At what point is a shoe is/isn't considered "high_heels" + example.

Is this or is this not a high heel
post #163241

I personally wouldn't tag them high_heels, not sure about others. Having a raised heel on a shoe doesn't automatically make them high_heels, the presence of a somewhat raised heel is fairly common even on some men's shoes.

Certainly post #163241 getting around that gray area, but it seems we're also just tagging anything with a raised heel like post #463630.

yeah, I'm inclined to say go ahead and use high_heels. Unless someone wants to make a more generic heeled shoe tag and go through all the posts and set an easily identifiable threshold for what constitutes "high". ::shrugs::

Well, here's one that definitely LOOKS like a high hell, in general form, but in reality, the heel is almost too low to considered "high"
post #173799

However, this is a sandal with a heel that is definitely NOT a high heel:
post #171281 and post #168553 and post #169584

Those 3 are what I consider not high heels. Though, I kinda consider post #163241 a high heel, I think it's fairly open for debate.

I was going to point out that you can use the post #xxxxx shortcut but you already seem to know it, heh. Try to always use it when linking, just because it looks a lot neater. I'll edit the ones in your post for now.

Heel, definitely not High: post #154637
Heel, definitely high (wasn't labled until now): post #142843
Labeled Heel. High enough?: post #154372

I do think we should have a low_heels tag as a counterpart to the high_heels tag. Though I'm not quite sure about dividing it. The extremes are easy enough to separate but the middle ground is hard.

According to wikipedia there are 3 heel lengths. Low heels (<2 1/2"), Mid Heels (2 1/2" - 3 1/2"), and High Heels (3 1/2"+). That's of course improbable to tag, so break it down to low and high, and perhaps the divider being something like if you could imagine that the character was resting their heel on a baseball. If you could fit a baseball under the heel of the foot, then it's a high heel, if not it's a low heel.

Last one definitely looks high enough to me. For ones like he first that don't really elevate the wearer, they wouldn't be any kind of tagged heel, I'd think.

NWF_Renim said:
I do think we should have a low_heels tag as a counterpart to the high_heels tag. Though I'm not quite sure about dividing it. The extremes are easy enough to separate but the middle ground is hard.

According to wikipedia there are 3 heel lengths. Low heels (<2 1/2"), Mid Heels (2 1/2" - 3 1/2"), and High Heels (3 1/2"+). That's of course improbable to tag, so break it down to low and high, and perhaps the divider being something like if you could imagine that the character was resting their heel on a baseball. If you could fit a baseball under the heel of the foot, then it's a high heel, if not it's a low heel.

I'm not sure if there is enough low heels to need to define them, but I'm not against that tag. Sooo...
post #64225 - Low?
post #6818 - high? or even wedge or wedge_sandal?
post #10756 - High?
post #461302 - ???? FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU! >:[ Though, I'd probably consider it high/

And maybe low for those "flip flops with thimbles as heels".