What to do with the forum to become better?

[Ernest]

I made this thread because i think there is a lack of couple things in here.
At this moment we have here 2 main categories:
- General Category
- Library

What i want (what i think would be best for now), is to make General Category a place only for typical 'forum talk' - lets leave there Admission forum, General Photography Chat forum, but also make there offtopic forum, hydepark, forum issues, and so on.

Next, forums named:
- Classic Photography
- Experimental Photography / Art Photo
- Miscellaneous
- Postprocessing Techniques
shoud be disengaged from General Category, and moved to newly made category (for example): Our Photography. This will be a place where all our photos will be shown and commented, except for Postprocessing Techniques, where we would talk about some photo techniques, etc.

I think that the forum will become then more clear and easy to use
I would like to hear your opinion.
Best regards, Ernest

[eob]

We are open to all suggestions that have a potential to improve this forum. However, always keep in mind that simplifying is better than adding narrow categories that only one or two of our members would have a use for. For example, I realize that the wedding photography or the macro photography are as vital as they are separate parts of image-making. But they both fit quite good into either the Classic Photography group or the Experimental/Art Photography group. That said, I think we all agree that any and all suggestions should be seriously considered by the administrators.

Now, I think that separating a general chat from posts containing images and discussions/critiques regarding those images does make sense. So, the General Category should contain subcategories Admission and Photographic Chat.

All posts containing images and the related discussions should be moved to the Our Photography group (Classic Photography; Experimental and Art Photography; Special Post-processing and Miscellaneous). In my private opinion, Post-processing should stay within Our Photography group, since it is almost always illustrated with our own images.

Anybody has more suggestions, or opinions on those suggestions presented by Ernest and me?

[Ernest]

What you wrote is good for me. Also have in your minds that something like "forum issues" category can be also a good idea, a place where all problems / suggestions (like this thread) can be posted. Also the "Offtopic" and/or "Hydepark" forums can be a good thing to prevent from posting not always photographic subjects into a "General photography chat" forum.

[eob]

Well, then, I would be willing to add something like Our Forum to the General Category.

I am not so sure whether or not we need the "Offtopic" and/or "Hydepark" subcategories, though... Do we have the time and the inclination to read and post this kind of chat in this strictly photographic community? Or are we too strict in this matter?

[Ernest]

I think always this kind of subforum is useful to just not trash the other forums with not properly threads... But i leave this to your mind. It's just a proposition

[aprilS]

Anybody has more suggestions, or opinions on those suggestions presented by Ernest and me?

If I understand correctly, the proposed structure would read:

* General
   - Admission
   - Photo chat (not related to posted images)
   - Our forum (problems and suggestions)
   
* Our Photography
   - Classic
   - Experimental/Art Photo
   - Special Post Processing
   - Miscellaneous

* Library
   - Photography Workshop
   - Articles
   - Photographers

I'm fine with that, and agree that creating a site which has too many categories -- especially categories nested 3 deep -- can become problematic to maintain and for people with limited time to view.

The only thing I would add is that I'm never sure what the difference is between "Experimental/Art Photo" and "Special Post Processing." My assumption is that the first involves experiments with in-camera techniques, while the second is manipulated after capture. Perhaps that could be clarified in the description? (Not to mention, I consider all our photos "art photos". )

[eob]

Yes, April. Your interpretation of the structure of Photosapien forum is correct (presuming it will be accepted by others).

Well, the Experimental / Art Photo may or may not be treated with some kind of "special post-processing". And Special Post-processing does not necessarily have to be a work of art (could be an exercise, for instance). Is that a sufficient clarification?

[aprilS]

* Experimental/Art Photo: New techniques and artistic approaches, experimental subject matters; may or may not be treated with some kind of "special post-processing"

* Special Post-processing:  Whenever the main achievment is through postprocessing; does not necessarily have to be a work of art (could be an exercise, for instance).

Hmmm... That makes me think of redefining the categories as:

* Experimental/Art Photo: New techniques and artistic approaches, experimental subject matters; may or may not be treated with some kind of "special post-processing"

* Exercises: Explorations which are starting points for investigation, rather than finished work.

[eob]

That is a logical conclusion, April. However, do we really need to expand our structure to include strict exercises as opposed to a finished work? Or, should we get rid of the subcategory Special post-processing and create a new one: Exercises (which may include - among others - special post-processing techniques)? My money is on the latter...

[aprilS]

However, do we really need to expand our structure to include strict exercises as opposed to a finished work?

No, and agreed. After posting I thought, "But everything we do is an exercise," to some extent. Anyone posting an image can always add "this is a preliminary investigation" and invite comment in that respect.

Or, should we get rid of the subcategory Special post-processing and create a new one

Post-processing, whether traditional or experimental, is such an inherent part of creating an image I do think that category could be eliminated entirely.

[Ernest]

I think NOT. Why? Because the postprocessing category is assigned for a discussions concerning many issues, not only about one exact image, but as an individual problem.

[eob]

I am quite ambivalent as to the issue of retaining the Special post-processing or getting rid of it. I see both of you have good points about it but I lean towards leaving that subcategory for posting topics that may be of an instructional value to other members of our forum. Images that are routinely post-processed need not be considered as candidates for that subcategory.

[aprilS]

I lean towards leaving that subcategory for posting topics that may be of an instructional value to other members of our forum.

Vote = yes.