I couldn't decide if this was more of a bustier or a corset. I really have no idea what the proper name is for this garment.

post #1398873

Edit: After some Googling into the world of fashion, this also seems reminiscent of a dirndl, but not quite that, either.

Is there a tag for a feral standing on it’s hindpaws (That’s the back paws right)?

MyNameIsOver20charac said:
Is there a tag for a feral standing on it’s hindpaws (That’s the back paws right)?

on_hind_legs.

Genjar said:
on_hind_legs.

Thanx:)

ikdind said:
I couldn't decide if this was more of a bustier or a corset. I really have no idea what the proper name is for this garment.

post #1398873

Good gosh these tags are a mess. There are swimsuits in the bustier tag.

That is more than likely a bodice, according to some googles, and my own experience and whatnot based on what's hanging in my closet :3

Edit: After some Googling into the world of fashion, this also seems reminiscent of a dirndl, but not quite that, either.

A Dirndl is the whole outfit: Dress, shirt, apron, and bodice. :)

edit: the post was here, I swear D:

SnowWolf said:
Good gosh these tags are a mess. There are swimsuits in the bustier tag.

That is more than likely a bodice, according to some googles, and my own experience and whatnot based on what's hanging in my closet :3
A Dirndl is the whole outfit: Dress, shirt, apron, and bodice. :)

edit: the post was here, I swear D:

Thanks! Good stuff to know. The images in bodice certainly look closer than the others.

I came across the coin_purse tag which seems to be split between underwear that only covers the balls (post #186314), actual bags of coins (post #183786), and backsack (post #833386). I feel I can safely delete the tag from backsack posts, but are there better, more commonly used tags for the other two uses? If it didn't have so few posts, I'd leave it alone on the 'bags of coins' posts.

regsmutt said:
I came across the coin_purse tag which seems to be split between underwear that only covers the balls (post #186314), actual bags of coins (post #183786), and backsack (post #833386). I feel I can safely delete the tag from backsack posts, but are there better, more commonly used tags for the other two uses? If it didn't have so few posts, I'd leave it alone on the 'bags of coins' posts.

Well, from some Googling, it seems that "coin purse" is slang for testicles or scrotum. Given that alone, I would be inclined to favor testicles or balls, as appropriate.

It appears there's currently only one image remaining that's tagged coin_purse which does not feature an actual, first-definition coin purse. I'd agree that post #186314 a mistag.

I haven't been able to find any evidence that "coin purse" is used with any frequency to refer to an article of tight-fitting clothing intended to cover the scrotum but expose the penis. But then, I'm not really one for fashion, and even less so for male fashion.

Is there a tag for when a shirt is lifted up and over a character's head, or is that covered by raised_shirt?

post #1400837

IS there a tag for clothing made out of plants?

post #1403432

SnowWolf said:
IS there a tag for clothing made out of plants?

leaf_clothing

BlueDingo said:
leaf_clothing

Fff... I looked through almost every sylvari picture and it wasn't there. sigh... thank you :D

And, here I am again.

post #1404196 post #1404198 post #1404200

What's this... clothing? it's a length of fabric. It's not clothing. I'd tag it, like draped_cloth or draped_sheet or something??

Character using another to sit on?

post #1405693

This sorta thing. Could also work with using somebody as a footrest.

SadPandaInSnow said:
Character using another to sit on?

post #1405693

This sorta thing. Could also work with using somebody as a footrest.

There MAY be a better tag for it, but objectification seems to cover that ... (and several other things like "look at these sex objects" and "look at these litteral living sex toys" .... living_furniture is it's own unique thing too...

SnowWolf said:
There MAY be a better tag for it, but objectification seems to cover that ... (and several other things

Not surprising.
We have several *cation tags that are tagged for transformation or related things. Such as personification, which is used when concepts (most commonly death) and other intangible things are portrayed as characters.

