Over-Kneehighs and Zettai Ryouiki

@dimsun: Oh... Thanks!

2013-12-09T11:51:01-05:00

Oh... Thanks!

@Toks: > dimsun said: > > Sorry about the delay. > >...

2013-12-01T19:18:57-05:00

dimsun said:

Sorry about the delay.

As informative as these posts are, I don't think they help answer my question about zettai ryouiki...
My question was if over-kneehighs and a skirt could qualify for zettai ryouiki even though the wiki said it applies to the exposed area between the "skirt and thighhighs."

Yes. According to Pixpedia, zettai ryouiki is the space between "a miniskirt and over-knee-high socks, thigh-high socks, or similar". The socks just need to be somewhere above the knees.

@dimsun: Sorry about the delay. As informative as these...

2013-12-01T18:28:02-05:00

Sorry about the delay.

As informative as these posts are, I don't think they help answer my question about zettai ryouiki...
My question was if over-kneehighs and a skirt could qualify for zettai ryouiki even though the wiki said it applies to the exposed area between the "skirt and thighhighs."

@BCI_Temp: Actually, I like ghostrigger's post because...

2013-09-28T13:12:28-04:00

Actually, I like ghostrigger's post because it's a good guide for what I'm saying: Where is the line between F & G where over-kneehighs stop and normal thighhighs start? NWF_Renim suggests 1/4 and 1/2, but that's a lot of fuzzy ground between. It gets kind of nitpicky and subjective.

Here's some solo images tagged with both over-kneehighs and thighhighs that lie between F & G. Which ones are over-kneehighs and which ones are thighhighs?

post #28983, post #28984, & post #28985
post #734889
post #760645
post #806290
post #863075
post #918467 (Over-kneehighs or just pulled down thighhighs?)
post #1137444
post #1211441
post #1211842
post #1212091
post #1358423 (What counts as the top on these?)
post #1439929
post #1488099
post #1510485

It doesn't help when some artists draw girls with short or long thighs.

And speaking of art quality complicating matters, just where *are* the knees on post #823001, post #1051110, post #1187393, and post #1447635?

I will say this: I'm no longer in favor of nuking the tag, but we definitely need some sort of hard guideline for it (and some major cleanup of the kneehighs tag). That would help answer the original poster's question about zettai ryouiki.

@ghostrigger: maybe for reference post #342378

2013-09-27T01:44:35-04:00

maybe for reference post #342378

@NWF_Renim: Can you not see the knee on the person to judge...

2013-09-27T01:04:45-04:00

Can you not see the knee on the person to judge length? There is a clear difference in length between over-kneehighs (post #765729) and thighhighs (post #1513126, better yet post #1510660). You can judge the length going from the knee, there is a significant difference between lengths, it is not "Too subjective."

Kneehighs (post #1510172) is under the knee as it reads "up to the knee," it has been for awhile. If it is literally on the knee or just above it is going to be over-kneehighs. There is no "how far up the knee," as soon it as covers the knee it becomes over-knee highs.

In short, kneehighs stop under the knee and does not go over the knee. Over-knee highs cover the knee and just above it.

If you're going to pull stuff like this, than you better understand that the tagging definition of "kneehighs" covers a length below the knee. "Thighhighs" covers the lengths above the knee and it has been that way for awhile (just like kneehigh length). "On the knee" itself was never used before, so trying to use that as an argument is pointless. Neither length was split right on the knee and even then if you want to go into it, just covering the knee then by rights it would more likely to fall under "thighhighs" given that "kneehighs" is defined below the knee, so even going on to the knee would make it more like thighhighs in length definition than kneehighs in definition to begin with.

"Thighhighs" is also an actual length though for stockings and socks that goes all the way up to around the mid-thigh, a visually longer distance than "over-kneehighs" lengths that end just above the knee, unlike thighhighs. As the "thighhighs" length for tagging purposes is for all lengths above the knee, over-kneehighs could easily be categorized under the thighhighs tag, but as a length of socks and stockings it is also an independent length far shorter than true thighhigh length and thus a legitimate taggable concept on its own (ie something that could have its own tag, and not one that should be nuked).

If you want a description of the length then covering the thigh from the knee a "over-kneehigh" length visually covers likely only at most up to around 1/4th of the thigh. A "thighhigh" length should cover around 1/2 or more of the thigh. If you'd like a visual example then over-kneehigh length (post #911326, post #888074) versus thighhigh length (post #1510800, post #1513076, post #1509135).

@BCI_Temp: The problem is where is the dividing line...

2013-09-27T00:55:13-04:00

The problem is where is the dividing line between "just over" the knee and "on the thigh?" Where does the knee end and the thigh start? (post #1434404 is about where I would put that line myself, but if it straddles the line, is it more one or the other?)

What about legwear that stops on the knee? Are those kneesocks or over-kneesocks? How far up the knee do you have to go to be over it?

Too subjective.

@NWF_Renim: Except if they end just above the knee that is...

2013-09-27T00:50:29-04:00

Except if they end just above the knee that is also an obvious visual division point since true thighhighs end up on the thigh and not just barely above the knee. It doesn't muddle anything. There are those that very clearly are not thighhighs in length (post #1434404), so it is a perfectly legitimate division. There was even an old post somewhere that showed different lengths with a level just above the knee called "over-knee highs" that was just below the length that is designated "thighhighs."

It was never decided in the forums in the end if they should be out right independent or a subtype of thighhighs, thus its current state. Given that thighhighs can cover anything above the knee it can be a subtype, but it is not something worthless as you think it is since it does have a clear visual difference from normal length thighhighs.

@BCI_Temp: Why do we even have an over-kneehighs tag? ...

2013-09-27T00:32:13-04:00

Why do we even have an over-kneehighs tag? It's just takes the nice, easy division point between kneehighs and thighhighs (i.e. the knee) and adds a muddled, subjective middle category.

As far as I'm concerned, these are just thighhighs and fall into acceptable usages with zettai ryouiki. The Wiki page itself suggests that over-kneehighs should implicate thighhighs but doesn't really explain when you wouldn't or why it should just be an alias.

@dimsun: Not sure if this has been asked before, but can...

2013-09-20T22:21:47-04:00

Not sure if this has been asked before, but can over-kneehighs qualify for zettai ryouiki? I've read the wiki and it said "skirt and thighhighs," but I think it could be extended to over-kneehighs.