Add light_hair as a better replacement for light hair color

BUR #49969 has been rejected.

mass update hifumi_(blue_archive) -> light_hair

I wanted to propose adding light_hair tag as a more adequate replacement to the light hair color tags.

One of the better candidates is hifumi, whose hair is not brown or blonde, but light brown. Yet, this tag seems to have been deprecated last year, and you won't be able to correctly search for "light brown hair" anymore after it's been removed.

Of course, you will need to do a more thorough search and replace than this, I just wanted to gauge the interest in adding this tag.

Reading through some of the light/dark hair deprecation discussions (all before my time), it seems like these kinds of tags can get messy. It seems like this tag could also be ripe for tag padding; most blonde hair posts could also be tagged with a theoretical light hair tag. Also, using a mass update like this generally isn't a good idea. What if somebody gave Hifumi an alternate hair color like black hair? It definitely wouldn't be light hair.

BURs of this sort are generally not very useful for proposing tags because there are posts like post #6785052 included that make the BUR not viable.

If you want to show a large group of posts that would qualify, curated favgroups can work better.

BUR #49972 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

deprecate light_hair

I don't see a value in this. All blonde_hair for instance is light hair, and the reason the light_* tags are deprecated in the first place is even in cases where a color range is wide we can't agree on what constitutes light/dark/"normal"

As one of the people who murdered the original light/dark hair tags, my reaction to this proposal is "Oh god, not this again".

The problem with these tags is basically the problem with the base color tags times a hundred: what a given "color" is is highly subjective. Even with this Blue Archive character alone (because of course it's fucking Blue Archive...), I'm seeing a lot of blonde hairs as opposed to just plain old brown. While this admittedly ties into a related pet peeve of mine in that these kinds of mass updates tend to cause more problems than they solve (as no matter what a detail canonically is, people can and will draw it differently), this one character's hair color variety is the exact sort of mess you can find in the deprecated light blue hair. Fuck all that.

I will say however, I don't hate the proposal along this line for greyscale as discussed in topic #25370. Though honestly, this very BUR is the exact sort of thing the detractors of that proposal warned of. So well...Guess this is why that's never gonna happen.

Knowledge_Seeker said:

...

I will say however, I don't hate the proposal along this line for greyscale as discussed in topic #25370. Though honestly, this very BUR is the exact sort of thing the detractors of that proposal warned of. So well...Guess this is why that's never gonna happen.

+1, I still like the idea of tagging shades on monochrome, but it's probably never gonna happen....

BUR #49974 has been rejected.

mass update favgroup:48470 -> light_hair

tamuraakemi said:

BURs of this sort are generally not very useful for proposing tags because there are posts like post #6785052 included that make the BUR not viable.

Sorry, overlooked this. I made a favgroup that only contains the posts where her hair is visible.

-

Moebits said:

Of course it is valuable. How am I supposed to search for light hair now??

Instead of adding a million light* color tags, you can just have one that defines the quality for light or desaturated hair.

Light hair looks distinct enough from the base color to justify its own classification. By deprecating the original tags without offering a real replacement, all you’ve done was remove a useful search query.

You don't, you just use "brown hair/blonde hair", I have no problems searching for Asuna who is light brown as well while looking for pics of her, light hair colors don't even make sense as a tag anyway as artists' have different ways of using the color pallets and light brown hair will look like blonde hair and vice-versa.

Moebits said:

Of course it is valuable. How am I supposed to search for light hair now??

Instead of adding a million light* color tags, you can just have one that defines the quality for light or desaturated hair.

Light hair looks distinct enough from the base color to justify its own classification. By deprecating the original tags without offering a real replacement, all you’ve done was remove a useful search query.

Reading forum #310656 and forum #320982 might give you some context. But let's take light blue hair as an example since it was mentioned.

Let's say I want to use light hair in tandem with blue hair to find the equivalent of light_blue_hair. In my mind I'm looking for post #8509172 but if you look in the tag at the moment since it still isn't fully cleared out you'll see post #8151474, post #8122197, post #8120002, post #8260512 and so on.

