• Ultraviolet Photography
  •  

[Tags] Discussion #3 Now Open. POLL included.

25 replies to this topic

Poll: Tag Questions (8 member(s) have cast votes)

Have you ever used a Tag to make a search?

  1. Yes (4 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  2. No (4 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

Do you Tag your taggable topics?

  1. Always (3 votes [37.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.50%

  2. Usually, but occasionally I forget. (2 votes [25.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 25.00%

  3. Sometimes, but only for certain tags I like. (3 votes [37.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.50%

  4. Never, tags are a pain. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Are Tags useful on a board index to find topics you like?

  1. Yes (1 votes [12.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.50%

  2. Sometimes (7 votes [87.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 87.50%

  3. No (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Do we need both a Tag and a dedicated section with the same name? Example: People & Portraits section vs. Portrait tag.

  1. Yes. That Tag might be needed also outside the dedicated section. (2 votes [25.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 25.00%

  2. Maybe, I'm not sure. (6 votes [75.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 75.00%

  3. No. Why Tag a topic if it fits into a dedicated section? (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members+G
  • 4,252 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 09 April 2021 - 21:57

Andrea - I had been using "Infrared" to include all of them (this being prior to the addition of the MWIR/SWIR/LWIR tags) and in addition to those...I should probably remove it from the non-NIR ones in future.

Edited by Andy Perrin, 09 April 2021 - 22:04.


#22 Stefano

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,021 posts
  • Location: Italy

Posted 09 April 2021 - 22:24

If Andrea adds a NIR tag, and we remove the Infrared tag from anything that is outside NIR, then we could just convert the Infrared tag to the NIR tag, if this is possible (I remember some discussions about this, but I don't remember much).

#23 Stefano

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,021 posts
  • Location: Italy

Posted 10 April 2021 - 15:02

Another idea: should we have separate tags for UVIVF, UVIIRF and so on? If so, would it be reasonable to have a fluorescence section, like the Infrared and Ultraviolet sections I mentioned? Or maybe it is just better to leave anything as it is now?

#24 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members+G
  • 4,252 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 10 April 2021 - 20:12

I vote against separating out the fluorescence tags. It's easy enough to just put those in the search. The problem is that the number of permutations increases quadratically when you start considering things like "A induced B fluorescence."

#25 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 8,953 posts
  • Location: UVP Western Division, Santa Fe, New Mexico

Posted 11 April 2021 - 04:50

would it be reasonable to have a fluorescence section, like the Infrared and Ultraviolet sections I mentioned?

We already have a Fluorescence & Luminescence board.
And, as mentioned above, we also have general Infrared and Ultraviolet sections.

I'm slightly confused as to why you are asking for 3 sections we already have???
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#26 Stefano

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,021 posts
  • Location: Italy

Posted 11 April 2021 - 05:14

I knew of the Infrared section, now I searched and we have Ultraviolet & Multispectral (is Multispectral Ok together with Ultraviolet? I think yes, at this point), and actually never noticed Fluorescence & Luminescence. It must be because I never did UVIVF or similar.

So yes, we have them. I think they are good as they are (apart from Ultraviolet and Multispectral being together if anyone else finds the need to separate them. The thing is "Multispectral" alone wouldn't make much sense to me).