If the artist(s) mention the intention of the character, then the tag helps. There are also personifications or interpretations. I suppose removing franchised goddesses would clear it up a bit.
*Goddess - Minus AMG and Okami
Posted under General
If the artist(s) mention the intention of the character, then the tag helps. There are also personifications or interpretations. I suppose removing franchised goddesses would clear it up a bit.
*Goddess - Minus AMG and Okami
Do we want to differentiate between male and female divinity or would deity be sufficient? I can see examples of:
And I'm sure there's more.
DschingisKhan said:
Do we want to differentiate between male and female divinity or would deity be sufficient? I can see examples of:
- Fujin
- Raijin
- Poseidon
- Sort of Apollo
- Hades
- Quetzalcoatl (Need an alias from kukulcan here)
- Albert Yi
- Amaterasu (of the non-wolf variety)
- The entire(?) Hindu pantheon (post #374242)
- Zeus
- At least one Athena that's not from Saint Seiya
- Much of genzoman's work
And I'm sure there's more.
I see what you have done there and I agree entirely.
Perhaps a tag group for deities? Or maybe make the mythology tag a copyright tag and add it to more images? That would apply to things besides deities though. Maybe a pool? I do think there should be a way to collect artwork of various deities together without having to know every single deity name.
Sometimes you can tell a character is a deity (or parody of one) from the image. The visual cues may be specific to pantheons or even particular gods/goddesses, but that doesn't mean they aren't there.
Somewhat off topic, but is there a tag for ribbons-floating-above-the-head? ( post #866954 , post #632285 , post #702519 ) I think that's a sign of divinity.
ion288 said:
But these are all context. We don't know they are Gods or Goddesses unless we know who is in the picture. If you cannot see immediately that the character in the picture is a deity then it should not be taged with that. Regardless of the artists intentions.
You've described every single copy: tag, pretty much. As alegria points out, this pretty much makes mythology a copyright according to our usual methods. I think there's no good reason to not tag for deities if we have the information already.
Some tags do rely on prior knowledge of a character, but those tags are still added for visible elements in the image.
Example: genderswap relies on the viewer having foreknowledge of the canonical gender of the subject, but you can see that the character is of a certain gender in the image.
I just think that if you're going to tag for divinity, there ought to be a visible element of divinity in the image.
sgcdonmai said:
I just think that if you're going to tag for divinity, there ought to be a visible element of divinity in the image.
What is a "visible element" in this case? I don't think post #708100 is showing overt "divinity" or anything like that, but I'd feel like a damn liar if I tried to argue that it's not poseidon.
DschingisKhan said:
What is a "visible element" in this case? I don't think post #708100 is showing overt "divinity" or anything like that, but I'd feel like a damn liar if I tried to argue that it's not poseidon.
Visibly ruling over the sea, and being generally huge and mighty counts as a visual indicator, I'd say.
I've seen a few posts that clearly have a visual indicator of a goddess. There's specific iconography associated with, say, Hindu or Shinto goddesses (or, for that matter, all sorts of goddesses in most manga and so forth) that this tag can be used to mark.
Note that there are 35 images -- out of about a hundred Goddess-tagged images total -- in 'goddess original'. That implies, to me, that the tag does have a usage. Look at post #751465, say. That image very obviously and unambiguously -- at least to anyone familiar with the iconography -- has 'goddess' as its primary theme; I think it would be bad not to have a tag for images like that.
Part of the problem, though, is that people also apply it to every aa megami-sama image, say, even when there's nothing really in the image to play up the fact that the character is a goddess.
And I don't think that contextual tags are always bad, as long as they unambiguously and specifically identify a theme that is clearly present in the image.
The point of the 'tag what you see' rule is twofold: partially to avoid arguments over ambiguity, partially to avoid tags for irrelevant things or things that are part of canon backstory without really mattering to the image.
That doesn't mean that, say, tags like adult and young (which require knowing the 'normal' age of the character in order to determine that this version is older or younger than usual) are bad tags, or that family-relationship related tags are bad. Those things are often the main 'theme' of an image, so they're a useful way to categorize them -- if you got rid of them, many images would be left with only relatively generic tags like hair color, eye color, etc to identify them, which I think is bad.
When there's a single tag that unambiguously covers the driving theme of an image, it should be used, even if it requires a bit of knowledge of the characters involved or something.
Thinking of the young and adult tags here, more than the goddess one, really, since I kind of agree that it'd be better to restrict goddess to characters with the iconography of a goddess. Of course, it'd be hard to keep people from plastering it on every image where the character is a canon goddess without that making a bit of difference to or showing itself in the image at all...