In images like this: post #433698
where there are solo, duo and group sex acts, does each act get it's own character count tag or does it simply get a group tag?

I believe we were supposed to count each part as its own separate image, at least if it's clear enough they're meant to be, like here. So in that case group, solo and duo can indeed coexist on one post.

But I'm less sure what the guidelines are for orgies where not everyone is strictly involved with the rest. You know, those pics that have a room full of duos and threesomes and maybe some poor sod wanking all alone in the corner. Would those get solo + duo + threesome + whateversome + group_sex + orgy tags, or just the last two?

Jugofthat said:
I believe we were supposed to count each part as its own separate image, at least if it's clear enough they're meant to be, like here. So in that case group, solo and duo can indeed coexist on one post.

Correct. I dislike tagging them this way since it slightly confuses a few of my tag fixing searches (male female solo could be completely emptied if it wasn't for this) but I get over it. As odd as it feels they are tagged this way.

Useful related tags: multiple_scenes, sequence
Related discussions: forum #124387 (multiple heads) forum #142102 (out of frame, disembodied_*) forum #135763 (small animals)

(yes I know that you started the second one)

parasprite said:
Correct. I dislike tagging them this way since it slightly confuses a few of my tag fixing searches (male female solo could be completely emptied if it wasn't for this) but I get over it. As odd as it feels they are tagged this way.

Wouldn't just excluding multiple_scenes mostly fix that problem?

Speaking of sequence, how do you use that? I don't use it where it's a comic or multiple positions, so I've kinda come to use it for small pic series that are directly chronological (i.e. each picture is sort of a comic panel).

Circeus said:
Wouldn't just excluding multiple_scenes mostly fix that problem?

It would if people tagged it more often. Granted I'm pretty lazy about tagging it myself, so I probably shouldn't say much about that...*cough*

Circeus said:
Speaking of sequence, how do you use that? I don't use it where it's a comic or multiple positions, so I've kinda come to use it for small pic series that are directly chronological (i.e. each picture is sort of a comic panel).

As a general rule, I use it for things that not quite comic-y enough to tag comic (if that makes any sense.

This is pretty much how I've interpreted the other tags:

____________________________________________________________

post #565032 comic

Boxy, controlled flow, possible dialog, reads left-to-right or right-to-left, then down. The panels are sometimes individual posts but they usually look at least vaguely "comic-y".

____________________________________________________________

post #459482 post #476668 multiple_positions

No real order. Emphasis on sex positions. If an artist was practicing drawing one particular character you would probably end up with this.

____________________________________________________________

post #334929 post #278393 multiple_scenes

No real order. Emphasis all over the place. If you could picture a bunch of doodles it might end up like this.

____________________________________________________________

post #451438 post #200166 sequence

There's a clear beginning and end to it. This might work well as a flip book.

Sometimes they are separate posts (this usage is widely undertagged imo).

post #249495 post #249498 post #249496 post #249500 post #249499

____________________________________________________________

Not going to be perfect in all cases obviously, but you can usually fit them into at least one of the tags.

parasprite said:
Very helpful stuff

Nice one, that's awesome! Thanks again parasprite. :)

Circeus said:
Speaking of sequence, how do you use that? I don't use it where it's a comic or multiple positions, so I've kinda come to use it for small pic series that are directly chronological (i.e. each picture is sort of a comic panel).

I tend to use sequence for images which have two or more pictures in it, which seem to have a "this happened, then this, then this" etc type of relationship to each other. Which is otherwise hard to search for. So stuff like transformation sequences, or stuff like this:
post #399183 post #449077 post #299451 post #354491 post #548367
seem to work really well under that tag. Though maybe that last one could be comic instead. Could probably go either way. And a lot of what Parasprite said is good. The only difference would be I usually use multiple_images where some people are saying they use multiple_scenes. I do that because multiple_scenes really works well for animated stuff, interactive with hidden or multiple scenes, longer short_films, etc. Especially since those often aren't obvious unless you watch it/play it all the way through. So multiple_scenes helps communicate that, and gives more reason to leave a tag on there even if you haven't seen it yet. Because it has multiple_scenes and that tag is in the second one, or something like that.

One note: the type you mentioned ("small pic series that are directly chronological (i.e. each picture is sort of a comic panel") when it's stuff like this post #483645 where each is a separate image altogether, it actually works better to either make a pool for it (if it's 4 or more images) or to parent/child them together. That way if people want to see the other parts of the series it's all linked together and easy to browse through. Otherwise, tagging it with something like sequence would only make them aware there's more images about that, but they'd still have to browse the entire tag just to find the rest of it. So I've found that method works better for stuff like that instead of using the sequence tag for that type.

Jugofthat said:
I believe we were supposed to count each part as its own separate image, at least if it's clear enough they're meant to be, like here. So in that case group, solo and duo can indeed coexist on one post.

