It can't have escaped everyones notice that this forum (and most others), is structured in a logical tree format. Thats by far the best way for gentle aimless browsing through the posts. People are not always looking for something precise and specific and might just want to click through the tree to see whats going on. Why can't we have hierarchy AND keywords? Are they mutually exclusive?
It can't have escaped everyones notice that this forum (and most others), is structured in a logical tree format. Thats by far the best way for gentle aimless browsing through the posts. People are not always looking for something precise and specific and might just want to click through the tree to see whats going on. Why can't we have hierarchy AND keywords? Are they mutually exclusive?
Why can't we have hierarchy AND keywords? Are they mutually exclusive?
While this thread has come dangerously close to getting out of control, I have to say that this sums up my feelings. A tree structure has many valid uses, as do keywords. Having one shouldn't mean you can't have the other.
The real issue may be how the smugmug server is set up. It may be intractable to add in a generic n-level deep tree structure without a complete re-write of much of the software that powers smugmug. This might be too much to ask of the smugmug team, but if it is possible, I would sure love to have a tree structure. Keywords are nice, but all of my pictures on my local drive are in a tree structure, and I back up every last one of them at smugmug. It would be easier if I could use a tree.
Why all the fuss?
Wow. I'm just a naive amateur photographer. You guys sure do get worked up. I do take a lot of pictures, have done for years. And I like many of the pictures I take. I also like Smugmug. But I would like it a lot more if it had a hierarchical files system. Seems like it could do both hierarchy and keywords, so why the argument?
I must admit that I'm intimidated by the idea of inputting keywords into ALL my photos. That seems like a very tedious job. You guys seem to have that figured out. There was a post earlier that made some suggestions, but it was too advanced for me to follow. Maybe someone could make some suggestions for a keyword novice?
By the way, guys: chill out. We're just talking here, right?
Comments
While this thread has come dangerously close to getting out of control, I have to say that this sums up my feelings. A tree structure has many valid uses, as do keywords. Having one shouldn't mean you can't have the other.
The real issue may be how the smugmug server is set up. It may be intractable to add in a generic n-level deep tree structure without a complete re-write of much of the software that powers smugmug. This might be too much to ask of the smugmug team, but if it is possible, I would sure love to have a tree structure. Keywords are nice, but all of my pictures on my local drive are in a tree structure, and I back up every last one of them at smugmug. It would be easier if I could use a tree.
--Aaron
http://mrbook2.smugmug.com
Nikon D200, usually with 18-200VR or 50mm f/1.8D
Ubuntu 9.04, Bibblepro, GIMP, Argyllcms
Blog at http://losthighlights.blogspot.com/
Wow. I'm just a naive amateur photographer. You guys sure do get worked up. I do take a lot of pictures, have done for years. And I like many of the pictures I take. I also like Smugmug. But I would like it a lot more if it had a hierarchical files system. Seems like it could do both hierarchy and keywords, so why the argument?
I must admit that I'm intimidated by the idea of inputting keywords into ALL my photos. That seems like a very tedious job. You guys seem to have that figured out. There was a post earlier that made some suggestions, but it was too advanced for me to follow. Maybe someone could make some suggestions for a keyword novice?
By the way, guys: chill out. We're just talking here, right?