this new calc depends on pixel measuring the "inconsistently" drawn manga
For example, Naruto is stated to be 2 metres tall but the manga depictions aren't 1:1 with the statement. He is then involves in a speed calc that requires his height for pixel measurement. We can't just blindly use the 2m value for pixel measurement when we've already established that manga depictions aren't 1:1
I'd honestly prefer it if the values were averaged. It's not perfect but it should suffice for the meantime. Similar to the Toneri calc

 

[Ghostimuscrime]

I get your point. I really do. I was about to send something similar regarding how we treat bijuu sizes
However, this new calc depends on pixel measuring the "inconsistently" drawn manga
For example, Naruto is stated to be 2 metres tall but the manga depictions aren't 1:1 with the statement. He is then involves in a speed calc that requires his height for pixel measurement. We can't just blindly use the 2m value for pixel measurement when we've already established that manga depictions aren't 1:1
I'd honestly prefer it if the values were averaged. It's not perfect but it should suffice for the meantime. Similar to the Toneri calc

I address this in the last section of my response, just because you can have inconsistencies does not mean you can't derive certain information, the general broader things would still be fair game e.g. how many faces are in the hokage rock, who's faces are in the hokage rock, is the village existing outside space, in an ocean or random ground?


Some things will bear certainty within inconsistencies and those things are broader more important lore pieces which do not get lost even if the sizing comparison between human number #277 conflict with distant background building #998



the naruto's TBB part is an explicit part of the art piece, Kishimoto actively intends for us to be shocked at the big boom that 6T naruto forms, kishimoto does not want us to look at the sizing of the railings so you cannot throw railing size to counter the TBB

 

[MinatoSparkle]

I wouldn't exactly put it like that, but I do think conveniently showing the comparably sized Forest of Death (when the FoD is almost never drawn in general) next to the Bijuudama is quite telling of the intention compared to using small inconsequential markers that are almost impossible to draw consistently

 

[MinatoSparkle]

Bump

 

[XSOULOFCINDERX]

Bump.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

I’m also in favor of averaging the results.

Do you have thoughts on whether the forest here is the Forest of Death?

 

[MinatoSparkle]

Bump

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

This thread is kind of all over the place right now, and I'm kinda lost icel.
What exactly are the current points of discussion/contention? If the thread can't be pulled back on track, it might be best to redo it with more focus and a clean slate.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

This thread is kind of all over the place right now, and I'm kinda lost icel.
What exactly are the current points of discussion/contention? If the thread can't be pulled back on track, it might be best to redo it with more focus and a clean slate.

Whether this is the Forest of Death, which just needs 1 more vote to be accepted

 

[Kaydee1648]

Bump
i think we have enough staff agreement in averaging the values

 

[MinatoSparkle]

That can't be decided in a regular CRT I'm pretty sure

 

[Kaydee1648]

why

 

[MinatoSparkle]

why

It's a calc related matter, so needs a calc group discussion

 

[Damage3245]

It's a calc related matter, so needs a calc group discussion

Indeed.

 

[DavidTPPM]

How exactly common are perfectly circular forests for there to be 2 of them near a single village?

And why would Kishimoto specifically show a random unknown forest that just so happens to meet the exact shape and supposed location of a different known one? Seems pointlessly misleading

 

[MinatoSparkle]

I'm sure whatever third staff that eventually ends up reading the post would agree

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

I'm sure whatever third staff that eventually ends up reading the post would agree

I can tag some staff. Just lmk who you want me to ping.

 

[Damage3245]

How exactly common are perfectly circular forests for there to be 2 of them near a single village?

And why would Kishimoto specifically show a random unknown forest that just so happens to meet the exact shape and supposed location of a different known one? Seems pointlessly misleading

Considering we can only see a portion of it on the panel, we can't objectively claim it is perfectly circular [in that instance, at least].

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

Considering we can only see a portion of it on the panel, we can't objectively claim it is perfectly circular [in that instance, at least].

I mean, it's essentially in the exact same position as this forest, which most if not all participants of the previous thread accepted as more than likely being the FoD.

 

[Damage3245]

I mean, it's essentially in the exact same position as this forest, which most if not all participants of the previous thread accepted as more than likely being the FoD.

I'm not saying that isn't a conclusion you can draw from comparing to a different panel, I'm just saying that it's not the case that we have two panels of completely clear views of two perfectly circular forests. You have that panel that you linked, but the one from the Pain arc doesn't show what we could objectively label a completely circular forest without making assumptions.