'Objectification' will probably need to be renamed. It's usually just called 'human furniture' elsewhere, but obviously we can't use that name here. :/

Genjar said:
Not surprising.
We have several *cation tags that are tagged for transformation or related things. Such as personification, which is used when concepts (most commonly death) and other intangible things are portrayed as characters.

'Objectification' will probably need to be renamed. It's usually just called 'human furniture' elsewhere, but obviously we can't use that name here. :/

furniture?

...I'll be in the corner

MyNameIsOver20charac said:
furniture?

...I'll be in the corner

*Snort!!*

Genjar said:
Not surprising.
We have several *cation tags that are tagged for transformation or related things. Such as personification, which is used when concepts (most commonly death) and other intangible things are portrayed as characters.

'Objectification' will probably need to be renamed. It's usually just called 'human furniture' elsewhere, but obviously we can't use that name here. :/

Wanna say it was used on shangrila or f-list or some place that let you list all of your kinks in one basket. That said, objectification's clearly too ambiguous as a word to keep around... Let's see, I"m seeing...

... I dunno how many tags that makes, but I'd guess around 3 or so.

Some of it is probably inanimate_transformation or post_transformation or something.

Some of it is probably a variant on macro and micro interactions (Not sure what those tags are off hand, but I suspect the land of micro and macro interaction is under tagged)

some are probably just pin ups.

Then there's the "real peopel being used as furniture/footrests"

I also feel like post #667447 should be tagged somehow in a certain way like "living decoration' or something, but beats me.

SnowWolf said:
(Lots of stuff. Scroll up a bit.)

So basically, we need to differentiate between "character treated like an object" and "character turned into an object". Objectification should be the former, inanimate_transformation would work for the latter.

Edit: Apparently, the human furniture thing is called Forniphilia.

How about hair that's.. uh.. really weird?

Like..

post #1404942 post #1403431 post #1405839

Two of them have water for hair. The last girl seems to have kelp or seaweed maybe.

Okay, we have flaming_hair and cosmic_hair and gear Dog, SO many *hair tags. ... bt nothign for "my hair is water"??

SnowWolf said:
How about hair that's.. uh.. really weird?

Like..

post #1404942 post #1403431 post #1405839

Two of them have water for hair. The last girl seems to have kelp or seaweed maybe.

Okay, we have flaming_hair and cosmic_hair and gear Dog, SO many *hair tags. ... bt nothign for "my hair is water"??

Maybe create a water_hair or liquid_hair tag? While we're at it, we should probably make an unusual_hair tag so we can group these.

I would suggest creating plant_hair for the third one but many instances of this would just look like green hair.

BlueDingo said:
So basically, we need to differentiate between "character treated like an object" and "character turned into an object". Objectification should be the former, inanimate_transformation would work for the latter.

Edit: Apparently, the human furniture thing is called Forniphilia.

Forni...? I'd never assume that that was that. I mean, I'm not gonna say it's wrong, but ff.

Maybe there's a few similar things that we can tuck together into a more 'obvious' sounding umbrella tag so that forniphilia can imply that :p (because, I swear, forniphilia sounds like "I like sex" to me ;P

SnowWolf said:
Forni...? I'd never assume that that was that. I mean, I'm not gonna say it's wrong, but ff.

Maybe there's a few similar things that we can tuck together into a more 'obvious' sounding umbrella tag so that forniphilia can imply that :p (because, I swear, forniphilia sounds like "I like sex" to me ;P

forniphilia I-> objectification, because treating someone like furniture is treating someone like an object.

Thought we had a Painal tag, guess not.

BlueDingo said:
Maybe create a water_hair or liquid_hair tag? While we're at it, we should probably make an unusual_hair tag so we can group these.

I would suggest creating plant_hair for the third one but many instances of this would just look like green hair.

