When searching things like pokemon, I generally -anthro, since it removes art where they've basically stuck a pokemon head on a human body.

However, this doesn't really work on a pokemon like a Lucario, which is humanoid enough to be listed as anthro. The problem is that there's no real way to filter out artistic liberties taken with anatomy where a character's anatomy is humanized so much that they no longer resemble the original design.

Could you link the kind of posts you'd like to avoid? There's plenty of tags that could help you avoid certain content, so it would be helpful to narrow down what you'd like to avoid and what tags would be used.

pokémorph is theoretically the tag you're supposed to use for "pokémon head on human body" type deals, although it's sorely undertagged (and yes, I know, I share some of the blame for that).

Ah this problem, it annoys me. Tis hard to find pokemon that look like pokemon without artists adding something. Especially on ones like Lopuuny. The best I have found is adding "feral" to the search. But it would be nice to have a tag when something is actually on model from it's based thing

camkitty said:
Ah this problem, it annoys me. Tis hard to find pokemon that look like pokemon without artists adding something. Especially on ones like Lopuuny. The best I have found is adding "feral" to the search. But it would be nice to have a tag when something is actually on model from it's based thing

semi-anthro is supposed to help here but it's woefully undertagged, and just implies the creature in question hasn't been fully anthrofied.
on_model probably should be applicable but I think there's some contention over how it should be used, regarding specific artstyles rather than just anatomy style?

One challenge to anything like this is that it requires lore knowledge about what a character/pokemon/species is supposed to look like. It would definitely be a useful tag, just hard to implement even before you get into questions of subjectivity/consistency.

tittybitty said:
One challenge to anything like this is that it requires lore knowledge about what a character/pokemon/species is supposed to look like.

Meh, a lot of tags rely on external knowledge. Family relations, crossgender, alternate species, crossover, heck even character names technically fall under that. Worst case scenario it could be on model (lore).

strikerman said:
Meh, a lot of tags rely on external knowledge. Family relations, crossgender, alternate species, crossover, heck even character names technically fall under that. Worst case scenario it could be on model (lore).

You're right that lots of tags rely on external knowledge. I do think that a character's gender, species, copyright, and (to a lesser extent) family relations are all easier for someone with a passing familiarity to judge/remember/tag than how on or off model something is, especially once different art styles and even different canonical versions of a character/species get thrown into the mix.

The main problem I see is, how much artistic liberty is too much? on_model exists and should be used for when a character is depicted nigh indistinguishable from the source material, and we have anthrofied for when a character has more human-like traits (even if the character is already anthro, it applies if they're "more human" than normal while still being anthro), both of which are very under-tagged because its not terribly clear when they would apply (at what point does braixen become anthrofied?) if people even realize those tags exist. Between these two tags, I'm not sure you can get more precise categorization. Like, this is an anthrofied lucario, and this is an on-model lucario, but where does this or this fall with regards to design accuracy? It seems to me everyone would have their own opinion, and even if people knew of this accurate_design tag, some would say it's not being tagged on things it should be while others would say it's being tagged on things it shouldn't be.

watsit said:
The main problem I see is, how much artistic liberty is too much? on_model exists and should be used for when a character is depicted nigh indistinguishable from the source material, and we have anthrofied for when a character has more human-like traits (even if the character is already anthro, it applies if they're "more human" than normal while still being anthro), both of which are very under-tagged because its not terribly clear when they would apply (at what point does braixen become anthrofied?) if people even realize those tags exist. Between these two tags, I'm not sure you can get more precise categorization. Like, this is an anthrofied lucario, and this is an on-model lucario, but where does this or this fall with regards to design accuracy? It seems to me everyone would have their own opinion, and even if people knew of this accurate_design tag, some would say it's not being tagged on things it should be while others would say it's being tagged on things it shouldn't be.

So basically people need to use on model a lot more (and the other one as well). To me it stops being on model the moment anything human traits start appearing, so to me both side examples are still on model. But it is subjective, I get that.