Tag Implication: worm's-eye_view -> from_below

Reason: worm's-eye_view basically implies an extremely low-angle shot, so I'd expect it to be a *subset* of images tagged as from_below.[/section]

I think this will just cause further confusion with the from_behind tag.

I would think something more like low_angle would be preferable.

There was a thread on this same tag subject already.....

On the one hand it makes some sense to distinguish between an extremely low/almost directly underneath them angle vs one that is only just below the horizon line looking up at them (as if viewing someone from a sitting position for instance).

But that's the theory. In practice, I find it hard to pinpoint which images would belong under which tag as I browse through both tags right now. And if it's hard to differentiate between two tags, then generally speaking they will end up being used interchangeably over time and the differentiation becomes useless. The main points I can see are these:

• Most from_below pics are from a fairly low angle to begin with. To keep this implication clear you'd need a hard and fast definition for how low of an angle makes it worm's-eye_view vs how low is only from_below. Would worm's-eye_view apply to pics which are only directly beneath and looking up? Or, if it's based on how severe of an upward angle it is, then what would be used to describe exactly where the degree line between these two tags is? How would people determine which tag is the one they're supposed to use for the picture they're tagging? We'll need a clear definition to help keep them apart.

• I'm also not sold on worm's-eye_view as a tag worth keeping (the wording of it, not the concept). The hyphen, apostrophe AND underscore combination make it complex to guess for taggers and searchers alike. A tag that's hard to use, hard to find, etc is not the best option. Is there a better version of this tag? Maybe something like extreme_low_angle or extremely_low_angle?
• worm's-eye_view is also more euphemistic instead of direct. Do we want analogy styled tags? In my experience: the more obvious to guess, easy to type and unambiguous the tag is, the more successful use it gets on this site. Especially over long term use. Less obvious tags get undertagged or misused/misunderstood. The fact worm's-eye_view (and it's counterpart tag bird's-eye_view) have been around for awhile now but they haven't been readily used tells me they aren't seen as very functional in practice. On a related thread, several people admitted they found them hard to remember and difficult to type out correctly. I think that needs to be taken into account in any discussion about keeping them. I really think we could find or come up with a better worded version of the worm's-eye_view tag. And then implicate that instead.

On a side note, based on Seven_Twenty's point:

The only thing it has in common with this thread and from_below is that "from_" as a tag format might be problematic to use. And I think that might be true. I know I've already seen a few images in from_below that were of someone laying underneath someone else, and they were licking or interacting with them "from_below" them, which was a mistag because the viewer is still seeing it from a normal straight on view. If from_behind is any indication, these types of mistags will probably increase with popularity. The from_* wording for a tag is just prone to wider interpretation and maybe should be avoided. Possible solutions to both:

• from_below is already suggested for alias to --> low_angle_shot. That would probably solve any future mistags with reaching or licking a character from_below another character. Sometimes the tag just isn't definitive enough and I think the from_* type tags run into that problem.

• Which is similar to what I think would help the from_behind tag issue: which would be changing from_behind ---> from_behind_sex. But again, the from_behind situation probably needs its own thread.