No way in hell am I going through all of the hair tag, but I will go through the many pages of sex_hair and brwn_hair and godiva_hair and what not. :)

Now the question is...

should water_hair/goo_hair/etc imply unusual_hair, or should 'unusual_hair' saved for "everything else" (ie, "geeze, I have no idea what this is, but this lady's hair is made out of swords, and that's weird.")

BlueDingo said:
forniphilia I-> objectification, because treating someone like furniture is treating someone like an object.

Excellent :D

Should I add the objectification stuff to my todo list? It's looking pretty long at the moment though...

BlueDingo said:
forniphilia I-> objectification, because treating someone like furniture is treating someone like an object.

Like I said, objectification is likely to be mistagged. We have these among major tags:

• ponification, for non-ponies drawn as ponies.
• furrification, for non-furries drawn as furries.

So it's easy to think that 'objectification' is for characters who have been turned into objects. Instead of just posing as such.

SnowWolf said:
should water_hair/goo_hair/etc imply unusual_hair, or should 'unusual_hair' saved for "everything else" (ie, "geeze, I have no idea what this is, but this lady's hair is made out of swords, and that's weird.")

Unusual_* is generally tagged for extremely unusual (often unique) things, but I'm thinking that water_hair is rare enough to belong there. Not sure about goo_hair, that's pretty common on goo_creatures..

Today I happened to catch a weird drawing in the front page that had the novel new tag of handtaur. Well then. Looking at the author's stuff, I see he's fond of drawing bizarre body configurations, yet it's not meant to be repulsive or even unpleasant to the characters themselves. Was this an actual fetish or did this gentleman actually come up with a new, as-of-yet unnamed perversion?

OneMoreAnonymous said:
Today I happened to catch a weird drawing in the front page that had the novel new tag of handtaur. Well then. Looking at the author's stuff, I see he's fond of drawing bizarre body configurations, yet it's not meant to be repulsive or even unpleasant to the characters themselves. Was this an actual fetish or did this gentleman actually come up with a new, as-of-yet unnamed perversion?

Yeah, this seems like something that will be mostly unused, not because it's a useless tag, but because there's just not going to be much of it. Is there an unusual_form tag? That would be broad enough to cover all of these weird "idk what even is this" body forms/transformations/shapes.

Genjar said:
So it's easy to think that 'objectification' is for characters who have been turned into objects. Instead of just posing as such.

Very fair. Hm.

Unusual_* is generally tagged for extremely unusual (often unique) things, but I'm thinking that water_hair is rare enough to belong there. Not sure about goo_hair, that's pretty common on goo_creatures..

I'll go through the 10 pages of assorted *hair tags, and see what I come up with. Implications can happen later :D

handtaur

Wow. I love people! That is so dang creative :D

regsmutt said:
Yeah, this seems like something that will be mostly unused, not because it's a useless tag, but because there's just not going to be much of it. Is there an unusual_form tag? That would be broad enough to cover all of these weird "idk what even is this" body forms/transformations/shapes.

Nope, no unusual_form tag Or _body or anything, as far as I can tell.

I think that'd be a really good one to have.

So... I switched handtaur to unusual_form on those two.. and uploaded something unusual of my own.

This isn't so much 'do we have a tag for this' so much as "what... on earth do I tag this?"

post #1407856

I'm at a loss for species tags. Should... unusual form be a species tag? is that the answer?

FYI, body_horror is a tag. Its wiki specifically describes horrific transformations, which would probably be a better name (horrific_transformation), but that's not how I think of it. I just think of particularly grotesque or bizarre bodies, transformation or no. I see its most recent tagging... do you remember the artist mot from way back? They're still active. Their stuff is almost exclusively unusual_form, corruption variant, but usually without featuring actual taggable (and blacklist-able) fetishes.

SnowWolf said:
This isn't so much 'do we have a tag for this' so much as "what... on earth do I tag this?"

post #1407856

Humanoid with multi_limb? The basic form is there, just with extra limbs.

