The tag alias #73667 3d_modeling -> 3d_(artwork) is pending approval.

Reason: This is being used almost entirely as a synonym for 3d_(artwork). The one single exception, which I've just removed the tag from, is post #4690742. I think that one is better served by simply blender_(copyright) and default_cube_(blender). Perhaps we can come up with another tag for that kind of background if we want.

Allow me to play devil's advocate: almost all of these seem to be showcasing models created by the artist of the post. This is actually relevant information, and we probably should have a tag for it. For example, T-posed 3D models with no background would normally be deleted for not meeting artistic quality standards unless the artist of the post is the modeler, in which case the artistic quality of the model itself is judged instead of the quality of the pose/scene/render. Likewise, recordings of sandbox games like VRChat are deleted as screencaps unless it's showing off a 3D model created by the artist of the post, in which case it's allowed. So it is an important distinction as far as acceptable content is concerned. This also currently seems to be the only tag in use for this concept.

That said, we could probably come up a better name for it. Maybe model_showcase? There are also a small handful of posts in the tag that don't seem to fit this definition (like post #1507375), so maybe mass updating would be better than aliasing, but still at least 99% or so seem to be model showcases, so I'd probably like to do something with this before getting rid of it.

spe said:
That said, we could probably come up a better name for it. Maybe model_showcase? There are also a small handful of posts in the tag that don't seem to fit this definition (like post #1507375), so maybe mass updating would be better than aliasing, but still at least 99% or so seem to be model showcases, so I'd probably like to do something with this before getting rid of it.

Could model_sheet apply to such posts? The problem is that "showcasing a model" can be for any image or animation in which the creator wants to show off models they made, regardless of what the post depicts. There's no reason something like
post #5173260
couldn't apply, if the artist is the one that made a model they wanted to show off. It would say nothing about the image, just the artist's intent of the image. If the image or animation needs to be otherwise bare and have a solo depiction of the model in question to show it off, it could be something like model_sheet + 3d_(artwork).

watsit said:
Could model_sheet apply to such posts? The problem is that "showcasing a model" can be for any image or animation in which the creator wants to show off models they made, regardless of what the post depicts. There's no reason something like
post #5173260
couldn't apply, if the artist is the one that made a model they wanted to show off. It would say nothing about the image, just the artist's intent of the image. If the image or animation needs to be otherwise bare and have a solo depiction of the model in question to show it off, it could be something like model_sheet + 3d_(artwork).

I don't think model_sheet fits for most of these, personally. Model sheets tend to follow a recognizable formula with a common purpose: to illustrate a character in order to give other artists a guide for drawing that character. Usually they'll show the character from multiple angles and include other details like a color palette, close-ups of markings or accessories, character name and information, etc. People looking for model sheets are probably looking for that kind of thing specifically. A lot of these aren't very useful for that purpose. Often the character is only shown at one angle, and sometimes it isn't even the whole body. Ideally, I think 3d model_sheet should be mostly 3D rendered artwork that follows that formula (though, based on that search, it does need some clean-up). Naturally, there would be some overlap with a model_showcase tag (or maybe it should be 3d_model_showcase to make its purpose clearer?) but I definitely wouldn't call post #5013731 or post #5087182 "model sheets" even though they are showcasing a model that was made by the artist of the post. More comprehensive setups like post #5160922 probably fit both tags.

As for 'artist intent'? At least in some cases, the intent is already clear within the post (such as text on the screen). There seem to be some common visual elements: it's usually just a single model, the focus is on the model (as opposed to scenery or something else), and usually they aren't doing anything overly involved like having sex. There's often no background, or a simplistic/out of focus background. There may be some exceptions. I could understand excluding something like post #5173260 because there are three different models, so it's not clear which one is being showcased, plus it's more of a full scene. Artist intent may inevitably be a factor in some cases. The important thing, I think, is that it's a factor in post approvals. It's like the grandfathered_content tag. Something that normally wouldn't be acceptable (in some of these cases, anyway) is allowed if it's a modeler showcasing their model. I don't know why we wouldn't tag that.