Is there a tag for artworks which have been fully painted out to the canvas edges, with the background placing the character in a physical location? The only way I can think to get results for this type of artwork would be to do a search like "-simple_background -white_background -two-tone_background -gradient_background" etc.
Example of a post I would apply this tag to. And one I wouldn't even though the background is quite elaborate, it doesn't place the character in a physical space.
And if this would be a useful tag, would "full_composition" be a suitable tag name?
what would be the limits of this tag according to you? because merely placing the character in a physical location is different from the entire background being defined and also from having a "fully painted composition". examples:
post #8511328 places the character in a space, but does not paint that place up to the borders of the image itself.
post #8525687 also places the character physically without fully painting the background, here the sky is simple flat white
post #8523899 could be said to have a "full composition" if you interpret the blue background as blue sky, but i don't think it really places the character in a space, precisely because the background is so ambiguous
what would be the limits of this tag according to you? because merely placing the character in a physical location is different from the entire background being defined and also from having a "fully painted composition". examples:
post #8511328 places the character in a space, but does not paint that place up to the borders of the image itself.
post #8525687 also places the character physically without fully painting the background, here the sky is simple flat white
post #8523899 could be said to have a "full composition" if you interpret the blue background as blue sky, but i don't think it really places the character in a space, precisely because the background is so ambiguous
Personally I wouldn't consider any of them to be qualified for this potential tag. While I know the concept is a bit abstract, I get what op is talking about. It should be something that you would consider almost scenery in a sense. In fact I usually try to add them in scenery but some still have to be left out because the characters take too much of the image focus or the "space" in question is not pretty enough, or loaded interior, but they're not always loaded enough.
what would be the limits of this tag according to you? because merely placing the character in a physical location is different from the entire background being defined and also from having a "fully painted composition". examples:
post #8511328 places the character in a space, but does not paint that place up to the borders of the image itself.
post #8525687 also places the character physically without fully painting the background, here the sky is simple flat white
post #8523899 could be said to have a "full composition" if you interpret the blue background as blue sky, but i don't think it really places the character in a space, precisely because the background is so ambiguous
I think of this potential tag as kind of a counterpart to simple_background (though not a perfect opposite). And simple_background has similar subjectivity, there is a lot of room for disagreement around what constitutes a background that is simple enough for this tag. But it's still a very useful and popular tag, and I think this "full_composition" tag I'm proposing could be useful as well.
Personally I wouldn't consider any of them to be qualified for this potential tag. While I know the concept is a bit abstract, I get what op is talking about. It should be something that you would consider almost scenery in a sense. In fact I usually try to add them in scenery but some still have to be left out because the characters take too much of the image focus or the "space" in question is not pretty enough, or loaded interior, but they're not always loaded enough.
Good note, the scenery tag definitely seems relevant to articulating what I'm trying to get at (it's kind of weird that there doesn't seem to be a term for this at all, "full composition" is the best phrasing I've come up with so far).
And to make another (rambly) attempt at articulating my definition of the tag: I've heard an explanation for why digital art feels digital, which is that digital artists tend to paint using layers. The subject of the artwork feels like it is on top of a background, vs being in an environment, since the environment is completely separate from the subject, painted separately. So basically this tag would be for artworks which have a traditional feel, in the sense that it is one cohesive piece, without a layered feel. As opposed to artworks with a pure focus on the subject/s, with the space around it/them being an afterthought that needs to be filled in somehow, or left empty.
Personally I wouldn't consider any of them to be qualified for this potential tag. While I know the concept is a bit abstract, I get what op is talking about. It should be something that you would consider almost scenery in a sense. In fact I usually try to add them in scenery but some still have to be left out because the characters take too much of the image focus or the "space" in question is not pretty enough, or loaded interior, but they're not always loaded enough.
I was more or less trying to get my head around what they envisioned for the tag, not implying that my examples should fall under the tag (in fact i also think the tag is useful only if those posts aren't included). But the scenery comparison makes sense and i completely see it now, basically that tag but without the focus on the environment being mandatory.
saltsort said:
Good note, the scenery tag definitely seems relevant to articulating what I'm trying to get at (it's kind of weird that there doesn't seem to be a term for this at all, "full composition" is the best phrasing I've come up with so far).
And to make another (rambly) attempt at articulating my definition of the tag: I've heard an explanation for why digital art feels digital, which is that digital artists tend to paint using layers. The subject of the artwork feels like it is on top of a background, vs being in an environment, since the environment is completely separate from the subject, painted separately. So basically this tag would be for artworks which have a traditional feel, in the sense that it is one cohesive piece, without a layered feel. As opposed to artworks with a pure focus on the subject/s, with the space around it/them being an afterthought that needs to be filled in somehow, or left empty.
I don't agree with the part about duality of traditional art vs digital art, but full_composition is also the best name i can come up with, honestly, and it seems good enough to me.
So, based on this discussion, I get the feeling that I know what the tag is trying to achieve, but I can't help but wonder whether it's actually good to have. It feels like a tag that's basically made to have >1M posts, which I always find a bit iffy.
Is there a tag for artworks which have been fully painted out to the canvas edges, with the background placing the character in a physical location? The only way I can think to get results for this type of artwork would be to do a search like "-simple_background -white_background -two-tone_background -gradient_background" etc.