Honestly, that's the kind of creature that I'd consider tagging as mutant. If mutant weren't invalidated.

abadbird said:
FYI, body_horror is a tag. Its wiki specifically describes horrific transformations, which would probably be a better name (horrific_transformation), but that's not how I think of it. I just think of particularly grotesque or bizarre bodies, transformation or no. I see its most recent tagging... do you remember the artist mot from way back? They're still active. Their stuff is almost exclusively unusual_form, corruption variant, but usually without featuring actual taggable (and blacklist-able) fetishes.

I thought about tagging body horror, but the whole wiki description focused grotesque and like, gory... aspects. I mean, This absolutly has some aspects of body horror, but it's... weirdly located limbs, and extra limbs, not... fields of flesh-holes, meat webbing or networks of tubing weaving in and out of something's body, etc.

My post's not... THAT.. different from Stith from Titan AE: post #404200 post #986188 post #27695

That said... thanks for the mot link -- stuff i nthere is absolutly unusual_form

Genjar said:
Humanoid with multi_limb? The basic form is there, just with extra limbs.

Could possibly qualify as monstrous_humanoid, but that's subjective.

I'd say that monstrous shouldn't really apply. She's not scary looking. Just very... limber :D

Maybe she's a cat_humanoid with cat ears? XD (kidding)

I'm looking for a tag that is basically grateful sex or thank you sex.

Lalala_Bob said:
I'm looking for a tag that is basically grateful sex or thank you sex.

I don't think we have one. We could create a gratitude tag and search gratitude sex for applicable images.

The girly wiki states: "A male or ambiguous_gender character with a feminine personality, clothing, and sometimes[/b] body type." What if you want the feminine body type specifically? Many girly characters don't have that body type (or you can't tell) and get the tag because they wear makeup, crossdress and/or make suggestive poses, and wide_hips sometimes returns manly and/or muscular images.

Adamthewolf178 said:
Do we have a tag for posts that can be used as wallpapers or are meant to be used that way?

It wallpaper.

Adamthewolf178 said:
Do we have a tag for posts that can be used as wallpapers or are meant to be used that way?

height:# and width:#. Replace # with desired dimensions.

Example: height:1080 width:1920

BlueDingo said:
height:# and width:#. Replace # with desired dimensions.

Example: height:1080 width:1920

I was going to say that wallpaper is preferable since those are manually sorted, but looking at them... there's not a whole lot of difference between -text height:1080 width:1920 and wallpaper height:1080 width:1920.

Almost makes me question if we even need the wallpaper tag.

Bonus round! Is there a tag for wallpaper used on walls?

post #1394139

abadbird said:
Bonus round! Is there a tag for wallpaper used on walls?

post #1394139

Trick question.we don't have one except when talking about background type

Genjar said:
I was going to say that wallpaper is preferable since those are manually sorted, but looking at them... there's not a whole lot of difference between -text height:1080 width:1920 and wallpaper height:1080 width:1920.

Almost makes me question if we even need the wallpaper tag.

I kinda lean towards 'not needed'. Some things definitely look 'wallpaper-y' in their composition, meaning that it's a single character on a gradient/textured/color background either centered or to the side with a LOT of negative space. Stuff like this:
post #1343513 This kind of composition doesn't really have much use or make much sense outside wallpapers and covers.

I think people looking for 'wallpaper' are going to either be looking for specific dimensions or they're going to be looking for images with that kind of composition. Maybe a tag for that like 'majority_empty_space' could work.

regsmutt said:
I kinda lean towards 'not needed'. Some things definitely look 'wallpaper-y' in their composition, meaning that it's a single character on a gradient/textured/color background either centered or to the side with a LOT of negative space. Stuff like this:
post #1343513 This kind of composition doesn't really have much use or make much sense outside wallpapers and covers.

I think people looking for 'wallpaper' are going to either be looking for specific dimensions or they're going to be looking for images with that kind of composition. Maybe a tag for that like 'majority_empty_space' could work.

