Tagging characters that don't fill the image frame

Back in forum #140491, it was proposed that long_shot be used as a tag for posts where the character(s) don't occupy enough of the image to qualify for the full_body tag. No real discussion ever took place after this; a tag was created (wide_shot) but we still don't have a wiki for it. Recently, though, I noticed that some taggers have also been using negative_space for much the same purpose. Personally, I had taken "negative space" to imply large volumes of blank space like in post #2237674, but apparently there's nothing in the wiki that says it can't also be used for fully-realized backgrounds like post #3256452. If we're going to treat both tags as though they have the same meaning, then one of them is redundant and should probably be eliminated.

Whichever tag we decide to keep, should we try to define a rigid lower bound on it and an upper bound on full_body? I've been trying to tag wide_shot on posts where the character takes up about 1/4 of the image at most, but images like post #2636351 have me questioning that. Also, should there be a reasonable limit on how little of an image the characters take up for the tag to be viable? Using this tag on something zoomed out so far as post #2571862 just seems wrong.

I did most of the initial population of wide shot, but I got sidetracked and neglected to make a wiki for it.

I'd say negative space should only be used with simple backgrounds and wide shot should only be used for complete backgrounds. Part of the point of wide shot is the contrast between the character and their surrounding environment.

As for guidelines, at most 1/4th of the frame sounds like a good rule of thumb to me. Of the posts I tagged, I'd consider post #2946820 and post #2389262 to be on the lower end of what should count, and post #2947962 to be borderline (I counted it originally, but now I'm not sure).

For cases like post #2571862, I made very wide shot. The rule of thumb I used here is that if the character is barely visible in the thumbnail, then it's a very wide shot.

Personally I'd definitely consider post #2947962 as warranting the full body tag. If wide_shot and full_body are mutually exclusive, then I'd say that doesn't warrant the wide_shot tag. I know the wiki for full body says "most of the image" and this is technically only about 45% but as far as I'm concerned that "most" is just there in want of a better way of phrasing it.