Wiki: nude & exceptions

So the Nude wiki is pretty straight forward when it lists exceptions, things a character can be wearing but still be considered nude;

"If a girl is wearing nothing besides socks, thighhighs, gloves, or shoes.
If a girl is nude but is also wearing a coat around her shoulders."

From what I've come to understand over time, however, is that there are a lot more exceptions that aren't listed, and personally I think it would be nice if the wiki was a little more clear on some of them; if nothing else because I'm not clear on the fact or fiction of some of them myself. But here's what I have so far:

STILL NUDE
- jewelry. (post #1172193)
- leg/arm bands
- choker. (post #1451469)
- detached sleeves. (post #41686)
- detached collar/necktie/bowtie. (post #1252646)
- hat. (post #13834)
- knee/elbow pads. (post #288973)
- mask. (post #86002)
- pasties/maebari. (post #1468135)
- belt. (post #24241)
- garter belt. (post #25127)
- shoulder pads. (post #400634)
- cape/shawl. (post #2961)
- glasses/watch/headphones/etc. [accessories]

UNSURE
- painted clothes? (post #261090)
- completely open jacket/shirt? (post #113202)
- pulled up top? (post #193773, post #296103)
- pulled down bottoms? (post #1417321)
---------------------------------------------------

There are other examples, but point is all the links I provided are tagged as Nude. And all of them are "wearing" things besides thighhighs, socks, gloves, and shoes. And while some of them seem like obvious exceptions to being considered clothing such as jewelry, others aren't so obvious like hats or garters.

I'd love for the entry to be more clear I suppose. Or link to a place that tells taggers more clearly what they should and shouldn't be tagging as Nude. I already put a dent in some mis-tagged posts, mostly ones that were tagged both bottomless/topless and nude, but I guess I'm not even clear myself on a lot of posts if I'm right or not about someone being nude or not.

Nudity is by no means easy to define, and the area of nudity varies a lot between different standards. There are people who think female nipples are nude (see: US FCC, ESRB) and some would think you cannot be nude until you've taken everything off.

I think here's a good definition for Danbooru:

Nudity is when the area of the body above the knees and below the neck are mostly uncovered by clothes. The skin and the form of the body must be mostly visible.
Nudity is cancelled by wearing lingerie, or underwear.
Tattoos, body paint and jewelry might be done on a case-by-case basis.

For nude bodies clothed by aprons and other not quite clothing, there's tags like naked_ribbon, naked_apron, naked_cape and stuff. For semi-nude there's topless, bottomless and so on.

And for painted clothes there's naked_paint.

I would count tattoos, body paint, and jewelry as all nude. If it's not clothing, it doesn't count, unless it's indistinguishable from clothing, like your Cammy body paint example. Without the brush, I wouldn't be able to tell it wasn't a leotard.

For my rule of thumb, nude involves the torso. Stuff worn on the extremities doesn't count. If you've exposed the full torso, neck to thighs, back and front, then you count as nude.

Tags like naked paint, naked towel, etc. usually supplement nude because they don't involve clothes, whereas tags involving a piece of clothing like naked apron or naked shirt negate nude. (Garters are kind of a special case exception, in my mind.)

Of your borderline examples, the Cammy body paint pic is the only borderline one I see; Reimu pulling down her pantyhose is nude, and the rest are not.

BCI_Temp said:

For my rule of thumb, nude involves the torso. Stuff worn on the extremities doesn't count. If you've exposed the full torso, neck to thighs, back and front, then you count as nude.

Just as a related question on that subject, would you also use that definition for Topless? If not and they can be Nude while wearing something that counts as a top, could such a character be Nude and Bottomless in such a situation, despite the Bottomless wiki saying they shouldn't be used together?

Topless and bottomless are subsets of nude and shouldn't ever be used with it on the same character.

"If not and they can be Nude while wearing something that counts as a top..."

You can't be nude and wearing a top, because a top (at least partially) covers the torso. That's why I said naked apron and naked shirt negate nude. After all, they prevent you from having "exposed the full torso, neck to thighs, back and front."

What my question was more meant to mean was this; Does the rule saying extremities don't count extend to topless and bottomless? I used the word top when referring to things such as detached sleeves and long gloves only because they're on the upper half of the body, my bad. IE; if a character is wearing jeans and their torso is bare, but their arms are fully covered to the shoulders, are they still topless?

I could always assume things that don't count in one case don't count in the other, but it doesn't quite feel the same to me; Almost like topless should mean torso and arms bare; Just like I personally dislike characters with thigh highs being included in bottomless.

