Jump to content
UltravioletPhotography

[Tags] Discussion #2


Andy Perrin

Recommended Posts

Andrea, any chance we could get some more tags for Infrared Video and things to complement the UV Video? Would also be nice to have IR lighting, IR portrait, etc. since these days the forum is full of all those things. I know you don't want to have too many tags, but in that case maybe consider removing the spectral classifiers, like having just "Video" instead of "UV Video."

 

Currently my SWIR video time lapses have no appropriate tags to go under besides "SWIR" and "Infrared." This is also true of Christoph's EIR video.

Link to comment
I think your SWIR videos fit well in the general SWIR tag. You would like a full set of video, lightning, portrait etc. tags for UV, IR, SWIR etc? It could be a nice idea, but a bit long to implement I guess.
Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...

My apologies for not seeing this topic sooner.

To review existing tags, below is the current list.

 

The general problem with tags is that many people do not use them.

So some important topics are omitted from the Tag Search result.

 

I might be able to remove the "UV" from Tags containing it if I can construct an appropriate SQL query. But I do not like to alter database entries because the DB tables are so interlinked. It is difficult to tease out all the pointers.

 

It is easy to create a new tag to add to this list. But all topics which might use that tag must be updated by hand. So I will only add a new tag if the request is accompanied by a linked list of topics which use that new tag. If I get such a list, then I will hack away at the new tagging in spare moments. :grin: :cool: :bee:

 

The Tags

  • Conical Cells (a popular botanical sub-category)
  • Filters (use for any kind of filters)
  • Fluoresence (use for any kind of luminescence however induced)
  • Infrared
  • Insect Vision (perhaps should be 'animal vision'?)
  • LWIR (use for thermal Infrared images)
  • Multispectral (use for uv/vis/ir stacks or for displays of various image types)
  • Processing (anything to do with image file conversion or edits)
  • SWIR (use for shortwave Infrared images)
  • UV Camera
  • UV Film Film (the old-fashioned stuff, not videos)
  • UV Lens
  • UV Lighting
  • UV Portrait
  • UV Video ==> Video
  • White Balance

Link to comment

I was able to drop the UV from the Video and Film references because there were so few of those tags used.

UV Film ==> Film

UV Video ==> Video

 

UV Camera, UV Lens, UV Lighting, UV Portrait will have to wait until I have another block of time.

I will probably tackle UV Lighting next because there are only about 50 or so of those?

 


 

For a while now, I have been wanting to add a tag permitting searches for Aerochrome emulations.

So how about an Emulation tag??

Given there has been a recent discussion about Collodion emulations and we have had some other

types of emulations, I think this could be a useful tag.

 

Any feedback on this?

And is anyone willing to help me find all the topics which would need to be retrofitted with an Emulation tag?

Link to comment
Andy Perrin

Thank you so much Andrea! I love the idea of an Emulation tag.

 

Sugggestion: Why not limit your searches to the last N years? For all the tags, I mean. I think you'll go nuts if you have to do all the way to the beginning of time. If individual people want to add tags to older posts before that, they can ask you or do it themselves.

Link to comment

I could tag my old topics if necessary. I almost always tagged them, it could take a while to go back and check all of them for additional tags but should be doable (also, the search is limited to 1 year, and that's a problem). I have already started tens of topics, some members probably much more, even if I am among the top posters here. The problem would be the topics started by inactive/little active members, they may be a good fraction of the total and pretty much have to be tagged by Andrea or Birna "by hand".

 

Also, we really have to think at the future. UVP is growing, and it will likely grow faster and faster (just look at the Introduce Yourself section), and thus making these changes will be much more time-consuming as time passes. We should expect more kinds of photography to appear here, SWIR for example appeared only recently (more or less) thanks to Andy's contribution (if we don't consider Nick Spiker's example), and so we might already put now tags we could expect to be used in the future (such as MWIR), or split existing tags into several versions (adding tags is easy, splitting them is a pain).

 

Is it a good idea to fill the tag set with lots of tags we may never use, or keeping things simple and adding them as they are needed? The real, big problem is that there are a lot of topics to tag. Nothing is impossibile, but something may become impractical in the future.

Link to comment

The Tag capability exists to enable simple, general searches through the topics.

So we have tags only for the most frequently searched for things: camera, lighting, filter, lens and so forth.

 

For more specialized searches, the UVP search engine should be used.

If that fails you (as it sometimes does), then make a Google site-specific search:

  • format ----- site:ultravioletphotography.com searchTerm
  • example --- site:ultravioletphotography.com Aerochrome

That Aerochrome search on Google brought up 9 pages of UVP entries. Cool !!!!!

Link to comment

For more specialized searches, the UVP search engine should be used.

If that fails you (as it sometimes does), then make a Google site-specific search:

  • format ----- site:ultravioletphotography.com searchTerm
  • example --- site:ultravioletphotography.com Aerochrome

That Aerochrome search on Google brought up 9 pages of UVP entries. Cool !!!!!

I didn't know that. This is a useful Google (and not only?) feature.

Link to comment

Andy's Sugggestion: Why not limit your searches to the last N years?

 

Yes indeedy !! I would have to do that. :cool:

Link to comment
Silly question: at the moment there is no single tag containing "UV" or "Ultraviolet", is this correct? If so, is this intended, like everything that is not marked "Infrared" or "Multispectral" is per definition ultraviolet?
Link to comment
Andy Perrin
That's how I was interpreting things. I mean, it is "ultraviolet photography dot com." So I figured that was the default assumption, and only things that aren't that need a special tag.
Link to comment

That's how I was interpreting things. I mean, it is "ultraviolet photography dot com." So I figured that was the default assumption, and only things that aren't that need a special tag.

 

Got it, thanks.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...