Rotated and reversed should be third-party edits

BUR #39469 has been rejected.

create implication rotated -> third-party_edit
create implication reversed -> third-party_edit

Unlike stitched, images that are sideways or mirrored are still perfectly viewable on a single page. It makes no sense that on one hand we take great care in preventing md5 mismatches to make sure we have the actual, most original image, while on the other hand we allow rotations that at best have a chance to destroy metadata, and at worst cause image degradation through generational loss.

A sort of end-game would be having a flag attached to post so that sideways posts can be displayed correctly on the client side, but that's just quality of life and not necessary to view the images normally.

Everything I've checked so far in reversed -third-party_edit and rotated -third-party_edit are not third party. They're reversed or rotated by the original artist.

There are posts like post #2762466 <-> post #2762467 and post #2917541 <-> post #2917539 that appear to be official examples of reversed images. The latter example the source link shows that the character uses both art and seems as it powers up is when it flips and then changes design as it goes up. I'm not familiar with the game, but that's what it appears at a glance.

kimonomiko said:

Everything I've checked so far in reversed -third-party_edit and rotated -third-party_edit are not third party. They're reversed or rotated by the original artist.

The first example as of writing under rotated, post #9042278, was posted sideways by the artist on Twitter, but was seemingly rotated before uploading by the user who uploaded it.

GreyOmega said:

There are posts like post #2762466 <-> post #2762467 and post #2917541 <-> post #2917539 that appear to be official examples of reversed images. The latter example the source link shows that the character uses both art and seems as it powers up is when it flips and then changes design as it goes up. I'm not familiar with the game, but that's what it appears at a glance.

Though usage is slightly inconsistent, probably because of some mistags, this is where I would expect mirror image to be used, similar to first-party sideways images.

ANON_TOKYO said:

The first example as of writing under rotated, post #9042278, was posted sideways by the artist on Twitter, but was seemingly rotated before uploading by the user who uploaded it.

Those should definitely be tagged as third party + the uploader DMed about this then. But this doesn't warrant an implication since there are plenty of other first-party rotations and reversals.

kimonomiko said:

Those should definitely be tagged as third party + the uploader DMed about this then. But this doesn't warrant an implication since there are plenty of other first-party rotations and reversals.

Again, there's already sideways (and mirror image) for first-party rotations. "Historically" the metatag variants have been used for when it's done after the fact. post #6887501 wouldn't be rotated, the child just has to be sideways.

ANON_TOKYO said:

Again, there's already sideways (and mirror image) for first-party rotations. "Historically" the metatag variants have been used for when it's done after the fact. post #6887501 wouldn't be rotated, the child just has to be sideways.

Okay, I think I see what you mean now. So does that mean most of reversed -third-party_edit and rotated -third-party_edit are mistagged, and should be mirror_image or sideways instead if they're first party? If that's the case then it needs to be gardened/updated in a separate BUR then, because most of the active posts for reversed and rotated are first party. And if that's how those tags are meant to be used, then all the wikis should be updated to specify that IMO.

loosely related but if mirror image is going to be used, it probably needs a rename as it's currently filled to the brim with reflection and symmetry mistags. flipped image?

kimonomiko said:

Okay, I think I see what you mean now. So does that mean most of reversed -third-party_edit and rotated -third-party_edit are mistagged, and should be mirror_image or sideways instead if they're first party? If that's the case then it needs to be gardened/updated in a separate BUR then, because most of the active posts for reversed and rotated are first party. And if that's how those tags are meant to be used, then all the wikis should be updated to specify that IMO.

Yes, and the wiki already indicates this for the most part. THe proposal of my BUR is to make it an actual third-party edit. The reason is that in some cases like stitched we don't consider it as such, since it can be done losslessly and the image is difficult if not impossible to properly view without. These two tags don't have that problem (at worst you have to tilt your head a bit), so I don't think it applies. From what I can tell, it seems to be used correctly for at least a decent portion though.

Kaleidoscoped said:

loosely related but if mirror image is going to be used, it probably needs a rename as it's currently filled to the brim with reflection and symmetry mistags. flipped image?

From what I can tell, mirror image kind of pulls a weird double duty. It should probably be modified a bit, or a new tag should be made, to make it a proper first-party version of reversed, just like rotated vs sideways.

ANON_TOKYO said:

Though usage is slightly inconsistent, probably because of some mistags, this is where I would expect mirror image to be used, similar to first-party sideways images.

The problem with this is the mirror image is a bad tag. Despite what the wiki states, the majority of images are just reflections which shouldn't be tagged at all because if those are acceptable for the tag then all images of reflections would also qualify meaning the tag would become consumed by reflection posts. If that wasn't enough, the bulk of what is left would just be symmetry images.

GreyOmega said:

The problem with this is the mirror image is a bad tag. Despite what the wiki states, the majority of images are just reflections which shouldn't be tagged at all because if those are acceptable for the tag then all images of reflections would also qualify meaning the tag would become consumed by reflection posts. If that wasn't enough, the bulk of what is left would just be symmetry images.

Yeah I think realistically something "proper" like mirrored should be made for cases like the example you gave, and all the other reflection-type stuff already have more descriptive tags.

ANON_TOKYO said:

The first example as of writing under rotated, post #9042278, was posted sideways by the artist on Twitter, but was seemingly rotated before uploading by the user who uploaded it.

Yes, I rotated the image. Because in topic #20220, the administrator said it's allowed to rotate the image without forgetting to tag it rotated later.

i believe it's been an admin statement at some point that exif rotating certain images is fine? unsure if that's the current policy

third-party edit is for actual edits to the image, not meta-fixes. An image rotated into the right orientation should not get third-party edit imo, for the same reason why stitched doesn't imply third-party edit. I think it's a pedantic and dumb way to use the tag, and it makes it harder to filter out actual third-party edits.

reversed is different because it doesn't actually help anyone to flip an image. Those should usually be deleted if they're third-party edit.

The bulk update request #39469 (forum #345175) has been rejected by @nonamethanks.