Posted under General
This is the most stereotypical post for e621:
Pending misstagging, it has the 31 most common tags:
mammal anthro hi_res female male solo genitals clothing breasts hair fur penis duo bodily_fluids nude canid canine simple_background nipples video_games clothed digital_media_(artwork) balls genital_fluids erection text smile blush sex pussy butt
It's a good post.
Feels like this combination of tags should result into more than one image though.
hexen said:
It's a good post.
Feels like this combination of tags should result into more than one image though.
I thought it might've been because of solo and duo being conflicting tags but interestingly removing them both from the query still only provides 3 results. Otherwise, this seems like a perfectly average combination of tags..
Well not any more it doesn't, solo was removed.
Removing duo (which has fewer posts than solo) still doesn't return any results. Removing both gives 3 results including this one (as faucet said), but I feel that's not really in the spirit of the challenge. Of course, the problem you run into then is that female and male are both ranked higher than solo, and no post can legally be tagged with all three. So the most tags you can include in your query before you have to start making arbitrary decisions about which conflicts to discard is 5: mammal anthro hi_res female male. Needless to say, this has rather more than 1 result.
hexen said:
Shouldn't it still be tagged solo? It's one of those multiple_x images after all.
No, there are two characters there in the post. It's too confusing and arbitrary to say solo applies just because one character appears multiple times, sometimes without the second character in a "frame" (as loosely as that word can be interpreted here).
Well, now you have to remove the butt tag from the search, and you come up with this:
However, as the dialogue in this posting images once again suggests that these are all connected separate images and not a set of distinct sketches, apparently we have to assume the other character as an unseen character, or that this is a comic, and the solo tag should be removed from this posting.
After that one, one must start skipping tags a little, leaving text away. This set
mammal anthro hi_res female male solo genitals clothing breasts hair fur penis duo bodily_fluids nude canid canine simple_background nipples video_games clothed digital_media_(artwork) balls genital_fluids erection smile blush
Produces (in addition to that previous one) this posting:
I think here it is safe to assume that these four pictures are so distinct that this is not a group.
urielfrys said:
However, as the dialogue in this posting images once again suggests that these are all connected separate images and not a set of distinct sketches, apparently we have to assume the other character as an unseen character, or that this is a comic, and the solo tag should be removed from this posting.
The solo and duo tags should be removed, since there's three characters (Isabelle, Villager, and some humanoid wolf character). Unseen characters or the post being a comic shouldn't matter. Otherwise, something like post #3162054 would just be duo (not one segment has more than two characters), or post #2954808 would just be solo, which would be ridiculous since there's clearly more there. If I search for solo or duo, I shouldn't be getting posts with more than one or two characters in it. And if I remember a post having more than two characters, like post #1578370, I should find it under group, not be under solo and duo at the same time because of a technicality in how the page is laid out and how someone interprets the characters (can you be sure the donkey isn't "with" the hippo and dog, licking himself while watching the other two get it on?).
Updated
watsit said:
or post #2954808 would just be solo, which would be ridiculous since there's clearly more there
A post like this is an example in the multiple_images wiki that states that "if the multi-image contains a dozen separated solo portraits, the post as a whole is solo instead of group". Am confused.
Updated
hexen said:
Am confused.
Yes, I strongly think the wiki needs to be updated, for the character count to include the whole post rather than trying to arbitrarily separate characters into groups to count separately. post #1578370 is a perfect example, the top three characters look like they're "together" to me, with the two going at it and the third having to angrily sit to the side and watch (while licking himself). Or post #2603952, how many are actually separate given we can see some characters spread over multiple panels (both in front and behind the bars), while some characters are stepping out of their panel? If I remember a picture having three or more characters, I shouldn't fail to find it under group because technically the characters were segmented into groups of two or less which I couldn't have known. What one person may consider together another may consider separate, so who can say what a given post will be tagged.
There are three features that are now attempted to be pointed out by a single denotation:
1. How many characters are presented as involved with each other?
2. How many... pairs of eyes are drawn on the post? (Or how many noses... or how many torsos... Essentially, the count of depictions, regardless of whether it is the same character multiple times or not, and in how many different images within the image they are)
3. How many individuals are depicted? (Regardless of how many distinct depictions of each of them there are.)
Actually, until recently, I though the character count only regarded point 3, with possible near-exceptions of cases such as clones or magical copies or such, which should all be considered as separate individuals. It felt then reasonable that with a query solo male you would not get any pictures with females or other sexes in the posting. A post with two images, one depicting Goofy and the other one depicting Mickey and Minnie, would be "group", even though these two images had nothing else to do with each other than being a part of the same post. Now I learned that even solo -duo -group could get you a posting with the whole Marvel universe on them. Essentially, point 1 is most close to how character counting is currently done.
I have to say, multiple_images is both completely necessary and completely frustrating. Sometimes you literally get two images mashed together. Like, different art styles, different characters. Obviously different scenes. It seems incoherent to me to describe it as anything but two different solo images. duo doesn't describe either image. Moreover, in terms of searching for porn, you want a duo image to be one where two character are interacting somehow. If the characters are all in separate boxes, in sex terms that makes the most sense as solo characters, because they can't do any duo/group positions or sex acts. And if you're looking for something like solo asphyxiation, you would still want to find it even if it's tucked in the corner of a group-by-policy-3 sketch_page.
At the same time, as Watsit says, it's counterintuitive. Loads of people break the rules without knowing it. Just look at six_fanarts_challenge group; Rules-As-Written, almost all of them should be solo + multiple_images. It's an enormous uphill battle to keep up with on top of just the character count tags in general. And, of course, there's all the edge cases. How do you deal with collages? What about movie_poster images like post #200237? What about infographics that toe the line with being comics e.g post #2923589? model_sheets like post #3074372? Is this a lineup or a pair of stickers post #916937? I've got a whole page of exceptions and questionable cases and I've barely worked on that project. It's such a mess.
I would normally be more averse to such a large policy change, but people violate multiple_images so consistently that most multiple_images posts will need to be reviewed anyway. Ideally, we'd get consent from the other people who have touched https://tagme.dev/projects/charnum/ but that's probably never going to happen.
