mismatched_thighhighs are very noticable, like required by asymmetrical_clothing.
Updated by juunigatsu no usagi
Posted under General
mismatched_thighhighs are very noticable, like required by asymmetrical_clothing.
Updated by juunigatsu no usagi
But mismatched_thighhighs can mean thighhighs of two different colors or patterns, not just lengths, and I don't think that falls under asymmetrical_clothing.
asymmetrical clothing wiki definition:
A character wearing clothing that very noticeably differs from one side of the body to the other.
I'd say that mismatched thighhighs would qualify under that definition. If the difference between the thighhighs' appearence (color, cut, pattern, etc.) is noticeable enough to get the one tag, then it's asymmetrical enough to get the other.
+1
I only linked that to expand on searching by differences in clothing pieces. Unless you want me to change the definition? So far as I've seen, the current character that would fall under the asymmetrical+mismatched is Rita Mordio.
I thought asymmetry for danbooru was more about differences in shape, though not really on color alone. But I can understand how asymmetric color would work.
-1
I still believe that the outfit as a whole is what needs to be asymmetrical, individual parts do not necessarily make the whole asymmetrical. post #676278 has mismatched thighhighs, but it's not very asymmetrical as a whole.
It's still only one piece of clothing though, and its significance can vary depending on how much of them is actually shown. post #647608 they're mostly not visible.
Honestly though, coloration differences to me just doesn't qualify these things as asymmetrical. Images like post #277293 are for the most part fully symmetrical except the difference in coloration of the socks/thighhighs (and there are plenty of examples like that).
Personally I think the asymmetrical clothing is kind of becoming nothing more than a garbage tag. People assigning images as asymmetrical because of minor asymmetries in the outfit. Minor asymmetries are natural, common, and completely insignificant. It should be the outfit as a whole, not these individual pieces of clothing.
Anyways almost any implication to asymmetrical clothing is bound to failure, because we're going to have images where that specific item will be present but it's appearance will be made insignificant due to a variety of reasons. post #425145 has pants with a single pantsleg and the angle makes it's impact utterly insignificant.
NWF_Renim said:
People assigning images as asymmetrical because of minor asymmetries in the outfit. Minor asymmetries are natural, common, and completely insignificant. It should be the outfit as a whole, not these individual pieces of clothing.
The problem with this is that outfits as a whole comprise of individual pieces of clothing, and it's up to each person to use his common sense to decide if something should be tagged asymmetrical_clothing.
I think mismatched_socks and mismathced_thighighs qualify for this implication, they're not something common enough to be considered insignificant or go by unnoticed by most people (e.g. wristwatches, bracelets, leg garters, anklets, etc.)
That said, I do agree that asymmetrical_clothing is not used properly, stuff like post #723141, post #723101 or post #724940 clearly don't belong there.
tldr: +1 for the implication.
Updated
unicogirl said:
So should I change the definition or be more specific?
Definition of which, asymmetrical_clothing?
How about this?
Can include length if there is a slight difference, but extreme differences should be for asymmetrical tag.
or
two different colors, patterns, or slight length differences. For example post #380206 / post #399988