categorising photos into sections for a website

elven

Um, what the title said...

How would you go about it?

by:

Landscape
Portrait
Macro
Abstract
...?

or

Objects
Animals
People
Buildings
Flowers
Trees
...?

or:

Simple
Contrast
Warm
Sombre
Light
...?

or something else entirely?

The ones I've been on that I really liked were arranged in an unusual way, like this guy:

http://www.davidloftus.com/

although it's a little clunky and not hugely intuitive I think I like the approach in terms of mood and style rather than just arranging by subject. And his photography is bloody fantastic, but that's beside the point :rolleyes:

Thoughts, anyone?

FreeAnd..

confusing isnt it? I have started using months with general galleries - people, landscapes etc but it can be so much work sorting them out...now i just use a latest and dump everything in, i also have one for each month so all uploaded for that month goes in. I then have the general galleries too and add to these when i feel like it. If you check back on someones gallery after a while it can appear static even though things have been uploaded to galleries but they seem too familiar and you may over look something. Thats why i find it handy to be able to see the latest if i am a returning visitor or just the general galleries if its my first time there...make sense?

thebaz

I'd keep it simple, and therfore go for option 1 or 2 , and preferably 2.
The easier a web site is to navigate , the more people will use it, thats my experience anyway.

elven

Yep. I think a 'recent work' would be good as a separate section, but I'm not going to be loading it up with everything I post on flickr, more of a 'best of' type thing, so I want to keep it to some nicely defined sections like that.

Hmmmm there's so much in this, never mind building the actual site itself!

FreeAnd..

I dont understand - shouldnt all your work be Best Of?

FreeAnd..

sorry, didnt get to see anything on that guys sight...its just too slow

latchiko

I would say the main consideration is who do you envisage to be the main users of the site? Somebody who knows nothing about photography might not know what macros is, for example.
Assuming you can tag images with multiple categories then you could set it up so that the visitor chooses technique/style or mood and then chooses a more specific sub category (macro/trees/warm). Might be more confusing though, depending on the target users. If users aren't browsing but looking for something to suit their needs then allowing them to select various tags and returning the appropriate set of images might be the way to go.
I use the first method you've descibed myself.

elven

FreeAnd.. wrote:

I dont understand - shouldnt all your work be Best Of?

Ah, we can't all reach your lofty ideals though

I suppose there are going to be people who like to browse photography sites in different ways, who would be at different levels of familiarity with photographic terms, and would also be looking at it from different perspectives. It's not like I'm trying to sell myself as an events or wedding photographer though so the actual subject seems almost irrelevant. I also notice a lot of fine art photography sites (not making any suggestions or anything about my own mind) will group by projects.

I suppose the answer is simply to give people the choice: by style, by subject, by mood, then go for the different categories from there. I'll have to do the tagging thing so I can cross reference them.

On a slightly separate topic, how do we feel about thumbnails? Is it very naughty to make people click through a series, and/or with just numbers/titles to choose from instead? I think thumbnails can be misleading because it's always going to make the simplest, brightest pictures the ones that everyone goes straight for - a la flickr...

Valentia

I have been messing around in Lightroom. They have web templates and I did one up last night for the craic. It is shots of Jekyll & Hyde by our local musical society. I kinda like the idea though I'm not a great fan of Flash this seems to load fairly quickly. I also like the notion of the slide show.

Now if you set up a themed site with links to other areas of your site designed to suit the mood of the pics?? It's not as difficult or time consuming as it looks. The only thing is that if you add photos it might mean uploading everything again, I don't know for sure. I'm only tinkering with it and am no genius when it comes to this stuff. The musical pics are at www.porchfield.com/hyde if you want a look.

mikeanywhere

Jools, there are a number of considerations for a site irrespective of whether its for personal or business use. This is me looking at it from both heads (ie personal and work).

Its a known fact that people will not use a site if it takes too long to load. I know I am like this myself and its the same for other people who I have spoken to recently. We as a society, even in little ol Ireland, are in a rush for everything and as a result expect the same from the site as we do for other things.

