Discussion Request: How to use the tag "feet" and the others related correctly?

May 22, 2019. Don't forget to read my new replies below!

Before all, I have already tag a number of images with "feet" and related tags. Feel free to fix them after reading my points of view about it!
(English is not my mother tongue. I am sorry for a potentially uncomfortable reading process.)

I am trying tagging some images which do focus on feet in my personal thought. However, I found it impossible to find all the images and tag all of them on my own, as its amount keeps going all the time. After reading wiki feet, I still cannot get an undoubted stipulation on that. So I decided to open a forum to talk about my view and discuss it with you.

Let's quote first, (original definition on wiki) "Images that focus on one or both of a character's feet. This does not include feet fully covered by shoes. Feet covered by sandals, socks, thighhighs, or pantyhose still count."
The main problem is the definition of Focus. So there are my own ideas.

1.One or both feet is quality enough to watch comparing with the whole image.

First, the feet should be at least clear.
The tag "feet" should not be included in when an image does show "feet" but the quality does not match with the other part of image.

Example 1 : The feet of this image is of a bad quality. Tag "feet" is not recommended when "barefoot" can still be used.
Example 2 : In this image, character's main body is clear and good. However, the feet are of lower quality even the toes are clear. In that the tag "feet" is not recommended.
Example 3 : As for this one, character's feet is just a pass quality. But it matches the overall quality of the image, while it is also a important part of image. In that the tag "feet" can be used.

2.Different Sensitivity in different angle of view

A bottom angle of view to feet should have a higher sensitivity on "feet" tag.
A side angle of view to feet has a normal sensitivity.
A top angle of view to feet has a lower sensitivity.

Most viewers are tend to like the "feet" images with sole(the bottom of feet) most.
Then the shape of the feet, which is usually highlighted using a "profile" of feet.
And finally the instep(the top of feet) angle.

However, the boundaries of the three angle of view are little indistinct, somewhat "smoothly change from the bottom to the top".

Sensitivity here simply means your attention/extra-bonus to adding the "feet" tag. Not whether you should tag "feet" or not.

For example, when an image includes an "okay" foot/feet and you are wondering. Using this ranking can help you to determine.

You should tag "feet" on an image anyway where feet are good enough even though it gives you a top angle of view.

This ranking is still worth discussing.

3.Think twice when tags like "barefoot" and "toes" are used before a "feet" tag is likely to be rejected or ignored by you.
(Same where are just opposite)
(This is more likely to be a reminder)

feet must be one of the most often incorrectly used tags. Unfortunately, many users tag feet just because feet with no shoes are somewhere in the image, but the important point is that one or more feet are the focus of the image. Drawing quality of the feet doesn’t matter at all.

post #3510708 - Feet in foreground, qualifies.
post #3508755 - Leg and foot focus, qualifies.
post #3494942 - Feet in foreground, qualifies.
post #3496526 - Foot in foreground, qualifies, IMO.

post #3513961 - No special focus on the feet, doesn’t qualify.
post #3513297 - No special focus on the feet, doesn’t qualify.

In topic #14889 I suggested to rename the tag to foot_focus, but I still didn’t get around to tackle that and the over 65k posts aren’t something I can handle and apparently nobody else is up for it either.

If you’re interested in especially well-drawn feet, maybe pool #109 is what you’re looking for.

In short, if the wiki says “focus”, it does mean “focus”, not “somewhere in the image”.

kittey said:

feet must be one of the most often incorrectly used tags. Unfortunately, many users tag feet just because feet with no shoes are somewhere in the image, but the important point is that one or more feet are the focus of the image. Drawing quality of the feet doesn’t matter at all.

post #3510708 - Feet in foreground, qualifies.
post #3508755 - Leg and foot focus, qualifies.
post #3494942 - Feet in foreground, qualifies.
post #3496526 - Foot in foreground, qualifies, IMO.

post #3513961 - No special focus on the feet, doesn’t qualify.
post #3513297 - No special focus on the feet, doesn’t qualify.

In topic #14889 I suggested to rename the tag to foot_focus, but I still didn’t get around to tackle that and the over 65k posts aren’t something I can handle and apparently nobody else is up for it either.

If you’re interested in especially well-drawn feet, maybe pool #109 is what you’re looking for.

In short, if the wiki says “focus”, it does mean “focus”, not “somewhere in the image”.

I understand. What I am confused about is just the "focus". Somehow it can both mean "zoom in" and "make something on people's mind".
So that makes me use this tag wherever feet is "exist and looks good", instead of a "main part". That could be my mistake but it worth discussing as well.

Feet is like ass or breasts in that people tag it whenever the body part is visible. Many taggers have the attitude that if a thing is visible, it must be tagged, regardless of how significant it is. It's very difficult to police this.

Pov feet and pool #109 ("Perfect Feet") are probably more what you're looking for. Pov feet is for when the image truly is focused on feet, and Perfect Feet is for well-drawn feet (which is pretty subjective). Pov feet really should be aliased to foot focus instead. Feet and pov feet have basically the same relationship as ass versus ass focus: one is for when the body part is visible, the other is for when it's a major part of the image.

Focus and quality are separate things. The word "focus" in the context of tags like ass focus, male focus, cat focus means "this thing is the main subject of the image". It doesn't necessarily mean they're high quality. The quality of something like post #2027174 is debatable, but it's clearly focused on feet.

I should mention that I recently edited the feet wiki. I saw your recent edit, which basically said that feet still counts even if it's only one foot, and incorporated that into the first line instead. Previously it said that "This tag is for images in which one of the focuses is the character's feet." I removed the "one of" part, which arguably changes the meaning, but honestly taggers don't pay very much attention to the exact language in wikis anyway.

Sincerely thank @kittey and @evazion so far for giving me helps on this problem!

After reading your replies, I went to Pixiv and did some research on the tag "feet"(足) there and I have found something interesting.

First of all, when you basically just input "足" and run the search, you will find more than 33k images. No matter how hard I was looking for, however, I couldn't find one image with a tag only says "足". In short, the objective tag "feet" for images somehow does not exist in Pixiv.

The images which can be searched by "feet" are actually tagged by something more accurate, such as "pov feet"(足裏),"toes"(足指) and "barefoot"(裸足), as they are including the Character "足". Also some of them are tagged by some geographic place or some posture including "足". Language happenstance.

What is more confusing is that, Pixiv do still have a explanation on the tag "足", simply means "An organ of the body that is used when a creature stands and walks.". That is a wide range!

And that could be the cause of this problem.

If we assume that some of the members on Danbooru also are members on Pixiv, they will be so confused. After that, they may tend to accept the easier and wider definition on Pixiv instead. To be honest, I am the one of them.

Sadly, the tags "pov feet","toes" and "barefoot", especially "pov_feet", are not paid enough attention to as well as "feet". Hope this discussion will help people to know these better.