Danbooru

[APPROVED] Transparent Background tag category

Posted under Tags

fossilnix

Transparency would be part of the meta information in the sense that a file has to be in a format that supports transparency, and also make use of the alpha channel. It's also something that could hypothetically be detected automatically. However, transparent_background wouldn't apply to transparency in other areas of the image, so I agree that it's not really a meta tag.

I think a general transparency tag (if there were one) would be more appropriate to be a meta tag, but I'm not sure how useful a tag like that would actually be for searching, especially now that artists are using single-transparent-pixel hacks to get around Twitter's PNG-JPG conversion (or so I've heard); that would really water down an automatic transparency tag if one existed.

Reply
BrokenEagle98

First off, we just recently had a conversation about items that are visible (e.g. artifacts), so using that as a disqualifier is a moot point. topic #14713

But, since the tag describes an aspect in the image itself... namely the background... it probably should be general.

So +1.

fossilnix said:

I think a general transparency tag (if there were one) would be more appropriate to be a meta tag...

I believe there's already a meta tag that covers the more meta aspects of transparency in a picture. It's called Alpha Transparency.

Reply
Danielx21

+1

I agree with arguments like these:

kuuderes_shadow said:

It doesn't make sense to me having this as a meta tag when all other *_background tags are general ones

And the transparency is a visible part of the image, not some meta information.

Provence said:

Transparancy is something that you can see despite it being a meta information. Might be a double-edged sword, but I think it should be general, too.

This was recently mentioned at topic #15096 which discusses the meta/general distinction concerning the tag borrowed_character.

Reply
1