Also the the site DOES needs to be easy to navigate. Again, its a known fact that people will get less hits or not use it all if they find they are taking too long to get to what they are after.

I know its different when you have your mates searching it etc but at the end of the day a webby is for all to see.

I have some very good internet stats which I am willing to share with you when I get back to Ireland.

With regards to tabs/ sections, it depends on how many images are going on the site. If its only the best of the best, then why not just do a portfolio section with a multiple of images included rather than base it around tabs etc. It gives you more room to play with.

Anyway, what the hell do I know hey??

elven

Cheers Valentia - that looks great, but it is more suited for that style of photo where you want to be able to scroll through the thumbnails because there are a lot of the same subject.

Mike, I'm with you 100% on the simplicity of navigation and speed of loading points. Believe me, what I'm thinking of is the simplest of the simple, I want the photos to be the centre of attention, and the navigation and presentation to be at least secondary, if not almost transparent...

I think the actual number of images is definitely something to think about when you're deciding on a navigation method. I'm at an awkward in-between stage where there's too much to lump in as one, but not so many that I need loads of categories, or a built in search or anything like that.

Does anyone have any examples of photographers websites that they think are exceptional, in terms of design?

I think, the simpler the better. You need to let the photos be the feature, and nothing else.

mikeanywhere

elven wrote:

I think, the simpler the better. You need to let the photos be the feature, and nothing else.

Having a good web design is also just as important as the images but maybe thats the work hat shining through now

elven

But, a good web design is one that feels effortless. I'm not saying that you don't need to worry about the design because the pictures speak for themselves (I bloody wish!!!)...

CraggyIslander

hmmm, I've been looking for something to brush up on my rusty programming skills..... this might be just it. A database driven site that stores all info on the pics (i.e. date, keyword, categories, etc, etc).

Then a simple php page that will get all pics in a category, matching keyword, etc... sorts em by date and presents em as a gallery of thumbnails. Or just the latest additions by the date.. across all categories....... how to automate the importing of info and generation of thumbnail when uploading pics will be the challenge tho

elven

Are you talking about importing info from the exif data? Hmmm then it starts to get more complicated

php isn't too different from asp is it?

CraggyIslander

asp is very similar, just mentioned php as its a strong combination with mysql db's for web development. Getting the info out of the db is easy, automating how it goes in is the tricky part

FreeAnd..

hmmm, I've been looking for something to brush up on my rusty programming skills..... this might be just it. A database driven site that stores all info on the pics (i.e. date, keyword, categories, etc, etc).

Then a simple php page that will get all pics in a category, matching keyword, etc... sorts em by date and presents em as a gallery of thumbnails. Or just the latest additions by the date.. across all categories....... how to automate the importing of info and generation of thumbnail when uploading pics will be the challenge tho

As opposed to storing on flickr and just using the flickr api and flickr search capabilities? All that needs to be done is to tag the images i.e. date, keyword, category and viola...and hope that the flickr search extends to meta data in the future then Bobs ones uncle..

elven

What's the best place to learn a bit about the flickr api?

elven

If one were to use a local db with hand built front end:

http://nmml.afsc.noaa.gov/pdf/NMMLPhotoMetaDataProtocol.pdf

FreeAnd..

What's the best place to learn a bit about the flickr api?

http://phpflickr.com/ should be a good start, if you want to use php - or go to www.flickr.com/services and work from there.

DB set up required is minimal as everything is taken from flickr..If you just want your best to display then just create sets in flickr for whatever or tag certain photos with whatever and then just use a dumb pull everything or link to a certain set or have a search facility or whatever..honestly, invest a day or two learning about it and it will save you in the long run...as i said before, just get it working on a blank page and then you can fit it into whatever design you finally decide on...that way you can change the full design of the site if you wish and continue using the same connection to flickr with a new design..

bovril

I would say go for titles that are simple in your examples one or two.

