Posted under Tag/Wiki Projects and Questions
fliphook said:
which original post
The first post in the topic (topic #42705). These two:
post #4183350 post #4137081
have visible butts. I'd even say this one does too:
post #4562640
and I'm curious how it qualifies for "tailbutt" given the visible crease where the tail connects to the body.
well those, to me at least, don't look like they have meaty butts
they want the tails to be between the legs, a continuiation of the torso not have the tail poke out the top of the buttcrack
they want to avoid these
post #4461153 post #4378175 post #4618509 post #4591802
i've been loking for a post that actually showed this, it was along time ago, it was animated where they showed a rear view of a scalie with a butt then erased the butt crack and redrew the area as part of the tail. i know it exists i just can't find it and it would best show what they are aiming for
watsit said:
The first post in the topic (topic #42705). These two:
post #4183350 post #4137081
have visible butts. I'd even say this one does too:
post #4562640
and I'm curious how it qualifies for "tailbutt" given the visible crease where the tail connects to the body.
imagine the crease unfolded. does it look like a normal butt in your mind? that's how i made that decision
also, this post here doesn't have well-enough defined cheeks to even count as anything more than just hips
post #4183350
fliphook said:
well those, to me at least, don't look like they have meaty butts
Perhaps not, but it doesn't have to be big and meaty to still be a butt.
fleskywood said:
imagine the crease unfolded. does it look like a normal butt in your mind? that's how i made that decision
Normal in what sense? Since we're dealing with drawn furry art, "normal" will depend on context. "Normal" as in realistic, or "normal" as in what you typically find in art here? Realistically, a raised tail can have a smooth underside where it connects to the body:
post #4438106 post #4635605 post #2830158
and only get a crease when it's lowered down:
post #4371902 post #3959907
If a tail is raised enough, I would expect it to look similar if drawn more properly, the main difference being the width of the tail and separation of the butt cheeks.
A lot of art, however, is stylized in a way where it looks like a tail juts out from the lower back as opposed to being a continuation of the spine, and/or with the butt cheeks closed or not being a rear view so you can't see its connection with the perineum.
fleskywood said:
also, this post here doesn't have well-enough defined cheeks to even count as anything more than just hips
post #4183350
There's certainly enough there to count as butt cheeks, in my opinion. It doesn't need to be a big_butt or bubble_butt to be a butt.
i think where the appendages line also defines a tail butt if looking at the rear and the leg joints and tail form a triangle its not a tailbutt
post #4442186 post #1177878 post #713887
but if the leg joints and tial line up on a more even plane its a tailbutt
post #1052399 post #2912920 post #1083604
fliphook said:
i think where the appendages line also defines a tail butt if looking at the rear and the leg joints and tail form a triangle its not a tailbutt
post #4442186 post #1177878 post #713887but if the leg joints and tial line up on a more even plane its a tailbutt
post #1052399 post #2912920 post #1083604
ye, there's almost a trapezoid shape to where, say, the rigging would be, if it were a 3d model
also 1.9k posts! thanks for the help, everyone
do not hesitate to debate the use of this tag. any information given wether it be positive or not can be utilized to better define the tag and make it more suitable.
any suggestions or info will be greatly appreciated
This tag has a very strong "you know it when you see it" feeling, but it is hard to nail down in concrete terms, which will make it hard to remove mistags.
I think it has less to do with the absence of a butt, because any character with legs could be said to have a butt because their legs have to connect to their torso somewhere. Could a definition using the size and position of the tail relative to their hindmost legs work? That would also give a clear reason why this tag shouldn't go on every feral snake.
oozeenthusiast said:
This tag has a very strong "you know it when you see it" feeling, but it is hard to nail down in concrete terms, which will make it hard to remove mistags.I think it has less to do with the absence of a butt, because any character with legs could be said to have a butt because their legs have to connect to their torso somewhere. Could a definition using the size and position of the tail relative to their hindmost legs work? That would also give a clear reason why this tag shouldn't go on every feral snake.
as stated earlier the position is more lower more flat, in line with the legs
the tail thickness is also avery good point as there are some kangaroos depending on the tail thickness would validate wether or not it should be tagged
post #713887
tail is too high and a little undersized
post #2912920
tail better bifurcates the hips and thickness is large enough to displace the cleft
(i only used these example bacause they were already here, when i have time i'll add more examples)
and there should be legs to have a defining area where all this takes place
Updated
oozeenthusiast said:
This tag has a very strong "you know it when you see it" feeling, but it is hard to nail down in concrete terms, which will make it hard to remove mistags.I think it has less to do with the absence of a butt, because any character with legs could be said to have a butt because their legs have to connect to their torso somewhere. Could a definition using the size and position of the tail relative to their hindmost legs work? That would also give a clear reason why this tag shouldn't go on every feral snake.
it shouldn't go on feral snakes because feral snakes don't have hips
I'm glad this tag exists! I made the avian_butt tag last year and was looking for a counterpart for describing similar but non-birdy characters.
That said, if anyone thinks merging these two tags would be better, I wouldn't be against it.
Updated
Maybe streamlined_butt?
After reading this thread, I'm just gonna throw my support for tailbutt. Most other suggestions have been... bad, and it's not like I can come up with anything better.
Might be able to work in 'pelvis' or 'pelvic' instead of 'butt', but that just sounds worse in any iteration that I can come up with.
Or go with 'buttless_tail' for maybe a bit of extra clarity.
Updated
genjar said:
After reading this thread, I'm just gonna throw my support for tailbutt. Most other suggestions have been... bad, and it's not like I can come up with anything better.Might be able to work in 'pelvis' or 'pelvic' instead of 'butt', but that just sounds worse in any iteration that I can come up with.
Or go with 'buttless_tail' for maybe a bit of extra clarity.
Yeah pretty much this. As much as I don't like the using 'butt' to describe this anatomy and I agree with TheGreatWolfgang in that it can be confusing, I can't think of anything better.
Tailbutt is cute and all alternatives are terrible.
2.6k posts! really cool to see all that activity while i was gone
What about side_hips?
https://e621.net/wiki_pages/side_hips
The tag is already used on 17 posts, but what it is describing is inconsistent. It's a way more intuitive name than tailbutt in my opinion.
luiop said:
What about side_hips?
https://e621.net/wiki_pages/side_hips
The tag is already used on 17 posts, but what it is describing is inconsistent. It's a way more intuitive name than tailbutt in my opinion.
None of these posts here remotely fit.
It could work, but you'd need to sort out what to do with the pictures already in that tag.