But I'm less sure what the guidelines are for orgies where not everyone is strictly involved with the rest. You know, those pics that have a room full of duos and threesomes and maybe some poor sod wanking all alone in the corner. Would those get solo + duo + threesome + whateversome + group_sex + orgy tags, or just the last two?

As far as I know, yes. It's not ideal, but it seems to be the best compromise for those types of images. Because people can -group if they want to exclude those results from their searches for duo, threesome, etc. And it does most accurately describe the paired-off partners in the image. And if someone just wants to see a threesome regardless of whether there's a twosome on the other side of the image, this allows them to find it. Though if it's a guy masturbating to the rest of the group, I usually leave out the solo tag because it's really voyeurism. But if he's off in a corner ignoring the group and masturbating facing the wall or a magazine or something then yeah, you could tag it "solo masturbation" etc for him.

As for the OP, Parasprite and Jugofthat are correct. If it could have easily been cropped into several different pictures and doing so wouldn't change any meaning, then it gets tagged multiple_images and each section gets it's own character count. Because the images aren't interacting with each other or related to each other in any way. (the multiple_images tag is so that it's easy to exclude from a search if someone wants to since it's sort of a exception to the use of those tags.) There's also opencanvas for when it's like the artist had a drawing session using only one piece of paper/canvas. Stuff where the lines between unrelated different images sometimes overlap/drawn running into each other but it's still not all part of one single image either. Some people like that or hate it, so opencanvas can be used to find it or blacklist it.

@furrypickle @parasprite

Thanks. Turns out that's pretty much my understanding of the tag.

In the one case I used the tag for a sequence of separate pics, it was part of a bigger pool anyway (I didn't bother making a smaller one), so it's all fine.

I wasn't aware of multiple_images or opencanvas and I'll probably have to go through my multiple_scenes to see what could use those tags.

So let's try a rundown:

• multiple_images
• multiple_scenes (multiple images with different characters)
• multiple_positions (multiple images that are either solo_focus or the same characters)
• multiple poses (multiple images all with the same solo character)

Does that sound sensible?

Circeus said:
@furrypickle @parasprite

Thanks. Turns out that's pretty much my understanding of the tag.

In the one case I used the tag for a sequence of separate pics, it was part of a bigger pool anyway (I didn't bother making a smaller one), so it's all fine.

I wasn't aware of multiple_images or opencanvas and I'll probably have to go through my multiple_scenes to see what could use those tags.

So let's try a rundown:

• multiple_images
• multiple_scenes (multiple images with different characters)
• multiple_positions (multiple images that are either solo_focus or the same characters)
• multiple poses (multiple images all with the same solo character)

Does that sound sensible?

I like that a lot actually. That looks like a sensible way to organize it. I don't know that I'd go with those exact definitions but it's clearer than anything I have at the moment.

• multiple_images
• multiple_scenes (multiple images with different characters) or settings? post #235387 comes to mind
• multiple_positions (multiple images that are either solo_focus or the same characters) Probably good.
• multiple poses (multiple images all with the same solo character) perfect
• sequence - [what furry said]
• opencanvas - noidea

How about reserving opencanvas for pics like this one? post #368379

parasprite said:
I like that a lot actually. That looks like a sensible way to organize it. I don't know that I'd go with those exact definitions but it's clearer than anything I have at the moment.

• multiple_images
• multiple_scenes (multiple images with different characters) or settings? post #235387 comes to mind
• multiple_positions (multiple images that are either solo_focus or the same characters) Probably good.
• multiple poses (multiple images all with the same solo character) perfect
• sequence - [what furry said]
• opencanvas - noidea

post #222457 may be a better example of what you mean. I agree that one would be multiple_scenes, but thankfully such cases are probably rather rare overall due to the very natural of these pictures: they almost never have anough surrounding details that we can clearly tell these are the same characters in different place and times.

DragonFox69 said:
How about reserving opencanvas for pics like this one? post #368379

That seems like a good use of the tag.

Circeus said:
post #222457 may be a better example of what you mean. I agree that one would be multiple_scenes, but thankfully such cases are probably rather rare overall due to the very natural of these pictures: they almost never have anough surrounding details that we can clearly tell these are the same characters in different place and times.

These are really confusing to split up; there's so much overlap.

DragonFox69 said:
How about reserving opencanvas for pics like this one? post #368379

+1 . We probably need to specifically mention on the wiki that this should not be tagged for mere use of the program (OpenCanvas), especially since there are other programs that tend to produce similar results (with an infinite canvas like MyPaint, or networked collaboration like DrawPile). That aspect is slightly confusing, but 'opencanvas' is pretty descriptive of the infinite-canvas idea, so I guess it's forgivable ;)

Do note that some of the items tagged "opencanvas" appear to be tagged that because of collaboration, rather than 'lots of different drawings that are related'. For example
post #77558 , which should probably be tagged 'collaboration' instead. (there is a convenient alias 'collab' that helps with this)

*Lurking in the thread to soak in more proper tagging information* I love just following the discussions in the forums sometimes, so informative. I feel like I should be taking notes though, lol.

