rgbstock
Image categories
1. micromoth15 March 2015, 9:38 GMT +01:00
I know we've touched on this before, but would it be possible for the categories on RGB Stock to be improved? I find it strange that although the categories discriminate so readily between forests/trees, they don't discriminate between water/snow/ice or between mountains/hills. What is the rationale here? There's also no category called Science. And although there are categories for each of the continents on Earth, there's nothing at all for outer space! Is there any chance of some improvements in the near future, particularly for the addition of the latter?
26. gesinek23 March 2015, 13:51 GMT +01:00
The idea with the links is good Dez. That could be interesting for downloaders.
I tried to add a few categories in your script Micheal but I can't save so here are my suggestion:
places:
workshop/garage and shop/mall
concepts:
sorrow, anger, fear
architecture:
castles/palaces and churches
Very good work your script.
Oh I looked again at the file and it worked, my suggestions are saved automatically :-)
Seems I don't have enough experience with such clouds.....
27. Ayla8724 March 2015, 6:23 GMT +01:00
Gesine, we already have a shop category and I have put my mall photos in there. Isn't that sufficient?
Maybe the same goes for our suggestions on health and sanitation, I'm not sure. We have the impression that health is grippier and wider (more like a concept).
Dez, you write "You may notice I put a couple of choices under most of my images" - can you give me an example?
28. gesinek24 March 2015, 10:26 GMT +01:00
Michael it is not sufficient.
I made the hints Dez made myself. They don't look nice and are hardly readable:
http://www.rgbstock.com/photo/p7MoYD8/Guitar
HTML notation for linefeed doesn't work
29. xymonau24 March 2015, 12:20 GMT +01:00
Yes, they don't link, and people have to cut and paste the address in the browser, but I try to link them and I have noticed in the past that some people will go and look, and even download. A working link would be better, and definitely more space in the description. One of mine, Michael: (look in the image description) http://www.rgbstock.com/photo/p7OMfvE/Group+of+People+1
30. Ayla8724 March 2015, 12:22 GMT +01:00
Thanks for the example, Gesine.
I have an idea how you can make your lists a little bit more readable: you can make them shorter. Just leave the last / and everything behind it (the title of the photo) away.
It is sufficient to write
http://www.rgbstock.com/photo/p7MoYD8
try it out, this will work as a fully functional link and lead to the photo.
32. Ayla8724 March 2015, 13:48 GMT +01:00
I think Jay will follow this thread full of suggestions and will find the time to surprise us with some new features in the future. Photocollections of related pictures to choose from would be such a hot thing to offer. Working links in the photo descriptions might be a helpful service, too.
34. jazza25 March 2015, 23:50 GMT +01:00
Maybe I can show you a little preview of the new categories page. It is not quit finished jet.
http://www.rgbstock.com/categories/
35. Ayla8726 March 2015, 7:35 GMT +01:00
The categories page is a very uniqe and mouth-wheathering entrance to the variety our site has to offer because it nicely opens the fan, if you understand what I want to say. Looks great.
What is structurally missing is a way to reach those photos which are currently placed in the main or general categories. Perhaps we should call them "other" in the future to have a place at the end of each category where you can put everything that doesn't fit directly in the other subcategories? I mean we have do decide now as a standard where we want to collect and show the miscellaneous photos in each category. In our growing cloud category list the need to clean up the "general categories" is mentioned already:
http://1drv.ms/1BWeOT2
36. Ayla8726 March 2015, 8:36 GMT +01:00
http://www.rgbstock.com/faq
Number 7. How can I find the image I want? - I think it still is a bit of a problem that you find very different results currently if you search by keyword and if you search by category. The reason is of course that many photographers haven't chosen the proper categories for their photos yet, so they don't show up in the categories. We should make photographers aware of this in a future newsletter when they want their photos to be found better, that they have to visit the photo management and get active.
The other point is the marketing aspect. I wonder if it is important to make site users aware that there is currently the danger that they miss the perfect photo when they don't try to search different ways. Because our hidden gems are described with several attributes it sometimes needs more than one try to find them (just like on a treasure hunt).
37. xymonau26 March 2015, 11:56 GMT +01:00
Jay, there are a lot of categories missing - ones that people have to search for under "backgrounds". Things like playing with colour - something I would use a lot. Paper or parchment is a needed specific rather than - again - backgrounds. Can you please give us more time to get the list done? I am in the middle of legal things right now, but I would hate to see a half baked result after all the work that is going into it. Or will it be easy for you to remove, enhance, or add categories? Since our searching has been skewed because of a lack of a proper category system, I think we need to get this right and wait and see the results. Downloaders come back if it's easy to find what they want.
I agree with Michael about the existing categories, but I guess we will have to fix that ourselves. Those of us with huge galleries will have the biggest headache. Also, we need access to edit our images to do this because it could become a nightmare with any other set up.
38. xymonau26 March 2015, 11:59 GMT +01:00
Also, the image for "workplaces" looks more to me like "workspaces". However, the idea is great and looks good. Category "People" needs crowds.
39. Ayla8726 March 2015, 12:49 GMT +01:00
Oh, I think it is the business:people category Dez is talking about. There I would rather suggest an image like this one
http://www.rgbstock.com/photo/meKTB1s
And these are interesting workplaces
http://www.rgbstock.com/photo/o3hFDPa
http://www.rgbstock.com/photo/ojY7CQS
http://www.rgbstock.com/photo/nLr4Lqu
40. Ayla8725 April 2015, 9:21 GMT +02:00
Dez, do you think you can find the time to polish this category list a little bit? That would be sooo sweet :-o
43. xymonau18 June 2015, 8:05 GMT +02:00
Michael, all the named emotions in the concepts list can just be covered by "emotion and feelings". "Landmarks" covers churches, castles and others. That is already in there. I think you need to keep the "general" in the categories as there is always something that doesn't fit the list. Also, people will look for "abstract" to cover a multitude of things, so a general one needs to exist. "Health and Fitness" instead of "wellness". Environment is not a concept, so I suggest a separate section for the sciences. Science general, astronomy, science fiction, chemistry, geology, medicine and biology, natural science, space travel. That's as far as I can get today.
44. Ayla8718 June 2015, 12:22 GMT +02:00
Yes, emotion and feelings instead of all the separate named emotions is a good idea to keep the list a bit more clear and shorter. As far as the churches, castles and palaces are concerned, of course they are Landmarks, but the same would so for the skyscrapers. The problem is, that there are so many of them. I think this was the reason why Gesine suggested that it would be better to have separate categories for them.
I agree with the general categories and have added some more general categories to handle this subject consistantly over all areas.
I've worked your suggestions into the list. Any more ideas?
first page | previous page | next page | last page
