Aliasing >30_second_webm → long_playtime
Link to alias

Reason:

Noticed that someone were adding >30_second_webm to many videos. I still think it might be good thing to have, because there aren't any metatags for lenght of video, loop and filesize doesn't cover all the cases.

Then it's also bit inconsistant compared to every other tag. There also are things like hi_res and huge_filesize where both values are stated in the wiki instead. To me playtime sounds the best word for this and shouldn't be accidently mistaken for anything else, e.g. long_length could be mistaken for many things.

Another is the webm part, as there are tons of flashes and gifs which also fit well on that over 30 second marks, I there being at least couple gifs which are several minutes long. All the older content which are longer are most definitely going to be in flash format.

Definitely. Not only is it awkward to type, but as you pointed out, it makes no sense to restrict it to only webm.

I had been thinking of suggesting an alias for <30_second_webm -> short_animation, but I guess playtime would work as well.

Something like long_playtime sounds much more desirable than >30_second_webm but wouldn't it be a little weird having a 29 second video tagged as short_animation and a 31 second video tagged as long_playtime?

Genjar said:
I had been thinking of suggesting an alias for <30_second_webm -> short_animation, but I guess playtime would work as well.

Oh, didn't see that one.

But if there is already long_playtime, then simply using -long_playtime in search works exactly the same, there isn't need for short tag then. It would only make it pain to keep up when ALL of the stuff under animated would require it, meaning many may not use them when posting short stuff and majority of animations are short. And like said, there's loop tag if you need to search for short looped stuff specifically.

Tuvalu said:
Something like long_playtime sounds much more desirable than >30_second_webm but wouldn't it be a little weird having a 29 second video tagged as short_animation and a 31 second video tagged as long_playtime?

That's another reason it would be nicer to scrap the tag for short ones and have long ones general tag, which value can be changed in future if necessary without changing the tag itself.

Related thread: forum #157341

Would it be too much to have short_playtime, medium_playtime and long_playtime?

DragonFox69 said:
Related thread: forum #157341

Just to clarify, loop, means content that is a loop and looped properly, not for animation that has start and finish and then loops. This is because the default behaviour of all formats here are done so that they loop, even if the content wasn't a loop. If looping is disabled, gifs would require page refresh to see animation again, webms would require site code change and flash would require creator to code navigation or other interacivity.

Most loops are short, so like I stated earlier that's one way to narrow down search but not enough. Long_animation could also easily work, would maybe even be better as playtime might be term non-english speakers may not know.

But still againts tagging the short versions because of earlier said reasons, no need if there's long variant which can be excluded from search results instead and nobody would bother tagging short ones as majority of animations are the short ones. There's no "low_framerate" or "low_filesize" either and I'm still trying to figure out why no_sound is a tag when there's tag for sound already.

Chessax said:
Would it be too much to have short_playtime, medium_playtime and long_playtime?

That would be even worse than having just long and short. There's no tag for medium resolution either, only low, hi, absurd and superabsurd, because it would mean that all and every post would require to have one of the tags at all times again.

Mario69 said:
That would be even worse than having just long and short. There's no tag for medium resolution either, only low, hi, absurd and superabsurd, because it would mean that all and every post would require to have one of the tags at all times again.

Agree partially, just figured I'd throw it out there.

However, one reason why you would sometimes want all posts to have a tag is that it makes tagging projects super easy, i.e. animated -short_playtime -medium_playtime -long_playtime or type:webm -no_sound -sound But it's probably a minor point.

The thing about the resolution tags in particular is that they can be searched using metatags, while other things can't, making all of them pretty much pointless as tags and only function as shortcuts (except for awareness purposes), but I catch your drift.

I'm am the person who started the *30_second_webm tags, and here's my input: The long, medium, and short are way too subjective, and people would fight endlessly over it. Also, webms have the built in timer to accurately get the length of a post. Adding a length tag to flashes and gifs would take way too long, since they would have to be manually timed. I would recommend keeping the original tag for webms, and maybe using another tag for flashes and gifs. Of course this is the site's s and s to decide, but this is why my reasoning.

Personally, I don't like the "30 seconds" here. If I wanted to search for longer videos, then I would mostly like to filter out videos that are shorter than 5 or 10 seconds. But it's different with each person. Some people would like it 15s. Maybe 20s. Maybe a minute. You can't really match tastes with such a blunt number that is 30 seconds. Of course it should be absolute, and not relative like "short", "medium" and "long", as those are totally subjective and useless names for a duration. Also, if there should be such a tag as video length, then it should be animation length, and not just video length. Because there's plenty of flash containers that include only a video.

