posts like post #6316900post #6316935post #6315332 are clearly in need of a tag that properly fits their divine appearance and tags like eldrich_abomination & monster or giant monster aren't gonna cut it, we need a divine being tag or a deity tag or something like such that can properly describe and respect their appearance & presence within the pieces they're depicted in.
and we can't just rely on a pool like God Mode in order to represent or describe a being that's clearly not in a limited state of divine form, they are clearly not in a "mode".
that is more of a reference towards someone that's supernatural, not divine, werewolves and vampires would also fit the description of that tag.
what I'm looking for is a tag that separates the divine from the supernatural, a divine being is more than just supernatural, thus there should be a tag that defines that and separates the two.
Ideally you'd want a way to search for stuff like post #5495425, but the issue with such a tag (and the reason why god/goddess/deity were nuked in the first place) is that users will canonically add it to posts with no references to anything divine. For example:
Someone wearing an angel costume complete with fake halo? Check.
Kratos cooking dinner for the boy? He's a god, so check.
A 15-post set of Palutena, completely nude, no visible wings or halo, getting railed by three guys at once? Even in the midst of such depravity, my goddess is still divinity incarnate! That'll be fifteen checks in a row, and I will edit war over this for weeks.
I'd like to be able to search for this kind of content just as much as you, but we already have evidence in god/goddess/deity that this kind of constant mistagging will be unavoidable.
which is why I'm looking to see if anyone can come up with a tag that's more specific toward deities, maybe a word that's a different language could be used to distinguish divine being from supernatural beings, an old Latin word, or something like such, it'll take some deep diving but I feel it is necessary to make a tag for god-like beings.
yea that's a shame things like that aren't searchable because of the unsurprising amount of mistagging. Not sure about an "eldritch_god" tag name, which is the shortest name idea i can think of, but if any workable tag is to be had for this, i guess it's gonna have to look like the name of a pool for how descrpitive it needs to be
What defines a divine being? Halo, wings, aura, astronomical objects, lore? It's such a broad concept, especially with anime related media as has been discussed over the years, a tag for this is prone to fail. Just look at the history of the deprecated tags for this.
I don't see the problem with calling the posts linked as eldritch.
What defines a divine being? Halo, wings, aura, astronomical objects, lore? It's such a broad concept, especially with anime related media as has been discussed over the years, a tag for this is prone to fail. Just look at the history of the deprecated tags for this.
what should define the majesty of the individual being depicted in any given piece of a could-be deity or divine being should be based mostly on the quality of the art itself & if the character themself is depicted differently in a different form compared to their usual base form or canon-established alternate forms, and it has to be a form that stands out well above the usual forms in appearance AND the level of quality of the piece itself
quality wise it should be at least this good post #6140864 even if nudity is depicted so long as it's artistic.
Individual said:
I don't see the problem with calling the posts linked as eldritch.
because the nature of the being that's being depicted isn't just Eldrich and their not abominations either, they're divine & majestic, post #6073776post #6067539post #5841824post #1281093 < posts like these where the majority of the time said character is normally depicted as a human is instead depicted as a god that isn't in a human form should have a tag that better describes their appearance other than just a pool because there are some posts that aren't in the god_mode pool that could fit a broader, less strict description through a tag.
in conclusion, I believe two tags should be created to distinguish established divine beings like post #5913820 from established divine characters of human shape like post #4566643 with the latter requiring a high level of quality in order for the piece to fit the tag.
divine_being is good enough to describe the first one divine_person for the second one??? anyone got any ideas for the second one?
what should define the majesty of the individual being depicted in any given piece of a could-be deity or divine being should be based mostly on the quality of the art itself & if the character themself is depicted differently in a different form compared to their usual base form or canon-established alternate forms, and it has to be a form that stands out well above the usual forms in appearance AND the level of quality of the piece itself
quality wise it should be at least this good post #6140864 even if nudity is depicted so long as it's artistic.
This makes no sense. You're saying that whether or not something within an image can be considered "divine" should depend primarily on the "quality" of the image? That's subjective. A tag needs to be objective. You need to be able to define "divinity" as visible and identifiable traits separate from how good you think the image looks.
If you're going to use image "quality" as a metric, then it only works as a pool.
in conclusion, I believe two tags should be created to distinguish established divine beings like post #5913820 from established divine characters of human shape like post #4566643 with the latter requiring a high level of quality in order for the piece to fit the tag.
What do you mean when you say "established?" Because it sounds like you're describing "canon tags" which is exactly why we don't use god and deity.
This makes no sense. You're saying that whether or not something within an image can be considered "divine" should depend primarily on the "quality" of the image? That's subjective. A tag needs to be objective. You need to be able to define "divinity" as visible and identifiable traits separate from how good you think the image looks.
If you're going to use image "quality" as a metric, then it only works as a pool.
compare posts/5264062 to post #6140864 and you'll see my point, clearly similarities in what's depicted but clear differences in quality, now I ask if both pics were to depict what would come across to you to be your idea on what a divine being is, which would you be more inclined to tag as such, the one where a half-dressed blindfolded woman is in bed fucking and giving handjobs to dildos? or a barechested naked woman that's standing proudly on a cliff surrounded by flames while holding a sword?
it is clear what I'm trying to say here.
blindVigil said:
What do you mean when you say "established?" Because it sounds like you're describing "canon tags" which is exactly why we don't use god and deity.
established as in what is depicted in any given art piece, whether the said piece is depicting a character from a series or not, is showing clear signs of divine power either through the form of the character themself or through powers that the character possesses that affect them and the surrounding area on an epic scale.
compare posts/5264062 to post #6140864 and you'll see my point, clearly similarities in what's depicted but clear differences in quality, now I ask if both pics were to depict what would come across to you to be your idea on what a divine being is, which would you be more inclined to tag as such, the one where a half-dressed blindfolded woman is in bed fucking and giving handjobs to dildos? or a barechested naked woman that's standing proudly on a cliff surrounded by flames while holding a sword?
I would never think to define post #6140864 as Divine, it's a warrior or Barbarian you can tell because both those tags describe the armor and sword she holds. What elements of this image imply a supernatural diety worthy of a tag?
Most of the images you're bringing up fall just fine under eldritch abomination or giant monster bar that, halos and wings should just be tagged as angel in my opinion no sense in trying to use a catch-all tag for the entire world's mythology.
I would never think to define post #6140864 as Divine, it's a warrior or Barbarian you can tell because both those tags describe the armor and sword she holds. What elements of this image imply a supernatural diety worthy of a tag?
I highlighted those posts in order to show that the clear difference in quality is exactly what adds to the ethereal nature of depicting a divine being or divine entity more than anything else, quality adds credence to the holy aspects of the piece and what it presents.
if the piece itself looks like it has a high enough level of quality to where it is possible to be considered divine without the oversaturated indications then it should be tagged as such. gold, jewels, symbols & white wings should not be all that defines what is and isn't divine, that's a very small-minded outlook on the subject.
zetsubousensei said:
Most of the images you're bringing up fall just fine under eldritch abomination or giant monster bar that, halos and wings should just be tagged as angel in my opinion no sense in trying to use a catch-all tag for the entire world's mythology.
so you're just gonna look at these two post #6063507post #6316900 and tell me they're the same when one is clearly an Eldrich monster and the other is an ethereal being? there are different tags for different monsters for a reason, the same should be required for divine beings and entities as well instead of just funneling them all into "eldrich_abomination" or "giant_monster" when they are clearly more than just an eldrich abomination or a giant monster, hell, you might as well just funnal beings like orcs, werewolves, vampires & ghosts into the monster tag while you're at it.
