BUR #21182 has been rejected.
create implication very_wide_shot -> wide_shot
It's a subcatagory of wide shot
Posted under Tags
BUR #21182 has been rejected.
create implication very_wide_shot -> wide_shot
It's a subcatagory of wide shot
Previous topic #18164
Also came up in topic #23536. I didn't know about the older topic but I made the same BUR (forum #239636) and it didn't go through then either, but it wasn't the focus of the topic and didn't really get discussed. The existence of absurdly wide shot muddies the waters even more (which topic #23536 tried to address but fizzled out).
The reasoning in topic #18164 does make some sense, but I don't think it's that simple to make them mutually exclusive because we don't have very objective definitions of "far away" vs "very far away" like we do for the other composition tags.
Is it worse for very_wide_shot results to show up in wide_shot searches, or for borderline posts to be missed when searching for wide_shot?
IMO the implication is a better compromise because wide_shot -very_wide_shot would work in all cases except a post with multiple sub-pictures (like a comic, maybe, but it's hard to see that as the target of a search for wide without very wide shots); and I can't think of a reason you'd want to exclude wide_shot from a search without wanting to exclude very_wide_shot.
Updated
The bulk update request #21182 (forum #259943) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.