So if we're really going to go into "length", then there should be the following requirements:

• It should be possible to specify any duration
• It should be applicable to any sort of animation
• It should also be applicable to interactive animations (It's actually pretty easy to decompile a flash file, open it and add up the individual animation times)

The only way I see this could be solvable would be with a new post statistic. As you know, each post has several statistics. Post time, poster, rating, score, id, size etc. The solution would be to add a new statistic called "Animation Length", that can be edited.

And then s could search using this statistic through search strings like "length:>30" or "length:<10"

Btw, this statistic could be automatically populated for all video files simply by reading file headers.

FurryMcFuzzball said:
I'm am the person who started the *30_second_webm tags, and here's my input: The long, medium, and short are way too subjective, and people would fight endlessly over it. Also, webms have the built in timer to accurately get the length of a post. Adding a length tag to flashes and gifs would take way too long, since they would have to be manually timed. I would recommend keeping the original tag for webms, and maybe using another tag for flashes and gifs. Of course this is the site's s and s to decide, but this is why my reasoning.

I do thank for starting the tag as it is really useful for finding stuff. I still feel like over 30 seconds tag is all that is needed, after all you can just search stuff under 30 seconds by excluding the tag in search and it does compensate with loop tag well.

All the other tags that are based around objective values are stated on wiki. The huge_filesize and hi_res aren't called >30MB and >=1600x1200. This way the tag is A) easier to write B) easier to /guess C) not tied to specific values and filetypes as they can be changed on wiki if necessary.

Even if it's harder to determine length of flash and gif files, doesn't mean that it's not useful with them. You can easily state the filetype you want to search with filetype metatag, again, there's not seperate tags for flash and webm for sound, so it doesn't make much sense to have filetype specific length tag either. Actually because it's not immidiately visible, tag would be immensily more useful with gif and flash files!

You actually do not need stopwatch with majority of gifs and video formatted flash files. Opening with compatible programs usually tells the runtime immidiately. That's how I calculated this gif.

Delian said:
And then s could search using this statistic through search strings like "length:>30" or "length:<10"

At this point it becomes site feature request instead of one specific tag discussion. Also metatags work automatically(?) which means manual input on gifs/flash is required.

Well, the length of a gif can also be automatically extracted from the file. Since gif is made out of frames, and each frame has a "Delay" property. You add up these delays and you get a total running time.

So if anything, manual input would only be needed for flash files. But then, I'm pretty sure some tools exist which can extract lengths of flash files as well.

So the way I see it, stuff could be automated without any tagging needed.

WELL!!

There was a length:XY feature in the search box, but it got removed.

Delian said:
Well, the length of a gif can also be automatically extracted from the file. Since gif is made out of frames, and each frame has a "Delay" property. You add up these delays and you get a total running time.

Indeed. Here's a oneliner that does it using gifsicle :

((gifsicle --info < "$FILENAME" |grep delay|grep -Eo '[.0-9]+'|tr \\n +);echo 0) | bc

So if anything, manual input would only be needed for flash files. But then, I'm pretty sure some tools exist which can extract lengths of flash files as well.

This would only apply to certain flash files (non-interactive ones, basically. It might not even apply to looping non-interactive ones).
The length of interactive ones is by definition undefined.

I waited 2 months after talking to parasprite when they mentioned adding a metatag feature for length instead of doing it manually. Who knows if or when the metatag will be added.

@Delian 30 seconds is my happy medium between a minute and 5 seconds, since something with an absolute value could never appeal to every use for the tag. I llooked at ~100 random webms, and most of them below 30 seconds were something i'd expect to see from a 5-15 second webm, and most of them above 30 seconds were generally what i would expect from a webm over 1-2 minutes.

FurryMcFuzzball said:
I waited 2 months after talking to parasprite when they mentioned adding a metatag feature for length instead of doing it manually. Who knows if or when the metatag will be added.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that.

I'll take a peek at that now.

Edit: Found a simple way to do it. I'll see what I can do.

parasprite said:
Oh yeah, I forgot about that.

I'll take a peek at that now.

Edit: Found a simple way to do it. I'll see what I can do.

Does this simple way count all gif, flash and webm files? :3

parasprite said:
Oh yeah, I forgot about that.

I'll take a peek at that now.

Edit: Found a simple way to do it. I'll see what I can do.

lol you "forgot" about it. 10/10 quality trolling right here, no sarcasm.

乁( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)ㄏ

<KiraNoot> There will finally be a "duration" metatag.
<KiraNoot> Spoilers: It doesn't work on GIFs.

So what this essentially means, that WebM files will have duration data available at some point, making >30_second_webm obsolete.

But only WebM at start, most likely never for flash. What this means there's no tags of any sort for Flash and GIF files, which then means that manual tag is needed for those two filetypes at least at the beginning.

And then with that we come back around to this: just alias the tag to cover all filetypes and not just WebM. Then state the duration in wiki so it can be adjusted if needed and if 30 seconds doesn't sound fine.