Tag proposal: completely_nude

This has already been proposed in topic #8936. An agreement was somewhat reached, but nothing was done in the end.

At the moment, on Danbooru you can't reach artworks with completely naked characters. The current definition of nude is:

The state of being unclothed. On Danbooru, this means the character's full torso, chest and back from neck to crotch, is uncovered by clothing.

This means that to find artworks where a girl is wearing nothing, you would have to do at least a nude -detached_sleeves -thighhighs search.
This thread will mainly be to discuss on what does and doesn't apply as "completey naked" (Do accessories count? How much does a body need to be shown? etc.), before moving on with gardening.
(In particular i would like to take into consideration artworks like post #4073959, where the POV male is completely naked, but the focus is on the female clothed character.)

We could also take a different route on this: forum #91355 suggested to rework the nude tag itself, essentially making it become completely nude. (This would also make the various naked_* tags more useful...)

A third option i also want to raise would be to make an unclothed tag, and maybe have completely naked implied to it, if it's implemented. This would apply for characters that are "not wearing anything, but are still not completely nude". This way, artworks like post #30300, that wouldn't count neither as completely naked nor as nude, despite effectively not wearing anything, would still have a tag to be grouped into for easier search. (although at the same time, that would just be a naked_* search...)

Mysterious_Uploader said:

This has already been proposed in topic #8936. An agreement was somewhat reached, but nothing was done in the end.

At the moment, on Danbooru you can't reach artworks with completely naked characters. The current definition of nude is:

This means that to find artworks where a girl is wearing nothing, you would have to do at least a nude -detached_sleeves -thighhighs search.
This thread will mainly be to discuss on what does and doesn't apply as "completey naked" (Do accessories count? How much does a body need to be shown? etc.), before moving on with gardening.

I would support the creating of a completely nude tag as long as the nude tag is left as is, it's too old to be changed now. Would this new tag imply nude though?

Mysterious_Uploader said:

We could also take a different route on this: forum #91355 suggested to rework the nude tag itself, essentially making it become completely nude. (This would also make the various naked_* tags more useful...)

As said above, I think the tag is too old to be changed now (just like reworking the sex tag was rejected in topic #17242 (forum #171268))

I would be in favour for a tag creation for a "fully nude". I'm not quite sure how to approach it tho but in the current state of tagging a fully nude from the wait down character as nude+bare_arms+bare_legs seems silly.

Unbreakable said:

Would this new tag imply nude though?

There's no reason for it not to.

Mysterious_Uploader said:

There's no reason for it not to.

Just making sure.

.Dank said:

I would be in favour for a tag creation for a "fully nude". I'm not quite sure how to approach it tho but in the current state of tagging a fully nude from the wait down character as nude+bare_arms+bare_legs seems silly.

You aren't supposed to use bare/arms/legs/shoulders together with the nude tag.

+1 for completely_nude.

+1

+1 for completely nude tag

Mysterious_Uploader said:

We could also take a different route on this: forum #91355 suggested to rework the nude tag itself, essentially making it become completely nude. (This would also make the various naked_* tags more useful...)

This sounds like the best and most useful option, I am all for going through with this.

Funny that I was trying to find a completely nude tag when I uploaded post #4074134 and all I came across was zenra, which doesn't work in this context. +1 for the tag creation.

EroBB said:

This sounds like the best and most useful option, I am all for going through with this.

nude is too old and generic a tag, the truth is it can't really be touched.

nonamethanks said:

nude is too old and generic a tag, the truth is it can't really be touched.

That's a shame, it could really use some work. But I can see why it would be more trouble than worth.

As for what would count against completely nude, I think only things on fingers, toes, in ears and on/in hair shouldn't count against it. If we want to be really stingy I would remove the first two and take everything from chin and down needs to be bare for the tag to be applied.

