Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
The tag alias #69058 ambient_seagull -> ambient_bird has been rejected.
Reason: seagull aliases to gull because seagull is a nickname
EDIT: The tag alias ambient_seagull -> ambient_gull (forum #398012) has been rejected by @furrypickle.
Updated by auto moderator
This tag makes me depressed.
Can't even tell what birds those are from most instances, and on one where you can tell, they definitely are not gulls. Just because it's on beach, doesn't mean it's a gull...
If they're close enough to tell, they generally stop being ambient and become countable characters instead. Do we need this, or should it just be aliased to ambient_bird?
Updated
what? my whole life is a lie, I always thought "gull" was just a short version of seagull...
genjar said:
... Do we need this, or should it just be aliased to ambient_bird?
Honestly, I'm thinking something along the lines of this too. How much detail do the ambient_* tags really need to go into? It would be a little absurd to have an ambient form of every single species tag.
The bulk update request #7327 is active.
create alias ambient_gull (4) -> ambient_bird (2496)
create alias ambient_seagull (10) -> ambient_bird (2496)
Reason: Alternative
Although I'd like to point out, we do have ambient_owl implying ambient_bird. Sometimes you can tell even when they're unimportant to the scene (so, ambient)
This line got an error:
'alias ambient_seagull -> ambient_bird'
EDIT: The bulk update request #7327 (forum #398018) has been approved by @furrypickle.
Updated by auto moderator
cloudpie said:
Reason: Alternative
Although I'd like to point out, we do have ambient_owl implying ambient_bird. Sometimes you can tell even when they're unimportant to the scene (so, ambient)This line got an error:
'alias ambient_seagull -> ambient_bird'
The error is probably from your earlier alias request.
Yeah ambient_owl should be aliased to bird. If you can tell it's an owl it probably counts as a character
Ambient question: Would post #4467130 count as ambient_fish, or trio?
snpthecat said:
Yeah ambient_owl should be aliased to bird. If you can tell it's an owl it probably counts as a character
I don't think I'd agree. Something can be ambient even if there's enough detail to tell what it is... or at least make an educated guess. Especially with posts that are absurd_res, you can get detail in background elements that would classify as ambient for being a relatively small and minor detail to the overall image.
snpthecat said:
Ambient question: Would post #4467130 count as ambient_fish, or trio?
Trio since a focal character is directly interacting with it (I wouldn't call it ambient if there's some awareness of its existence within the image, such as a character holding it). However, if it or a couple of them were just floating aimlessly in the background, it would be ambient_fish.
watsit said:
Trio since a focal character is directly interacting with it (I wouldn't call it ambient if there's some awareness of its existence within the image, such as a character holding it). However, if it or a couple of them were just floating aimlessly in the background, it would be ambient_fish.
Don't corpses not count as characters anyway? And it looks pretty dead. Or am i mistaken about them not counting
snpthecat said:
If you can tell it's an owl it probably counts as a character
I can tell this one is an owl (the ear tufts and big eyes), and it's definitely ambient
post #1314639
cloudpie said:
I can tell this one is an owl (the ear tufts and big eyes), and it's definitely ambient
post #1314639
Yeah, definitely fits. So the ambient_[creature]s we want to keep are those with distinctive enough shapes that you can tell what they are without their other features
cloudpie said:
Don't corpses not count as characters anyway? And it looks pretty dead. Or am i mistaken about them not counting
Probably in the "ambient corpse" kind of way. If it's just some nondescript dead bodies lying on the ground to add ambience to the scene and aren't the main focus, they probably wouldn't count, but if a body would otherwise count that just happens to be dead, I think it should count.
cloudpie said:
I can tell this one is an owl (the ear tufts and big eyes), and it's definitely ambient
post #1314639
Though it's tagged duo+solo_focus, so it's being counted as a character despite also being tagged "ambient". Should that be changed to solo only?
watsit said:
Though it's tagged duo+solo_focus, so it's being counted as a character despite also being tagged "ambient". Should that be changed to solo only?
I think so yeah. Just changed it
cloudpie said:
Although I'd like to point out, we do have ambient_owl implying ambient_bird. Sometimes you can tell even when they're unimportant to the scene (so, ambient)
Owls are pretty recognizable, I see no issues tagging that — or other recognizable ambient critters. But most of the ambient_gull tag is just a ︶︶...
The tag alias ambient_seagull -> ambient_gull (forum #398012) has been rejected by @furrypickle.
The bulk update request #7327 (forum #398018) has been approved by @furrypickle.
edited this a bit first to get both forms of the tag aliasing to -> ambient_bird.
Also, ambient_owl is fine. It can be recognizable as an owl while also being ambient. Ambient_* is meant for vague shapes sometimes yes, but also mainly for background/decorative/atmospheric elements that are not really present in a character sense. So they can be excluded from the character count for that image. Helpful for "two wolf anthros are doing the deed but there's a decorative ladybug/animal/bird/etc in the corner just to give it cute foresty vibes and aesthetics"... so it can be tagged duo instead of trio because that decorative one isn't really involved or reacting at all, it is just there to fill space decoratively. Also these tags help so that people can exclude the "ambient owl in the tree doing nothing except giving nighttime vibes" from their searches of owls when they are trying to find the images with relevant owls who are actually somehow involved in or reacting to the scene/characters.
ambient_gull/ambient_seagull was less helpful as a tag, because what little use it had was largely being tagged on birdlike + beachy and not because it had signs it was specifically a gull. So ambient_bird + beach etc is better for that. We also have ambient_flyer which does a better job for the variations of flying birdlike shapes or flying V shapes of any species whether recognizable or not. So both purposes it was being used for are already better covered by those instead.
Updated by furrypickle
