Posted under Tags
Need clarification on how to tag short hair. Does the tag only apply to posts where you can see that the entire hair length is short or does it also apply to posts where the hair (except sidelocks because short hair with long locks is a thing) simply doesn't reach the shoulders regardless of the actual hair length when it is fully down?
In short, are post #8201215 and post #7057492 short hair?
Previous discussion: topic #28990
The current guideline, for me atleast, is perfectly explained by AngryZapdos there.
AngryZapdos said:
With the exception of shit like post #4235178, hair length should be tagged based on how far down the style falls (or would fall) when pulled by gravity, not expected strand length if the style were untied. We should not be making users guess how far down the hair would hang if it were untied; there's never one single answer to that question, and it leads to inaccurate searches.
So I would tag post #8201215 with short hair and post #7057492 with short hair with long locks and sidelocks.
I think both of those are hair up to which I usually don't tag a length. The bun_with_braided_base and braided_bun both imply the hair would not be short if let down.
Shinjidude said:
I think both of those are hair up to which I usually don't tag a length. The bun_with_braided_base and braided_bun both imply the hair would not be short if let down.
CoreMack said:
I don't tag hair bun with either short or long. You can't tell for sure whether the hair is short or long. Tagging the bun describes the hairstyle sufficiently, you don't need another tag.
If I'm searching short_hair and by design I'm not finding posts like post #6131857 or post #7132631, then something is very wrong. Yes, the hair probably wouldn't be short if it was untied - but it's not untied, and that's the point. It's being worn short, and that's what should be tagged. Hundreds of posts in the high_ponytail medium_hair solo search would actually be long_hair if the ponytail was let down, but nobody's arguing for that because that would be stupid. The same logic applies here.
(Also, hair_up is only for characters who normally wear their hair down. It's the opposite to hair_down.)
AngryZapdos said:
If I'm searching short_hair and by design I'm not finding posts like post #6131857 or post #7132631, then something is very wrong.
Neither of those posts are short hair. Neither of the characters have short hair. I wouldn't want those posts to come up in a short hair search.
CoreMack said:
Neither of those posts are short hair. Neither of the characters have short hair. I wouldn't want those posts to come up in a short hair search.
The character in post #8033643 does not technically have medium_hair, they have long_hair that reaches shoulder length because it's tied into a high ponytail. Are you really saying we shouldn't tag this post as medium_hair since "the character doesn't actually have medium length hair"? Because that's exactly the same reasoning behind your stance on those other posts, and it would essentially bar us from tagging hair length on any short/medium length hair where the style doesn't hang freely.
Honestly, I have always tagged hair length as to where it would naturally fall, so most high ponytails / twintails are long. If the hair is up and the length is indeterminate I don't tag length. I think hair cut short is and should be distinct from having hair in a bun or folded up, etc.
Shinjidude said:
Honestly, I have always tagged hair length as to where it would naturally fall, so most high ponytails / twintails are long. If the hair is up and the length is indeterminate I don't tag length. I think hair cut short is and should be distinct from having hair in a bun or folded up, etc.
Well then, you have thousands of posts to fix, dating back over ten years. Hair length has been tagged this way for a very long time.
AngryZapdos said:
Well then, you have thousands of posts to fix, dating back over ten years. Hair length has been tagged this way for a very long time.
If you think that a hair bun should be tagged with short hair, then there's tens of thousands of posts for you to fix.
CoreMack said:
If you think that a hair bun should be tagged with short hair, then there's tens of thousands of posts for you to fix.
There are a lot of valid long haired buns like Sailor Moon or Rosa (Pokemon) with long twintails. If it's right against the head and doesn't dip below the neck I don't see why you'd want it to be in long hair by default though, it seems pedantic and visually doesn't match the rest of the tag.
Admittedly though I would tag a ponytail long hair by default even in the example Zap posted above because of the volume of hair visibly on display. Whereas post #8822140 or post #8805783 obfuscates the exact length and also visually doesn't take up much room on the picture.
CoreMack said:
If you think that a hair bun should be tagged with short hair, then there's tens of thousands of posts for you to fix.
Untagged posts are not incorrectly tagged, and are a poor yardstick for measuring how users think something should or should not be tagged. For example, there are over twenty five thousand posts of cowboy shots that aren't tagged with standing. Does this mean that those users think we shouldn't be tagging cowboy shots with standing? No. As evidenced by the thousands of other cowboy shot posts that are tagged with standing, it means they either forgot or were too lazy to tag it. This isn't proof of anything.
zetsubousensei said:
If it's right against the head and doesn't dip below the neck I don't see why you'd want it to be in long hair by default though, it seems pedantic and visually doesn't match the rest of the tag.
Agreed. I wouldn't tag long hair on a bun. A bun shouldn't be tagged as either short or long.
zetsubousensei said:
Admittedly though I would tag a ponytail long hair by default even in the example Zap posted above because of the volume of hair visibly on display.
Agreed. There seem to be many people using it the way Zap suggests, but I think it's unintuitive.
AngryZapdos said:
Untagged posts are not incorrectly tagged, and are a poor yardstick for measuring how users think something should or should not be tagged. For example, there are over twenty five thousand posts of cowboy shots that aren't tagged with standing. Does this mean that those users think we shouldn't be tagging cowboy shots with standing? No. As evidenced by the thousands of other cowboy shot posts that are tagged with standing, it means they either forgot or were too lazy to tag it. This isn't proof of anything.
When there is a consensus on how to use a tag, the fact that it is missing from relevant posts isn't proof of anything except bad tagging.
When there isn't a consensus on how to use a tag, and you have experienced users saying they don't think a tag should be used in a certain situation, the fact that there are tens of thousands of examples of that situation not having the tag is evidence that other users may feel the same way.
But that's not really the point. The point is that tagging short hair on a character who clearly does not have short hair is stupid.
CoreMack said:
But that's not really the point. The point is that tagging short hair on a character who clearly does not have short hair is stupid.
The point is that not tagging short_hair on hairstyles that don't even reach the shoulders is unintuitive, and such a rule could only be arbitrarily applied based on which approved hairstyles a character may or may not have.
AngryZapdos said:
The point is that not tagging short_hair on hairstyles that don't even reach the shoulders is unintuitive, and such a rule could only be arbitrarily applied based on which approved hairstyles a character may or may not have.
Well, I don't know what to say except that I find the idea of tagging short hair on a girl who has long hair tied up in a bun to be much more unintuitive.
Not tagging tied up hair with any hair length is pedantry that isn't helping anyone in finding anything.
If for some reason you want posts with just a specific natural hair length, you're better off excluding those specific hairstyles. If hair lengths excluded various kinds of tied hair, you'd just be SOL if you wanted to find hair that just falls to a particular height regardless of style (something which often has a significant influence on the feel of a picture, and is thus a good thing to be able to search).
It makes searches like double_bun short_hair useless since you're silently excluding a lot of applicable posts, and for the same reason leads to ridiculous situations like post #6966376 being short hair and post #8646610 getting nothing "because you can't be sure".
If we're not going to tag hair lengths because it's technically not their natural hair length, where does it end? Should I refrain from tagging someone like Takasaki Yu with medium hair twintails, just because it could be long hair if she let it down?