Such is the fate of all of these "shade" tags, we don't agree on what they are for and as such they become meaningless or are unilaterally applied to a character regardless of what the art actually depicts. post #8681597 post #6743567

I think this is a worse solution, again because some stuff like blonde will always be "light"

-

Moebits said:

Honestly, I feel like the tag "blonde hair" has been named incorrectly, as in the context of anime it is actually "bright yellow hair" in most cases. Blonde hair, as it exists in real life, is typically only a pale yellow color.

"I feel like "blonde hair" has been named incorrectly", no, "blonde" is the right definition of the hair color, you don't go around and ask someone everyone I know always calls people who have 'yellow' hair a blonde, now you can make the argument that brown hair should be renamed to brunette, and blue hair to bluenette, but the right way of saying "I am a yellow hair" is "I am a blonde".

Your favgroup still contains a lot of images that I personally would tag as blonde hair. This is not because I'm an all-seeing arbitor of hair colors, but because shades of color are highly subjective to the pair of eyes seeing them.

With the standard colors, the only problem is determining what color something is, which is, normally, easy to agree on (keyword is normally there). When we had shit like light brown hair, it creates the problem of not only determining the already subjective topic of a given color to tag, but also the specific shade. What I think of as light brown hair is not (and was not) the same as another tagger's, and this is why Danbooru cannot have nice things like precise shades of color.

I'm not going to rehash all the arguments I heard for and against the tags' existence, as Zetsubousensei already linked the relevant topics for that, but let's just nobody here is making any new points here, even down to the asinine terminology dispute around blonde hair.

-

Color pickers don't work because they don't take surrounding context, lighting, effects (such as film grain), etc. into account. This applies to color pickers and "shade" pickers. This is why they shouldn't be used in normal tagging either.

Moebits said:

I don’t think being "difficulty to tag" should be a reason to reject it, anyways. The main consideration should be whether the tag is useful for searching.

To quote Evazion from topic #29681:

evazion said:

Light blue hair and dark blue hair only get 100-200 searches per week. This is almost nothing. In comparison blue hair gets 3.6k searches per week, and this is still low relative to how large the tag is. Meanwhile a popular character, copyright, or artist tag can get 50k-200k+ searches per week. Even a niche tag like yandere can get 10k+ searches per week. We need more tags like yandere and less like light blue hair.

People vastly overestimate how much tags like this are actually used. In general, if it's just a minor aspect of a character's appearance, it's going to get next to no searches. People just don't search for things this granular. They search for high level things that tell you what the overall image is about, not low level things like the precise shade of a character's hair.

Generally speaking, what the typical member searches for and what the average tagger cares about are not aligned. What he said about light blue hair and dark blue hair here would no doubt be very true of this light hair tag you are proposing. Just because you think it should be searchable doesn't mean the rest of the people who use this site do, I'm sorry to say.

Knowledge_Seeker said:

To quote Evazion from topic #29681:

Generally speaking, what the typical member searches for and what the average tagger cares about are not aligned. What he said about light blue hair and dark blue hair here would no doubt be very true of this light hair tag you are proposing. Just because you think it should be searchable doesn't mean the rest of the people who use this site do, I'm sorry to say.

Like I said in that thread I still don't think "there's only 100-200 searches a week" was a valid reason to get rid of tags that made it easier to search for specific, taggable concepts.
post #8506515 & post #8499249 are so different they might as well be different colours altogether, yet they are both lumped under the same generic "blue_hair" now because oh it's the same "core" colour and we restrict ourselves to like 10 colours now with no way whatsoever of searching for those lighter or darker shades (anymore) and no granularity whatsoever.

And yeah sure it's "only 200 searches a week" but it's 200 searches a week that used to be able to search for something they wanted to search for, and now can't.

Astolfo said:

And yeah sure it's "only 200 searches a week" but it's 200 searches a week that used to be able to search for something they wanted to search for, and now can't.

I doubt they could actually find what they were looking for.

I recently cleaned up the light purple hair tag, and people were using it to tag completely different hair colors - purple, pink, white, gray, red, brown(!), aqua(!). It was just a tag full of junk and completely useless.

Of course, the same can be said about the basic color tags, since we don't distinguish between shades, and in the blue hair tag you can find both light blue and dark blue hair. But I think it's much better to have just 12 basic color options than to create another dozen shade tags that will very quickly become as useless as light_purple_hair.

This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.

The bulk update request #49972 (forum #395809) has been approved by @nonamethanks.