Posts

That sounds like a feature and not a bug, actually. Someone watching a person’s artist: tag may simply not be interested in their photographer: or editor: tag, so, no actually, those tags all exist separately for a reason, and using them all on the same image defeats the point and sounds silly to me. If someone wants to follow them all, they can, if they don’t want to, they shouldn’t be forced to. it’s not an all or nothing thing, they’re different things, and that’s okay.

(For the record, I’m against tag name unification)

I fully agree with @Heat Sink. It is indeed inconvenient to have several different ways to denote the author of the image. If you take a look at my user profile, you’ll see a combinatorial explosion of various authorship tags linked to my socials, because “artist links” were not well designed for having several authorship tags referring to the same person. It’s also very annoying that different tags that refer to the same person have different followership, and thus if people are subscribed to prompter:marestare, for example, they won’t see new posts that contain editor:marestare or artist:marestare without the prompter:marestare tag. For this reason, I’ve been adding several variants of the authorship tags to my posts.

It does seem very logical to decouple the authorship from the “level of human effort” categories of tags. Even on derpibooru, I think it would make sense to separate these concerns. For edits of other works, there could be a tag “edit”, and if people want to clarify who did what in multi-authored posts, they can do that via the description.

As for the unified tag naming, I don’t like the term “director”. I know it comes from e6ai, but I don’t like their choice because this tag doesn’t look all that intuitive for an outside person. An outside person would indeed look for something called creator or author. I think both are fine, but I lean more towards author for no specific reason other than maybe that it’s shorter.

I can’t agree with making tags less distinct across the entire site to solve what is honestly going to be a pretty uncommon edge case. However, there might be some value in adding a ‘creator:xxxxxxx’ tag that is implied by any artist/prompter/editor tag if that edge case is important.

@Heat Sink
For creating a unified tag for identifying who made stuff, I guess it makes sense. I guess it’s more of a personal thing as I’m not really comfortable being referred to as a “creator,” when in my opinion I’m not really creating anything. I’m not sketching a start image or editing a traditional art image I made, I’m just entering text into a UI and clicking a button until I get something I like. At best I’ll evolve/duplicate generations and clean them up afterwards, but I still don’t know if that really makes me a creator.

I know this is kind of relitigating some of the arguments about AI that was had on Derpi and elsewhere, but to me it just feels like the term should be reserved for people who go beyond simple text prompting.

We already have the “AI generated” & “AI composition” tags for this distinction.
Personally i feel that it would be redundant to also have a distinction in creator tags for it. When there can be a neutral unified tag that can signify who made it, and then the Generated or Composition tags for what kind of image it is.

One of the reasons that i think we should unify the tags is because of users having to have separate tags to correctly tag there images.
For example i have seen one user that made an “artist” tag for themselves as the image they uploaded was a sketch using an AI image as base. And people following the users “Prompter” tag don’t see this image unless they stumble upon their profile and see that they also have an artist tag. I have seen several users that had to make a new creator tag to properly tag the image. With a unified tag a creator can put all their AI based art on one creator tag.

I guess “Creator” could work with more involved works that are more AI composition rather than purely AI generated that required significant editing or inputs outside of just prompts. However I think the other tags should remain, especially “Prompter,” given how many works are just generations and only involve prompts.

@Heat Sink
Can you provide any reasoning for this change? At a glance, it seems utterly unnecessary, and I’m not keen on it.

Hello Everypony (and other creatures),

we, the Staff have been discussing a topic which we would like the community’s opinion on.
Since the start of Tantabus there have been three sorts of creator tags. “Prompter”, “Editor” & “Artist”
Now, there has been talks in the staff channels to combine these three creator tags into a single tag.

The staff already came up with a few suggestions like keeping “Prompter” as the single unified creator tag, but we also thought of alternatives like “Creator” or “Director”. if you have any idea or preference what this tag should be called if it is decided to continue this change, we would love to hear it.
This does not impact the “AI generated” & “AI Composition” tags. These will be functioning the same if it is decided that we go through with this change.

We would like to know your opinion on this idea, if you think this change will be a good idea or not, and to help us with ideas what to name this unified tag.

Like Felagund said a lot of posted images just doesn’t stand out in any way, and it obviously hard to find a words about something that ordinary. I think images with more creative, less usual situations or stories could get more attention and more comments.

Although it might not work for images that differs from other in negative way, like poorly generated or picturing things most people doesn’t like (extreme fetishes, etc).

A big part of art communities I’ve been in is based around sharing knowledge and critiquing. I’ve not been on tabtabus too much but 95% of the stuff that pops up in new is using a slightly modified default prompt and uploaded with little to no inpainting. There is no knowledge to learn from the people uploading that because they aren’t doing anything to make their gen different. Similarly critique is pointless since they don’t edit their gens anyway so why bother providing feedback. There are only a handful of people (truekry and siber you the real MVPs from what I’ve seen so far) that actually bother to put any effort into the things they are posting. I’m not sure there are enough competent AI users to get the ball rolling on the usual art community critique and share discussions.

@Star Streaker
FYI: I’m going to start including metadata info in my upload description. Also, you can access the metadata by cutting and pasting my images to:

Hii

That’s what I’m here for c:

Also, is fixed now!