I sometimes use sankaku's completely nude tag, the description for which is the following:

A complete lack of any and all clothing or coverings. Stricter than nude, this includes the lack of socks, shoes, arm-coverings, torn clothes, and clothes that are removed to the point that they're non-functional. All parts of the person's body are thus expected to be visible. Minor accessories such as jewelry and hair-bands are allowed under this tag however.

For my personal taste, I would even want minor accessories to count against this tag, allowing searching for a "just woke up/got out of the shower" kind of nude. It's not like they'll be a shortage of posts that qualify for the strictest definition possible. However, I suspect I'm in the minority there.

For my own take, completely nude should be essentially what Unbreakable said, nothing from the chin down. This would just leave hair accessories in it, which can be removed with a -hair_ornament tag search.
I was also thinking about making a naked_accessories tag, which would encompass things like armbands, garters, or other small accessories that wouldn't fit in completely_naked.

I went ahead and started populating the tag.
Should monster girls (eg. post #2336) count?

EDIT: Should people undressing also count (eg. post #4904)? Or people with towels in front? (eg. post #6496)?

EDIT 2: Do cuffs count as "full nudity"? I'd say not, but i'd like to hear others' opinion on it.

Mysterious_Uploader said:

Should monster girls (eg. post #2336) count?

I'd say if they are usually portrayed clothed (i.e. mermaids, centaurs, etc) they should count, although there is some contention in the case of slime girls and the sort

EDIT 2: Do cuffs count as "full nudity"? I'd say not, but i'd like to hear others' opinion on it.

I'm in the camp that jewelry and minor accessories like cuffs should still count as completely nude, but maybe they could go into the naked accessories tag

I went back in my older posts and retroactively populated completely nude as best as I could, although I left out such instances as, in no particular order:

• gloves
• thighhighs/kneehighs/other types of legwear or footwear
• panties around one leg
• naked ribbon or a ribbon wrapped around an arm or leg
• towel
• full body tattoo or other such body markings (post #1251231)
• necktie/bowtie only (post #1917267, post #2367754)
• bandages or garters
• odd instances of censorship (post #2505549) since I didn't know if it had to be full frontal and uncensored
• kimono/shirt/jacket being worn around the shoulders or off the arm (post #2853126)
• any sort of detached sleeves (post #2729035)

Basically, I thought it was okay if only hats or articles of jewelry like necklaces, bracelets and earrings were being worn. I also figured that wings and tail would be okay since they're not considered clothing.

There is also the question about pasties and bandaids on nipples

Mexiguy said:

I'd say if they are usually portrayed clothed (i.e. mermaids, centaurs, etc) they should count, although there is some contention in the case of slime girls and the sort

Since the amount of them is very minor, i don't think there should be harm into putting slime girls in the tag.

I'm in the camp that jewelry and minor accessories like cuffs should still count as completely nude, but maybe they could go into the naked accessories tag

Yes, i agree with the second statement.

There is also the question about pasties and bandaids on nipples

why does it feel like making this thread just opened up a pandora's box of naked_* tags
I feel like a naked_pasties tag could be made? But i'd like to hear others' opinion on it first.

Benit149 said:

I went back in my older posts and retroactively populated completely nude as best as I could, although I left out such instances as, in no particular order:

[...]

Basically, I thought it was okay if only hats or articles of jewelry like necklaces, bracelets and earrings were being worn. I also figured that wings and tail would be okay since they're not considered clothing.

For what you left out:
For gloves, thighhighs, naked ribbon, necktie, bandages, kimono being worn, detached sleeves, they're part of the reason why this tag exists. (I do think there should be naked_legwear and naked_armwear tags, but that's for another topic.)

The panties around one leg is... complicated. It's a solid neutral for me, and i'd like to hear others' opinions on it.
Full body tattoos should count as fully naked imo, like slimes.
Censorship shouldn't affect the "completely naked" status, since censors aren't worn but more of a "meta" part of the artwork. So the tag should be added in those cases. (It also doesn't need to be full frontal.)

Hats should stay imo, but jewelry should go into naked_accessories.
Wings and tails should be left if part of the body and not accessories.