It seems to me that digital_media_(artwork), if tagged properly, would exist on over 90% of posts (maybe even 95%). This seems rather superfluous and I can't imagine anyone ever needing to search for the tag.

That being said, I can imagine it being a useful tag to remove from searches to find anything non-digital - however, it's severely undertagged which means it would need a lot of work before this could be possible. This lack of tagging also suggests that most users don't really care about it or even know it exists, which leads me to believe there's little demand for it in the first place.

I'd suggest that only the less common forms of media be tagged rather than the norm, such as pixel art, 3D, traditional, mixed digital/traditional etc. - perhaps a new tag for unconventional media such as papercraft, snow scupltures and food art could be made too. (If such a tag also exists then it should be added to tag_group:art.)

i find it pointless too

it's like making a 2_eyes tag

It's useful for exclusion. If you remember you saw something that looked physical, but maybe was just a 3D hand drawing, you can search for it by adding -digital_media_(artwork) to your search.

No it's not. Maybe like...a long time ago when digital art was newer it had some merit, but now basically everything is done digitally. As a test I just got done looking at the front page...every single image is digitally done...I don't see a single traditional sketch or scan of any kind.

When something is so overwhelmingly general...it's best not to tag it. Instead we should focus on tagging the exceptions. Focus on tagging tradition_media_(artwork) and its sub-tags rather than bear the burden of constantly tagging in digital_media_(artwork)...it's kind of an unachievable goal.

Now I'm sure someone is going to bring up the "taggers", which have referenced to me before as a group of people who delight in tagging, and thus they must also delight in tagging useless bullshit, and thus we shouldn't feel bad about asking them to tag useless bullshit...which I think is honestly very insulting to those who like to tag and is essentially treating them like dirt. Asking them to tag in digital_media_(artwork) on EVERYTHING it applies to is a Sisyphean task I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy...and YES simply having a tag as a codified and official tag is an implicit request that SOMEONE should be tagging it.

And the tag really does need to be tagged to completion to have much of a use...otherwise you're not seeing the full range of digital media drawings when you search for it, and it's also useless as an exclusionary tag as well...if I search with a "-digital_media_(artwork)" modifier I'm still going to see PLENTY of digital media works.

To me the tag exists mostly to fulfill someone's OCD at this point...because it has a nice symmetry to the traditional_media_(artwork) tag...that's why it exists. It has no real-world use.

Worthless tag. It'd have to be tagged consistently to actually be useful, and with that high percentage of posts, that's not going to happen.

It's much simpler to tag the exceptions instead.

+1

The existing Medium taxonomy on the tag group page should stay there, in order to preserve information like 'pixel art is a type of digital art', and the tag should go.

I'm not altogether comfortable with digital_drawing_(artwork) (listed on the Medium page), too.. it seems like another 'default so don't tag it' situation. (we tag 'digital drawing' but don't tag 'drawing in general', so 'drawing in general' appears to already be treated as default)

savageorange said:

I'm not altogether comfortable with digital_drawing_(artwork) (listed on the Medium page), too.. it seems like another 'default so don't tag it' situation. (we tag 'digital drawing' but don't tag 'drawing in general', so 'drawing in general' appears to already be treated as default)

I think digital drawing is fine because theres other stuff that can be digital without being a drawing, such as 3d models?

I try to tag it consistently but its one of those tags that is far, far more effort than it is worth. I would be happy to see it gone.

YaoiMeowmaster said:
I think digital drawing is fine because theres other stuff that can be digital without being a drawing, such as 3d models?

If you agree with the rationale OP gave for removing digital_media_(artwork), then there being other digital things like 3d or digital paintings justifies tagging 3d and digital paintings, but it doesn't justify tagging digital drawings.

It's similar to how not_furry is a valid tag while furry is an invalid tag.

This tag is pointless two times over. First, it's not needed at all, the overwhelming majority of the art posted here is digital. Second, that _(artwork) disambiguation thing is pointless on its own, it's not even ambiguous, but even if it were it would be better to keep it just digital_media since it gets used so often.

Just nuke it. For the great justice of whatever.

No tag covers every instance of what it proscribes to, there will always be tons of submissions that don't get tagged for every single thing in them and I do not consider this tag to be exceptionally undertagged or less consistently tagged then what is normal on e621.

By its very nature of existing in the first place there are people that do in fact use the tag to search. Just because you don't use it doesn't mean others don't ether.Do I need to remind people how much of a load of Bullshit this particular reasoning is?

It should be noted that all tags that relate to the manufacture of an image in general arnt as popular as tags say for kinks.

To all those seemingly bandwagoning to have this tag removed, how will people be able to search digital art in general as users may not be able to add all types of digital art to their search or exclude all traditional art tags in their search.

I see no benefit for anyone in removing the tag, all itd be is detrimental to those that do use these tags. The tag is not violating any rules so.

By the way I do believe the OP is a bit of an exsageration, when it comes to the ratio between traditional and digital art, the former certainly is far higher then 10%. it is likly that traditional art is undertagged and may be a case that many submissions tagged as digital art are actually scans of traditional works.

And by no means is everyone now just doing digital art, it certainly isn't a super majority that is marginalizing traditional arts that you all are making it out to be.

There are more important tagging issues to discuss, this tag is not a issue.

Darou said:
To all those seemingly bandwagoning to have this tag removed, how will people be able to search digital art in general as users may not be able to add all types of digital art to their search or exclude all traditional art tags in their search.

They could add -[[traditional_art_(artwork)] -photography_(artwork)
-mixed_media to their search query. Or they can just search normally because chances are the artwork they find is digital.

I think digital_drawing_(artwork) and digital_painting_(artwork) should be removed aswell. They’re both kind of pointless because most pictures here are digital already and i feel like digital_painting_(artwork) is too vague to be properly tagged. How do you tell whether a picture was digitally painted or drawn? The wiki for it is empty as well so that doesn’t help a person know what its for. 3d_(artwork) and pixel_(artwork) can stay though.

Digital painting seems to have a clear identity to me. Both digital and traditional painting emphasize brush strokes over lines, and as such don't appear to have lineart. There are some IMO wrongly tagged posts at the top of digital_painting_(artwork), but once you scroll past the first 50, almost everything fits that criteria 'no lineart'. It also tends to use fuzzier brushes, giving a more impressionistic feel.