I'd keep wallpaper around. majority_empty_space will get tagged on other things that aren't appropriate, like post #1404235 post #1404245 post #1404231 post #1404230

Wallpaper's pretty blunt and straightforward. The wiki already links to our common aspect ratio tags (though do those need to be updated? It's been about 3 years since the page was updated...) (also do we have a tag for phone resolutions? are those a thing?)

SnowWolf said:
I'd keep wallpaper around. majority_empty_space will get tagged on other things that aren't appropriate, like post #1404235 post #1404245 post #1404231 post #1404230

Wallpaper's pretty blunt and straightforward. The wiki already links to our common aspect ratio tags (though do those need to be updated? It's been about 3 years since the page was updated...) (also do we have a tag for phone resolutions? are those a thing?)

A tag for lots of empty space doesn't have to be wallpaper exclusive! It's a very common compositional dealio. However using that tag+dimension tags should create a good search for a specific kind of image.

I don't think 'wallpaper' is too straightforward in practice. Once you get past the obvious images that really couldn't be anything else you get "images that are any of a list of specific dimensions+unknown criteria." It's hard to describe what makes some of them more suitable for wallpaper than a similar image in the same dimensions. Like... what makes post #601205 more suitable to be wallpaper than other simple-background duos? Just the dimensions?

Chances are in order to find suitable wallpapers people already have to search the specific dimensions plus whatever theme they're looking for. The aspect ratio tags are also more densely populated than the wallpaper tag is, so you have more to pick from. 16:9 -animated simple_background turns up twice as many results as wallpaper -animated simple_background.

How about a new tag for 'oral presentation'?

It's one of then things I really like and there are no specific tags for it. It's exactly what it says on the tin.

For example: https://e621.net/post/show/1408110

For pictures where the mouth is clearly open in a sexually suggestive manner.

As of now, the only tags you find for anything remotely close is 'open mouth' which is tagged on literally hundreds of thousands of images, and 'gaping mouth' which is mainly for vore mouth-shots.

regsmutt said:
A tag for lots of empty space doesn't have to be wallpaper exclusive! It's a very common compositional dealio. However using that tag+dimension tags should create a good search for a specific kind of image.

I don't think 'wallpaper' is too straightforward in practice. Once you get past the obvious images that really couldn't be anything else you get "images that are any of a list of specific dimensions+unknown criteria." It's hard to describe what makes some of them more suitable for wallpaper than a similar image in the same dimensions. Like... what makes post #601205 more suitable to be wallpaper than other simple-background duos? Just the dimensions?

Chances are in order to find suitable wallpapers people already have to search the specific dimensions plus whatever theme they're looking for. The aspect ratio tags are also more densely populated than the wallpaper tag is, so you have more to pick from. 16:9 -animated simple_background turns up twice as many results as wallpaper -animated simple_background.

I dunno. I'm not actually arguing one way or another here. Just... thinking outloud.

Wallpaper is kinda useful from the perspective that a human looked at it and said "this would make decent wallpaper"... the whole "60% of this picture is open air'/simple_background thing made more sense, from a wallpaper perspective, a decade or two ago. The only time I see desktops covered in an impenetrable wall of icons any more is when I look at some 60 year old's work computer. :P (seriously, clear type, more minimal icons, better functioning start menus, steam and other programs that 'hold shortcuts for you'.... blush built in desktop rotation programs...)

and the ratios--16:9 or whatever-- are helpful, of course, but I'm pretty sure a number of art programs offer up 'desktop resolutions' as default sizes, resulting in a lot of random art being at that size.

Wallpaper could technically act as a 'really big publicly maintained set'... but to be honest, it's probably not the best tag.

The biggest flaw with it is that it's under tagged. I dunno.

How about an unusual amount of suns or moons? Or other unearthly 'sky objects' Luke Skywalker's binary suns, or the moons here: post #1410387

Xianyu said:
How about a new tag for 'oral presentation'?