Another note, what counts as covered for the torso then? I assume shirts and bikinis pulled above the breasts interrupt this imaginary line drawn down to check if the torso is bare or not, but what about some of the other upper body things like neckties, sashes, belts, shoulder-pads, or detached collars; Are those exceptions like garters since they're not designed to cover, or is the rule more absolute and garter belts are exceptions unto themselves for no particular reason?

I realize technically none of his is in the official wiki definition yet, but of course I'm asking with something people can agree on in mind, and I like the basic expansion of the definition so far (the neck to crotch thing)

Saduharta said:
if a character is wearing jeans and their torso is bare, but their arms are fully covered to the shoulders, are they still topless?

Yes

Saduharta said:
ther upper body things like neckties, sashes, belts, shoulder-pads, or detached collars;

those all go with nude

BCI_Temp said:

I would count tattoos, body paint, and jewelry as all nude. If it's not clothing, it doesn't count, unless it's indistinguishable from clothing, like your Cammy body paint example. Without the brush, I wouldn't be able to tell it wasn't a leotard.

For my rule of thumb, nude involves the torso. Stuff worn on the extremities doesn't count. If you've exposed the full torso, neck to thighs, back and front, then you count as nude.

Tags like naked paint, naked towel, etc. usually supplement nude because they don't involve clothes, whereas tags involving a piece of clothing like naked apron or naked shirt negate nude. (Garters are kind of a special case exception, in my mind.)

Of your borderline examples, the Cammy body paint pic is the only borderline one I see; Reimu pulling down her pantyhose is nude, and the rest are not.

BCI_Temp said:
naked towel, etc. usually supplement nude because they don't involve clothes, whereas tags involving a piece of clothing like naked apron or naked shirt negate nude. (Garters are kind of a special case exception, in my mind.)

naked_towel (a towel wrapped around the torso) is not tagged nude. If they are just using a towel to cover themselves (not wrapped or "worn"), use nude_cover and covering_* instead.

There are cases in which you are not sure if the clothes are actually "worn" (panty_pull, off_shoulder, and in that case you may want to tag both bottomless/topless in combination with nude.

post #1406528, post #1192976
post #571371

I thought about the torso-only rule (also mentioned by BCI Temp), studied tag_group:nudity and now I don't think it is truly sufficient.

Here's a more comprehensive approach we can use, and I think it is more true to the way things are done here.

First, we have absolute nudity:
nude should be for full-body nudity. No clothes, except for some body marks or minimal jewelry. If you can see 98% skin and head, it's nude.

Then we have existing tags for near-nudity which may not negate nudity:
naked_paint, pasties, maebari

Then we have existing tags that do:
naked_apron covering only front
naked_shirt covering only back
naked_cape covering only neck and back
naked_scarf covering only neck and a bit more
topless covering only breasts
bottomless covering only waist and crotch
tag_group:nudity for the full list and definitions

And some new naked_* ones that we should have:
naked_gloves for nothing except gloves or gauntlets
naked_footwear for nothing except shoes, sandals
naked_legwear for nothing except stockings, garters and stuff.
naked_hat for nothing except large hats
naked_jewelry for nothing except bling
naked_gadgets for nothing except non-cloting equipment
naked_mask for a nothing except a mask

Here's a citation from the topless wiki page:

A lack of clothing on the torso of a male or female humanoid. Should not be used together with the nude tag, as nude would mean completely unclothed.

I think we're going to need a few new tags. Also, kudos to Saduharta for bringing this up. The current definition for nude was put up long before we had a comprehensive tag group for nudity stuff, and probably long before female users were known.

There's also naked_sleeves.

lady_garegga said:
Here's a more comprehensive approach we can use, and I think it is more true to the way things are done here.

BCI Temp explained quite well how it is currently handled. What you are proposing is a radical change that would require thousands of tag edits.

naked_shirt covering only back

naked_shirt does not require the shirt to be open. The shirt can cover both the front and back of the torso.

And some new naked_* ones that we should have:

I think that if you can search for nude + *, a naked_* tag is useless and should not exist. This goes especially for naked_sleeves.
naked_chocolate and naked_paint being the exception. They may share the same naming scheme, but unlike the other tags, they are not about wearing a single piece of garment.

lady_garegga said:

First, we have absolute nudity:
nude should be for full-body nudity. No clothes, except for some body marks or minimal jewelry. If you can see 98% skin and head, it's nude.