When it comes to me browsing sites less clicks is better, I don't mind thumbnails if they are shown with the bigger view of the pictures as in Valentias lightroom slideshow.

I think you should also have the site loading the images and navigation between them as fast as you can. No idea how to do this. Nothing worse than pictures that take an age to load.

Just my 2c

My own website is an idea I was actually chatting to a friend about last weekend. Would love to set it up. I think I'll make it my project for next year.

Best of luck with it.

CraggyIslander

*yikes* flickr! *shudders* *sneezes* have a real aversion to anything Yahoo! or "web 2.0" related......... hence I'd rather fix up something myself.... call me old fashioned or stubborn

CraggyIslander

elven wrote:

If one were to use a local db with hand built front end:

http://nmml.afsc.noaa.gov/pdf/NMMLPhotoMetaDataProtocol.pdf

hmmm there must be programming components that can do that for me..... rather than exporting.... interesting :-)

FreeAnd..

*yikes* flickr! *shudders* *sneezes* have a real aversion to anything Yahoo! or "web 2.0" related......... hence I'd rather fix up something myself.... call me old fashioned or stubborn

Alright, you're old fashioned or stubborn still though - re-inventing wheels passes the time i suppose..

elven

There's a consideration to be made of whether it takes more time to learn how to use the flickr api than it does to re-invent the wheel though

Depends what you're comfortable with, really...

FreeAnd..

There's a consideration to be made of whether it takes more time to learn how to use the flickr api than it does to re-invent the wheel though

Depends what you're comfortable with, really...

Well the flickr api is just that, an api - you call it, it does the work - to be honest there is nothing to learn..the difference between calling an api that does some work and returns a result versus writing an api to do the work is pretty self evident...especially as the flickr api is rich enough for most of your needs + you already use flickr for storage, but i guess some people do feel more comfortable sticking to what they know even if it does lead to re-inventing something round...I find it amazing the amount of people who do feel comfortable with what they know rather than inesting a little time to see if there is a quicker, more effecient way to do things a little better

elven

Because it's new, and scary!

You know you've bullied me into it already though

Oriel

latchiko, just wanted to say - great photos.

FreeAnd..

You know you've bullied me into it already though

Then my job here is done, seriously though - when i first set up my site i was maintaing stuff on flickr and on it. I had a good system but without even worrying about uploading images twice when i decided to change galleries around, delete photos, add new sets etc everything got a little awkward so unless your very first deisgn accounts for all eventualities you are much better off with the freedom, speed, non duplication of flickr...all that my own site consists of now is a menu and simple layout with everything else powered through flickr...The thing is, you know the workings of flickr - the php is already written to connect all you do is request an api key, pop that in the php script and a few small tweaks and you're done...dont be afraid to ask if you need anything more specific (and you might if you use hosting365, i cant remember exactly why but i had to go transforming something because of the version of php they use)..

CraggyIslander

If I didnt have an aversion to flickr! then I would look at their API, but rest assured I wont be reinventing the wheel.... am sure most of the spokes I need are already available from various sources...... google is my friend :-)

time for a pint here:D

leinsterman

I quite like that David Loftus site ... if you remember yesterday I was saying there is a challenge to making your site look unique (and "of you") while at the same time not losing the photos in the process ...

This Loftus chap has achieved it in my opinion.

I don't know about you but I'm very new to the concept of building web sites ... I see lots of debates about api's and SQL in this thread ... I was discussing with Valentia about this ... sometimes you need to learn to crawl before you run ... I'm going to keep mine very simple for starters ... though I will investigate using the flickr api ... to save space and minimise resizing work at home ...

With regard to organising the work ... well why can't it be simple to start with and later on do something a bit more fancy ? ... You already use sets in flickr ...

leinsterman

On closer reflection ... that David loftus site is really good ... very clever way to organise work and make it dynamic at the same time ... looks like flash ???

Now I know I made the point earlier about crawling before walking but ...

What about flash v HTML v ???