It's one of then things I really like and there are no specific tags for it. It's exactly what it says on the tin.

For example: https://e621.net/post/show/1408110

For pictures where the mouth is clearly open in a sexually suggestive manner.

As of now, the only tags you find for anything remotely close is 'open mouth' which is tagged on literally hundreds of thousands of images, and 'gaping mouth' which is mainly for vore mouth-shots.

Maybe something like inviting_mouth? suggestive_mouth? (I like inviting)

Xianyu said:
How about a new tag for 'oral presentation'?

That's close to mouth_shot, but I dunno if that'd be a good fit. The content tends to be vore-heavy.

There's also the underused presenting_mouth, but it can't be used for that post. Because the 'presenting' group is for posts where the orifice is not already in use.

Xianyu said:
How about a new tag for 'oral presentation'?

It's one of then things I really like and there are no specific tags for it. It's exactly what it says on the tin.

For example: https://e621.net/post/show/1408110

For pictures where the mouth is clearly open in a sexually suggestive manner.

As of now, the only tags you find for anything remotely close is 'open mouth' which is tagged on literally hundreds of thousands of images, and 'gaping mouth' which is mainly for vore mouth-shots.

Yes, yes, yes, though for opposite reasons. 'Soon to be a blowjob' shots are annoying as hell when looking for not-necessarily-vore mouth shots. I like suggestive_mouth or presenting_mouth.

clearly we go leaping off into the subjective deep-end and use 'sexy_mouth' :D Presenting_mouth sounds pretty good and lines up with several other tags.

I dislike 'suggestive' because that sounds like it should be something like...

post #1335868 post #1366262 post #1287073

SnowWolf said:
How about an unusual amount of suns or moons? Or other unearthly 'sky objects' Luke Skywalker's binary suns, or the moons here: post #1410387

we have alien_planet but that probably isn't the best tag sense that has canontations of scifi when these environments can also appear in fantasy, it also only has 3 posts right now so. Unusual_world or unusual_sky would probably be better...

Darou said:

we have alien_planet but that probably isn't the best tag sense that has canontations of scifi when these environments can also appear in fantasy, it also only has 3 posts right now so. Unusual_world or unusual_sky would probably be better...

What if we made a multiple_suns and multiple_moons tag?

Darou said:

we have alien_planet but that probably isn't the best tag sense that has canontations of scifi when these environments can also appear in fantasy, it also only has 3 posts right now so. Unusual_world or unusual_sky would probably be better...

This is going to be like, super ultra anal, but isn't any planet that's not Earth an alien planet, regardless of the genre it appears in? But yes,unusual_sky would probably be a better fit since it'd also apply to dreamscapes, alternate worlds/universes, and 'earth but someone's done something fucky to the moon' situations.

BlueDingo said:
What if we made a multiple_suns and multiple_moons tag?

and what if rings are involved or other constant forms found in the sky that are not manmade but also not identifiable as moons or suns/stars? right now its just for defining non-earth environments in general. if there are enough to get more specific then we can always then split it up into implicated tags...

Am i crazy? I uploaded an image and as I was tagging it I was looking at he wiki to help get the wording right. part of the image is a girl eating jam with a spoon. I did some digging, and apparently while the wiki has fork and chopsticks other utensil tags like spoon are blank, and there is no general tag for eating_utensil. I'm surprised the wiki is blank for those as I figured they'd be common enough. Should we have a general eating_utensil tag and have specific tags like fork and butter_knife implicate back to it?

Hmm.. I suspect there's a collection of tags to be had here.

I am really astonished that there isn't, like, an alien_landscape tag for all sorts of blue-glowy James Cameron stuff.

Multiple_suns is a very good tag-- as it's probably pretty clear if there are several suns. (I say probably because I have only traveled to one planet in this galaxy and it's pretty straightforward if something is sun or moon.)

