zetsubousensei said:
So using traditional_media as a comparison we don't tag faux_traditional_media with the the more specific tags like watercolor, pen, graphite, ect and they are two completely seperate tags. One solution to make it less broad would be to remove the authentic pieces and keep retro artstyle specifically for them.
Another, perhaps easier to maintain solution is to share the decade tags but to still keep faux and authentic split. Whatever the solution I do NOT support implying faux to authentic since we don't do that with traditional.
Well we couldn't do that implication even if we wanted to. One of them would need a category change. The more specific tags also describe how or with what the piece was made, so it wouldn't make sense to use them for faux traditional media, which is digital art. We'd need to reconsider our entire tagging approach for those tags if we wanted to identify that something that wasn't drawn with a real pencil looks like it was.
None of these issues apply to the retro artstyles. Whether it was actually made in the 90s or in 2025, if it looks like 1990s (style) then it's 1990s style. I think it's silly to try to argue that someone using any of these tags wouldn't want to see art that looks exactly like everything else in the tag just because it wasn't literally made during the original time period. Honestly, this entire "these things need to be segregated by date of creation" discussion is a little bizarre to me.