Circeus said:
I wasn't aware of multiple_images or opencanvas and I'll probably have to go through my multiple_scenes to see what could use those tags.

Same here. I've been tagging such images as multiple_scenes, but I suppose I should switch over to multiple_images instead.

And I don't think I've ever heard of the term opencanvas before. What's the exact difference between that and multiple_images? I don't see it, just by looking at the tags.

Also, there's an another related tag: collage. It seems to be an arbitrary mix of multiple_images and mosaic. Looks like it could use some cleanup.

Opencanvas will often have lower quality art, or artwork that looks like it was drawn by a bunch of people instead of just one person doing a bunch of scenes.

Hey everybody,

I wanted to let you all know that I did a rough writeup on the wikis for multiple_images and most of the related ones already discussed here. They are kind of in "draft mode" right now and probably need a lot of tweaking (particularly with adding examples writing clearer definitions).

If anybody wants to add anything to it or offer comments/suggestions feel free to. I'm going to be paying attention to this thread in particular over the next couple weeks hoping for feedback and every little bit helps. :)

Things to consider adding:

• collage
• mosaic
• multiple_versions (see forum #147184)
• Edit: version_comparison is a possibility (see below)
• comparison

parasprite said:
I threw together the wikis for multiple_images and the related ones. They are kind of in "draft mode" right now and probably need a lot of tweaking (particularly with adding examples writing clearer definitions). If anybody wants to add anything to it or offer comments/suggestions feel free to. I'm going to be paying attention to this thread in particular over the next couple weeks hoping for feedback and every little bit helps. :)

Things to consider adding:

• collage
• mosaic
• multiple_versions (see forum #147184)

While I wouldn't object a multiple_version tag, I ended up (as noted in the other thread) finding that some stuff seems to be in comparison, so I'm going to use version_comparison (since comparison is such a mess at this time).

Circeus said:
While I wouldn't object a multiple_version tag, I ended up (as noted in the other thread) finding that some stuff seems to be in comparison, so I'm going to use version_comparison (since comparison is such a mess at this time).

Noted and I've edited the post. As long as the new tag is unused we can always change/merge/tweak/rename it later if needed. I've edited the post and I'll keep an eye on that one. I don't recognize the comparison tag, but a brief look seems like that might overlap with a few of these so I added that as well.

parasprite said:
Hey everybody,

I wanted to let you all know that I did a rough writeup on the wikis for multiple_images and most of the related ones already discussed here. They are kind of in "draft mode" right now and probably need a lot of tweaking (particularly with adding examples writing clearer definitions).

If anybody wants to add anything to it or offer comments/suggestions feel free to. I'm going to be paying attention to this thread in particular over the next couple weeks hoping for feedback and every little bit helps. :)

Things to consider adding:

• collage
• mosaic
• multiple_versions (see forum #147184)
• Edit: version_comparison is a possibility (see below)
• comparison

Okay, I've been thinking this over for a while now and I think I'll have a go at proposing a framework for this.

What do you think of this?

DragonFox69 said:
Okay, I've been thinking this over for a while now and I think I'll have a go at proposing a framework for this.

After tagging these for a while, I think your proposal works just fine.

There's one thing I'm still unsure about, though:

Furrin_Gok said:
Opencanvas will often have lower quality art, or artwork that looks like it was drawn by a bunch of people instead of just one person doing a bunch of scenes.

But why are those tagged as opencanvas, instead of something like... I don't know, doodles? I've never heard the term OpenCanvas used for anything except for the paint software, and I don't see what those images have to do with it.

Genjar said:

There's one thing I'm still unsure about, though:
But why are those tagged as opencanvas, instead of something like... I don't know, doodles? I've never heard the term OpenCanvas used for anything except for the paint software, and I don't see what those images have to do with it.

Yeah, not exactly the most intuitive name. I have no idea who came up with it first, but I've been tagging them under that, at least for the time being since I don't really have any better/different name for it though that minimizes confusion of use compared to other similar tags.

multiple_sketches? sketch_compilation?

I'll have to think about that one.

Genjar said:
After tagging these for a while, I think your proposal works just fine.

Thanks. :)

Genjar said:
There's one thing I'm still unsure about, though:
But why are those tagged as opencanvas, instead of something like... I don't know, doodles? I've never heard the term OpenCanvas used for anything except for the paint software, and I don't see what those images have to do with it.

Neither have I. I've never really been sure if opencanvas is different enough from multiple_images to warrant it having it's own tag. Sure the content is different but the purpose of these tags is more for the layout of the image to me, so I think my vote has to go with aliasing opencanvas to multiple_images.

Genjar said:

But why are those tagged as opencanvas...

I'm pretty sure opencanvas means there are multiple artists working on one canvas/image all at the same time.