The bulk update request #2380 is pending approval.

create implication lens_flare_abuse -> lens_flare

Reason: Subset.

I'm not really a fan of this tag. Abuse is a subjective term and I see a lot of cases where people are confusing normal amounts of bokeh with lens flares and calling it lens flare abuse.

evazion said:

I'm not really a fan of this tag. Abuse is a subjective term and I see a lot of cases where people are confusing normal amounts of bokeh with lens flares and calling it lens flare abuse.

There's not many of those (far fewer than it looks like from the thumbnails), and looking through some posts it seems most of those stem from a single user.

And I don't think "abuse" is subjective in this case - it basically refers to lens flare in places or amounts that wouldn't be possible in an actual picture.

I still don't see why lens_flare_abuse gets to remain as a tag while chromatic_aberration_abuse was turned into a pool. Subjective or not, they're both examples of visual effects being turned up past the point of realism. It's the same concept in both cases, so treating one differently from the other makes zero sense.

iridescent_slime said:

I still don't see why lens_flare_abuse gets to remain as a tag while chromatic_aberration_abuse was turned into a pool. Subjective or not, they're both examples of visual effects being turned up past the point of realism. It's the same concept in both cases, so treating one differently from the other makes zero sense.

Because Chromatic Aberration Abuse is, as the description states, about when chromatic aberration is used to the point that it is "straining and painful on the eyes", which is inherently subjective. The equivalent definition to the one I gave for lens_flare_abuse cannot be applied to chromatic aberration abuse as with a sufficiently bad lens you can get levels of chromatic aberration beyond anything on the site - potentially up to the entire contents of the image being totally obscured by the aberration. The location and quantity of lens flare on an image, on the other hand, is dependent on the location of light sources, and thus it's perfectly possible (and not particularly uncommon) for a drawn image to have lens flare that you can categorically state would not happen in a real photo - post #2865546, post #2515452 and post #735796 are some examples.

Thus chromatic aberration abuse is and can only ever be subjective, whereas lens flare abuse can be entirely objective.

(ed: Better explanation already posted. Not sure why I can't delete.)