gallery Organization

[jd callow]

Good Day all,
I'm still on my agenda to build this site to meet your needs. Today’s request for feedback is on how to organize the gallery portion of the site.

Currently we have:
Standard
Critique Gallery
Technical
Experimental.

We could go with subject:
nature (rocks and trees)
documentation (street, event, etc)
Portrait (gallery of heads)
figure (the voyeurs home)
still life (dead flowers)
abstract (is that Jesus in my ham sandwich?)
other (I refuse to be pigeonholed)

or we could leave it alone or possibly you, the membership, have an opinion.


One item I am pretty sure about is that the critique gallery is going to be handled differently.

I am proposing we make critiques threads. The user will post what it is they were striving for, post the image in the thread and ask for a critique. This way the viewer will know what the poster was after and can intelligently respond.


Your thoughts are requested.


jdc

[Katharine Thayer]

Good Day all,
I'm still on my agenda to build this site to meet your needs. Today’s request for feedback is on how to organize the gallery portion of the site.

Currently we have:
Standard
Critique Gallery
Technical
Experimental.

We could go with subject:
nature (rocks and trees)
documentation (street, event, etc)
Portrait (gallery of heads)
figure (the voyeurs home)
still life (dead flowers)
abstract (is that Jesus in my ham sandwich?)
other (I refuse to be pigeonholed)

or we could leave it alone or possibly you, the membership, have an opinion.


One item I am pretty sure about is that the critique gallery is going to be handled differently.

I am proposing we make critiques threads. The user will post what it is they were striving for, post the image in the thread and ask for a critique. This way the viewer will know what the poster was after and can intelligently respond.

Your thoughts are requested.


jdc

Hi,
I've just discovered this section of the forums in the last couple of days, since I bookmarked the digital negative section when I first came to hybrid a couple of months ago and that's the only place I've ever been, until a couple of days ago.

Anyway, I started looking in the gallery this morning, and then came looking for a place to register a suggestion about the gallery organization, and here it is.

I don't see any purpose in organizing the galleries according to subjects, but I think as long as we're planning to have more of an alternative process forum here, I'd like to suggest a separate gallery for alternative process prints. I have no interest in looking at inkjet prints, and found it frustrating to page through inkjet prints looking for alternative process prints. Or maybe have a sort feature as in the APUG galleries so one could sort by alternative process. Just a thought.
Katharine Thayer

[df cardwell]

Could there be a 'sort by process' function ?

Simple categories might be best: Ambrotype, Calotype, Woodburytype ?

Although folks claiming to be doing Woodburys would be required to buy beer for the rest of us !

[David A. Goldfarb]

APUG has a gallery search function, so you can search on process type or film size or lens type or subject matter, etc., as long as the users post the information somewhere in the image description. I'm sure that could be easily implemented here, and the upload form could be updated to solicit more detailed process information, so that people are more likely to provide it.

[MAGNAchrom]

We could go with subject:
nature (rocks and trees)
documentation (street, event, etc)
Portrait (gallery of heads)
figure (the voyeurs home)
still life (dead flowers)
abstract (is that Jesus in my ham sandwich?)
other (I refuse to be pigeonholed)

In keeping with the "we don't care how it was done" gestalt, I think organizing it by subject makes great sense. In fact, I've been arguing for years that photo competitions should stop categorizing awards into B&W vs. Color vs. Digital and simply offer awards per subject category regardless of HOW the image was done. One shouldn't care that a great portrait is film or digital or b&w or color or polaroid-transfer or hand-tinted -- it still is a great portrait.

Cheers,

[Baxter Bradford]

Hmmmm - I was unaware of the 'alternative' view that this is becoming 'their' forum.

A search facility would be beneficial for photographers fitted with Blinkers. Personally I like to be inspired from those working in all of the different hybrid domains.

Thus the proposed subject matter categories are fine with me.

Of to Cornwall to actually do some photography instead of talking about it - how alternative is that?

[jd callow]

Thanks Baxter. Have big fun and get some great shots.

[BillSchwab]

Personally I am more interested in catagorizing by process rather than subject. However, if subject becomes the way, I vote for a "landscape" cat. I've always thought of "nature" as wildlife photography... bugs... that sort of thing.

Bill

[Don Bryant]

Personally I am more interested in catagorizing by process rather than subject. However, if subject becomes the way, I vote for a "landscape" cat. I've always thought of "nature" as wildlife photography... bugs... that sort of thing.

Bill

Thank you for saying that Bill, I too have never considered landscape as nature or wildlife photography.

Don Bryant

[jd callow]

if we go with photo's by subject I think I need a more informed listing.

The same would be true with process.

Another approach might be intent. As in experimentation, political, romantic, iconic, ironic.

Thanks boatlaods

jdc