Moons, though.. Time for my own super anal moment: A moon is a body that orbits another body, generally a much bigger one. (the moon is, as far as moons go, HUGE. Like, bigger than pluto. ) so when you've got, like, a giant planet floating peacefully up in the sky (like on Yavin IV or Endor)... the planet you're on is probably a moon. Orbiting another planet. but people will TOTALLY tag that as moon anyway.

Not really sure how to tag a visible planet off in the sky.

but maybe something like... Alien_sky and it could hit all of the multiple moons and suns and planets. Or something like that. Preferably something that discourages pictures where "everything is normal, just the sky is green" ;) Unearthly_skyscape, unearthly_sky... Hmmmm....

single_cell said:
Should we have a general eating_utensil tag and have specific tags like fork and butter_knife implicate back to it?

We thought of adding some kind of holding_utensil tag back when the holding tags were reworked, but it didn't seem to garner much interest. I think I remember something about 'eating + (utensil tag)' working well enough if you want to search for those.

And it was difficult to come up with a good common tag name for those, most utensils have other uses (such as cooking) besides dining.

One i've looked for before but not yet managed to find: a tag for characters who are wearing shorts however the zipper is open and you are able to see a little lower than usual. This tag I guess may be associated to more than just shorts, but thats filterable :P

Genjar said:
We thought of adding some kind of holding_utensil tag back when the holding tags were reworked, but it didn't seem to garner much interest. I think I remember something about 'eating + (utensil tag)' working well enough if you want to search for those.

And it was difficult to come up with a good common tag name for those, most utensils have other uses (such as cooking) besides dining.

holding_cutlery or holding_tableware. holding_cookware if cooking utensils need a tag.

'eating (utensil)' has a pretty good hit rate so we might not need the above tags.

pokis said:
One i've looked for before but not yet managed to find: a tag for characters who are wearing shorts however the zipper is open and you are able to see a little lower than usual. This tag I guess may be associated to more than just shorts, but thats filterable :P

Well, we have open_zipper and, related penis_through_fly

There are only about 1500 zipper posts, so populating open_zipper shouldn't take too much effort..

The only catch is, open_zipper is for all zippers not just the fly.

Thought about some sort of 'open_fly', but not all flies have zippers. Some are just buttons.

Hmm....I'd honestly just probably use open_zipper.

SnowWolf said:
Well, we have open_zipper

You mean open_pants.

BlueDingo said:
You mean open_pants.

Well, we also have open_zipper :P

I could see a want for a tag to describe open_pants -penis but, I --oh. Wait. There you go. :)

Sooo what body type is mareanie?

In this post

post #1216810

"Mareanie may be based on a sea urchin mixed with a Crown-of-Thorns starfish." Crown-of-Thorns Starfish

It's effectively legless, armless, and has hair tentacles.

"In borderline cases between feral and anthro, if the character couldn't pass off as a feral animal, it should be tagged as anthro. Use the overall body shape and posture when determining which tag is more appropriate." -anthro

I don't know about "borderline", but I don't ever see Mareanie "pass[ing] off as a feral animal". Does that make it anthro?

I could see monster or tentacle_monster as life rafts of convenience.

What's the correct thinking for classifying this under the current system?

Do we have something for like.. catloafing? y'know, how cats will lay down, and tuck their front paws infront of them? if they're fluffy enough, you can't actually see their front paws?

Kinda like:

post #1412955 post #745262

abadbird said:
Sooo what body type is mareanie?

In this post

post #1216810

"Mareanie may be based on a sea urchin mixed with a Crown-of-Thorns starfish." Crown-of-Thorns Starfish

It's effectively legless, armless, and has hair tentacles.

"In borderline cases between feral and anthro, if the character couldn't pass off as a feral animal, it should be tagged as anthro. Use the overall body shape and posture when determining which tag is more appropriate." -anthro

I don't know about "borderline", but I don't ever see Mareanie "pass[ing] off as a feral animal". Does that make it anthro?

