The tag implication #31995 inside -> detailed_background has been rejected.

Reason: If a post is tagged with inside, the background must be detailed enough to be tagged detailed_background as well.

Same goes with outside.

EDIT: The tag implication inside -> detailed_background (forum #290383) has been rejected by @Millcore.

-1. There are plenty of posts that can be safely said to be inside but do not have detailed_backgrounds. See post #623662, post #1862762, post #1158152, post #306872, post #856841, post #292073, post #345048, post #826745 etc.

leomole said:
-1. There are plenty of posts that can be safely said to be inside but do not have detailed_backgrounds. See post #623662, post #1862762, post #1158152, post #306872, post #856841, post #292073, post #345048, post #826745 etc.

Most of those count as detailed_background. They may be sparse, but you can still tell the location. There are rare exceptions such as that post #345048, though I'm not certain if we actually should infer inside from visible objects.

The tag implication inside -> detailed_background (forum #290383) has been rejected by @Millcore.

I'm kinda thinking we should revisit this idea. Many people miss the detailed_background tag when tagging inside or outside (just look at ~inside ~outside -detailed_background - looks to me like ALL of these should have the tag). Let us not forget that "detailed background" doesn't mean that the background actually has a high level of detail. It is not to be confused with amazing_background or even scenery_porn. It is simply, as the wiki states, Any background detailed enough to place the scene in a clearly defined location. Note that sparse does not equal simple background. Scenery such as unfurnished rooms or clear skies with just a couple of clouds count as detailed backgrounds.
By this definition, if the scene is inside or outside, it absolutely should be a detailed_background.

~inside ~outside simple_background also returns 165 pages of results, which seems like a big tagging project to fix.

The wiki should also be updated to include some visual examples of detailed backgrounds that aren't so "detailed" because the current examples are all quite high quality and misrepresent the tag.

edit: while it's mostly mistagged I've found a few things I really wouldn't want to tag as detailed_background while the outside tag still fits.
post #3044956 post #2280259 post #1679697

These examples definitely still fit the requirements for detailed_background. Again, any background detailed enough to place the scene in a clearly defined location, which those do. “Outside” is a clearly defined location, regardless of how simply it is drawn.

faucet said:
edit: while it's mostly mistagged I've found a few things I really wouldn't want to tag as detailed_background while the outside tag still fits.
post #3044956 post #2280259 post #1679697

I actually wouldn't say the zootopia one qualifies for 'outside'. The fox is dirty, but there's no structure to the background beyond 'standing on one color, with another color for a backdrop', and the colors themselves don't look like it's strictly anything 'outside'.

scaliespe said:
“Outside” is a clearly defined location, regardless of how simply it is drawn.

I'm not sure I'd say it is. "Outside" on its own isn't a clearly defined location, it's any place lacking overhead structure. The beach would be a defined location, as would a bedroom. But something like
post #2280259
doesn't say "clearly defined location" to me, even though the sun would indicate being outside somewhere. Could be the beach, someone's backyard, a mountain, who knows.

That, I suppose, depends how clearly defined you need it to be. It’s clear enough to say that he’s not inside any building or underneath any kind of structure.

I think what is meant by “clearly defined” is more like anything that isn’t a simple_background or an abstract_background. Say, replace the background in that image with a plain white backdrop (or even plain blue; take out the sun) or something abstract like some squiggly lines and random shapes. Suddenly, you can’t even tell if he’s inside or outside. He could be anywhere. That’s when it becomes impossible to define a location, and is no longer a “detailed background.”