There's also the separate completely_nude tag proposed for this purpose in topic #8936.

S1eth said:

I think that if you can search for nude + *, a naked_* tag is useless and should not exist.

This also brings up pictures with multiple characters where one is nude and the other has *.

Schrobby said:
This also brings up pictures with multiple characters where one is nude and the other has *.

You can make this argument for every tag in existence. It's a really bad one.

Toks said:

There's also the separate completely_nude tag proposed for this purpose in topic #8936.

Yeah, I found that thread while searching to see what has been discussed on the Nude tag; But that was never implemented of course, and is sitting at 7 months since any activity. So not sure that tag is going anywhere.

@S1eth; Good to know those clothing items also work with nude, in addition to the clothing items mentioned in the wiki. That was the sort of thing I thought would be good to know.

slightly renamed the thread because it was bugging me.

Saduharta said:

What my question was more meant to mean was this; Does the rule saying extremities don't count extend to topless and bottomless? I used the word top when referring to things such as detached sleeves and long gloves only because they're on the upper half of the body, my bad. IE; if a character is wearing jeans and their torso is bare, but their arms are fully covered to the shoulders, are they still topless?

Yes. Bottomless is essentially no pants + no panties. Legwear doesn't count. "Topless" is more about what would be considered a "top" in clothing, with "bottomless" as a parallel. You don't consider elbow gloves or detached sleeves a "top" since it doesn't cover what's important.

I wouldn't mind a completely nude tag or parallel completely topless and completely bottomless tags, but I not volunteering to tag and populate them. :-) I've got my hands full with applying the news tanline tags.

Another note, what counts as covered for the torso then? I assume shirts and bikinis pulled above the breasts interrupt this imaginary line drawn down to check if the torso is bare or not, but what about some of the other upper body things like neckties, sashes, belts, shoulder-pads, or detached collars; Are those exceptions like garters since they're not designed to cover, or is the rule more absolute and garter belts are exceptions unto themselves for no particular reason?

In general, accessories don't count, unless they block a good portion the torso (and thus substitute for more traditional top or bottom wear). A detached collar is nude/topless compatible. So is a necktie. Sashes and belts depend on how they are used. Ask yourself, "Does it make more sense to count this as nude, or does it limit the picture to topless *or* bottomless?" The latter two tags should almost never be used together for the same character.

lady_garegga said:
I think we're going to need a few new tags.

If you haven't done a major retagging effort, I think you drastically underestimate the amount of effort your proposed tag changes would take. You are proposing months of work to little benefit beyond the existing tag schema. You also have to consider "tagging inertia" in the userbase when changing definitions under people. It takes users (especially those not regularly on the forums) a while to learn to use a tag differently.

Mkay.

Anyways, for now, it seems like the wiki entry might become something like this;

nude
The state of not wearing any garments.

Exceptions are made for the following:

- Articles designed to accessorize rather than cover. This includes socks, thighhighs, boots, shoes, gloves, hats, belts, ties, ribbons, collars, jewelry, sashes, shoulder pads, and other such items.

- Clothing that is on a character's person, but isn't being worn. IE; If their clothing is pulled off/aside to such an extent that it is no longer being used to cover the body.

- A character "wearing" paint or chocolate or other such substances. Since these do not actually cover the body and aren't really worn, the character in question is still nude.

- Non-garment items being used to cover the body means a character is NOT nude. Instead, those characters should be tagged with "naked_x" where x is the item being used. Naked_Towel would be used for a character using a towel to cover their body, for instance.
------------

And then the current part about monster girls with a mix of human and inhuman parts. I could be missing something, but that at least seems somewhat comprehensive for what's been discussed.

Saduharta said:

Exceptions are made for the following:
[...]
- Clothing that is on a character's person, but isn't being worn. IE; If their clothing is pulled off/aside to such an extent that it is no longer being used to cover the body.

Don't make an exception for that. Bra lift and bikini lift are not yet topless. They're still "wearing" a top. They just aren't wearing it properly. Same for skirt lift and bottomless.

BCI_Temp said:

Don't make an exception for that. Bra lift and bikini lift are not yet topless. They're still "wearing" a top. They just aren't wearing it properly. Same for skirt lift and bottomless.

S1eth is a higher level user than you, and he's the one who made the exception, so I'll stick with him on that for now. Perhaps it could use a rewording though.

S1eth said:

There are cases in which you are not sure if the clothes are actually "worn" (panty_pull, off_shoulder, and in that case you may want to tag both bottomless/topless in combination with nude.