Tag Implication: photorealistic -> realistic

Implicating photorealistic -> realistic.

Reason: Photorealistic will be realistic pretty much by definition.

I think the concepts might be too different for that.

Let's hold off for awhile before deciding anything.

I only brought it up because photorealistic pictures will have all the criteria for realistic (correct proportions and whatnot). At least if the way I'm reading realistic is that the only requirement is things drawn with a sense of anatomy and proportions, which any photorealistic drawing would have in excess.

I'm not against more discussion, I just made this to simplify the pcocess and make a place for discussion that's easier for jxh2154 to see and read.

The wiki seems to separate them in such a way that an implication would be at odds with the definition:

"Posts so realistic that they could be mistaken for photographs except upon close inspection.

Use realistic for posts that feature naturalistic anatomy and shading but would not be mistaken for photographs."

So either we don't implicate or the definition needs to be updated.

Edit: Okay looks like this is also going into forum #55730.

Edit2: And it looks like you all came to a reasonable conclusion that I agree with. No action needed from me.