panorama section

[shutterbugcrazy]

Has anyone in charge of POTN ever thought about adding a new section to the photo sharing categories for panoramas and panoramics? I think it would be easier to find them.

[Karl Johnston]

That's a good idea, i'm working on a panorama right now :D it'd be the first edition http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=635976 there it is as a matter of fact

[shutterbugcrazy]

I have a few ready to go as well

[Jamie Holladay]

You could always put panorama in the title. Then when you search you can find them and if you will notice at the bottom of the page the is a "Similar Threads" box.

[shutterbugcrazy]

better to know that every pic in that section will be a pano without having to search. Why not just add one more category.

[tommykjensen]

better to know that every pic in that section will be a pano without having to search. Why not just add one more category.

Before a new forum is added the traffic needs to be there. Personally I don't think the volume of posted panorama's is high enough to justify a new forum.

[Anke]

Surely there'd be confusion as to where to put a Landscape Pano, in the Landscape Section or the new Pano Section?

[tommykjensen]

Surely there'd be confusion as to where to put a Landscape Pano, in the Landscape Section or the new Pano Section?

That too.

[shutterbugcrazy]

It's not hard to figure out.. anything that is a pano of any type goes into that section. Adding a new category isn't real hard nor does it take up anymore space (meaning that pic would have ended up somewhere) I've operated forums before it doesn't take too much effort to create a new section. The categories are jumbled like for example black and whites ending up in abstract when people have been suggesting a black and white section

[tommykjensen]

It's not hard to figure out.. anything that is a pano of any type goes into that section. Adding a new category isn't real hard nor does it take up anymore space (meaning that pic would have ended up somewhere) I've operated forums before it doesn't take too much effort to create a new section. The categories are jumbled like for example black and whites ending up in abstract when people have been suggesting a black and white section

Trust me when I say Pekka knows how to run a forum. Yes it is easy to setup an extra category but when there is no traffic to justify it it won't happen.

As for b&w. There is no b&w category because all types of photos can be b&w and in theory so can a panorama.

[shutterbugcrazy]

It'll have to produce traffic kind of like the bandwidth draining amount of traffic that "Pets" and "Astronomy and Celestial" produce?

[Pete]

It's not a question of bandwidth, it's a question of organisation and making it easy for users to find material in which they are interested.

If you look at the sections inside "Sharing", you'll see that they're separated by subject type (Pets/Kids/Transportation/Landscapes/Macro).

Panoramas fit neatly inside those sections. So if you have a landscape panorama, it goes into T&L, if you have an urban type panorama, it goes into Urban.

The HDR subsection was created because there was significant discussion surrounding HDR processing and techniques. If you notice, this has been placed inside the "Raw & Post Processing" section because it's mainly dealing with discussion surrounding the technique.

Creating a new section for panoramas will just end up being confusing and won't align to the forum's organisation structure.

[Picture North Carolina]

The HDR subsection was created because there was significant discussion surrounding HDR processing and techniques. If you notice, this has been placed inside the "Raw & Post Processing" section because it's mainly dealing with discussion surrounding the technique.

And if you notice there is still a significant percentage of postings clearly labeled HDR made in the processing forum as opposed to in the processing/HDR forum.

This is not a comment on posters or forum structure, but rather it illustrates the fact that if you provide somewhat broad categories as Pete illustrates, there is less of a question as to where things should be posted.

If you create more finely-divided categories and sub-categories, you increase the odds that images will be scattered in many different areas.

Edit: as pointed out above, well-written subject titles can be an important organizational tool.

[Jamie Holladay]

the HDR forum is NOT a sharing forum. It is for discussion on the process. At the time it was created there was plenty of "traffic" to justify it. HDR fits in almost every category in the share section, as does B/W and Pano and Sepia. It makes no sense to seperate subjects of a photo by the style of the photo.

as pointed out above, well-written subject titles can be an important organizational tool.
that is the key

[Karl Johnston]

It'll have to produce traffic kind of like the bandwidth draining amount of traffic that "Pets" and "Astronomy and Celestial" produce?
HEY! =( Why astronomy and celestial? That's not a bandwith drain .. there's more far more skilled photographers there *cough* namely me *cough* than anywhere else on the site

[tommykjensen]

Its seems that everybody misunderstood when I said traffic. I did not mean bandwidth I meant solely the number of photos posted.