Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Can we have some new categories ... Please...

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

50% OFF new PortraitPro 12, plus EXTRA 5% OFF code EPHZROS414.
Diana
Diana  72011 forum posts Netherlands19 Constructive Critique Points
18 Aug 2009 - 4:30 PM

yeah well you wont get it even if you ask !

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
18 Aug 2009 - 4:30 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Nick_w
Nick_w e2 Member 63723 forum postsNick_w vcard England98 Constructive Critique Points
18 Aug 2009 - 5:45 PM


Quote: May I suggest someone starts a group. Then anyone who decides to join in uploads their shot with strobism as a tag, and after uploading the shot they could add a variation (selecting technique) showing the lighting set up. Bingo...the same result.

I must confess I didn't know there was an area to create groups - the problem with this is it will be construed by some as another name for click buddies Wink

But joking aside I do think it could work if its used in the right way, to educate on a particular facite of photography.

Just to give an idea how popular some of the sections are on another site that uses groups.

There are 58361 members of the Strobist group
65515 in Night Photography.

To put that in context the Black and White "Niche" group has 118555 members, and before anyone says I'm putting down Black and White, have a look at my PF and you will see that is far from the case. All I'm pointing out is for groups to be 1/2 the size of B&W there is considerable interest out there.

There is a strong interest in remote flash, all the magazines have run articles on it in recent months - similarly with night photography. Its just they get little interest in general on here so they gravitate elsewhere which is a shame. Look at the work of IRaddict and John Patrick (newfocus) for an example of excellent understanding of night time photography - its not just a technique, but is a subject in its own right - in Johns case showing an excellent grasp of the night sky.

Diana
Diana  72011 forum posts Netherlands19 Constructive Critique Points
18 Aug 2009 - 5:55 PM


Quote: for an example of excellent understanding of night time photography - its not just a technique, but is a subject in its own right

thank you Smile

Last Modified By Diana at 18 Aug 2009 - 5:55 PM
ketch
ketch e2 Member 6770 forum postsketch vcard Turks and Caicos Islands50 Constructive Critique Points
18 Aug 2009 - 8:33 PM


Quote: ...street photography gets a category because it is a genre whereas night photography is a technique.

Well ok buddy, but how about maritime and seascapes - not a technique but a genre - and in actual fact I recon night photography is a genre too and no way classifiable as a technique.

Now I am delighted that street photography has its own category but I have to say to have it ahead of nightime and maritime et al is completely and utterly barking. I strongly suspect all last months decission does (to endow street with its own category) is recognise the interests of a particularly influential 'lobby' group - well now we have a campaign to get the 23 categories bumped up to 25.

Cheers

Robert

PS: BTW - if we have Street photography how about Road photography and Motorway photography and Avenue photography and maybe even Cul De Sac photography - Cole?

Last Modified By ketch at 18 Aug 2009 - 8:34 PM
JJGEE
JJGEE  96106 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
18 Aug 2009 - 10:18 PM


Quote: Tags are great if use correctly!

Tags would be even greater if the "search" worked on connected words / phrases.

Try searching on, for example, Tower Of London. Returns totally irrelevant results.

I believe improving the search feature is on the development list but would be nice if it could get pushed up the list a little Smile

Pete
Pete Site Moderator 1218416 forum postsPete vcard ePz Advertiser England96 Constructive Critique Points
18 Aug 2009 - 10:20 PM


Quote: I believe improving the search feature is on the development list but would be nice if it could get pushed up the list a little

Richard's been working on a completely new search and I'm told it's going to be far superior.

JJGEE
JJGEE  96106 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
18 Aug 2009 - 10:21 PM

Thanks for the update Pete Smile

Pete
Pete Site Moderator 1218416 forum postsPete vcard ePz Advertiser England96 Constructive Critique Points
18 Aug 2009 - 10:26 PM

Actually I just tried your example and the first results all have "tower of london" either in the body copy or the tags so it's working fine. It gets the exact phrase first and then parts of it for the ones later. So in your example it's the incorrect tagging of ones lower down the page that causes irrelevant results.

fauxtography
18 Aug 2009 - 10:36 PM


Quote: Actually I just tried your example and the first results all have "tower of london" either in the body copy or the tags so it's working fine. It gets the exact phrase first and then parts of it for the ones later. So in your example it's the incorrect tagging of ones lower down the page that causes irrelevant results.

I'd say it isn't working fine. If i search for a tag, I'd prefer the results for that tag to appear as if it was an AND Boolean search, not an OR search as is the case at the moment. It's not "incorrect" tagging, but a search that brings up "tower", "london" and "of" as its results. What's the point of separating tags with commas if the search ignores those commas?

Last Modified By fauxtography at 18 Aug 2009 - 10:37 PM
theduck
theduck  458 forum posts
18 Aug 2009 - 10:36 PM

Hi Ketch,
Im very new to all this and this might sound like a foolish question, so forgive me, would it not be possable for you to set up your own topic to include the subjects you favour and have people post to that topic page?

Paul Morgan
Paul Morgan e2 Member 1214403 forum postsPaul Morgan vcard England6 Constructive Critique Points
18 Aug 2009 - 11:13 PM

Try searching E3, my camera type, it just refuses to work Sad

Pete
Pete Site Moderator 1218416 forum postsPete vcard ePz Advertiser England96 Constructive Critique Points
18 Aug 2009 - 11:15 PM

Yes two digits are a big problem. I'm not sure if the new search will have resolved that, but as far as I know it will do everything that Mark's suggesting Smile

fauxtography
18 Aug 2009 - 11:21 PM

Obviously there are benefits to an "OR" search, and given that tagging is like keywording and relies on users getting it right, it might be an idea to search as AND and provide a link at the bottom for an OR search. This would be especially beneficial if the search did not return any results, as it would help stop people getting disheartened, because tagging can be very specific..

ketch
ketch e2 Member 6770 forum postsketch vcard Turks and Caicos Islands50 Constructive Critique Points
19 Aug 2009 - 9:01 AM

Morning - so we have established that tagging is good - but that wasn't the subject of this thread (its just like doing a global search). But if it is so good why was there ever a need to establish Street photography as a category (and I have to add, this has nothing to do with definitions around genre or techniques - its a category plain and simple). I believe whatever reason applied to graduating Street photography to category status equally applies to nightime and waterscapes/maritime.

Best wishes

Robert

ketch
ketch e2 Member 6770 forum postsketch vcard Turks and Caicos Islands50 Constructive Critique Points
19 Aug 2009 - 9:12 AM

Just as a matter of interest and because I have nothing better to do right now - I have had a look at the first three pages of the current gallery - and done a quick and dirty assessment of teh categories on show (not necessarily of course the ones actually used - that woudl be silly).

I recon the following:

Fashion 2%
Architecture 5%
Transport 5%
Natural History 10%
Pets and Captive animals 4%
Waterscapes 25%

I have to say that this is almost certainly not a representative sample - but nevertheless I beleive it is significant. I suspect too that all those waterscape shots (with names like water and dark water have all been categorised as 'general' - come on EPZ this is just not good enough!!!

Cheers

Robert

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.