Example of a post I would apply this tag to. And one I wouldn't even though the background is quite elaborate, it doesn't place the character in a physical space.
And if this would be a useful tag, would "full_composition" be a suitable tag name?
Tip: If you didn't know already you can do wildcard searches for tags by replacing the "variable" part of them with * *_eyes or *eyes gets red_eyes, blue_eyes etc so you can search for the above without bypassing member tag search.
My first guess would be filtering out "border" but that isn't always properly tagged.
There's still a bunch of untagged simple background and such which I will clean up but it's the closest so far. As for tags I would maybe suggest "no border" but "full composistion" sounds good too.
Edit: nvm forgot "pillarboxed" and letterboxed don't have border in the name. post #8530066.
in that search: A lot of untagged simple backgrounds/borders/pillar/letterboxed, unsurprisingly, and more than half of the rest wouldn't be eligible for full_composition Also enough results for a timeout when i try to check the total count
But the scenery comparison makes sense and i completely see it now, basically that tag but without the focus on the environment being mandatory.
That's a good way to put it.
Mayhem-Chan said:
Most of the posts i come across that should have the tag in fact do not have it tbh.
in that search: A lot of untagged simple backgrounds/borders/pillar/letterboxed, unsurprisingly, and more than half of the rest wouldn't be eligible for full_composition Also enough results for a timeout when i try to check the total count
As discussed many times before, we shouldn't always expect people to use a bunch of negative searches as a workaround when it's clearly not efficient enough, and I think this is one of those cases. And as Mayhem-Chan pointed out even if we exclude all of the untagged simple backgrounds/borders/pillar/letterboxed, there're still many posts that don't qualify.
Well I think we should start with a favgroup or a pool so we can gather some exemple and if it looks reasonable it's easy to move them to a tag afterwards.
In my EventListener I can see I'm getting full composition being added to my posts, although all of them have been added by one person. Are we in agreement here that the tag is okay? I'm neutral towards the tag because like ANON TOKYO said, "It feels like a tag that's basically made to have >1M posts".
In my EventListener I can see I'm getting full composition being added to my posts, although all of them have been added by one person. Are we in agreement here that the tag is okay? I'm neutral towards the tag because like ANON TOKYO said, "It feels like a tag that's basically made to have >1M posts".
There should definitely be a favgroup made to vote on before the tag is made. I'm neutral on it, but it's bad practice to make a controversial tag if there isn't unanimous agreement.
There should definitely be a favgroup made to vote on before the tag is made. I'm neutral on it, but it's bad practice to make a controversial tag if there isn't unanimous agreement.
Oh wow sorry about that, I thought tags could be made whenever there was a gap in categorization, I didn't know there was a consensus procedure.
Oh wow sorry about that, I thought tags could be made whenever there was a gap in categorization, I didn't know there was a consensus procedure.
Depends if it's something basic like an object or weapon you can just make the tag, for something like this with a discussion you want a BUR so that people can vote, there is actually a thread right now for creating a concept we don't have yet forum #321917. You can see he put a ton of example posts in a favorite group and is trying to mass update them with the new tag. You can use that as an example of how to format a BUR, just group a couple hundred example pictures of full_composition and make something people can vote on.
Depends if it's something basic like an object or weapon you can just make the tag, for something like this with a discussion you want a BUR so that people can vote, there is actually a thread right now for creating a concept we don't have yet forum #321917. You can see he put a ton of example posts in a favorite group and is trying to mass update them with the new tag. You can use that as an example of how to format a BUR, just group a couple hundred example pictures of full_composition and make something people can vote on.
Would it be possible to use the images I had already applied the tag to before knowing there was a procedure, as the pool of example images to be voted on?
Would it be possible to use the images I had already applied the tag to before knowing there was a procedure, as the pool of example images to be voted on?
Yes, thats a good idea.
As for what I said previously, I still think it's just a bit too broad of a concept to warrant a tag. zetsobusensei mentioned on Discord that this is mainly about removing borders etc., and I'm inclined to agree. I do think there's a gap though, which is cases like post #8539645 where the edges are unfinished, but it doesn't qualify for any of the border tags. I'm thinking the concept of full composition may be better served by one or a few tags to plug these gaps so they can be negated in a search, rather than an absolutely gigantic tag. In this case maybe something like unfinished edges (or sketch edges to align with the unfinished background -> sketch background alias).
As for what I said previously, I still think it's just a bit too broad of a concept to warrant a tag. zetsobusensei mentioned on Discord that this is mainly about removing borders etc., and I'm inclined to agree. I do think there's a gap though, which is cases like post #8539645 where the edges are unfinished, but it doesn't qualify for any of the border tags. I'm thinking the concept of full composition may be better served by one or a few tags to plug these gaps so they can be negated in a search, rather than an absolutely gigantic tag. In this case maybe something like unfinished edges (or sketch edges to align with the unfinished background -> sketch background alias).
I know this is odd, but would "full_composition -> full_composition" be an alright formatting to use for the BUR? Or would there be a better way. Probably an unusual situation since this technically isn't even a BUK, with the tag already being populated.
I know this is odd, but would "full_composition -> full_composition" be an alright formatting to use for the BUK? Or would there be a better way. Probably an unusual situation since this technically isn't even a BUK, with the tag already being populated.
On second thought, probably best to just leave the tag as-is now and use it as an example for the concept. It can always be nuked later.
