Tag Implication: colored pencil

Posted under General

Wax crayons tend to be thicker and softer than colored pencils, but they are very similar (colored pencils usually also have colored wax cores). Additionally the English word "crayon" is derived from the French word for "pencil", so go figure.

葉月 said:
No, we have many media already covered. Traditional_media and all media tags are only to be used when they're certain. It's easy in pixiv because they have tools metadata.

So what do I do if I find a really convincing watercolor picture done with Photoshop or SAI?

Shinjidude said:
Additionally the English word "crayon" is derived from the French word for "pencil", so go figure.

And that's why I was confused. Same words, different meanings.
Plus what English calls "crayons" are called "wax chalks" or sometimes more informally "colored chalks" in French (French for "chalk" being "craie", with the same pronouncing as in "crayon"). Jeez.
Became clear when I read Crayola.

forum #26542, for those interested.

I agreed there with the "no more specific than faux" definition Hazuki proposed.

Although I can certainly see it from the other side. Suiseiseki said in that thread "I think if I were searching for watercolor images, I'd also want faux_traditional_media", and I can't imagine he's alone.

It does, however, stretch our meaning of watercolor and the media in general.

Bumping this.

Adding to the argument, I am usually on the side of "if i searched for X, I would want Y in the results", but in this particular case the *_(medium) tags are informative. They tell us something about the picture (namely, how it's made). So I think we definitely shouldn't pollute that function with faux_traditional_media, entries, aside from the whole issue of determining which faux-medium it is.

Anyway yeah, these implications need to be put in.

I thought we did reach a consensus in that images shouldn't be tagged /trad unless they were entirely or at least significantly drawn with a traditional medium of some sort. So a pencil drawing that was then colored in Photoshop, I wouldn't tag as /trad. But if it's a pencil drawing that was scanned in and just the colors adjusted a bit in Photoshop, I would tag as /trad. I do believe that was discussed and agreed upon some time ago, but I could be wrong.

I'm more looking at things that fall in a category I think of as "digitally assisted". If someone uses SAI to colour a drawing done in nib_pen, it's still really obvious that it's a pen, and the technical elements that make it an interesting thing to tag are still intact. But it was coloured in SAI, so it's definitely not /trad. But what is it?

Exhibit A: post #668292

Ah right, I see what you mean now. I agree with you, the /trad is inappropriate, but the nib_pen tag is definitely arguable. So maybe these implications aren't such a great idea...

I would call this mixed_media, but that tag doesn't exist yet. Might be good though, as long as the wiki explains clearly what that means. It's kind of an "advanced" tag anyway though, I doubt just anybody would use it.

I've thought of this before but imho that would only be useful when it's visibly mixed media. The lineart on post #668292 could very well have been made in SAI as well so I wouldn't count it (and I wouldn't even tag it nib_pen for this reason).
I don't think colored sketches (digital coloring with visibly /trad lineart) are very valuable either, but it might be nice for works where both lineart and coloring are /trad with digital final touches (color correction, light effects, etc.), though I don't have an example at hand right now.


1 2