I could see monster or tentacle_monster as life rafts of convenience.

What's the correct thinking for classifying this under the current system?

Definitely doesn't look feral (as we use it here) to me. Looks more like a humanoid to me- it has a humanoid face and the animal features it has are limited to things like hair.

abadbird said:
Sooo what body type is mareanie?

Pokemon tagging can be fairly messy, I know for sure that pokémorph should be used when pokemon are depicted to be more human-like than their canon appearance.

Mareanie is rather tricky as it lies outside of the definition for most body types. It doesn't have arms and legs, so it can't be anthro. It is close to a waddling_head, but it has a defined 'torso' under its head. It doesn't appear to be feral either as it is too different from any wild animal I can identify, while also having a fairly humanoid face.

I do believe it should be tagged with tentacle_hair, though I would doubt it being a fully fledged tentacle_monster.

regsmutt said:
Definitely doesn't look feral (as we use it here) to me. Looks more like a humanoid to me- it has a humanoid face and the animal features it has are limited to things like hair.

It could certainly qualify as having a humanoid_face, but it lacks the limbs to be a proper humanoid.

For like, my 2 cents on it - I tend to tag feral on things that do not have like, regularly usable hands. Maybe it has hand-like front paws, but it spends most of it's time walking on them. Or maybe it has wings. additionally/alternatively, it's torso is horizontally oriented, rather than vertically. As general rules of thumb, anyway. :)

Hm, I had another question/thought.

Gonna get all my little pony in here for a moment.

1. The Ponies of equestria where some pretty weird clothes. these are tagged saddle, but is that what we call them?

post #355873 post #1413018

2. Do we have a tag for when a characters who is not nightmare moon goes "nightmare mode"? we have nightmare_rarity_(idw) for a character from the comics, but what about if someone draws, say, nightmare twilight sparkle?

3. we have the alicornification tag. Is there.. .something better for "I turned this earth pony into an alicorn!" ? I mean, fluttershy_(MLP) alternate_species winged_unicorn has a lot of false positives. and allicornifcation only has 3 posts in it c_c I put 2 of them there myself.

abadbird said:
Sooo what body type is mareanie?

In this post

post #1216810

Hard to say.

It doesn't resemble any real animal, so feral is out.
And anything with a humanoid face is usually a poor fit for anthro. (One thing to keep in mind is that anthro and feral are strictly 'furry' tags, and should never be tagged for anything that's not_furry. Yep, everything in ~anthro ~feral not_furry is mistagged in some way.).

If it had limbs, it'd be solidly in the humanoid category, similar to the splatoon characters. Wiki defines humanoids as bipeds, but that guideline tends to get bent for creatures such as human-like ghosts and genies who often lack actual legs. In short, anything that's mostly human-shaped tends to be humanoid.

But that still feels like a poor fit for mareanie. Ah well, like I've said elsewhere, there are creatures that don't fit solidly into any current category.

How about ... uh... markings like on the legs of these things? and on Luna's hair in the fir in the first one.

post #1413963 post #1413954

SnowWolf said:
How about ... uh... markings like on the legs of these things? and on Luna's hair in the fir in the first one.

post #1413963 post #1413954

Some kind of pattern + fur_pattern. We have paisley_pattern, but those aren't quite the same. You can Google types of patterns to find *the* exact one, but then you may be the only person to ever use that tag unless you choose something broad, like spiral_pattern.

abadbird said:
Some kind of pattern + fur_pattern. We have paisley_pattern, but those aren't quite the same. You can Google types of patterns to find *the* exact one, but then you may be the only person to ever use that tag unless you choose something broad, like spiral_pattern.

https://vecto.rs/design/vector-of-black-swirly-vines-background-pattern-design-by-michaeltravers-2237

vine_pattern?

Hmmm.. Maybe swirly_pattern? Would allow for a broader definition...