If I find myself forced to describe a character, I'll make a sticky note and up on the wall it goes. That rarely happens though.
I personally don't use character description in my stories. I want the reader to be able to make the characters look like and sound like whatever they want. It makes the characters more relateable I think. If most books didn't describe characters I think casting for movies and t.v. shows would be easier and no fans of the book would have a right to disappointed. Also an author can avoid accusations of stereo-typing.
_____Complex, you're actually agreeing with me even if you didn't intend to do so. What I meant to say was, an outline is a detailed plan for a novel. (I'm tempted to say something like short stories are for short attention spans, but that'd probably cheese some people off. So, I won't say it--especially 'cause short stories are the way to go to win writing contests.) Likewise, blueprints for building...uh, buildings are detailed plans. Can we agree on that? In the words of the late Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?" _____Now, about why the heck a person would go into extreme detail about characters, here's why. Good stories are good lies. Realistic lies (like good stories) are detailed just enough to be believable. Detailed lies are good (so long as the details are kept straight.) Detailed stuff is realistic. If A equals B and B equals C, then A equals C... With me so far? Good. Consider the example of Star Trek. The makers of Star Trek movies and shows have whole freakin' technical manuals and encyclopedias. Rumor has it that there are even blueprints for some of the fictitious ships. When a movie, a show, a novel is so authentic that you're seeing the correct specs and capabilities of the same Romulan blasters, then you just know it's real enough a world to be immersed in. This is someone who hates Star Trek, by the way! _____Another thing, characters so vague that a writer doesn't have to keep notes on hand, they're probably so stock and unoriginal that they're probably not worth remembering. How many times have any of y'all out there read a Jim Butcher or Mercedes Lackey high fantasy novel and forgotten about what some characters do or what kind of being they are? Maybe the only memorable dude from Butcher's high fantasy stuff would be Tavi--the "badass normal" who can't use magic. The other characters are just generic bowls of oatmeal to be found in anything else written by J.R.R. Tolkien, George R.R. Martin, F.M. Busby, C.J. Cherryh, or anybody else who's a raging fanatic about making people remember initials instead of names. (What the Hell. Most published writers hide behind pen-names for marketing purposes anyway.)
I don't have to describe my character's physical features to the reader in order for them to be memorable. I do that with characterization - how they think, act, speak, etc.
Be aware that the primary reason Star Trek and other shows and movies do this sort of thing is that this information has to be shared among many people on the creative team over a long period of time. The writer of this week's episode is not the same person as the writer of an episode from last season, and the same goes for directors, costume designers, set decorators, etc. The only hope for any consistency at all is a set of tech manuals and other info accessible to the whole team. This is the exact opposite of my experience. A unique and well-defined character, to me, is a character so clear in my mind that needing notes to remember their hair color or height or tattoos is simply ridiculous. It's like needing notes to remember what your kids look like. Stock, unoriginal characters would be the ones who require notes (I think - I try to avoid those characters in my own work) just so the writer can keep them from blurring together in his own mind. "Which of my stock, unoriginal characters is left-handed, again? Better check my notes." I don't need notes on my characters. They're clear in every detail to me.
Another thought: I like sketching my characters, writing about them, and writing about the worlds that they invade. I do this to get something in writing and to help me brainstorm story ideas. Depending on your genre, you might include "character sheets" or illustrations in your stories, rather than describing them in the story.
As a writer, I've always given detailed description... its served me as a double-edged sword. Too much of anything is a bad thing, therefore it is faire to say, "too much description is bad as well." From a reader's stand point, it gets boring because I can't remember every detail. It all depends on how well you infuse the info. I've read it written out in a short paragraph and thats fine, it actually works well because my mind is in that mode of visualizing the character. I've also seen it infused slowly and it works, it just frustrates me personally not having an image of this character. So idf you take the slower rout get whatever you have to say in the first couple pages of introduction. When I say I can't remember every detail, I mean that it is probably for the best not to even mention details like height or eye color unless it is significant. If your character is taller than everyone, say it once, then show it through him having to look down all of the time. If he is shorter, maybe he grumbles alot that no one ever really notices him. As for eyes, unless they are imporotant [say for a characters identity or its the only differing facter between him or her and his or her twin] otherwise the standard will work. So if you have a farmer, mention maybe dark sun-baked skin, matted hair under a straw hat they always wear, dusty clothes, and brown boots. if the characer is specifically a name and a face, then a one line visual like "blonde hair, blue eyes, and a dazzling smile" will work or "Mike walked up picking at is afro with a comb" [no need to say mike is black, its implied since he's picking his fro lol]
