Posted under General
eyes_out_of_frame vs head_out_of_frame
is there any difference? i'm inclined going for an alias since the latter's wiki also include that of chin and mouth; or are we going to move that definition into eyes_out_of_frame to make the former distinct?
and we also have torso, btw.
Updated by jxh2154
Yeah, they seem to serve basically the same function, whether or not the mouth is included. I don't think it's necessary to make a distinction. +1 for aliasing.
Torso seems like another one of those broad, undefined, semi-useless tags. I don't think we actually have a tag for an image of just the torso - like, head and legs excluded - but that's probably because there aren't any such images. So that's probably a moot point.
I don't see the real point behind this alias.
post #2344685 for example. The eyes are not visible, but the head is tilted to the side. The head_tilt implies for me that the head is visible (since the character does make an action with the head), but in this case not the eyes.
remove alias eyes_out_of_frame -> head_out_of_frame
See post above and since no one said something, I take the next step.
In terms of purpose they're covering the same thing, which are scenes de-emphasizing the face by chopping it from the image. Whether it is part of or all of the head cut from the image, they're still covering the same type of depiction. Given this, I see no reason to separate these two tags.
If there is a major need for it, a later like head_completely_out_of_frame tag that implicates head_out_of_frame can be made to specifically cover depictions where the head is completely out of frame.
Related topic: I feel that depictions like post #2212933 and post #2350426 (NSFW) are inappropriate for the tag, and that some requirement of needing part of the chest level depicted in the image should be added.
NWF_Renim said:
In terms of purpose they're covering the same thing, which are scenes de-emphasizing the face by chopping it from the image. Whether it is part of or all of the head cut from the image, they're still covering the same type of depiction. Given this, I see no reason to separate these two tags.
Even if the head clearly makes an action? The purpose is clear to one point: if the eyes aren't visible, the "center" of the head is not here and persons to interact with the eyes the most so it isn't that important if only the mouth and maybe nose (if drawn) is visible. But this is another step. While I'd agree on the first one, I don't see where this purpose uphold if the head does something which is clearly visible even when the eyes are out. There this alias falls apart like I've written before. So we have to differenciate between these two things.
For the seconf thing: We have a lower_body tag. But this is clearly underused, doesn't have an wiki entry and if it's used, then it's most of the time used by the same user (:P). There is also the out_of_frame tag, but this is more unspecific then lower body.
Updated
Then you ignore that a head can do actions as well. A head can never tilt when it is out of the frame. What is this? Do we tag what we see or not? So to speak, this tags purpose is when the head is not visible and an action can not be seen. The tags purpose should not be when the head does an action but the eyes or not visible, like in the post above. So: Eyes out of frame is a more specific tag then head out of frame since it covers less. When you say that this is hair splitting, then you don't see this.
I think you need to take a different reading on the meaning of the tag, as you tend to get hung up on a certain readings of some of these tags. Right now your current reading of the meaning "head out of frame" is to mean "head is completely not in the frame", but an alternative understanding of the term can mean "head is not completely in the frame".
My understanding of your current reading of these tags:
Current reading of the tags:
Under this second meaning you can then take that there are two sub-types of the concept, which would be: "head completely out of frame" and "head partially out of frame". "eyes out of frame" would be the same as "head partially out of frame". This means at minimum that a complete separation would at least never happen, as it is a sub-type of the greater concept.
Yes. That is the current reading of tag.
But do you really think that is makes sense this way? I've given some counter reasons but they don't seem to convince you. Or is it simply that it would things more difficult and more intransparent when for example only the chin (lowest part of the head) is visible?
