Posted under General
I noticed Auburn Hair being noted as a tag with a wiki but no posts in forum #24575. Is there any good reason we shouldn't save / use it?
It's about as distinct from brown_hair or red_hair as aqua_hair is from green_hair or blue_hair, and aqua_hair is very well established.
Updated by jxh2154
I think people prefer orange hair more.
if you were to line them up in a spectrum though, orange is even farther from auburn than red is, and would be incorrect.
We do have a red/orange distinction to separate bright saturated red from blonder / yellower versions of 'redhead'.
Auburn would be on the other side towards brown, something like Makise Kurisu's canonical coloring" (e.g. post #1125043).
The whole gradient (for natural colors) would go something like:
black; brown; auburn; red; orange; blonde
Whereas for the unnatural cool colors we have something like:
black; purple; blue; aqua; green; blonde
Sorry, I didn't mean that as an attack. I just meant to say that to mean having/using/preferring orange_hair as a tag doesn't have any bearing on posts that auburn_hair would apply to.
And yes, your definition of auburn agrees with my understanding of the word: "a dark, saturated, reddish brown".
EDIT: Unless maybe you are saying that auburn = dark orange. Which I suppose could be an interpretation since browns share the same hues as reds and oranges. I'd argue that below a certain brightness and saturation though, the color ceases to be commonly called "orange" and either becomes "brown" or "burnt umber" or something else depending on factors other than hue. With respect to hair, a dark red or red-orange is often "auburn".
Updated