 

[DavidTPPM]

Considering we can only see a portion of it on the panel, we can't objectively claim it is perfectly circular [in that instance, at least].

Okay, but we can because we see it in a different panel and it's circular. Hell it's shown specifically when talking about Chunin exams, the place that uses the FoD and introduces us to its size.

Isn't it a bit silly to say that it's a completely different forest coincidentally with the same shape near Konoha that just so coincidentally happens to be shown while talking about the event that introduced and utilized FoD?

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

I'm not saying that isn't a conclusion you can draw from comparing to a different panel, I'm just saying that it's not the case that we have two panels of completely clear views of two perfectly circular forests. You have that panel that you linked, but the one from the Pain arc doesn't show what we could objectively label a completely circular forest without making assumptions.

Okay, but like, it's in damn near the exact same position relative to Hokage mountain. Why would we assume it's a different forest from the one we saw before if it's in the same exact position? If were on the other side of the village, I'd agree with you. But I'm just struggling to understand why your position is the more likely one here.

Bear with me for a second. Let's say you have a house with a circular pool located on its northeastern side, okay? Now, let's say you're shown a picture of what you know to be that same house on that same side, but the pool isn't fully shown. Would it then be reasonable to assume the pool actually looks like this?

 

[MinatoSparkle]

I can tag some staff. Just lmk who you want me to ping.

DarkDragonMedeus, Theglassman12, and Qawsedf234 would be great

 

[Damage3245]

Okay, but we can because we see it in a different panel and it's circular. Hell it's shown specifically when talking about Chunin exams, the place that uses the FoD and introduces us to its size.

Isn't it a bit silly to say that it's a completely different forest coincidentally with the same shape near Konoha that just so coincidentally happens to be shown while talking about the event that introduced and utilized FoD?

I think there's a lot of things about this which are silly in the end, but it doesn't matter. As for this, I think that DontTalk made a good point in the previous thread when relying on the supposed consistency of the Forest of Death here.

Okay, but like, it's in damn near the exact same position relative to Hokage mountain. Why would we assume it's a different forest from the one we saw before if it's in the same exact position? If were on the other side of the village, I'd agree with you. But I'm just struggling to understand why your position is the more likely one here.

Bear with me for a second. Let's say you have a house with a circular pool located on its northeastern side, okay? Now, let's say you're shown a picture of what you know to be that same house on that same side, but the pool isn't fully shown. Would it then be reasonable to assume the pool actually looks like this?

Maybe it is that circular forest as you say. Maybe it's actually these forests bits on the outskirts of it instead, just drawn a bit different as it's from a different angle. We don't get another panel to corroborate it.

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

Maybe it is that circular forest as you say. Maybe it's actually these forests bits on the outskirts of it instead, just drawn a bit different as it's from a different angle. We don't get another panel to corroborate it.

I'm honestly not seeing the vision here, Damage. These don't remotely seem to be the right shape or size to me, but we can agree to disagree. I'll just tag more staff so we can just move on from this topic already. Getting new sets of eyes could never hurt.

DarkDragonMedeus, Theglassman12, and Qawsedf234 would be great

I'll throw in a couple more for good measure.
@DarkDragonMedeus @Theglassman12 @Qawsedf234 @LephyrTheRevanchist @LordTracer @Dalesean027 @Dereck03
Sorry for the ping, guys, but would you mind evaluating the "Tackling the Forest of Death Troubles" portion of the OP? Your help would be greatly appreciated.

 

[DavidTPPM]

I think there's a lot of things about this which are silly in the end, but it doesn't matter. As for this, I think that DontTalk made a good point in the previous thread when relying on the supposed consistency of the Forest of Death here.

I don’t think that really answers the question or my arguments. DT says it's an assumption to say the landscape changes but we blatantly see landscape change, that is not debatable or an assumption. The same place in part 2 that has a huge river had no river in part 1.

And the landscape changing doesn't really answer the insane unlikelyhood of there being 2 perfectly spherical forests near konoha which I talked about.

 

[Damage3245]

I'm honestly not seeing the vision here, Damage. These don't remotely seem to be the right shape or size to me, but we can agree to disagree. I'll just tag more staff so we can just move on from this topic already. Getting new sets of eyes could never hurt.

I'd be very surprised if they were the same shape or size between the two panels, given how different everything else is like how one area where a river is in Part 1 has become a road with houses in Shippuden. A big empty field has seemingly transformed into a river vast river. The roads atop the plateau are a completely different layout, etc.

