Danbooru

Tag Implication: crease -> scan

Posted under General

[/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.

Did this:
create alias scan_artifact -> scan_artifacts
create alias scan_artefact -> scan_artifacts
create alias scan_artefacts -> scan_artifacts
create implication scan_artifacts -> scan

Agree with not implicating tags from copyrights, even if it's usually correct.

1