Posted under General
Create implication crease -> scan
Reason: Going by the wiki.. "A visible fold in a scanned image."
Might also be worth doing these too:
Create implication nyantype -> scan
Create implication megami -> scan
Create implication dengeki_moeou -> scan
Create implication dengeki_hime -> scan
Updated by a moderator
another modified suggestion maybe:
create implication crease -> scan_artifacts
create implication scan_artifacts -> scan
[/quote]
DakuTree said:
Create implication crease -> scan
Reason: Going by the wiki.. "A visible fold in a scanned image."
What if the crease has been digitally added as an effect to the image or the crease is just a visual effect to a non-scanned image (image overlaid on top of something with creases)? Example: post #419879
[/quote]
DakuTree said:
Might also be worth doing these too:
Create implication nyantype -> scan
Create implication megami -> scan
Create implication dengeki_moeou -> scan
Create implication dengeki_hime -> scan
What about if the image references the magazine, but is not a scan from the magazine? Example: post #387496
NWF_Renim said:
What if the crease has been digitally added as an effect to the image or the crease is just a visual effect to a non-scanned image (image overlaid on top of something with creases)? Example: post #419879
Didn't think about that. Although considering there will be very few images that actually have something like this, would it be better to have a separate tag for them? Possibly artificial_crease.
What about if the image references the magazine, but is not a scan from the magazine? Example: post #387496
Doing a simple search on ~newtype ~megami ~nyantype ~dengeki_hime ~dengeki_moeou magazine only returns 2 images that actually reference the magazine, one being the the one you mentioned and the other being a scan. Could possibly just have a *_(object) tag for these? (So nyantype_(object) for the image mentioned etc.)
DakuTree said:
Didn't think about that. Although considering there will be very few images that actually have something like this, would it be better to have a separate tag for them? Possibly artificial_crease.
It's still a crease, artificial or not. Why do you want creases to be exclusive to scans anyway?
Also, trying to implicate copyrights or characters to descriptive tags only leads to pain.
I'm with NFW Renim and Hillside Moose. Most of them would clash with too many corner cases to be worth bothering with. Implicate scan artifacts to scan, but leave it there and remember to tag it.
No need for artificial_<effect/artefact> tags. Effects like aged/burnt/creased paper could be real or artificial; these could all be intended effects by the artist and I would want to find them under one tag, but I would want -scan_artefact to filter accidents of the digitising process.
Speaking of artefacts:
Alias scan_artifact -> scan_artifacts
Alias scan_artefact -> scan_artifacts
Alias scan_artefacts -> scan_artifact
Hillside_Moose said:
It's still a crease, artificial or not. Why do you want creases to be exclusive to scans anyway?
The main reason I suggested the other tag was due to the wiki stating "A visible fold in a scanned image". Artificial creases do not fall under scanned, which means a separate tag or a change in the wiki would be needed.
As for the copyright tags, if it was any other copyright tag I would agree, but nearly every image in these tags fall under scan. I guess it could cause issues though. Will just manually tag them all for now.
Magazines can publish digital content, either on their website or as a bonus CD.
dengeki_moeou wallpaper are probably not scans, for example.
DakuTree said:
Artificial creases do not fall under scanned, which means a separate tag or a change in the wiki would be needed.
There. That term needs to be redefined as Danbooru is not yande.re (which focuses more on scans rather than tags).
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crease
As NWF Renim said, crease is not limited to scans alone.
crease+scan_artifacts is decent enough if the crease is related to scanning flaws.
