To be honest I've seen it often enough that I thought it would've had it's own tag, it's more of a signature or an artist logo than a watermark. I was uploading a few images from an artist such as post #3294481 and post #3294488 which had the stamp mark and couldn't think of the proper tag to use.
jitsuin/ginkouin/mitomein are simply seals accepted by government/bank/other organizations which is unrelated to what we are dealing with here.
gagouin literally mean seals that include the "gagou" name of the artist. I don't think name used by most modern artist who draw works accepted by this site can be considered as gagou. Although I am not sure about if there are any extended meaning in the seal's name that make it apply to other nicks or regular names as well
Moreover, the vaginal object push tag was added to those posts (except the one you linked) by a single user. Looking at that user's other post changes he/she also created the anal object push and double insertion tag.
Moreover, the vaginal object push tag was added to those posts (except the one you linked) by a single user. Looking at that user's other post changes he/she also created the anal object push and double insertion tag.
The principal difference is that the latter tag is meaningless and redundant and should simply be deleted. It was created and populated only a few months ago by a single user who was apparently intending to address a perceived tag deficiency as expressed in topic #15422. I never saw much use for such a tag, as the difference between it and vaginal_object_insertion is too subtle to be of any consequence, and it isn't often obvious whether or not an object is being "pushed" into an orifice. We don't need subjective tags that are open to interpretation, especially when they are barely any different from more objective tags.
Good day guys! I have a question (not sure i'm asking in the right place)- can I upload pictures, which are already in the base, but I'm just making this picture a stereo pair. Such pictues have tag "stereogram" and exist here, but i'm not sure if it is right to upload them without permission from author. so...
1) Is it ok in general or no and if YES
2) Should I ask an author before? Just not sure- lots of pics may be uploaded here like that, and author can just be out of business already. Maybe I should work only after permission recived. Or if picture is listed in database it is legal? Sure, I'n not going to to use any of pictures in any commercial purposes, lol.
3) Tag it like original picture but with "steregram"?
I usually don’t have a problem with stereograms, but that one gives me a headache. Some parts look like total perspective nonsense, such as the tail in the top right or the leg in the bottom right.
Have a look at help:third-party_edit. I’m not an approver, but I doubt that self-made stereograms would be accepted.
I usually don’t have a problem with stereograms, but that one gives me a headache. Some parts look like total perspective nonsense, such as the tail in the top right or the leg in the bottom right.
ok, thanks got it, Ill stop posting on last 2 pics there. Maybe just caught one of old pics made only with photoshop. To be sure, it is parallel stereo, which is used in stereoglasses and perfectly fits 3d helmets. Not cross eyed one.
1. Currently, breast_poking and all that are being aliased to poking. Should they be a separate tag instead? 2. The different I perceive is that, double insertion specify it is a double object insertion, while double penetration + object insertion would also include images like heterosexual intercourse with additional object insertion on the female body.
iridescent_slime said:
The principal difference is that the latter tag is meaningless and redundant and should simply be deleted. It was created and populated only a few months ago by a single user who was apparently intending to address a perceived tag deficiency as expressed in topic #15422. I never saw much use for such a tag, as the difference between it and vaginal_object_insertion is too subtle to be of any consequence, and it isn't often obvious whether or not an object is being "pushed" into an orifice. We don't need subjective tags that are open to interpretation, especially when they are barely any different from more objective tags.
It seems to me that post was actually asking for a way to differentiate between "inserting" and "inserted". Is there a tag to indicate that the object isn't being fully inserted, other than this tag?
1. Currently, breast_poking and all that are being aliased to poking. Should they be a separate tag instead? 2. The different I perceive is that, double insertion specify it is a double object insertion, while double penetration + object insertion would also include images like heterosexual intercourse with additional object insertion on the female body.
1. I was surprised there wasn't a breast_poking tag tbh but not sure what others think about populating it. 2. Yes, there will be some false positives, this is inevitable but we can't go making specific tags every single time, we would be drowning in tags in that case. As long as the overlap isn't too big it shouldn't be much of a problem, throwing in a "-sex" should remove most if not all of those anyway.
I tagged the horse as a rocking horse, but it's actually more of a rotating horse that you find on a carousel. Is there a more appropriate tag for that type?
What's the best way to tag the little portraits in the user interface here? The closest tag I can think of is inset but I can't find any good examples of it being used this way before.