Given the sheer number of differences, it seems weird, to me, to cling onto the "Forest of Death" being the sole thing that is identical between these two different depictions of Konoha hundreds of chapters apart.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Sorry for the ping, guys, but would you mind evaluating the "Tackling the Forest of Death Troubles" portion of the OP? Your help would be greatly appreciated.

My view is the following:

• It's not called or labeled the Forest of Death in the Pain fight
• The color page directly shows a massive river cutting through it that is not featured in the Forest of Death

In my mind calling it the FoD is unsupported. In my mind, considering Kishi changed entire countries and islands between chapters before, he likely just changed the geographic make up for that region. Which makes the previous numbers unusable anyways.

So you'd have to list me as disagreeing based on those points.

The other scaling in the OP makes sense, but does it run into an issue where everyone is downscaling to people who can canonically dog walk them in a fight? People surviving attacks doesn't 100% mean they should always scale to them.

 

[DavidTPPM]

Maybe it is that circular forest as you say. Maybe it's actually these forests bits on the outskirts of it instead, just drawn a bit different as it's from a different angle. We don't get another panel to corroborate it.

If that was a defeating issue couldn't we just use the part 1 page to measure to length width of the hokage faces compared to the FoD and then use that for the explosions diameter.

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

If that was a defeating issue couldn't we just use the part 1 page to measure to length width of the hokage faces compared to the FoD and then use that for the explosions diameter.

I was actually considering bringing this up as a compromise solution. It'd even make more sense to average the values using this method since the different methods would all be using the Hokage mountain via scaling it from different panels.

 

[Damage3245]

If that was a defeating issue couldn't we just use the part 1 page to measure to length width of the hokage faces compared to the FoD and then use that for the explosions diameter.

There's somewhat of an issue for that - just from a pixelscaling method standing - that the two reference objects could be considered quite far away from each other, as in the FoD is further in the background away so a direct size comparison wouldn't work out so well.

But I can do some digging and try to find out the viability of that.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

My view is the following:

• It's not called or labeled the Forest of Death in the Pain fight
• The color page directly shows a massive river cutting through it that is not featured in the Forest of Death

In my mind calling it the FoD is unsupported. In my mind, considering Kishi changed entire countries and islands between chapters before, he likely just changed the geographic make up for that region. Which makes the previous numbers unusable anyways.

So you'd have to list me as disagreeing based on those points.

The other scaling in the OP makes sense, but does it run into an issue where everyone is downscaling to people who can canonically dog walk them in a fight? People surviving attacks doesn't 100% mean they should always scale to them.

Well the thing is that I'm not scaling them to the top tiers per se, since Bijuu level characters with my proposal would be 4 teratons (and KCM2 Naruto 20 teratons), while top tiers are 98 to 397 teratons. I'm just saying 4/20 teratons is more consistent than 4.3/21.5 gigatons since Bijuu level characters do get folded by, but aren't neg diffed by top tiers.

But I digress, since it was concluded that even if my examples are correct, it wouldn't be able to overturn a different accepted calc for the same feat and that requires a separate calc group thread

 

[DavidTPPM]

There's somewhat of an issue for that - just from a pixelscaling method standing - that the two reference objects could be considered quite far away from each other, as in the FoD is further in the background away so a direct size comparison wouldn't work out so well.

But I can do some digging and try to find out the viability of that.

Yeah I see the POV isn't exactly right from above so the distance and angle would probably affect the numbers a bit, but there could still be some potential with the hokage faces given they appear so often

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

I'm honestly not seeing the vision here, Damage. These don't remotely seem to be the right shape or size to me, but we can agree to disagree. I'll just tag more staff so we can just move on from this topic already. Getting new sets of eyes could never hurt.

I'll throw in a couple more for good measure.
@DarkDragonMedeus @Theglassman12 @Qawsedf234 @LephyrTheRevanchist @LordTracer @Dalesean027 @Dereck03
Sorry for the ping, guys, but would you mind evaluating the "Tackling the Forest of Death Troubles" portion of the OP? Your help would be greatly appreciated.

You think you slick

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

Whether this is the Forest of Death, which just needs 1 more vote to be accepted

I do believe it's the FoD. I also believe Kishi ****** up. So that will certainly be interesting in the follow-up calc group thread.

 

[MinatoSparkle]

Seems that follow-up calc group thread is good to go now (whenever I get around to making it)