I probably should've thought of this earlier when I was uploading all those SAI-made images, but I was thinking that it would be cool to tag images with the medium that they were made in.
Of course, by no means do we know how all images were made, but if we do have that information (for example because it was tagged, or it's in the description), why not tag the images with it? It's certainly informative and it can help in searches, just like oekaki and /trad now.
In this case, it's made in MS Paint, so I made a mspaint_(medium) to reflect that. Is this a good idea?
I realize that the images that are in the archive can probably never be retraced as to what they were made with, but I don't see why we can't start tagging it now.
--edit-- I also realize MS Paint may not be the best example, but eh. Think of other images being tagged with stuff like Photoshop_(medium), painter_(medium) and SAI_(medium).
I don't know if it'd be worth it, but I believe Photoshop leaves a signature in the EXIF data by default. So if someone *really* wanted to, they could search for that in the existing images.
Shinjidude said: I don't know if it'd be worth it, but I believe Photoshop leaves a signature in the EXIF data by default. So if someone *really* wanted to, they could search for that in the existing images.
That sounds good in theory but I'd be wary of it, I do know of artists that occasionally do 99% of their work in one program and then get Photoshop out to do some color adjusting and resizing.
That process would still result in the image having that EXIF data on there, while I don't think it would be fair to tag it as a Photoshop work.
