Screenshots ver. 2.0

Yeah, be smart with the tags. This applies to more than just screenshots.

The authors name isn't an appropriate tag, and neither is the title of the work. "The Fantastic Wonder Dirt Hole by the Sea" shouldn't be tagged as "The Fantastic Wonder Dirt Hole by the Sea" because unless its a dirt hole by water none of those things are descriptive of the work. and we just end up with tags like "the, fantastic, wonder, by".

Ooh, custo has tags now? Like delicious and such? Great, folksonomy :)

Zactly, the word "the" is an article. It means nothing by itself. It's not an acceptable tag.

The key is to use descriptive words.

Think of it this way. Larry bought a brand new car, a blue BMW coupe with a black interior. We need to describe this car to someone over the phone.

Let's tag Larry's car. "Larry" is not an appropriate tag. It tells us nothing about the car, other than Larry owns it, and who cares about that? "New"? Well, it is new, but once again, it doesn't tell us much about the car. Bad tag. "Brand"? You might stick this in front of new, thinking you'd get "Brand new". Nope, all you get is the utterly meaningless tag of "Brand". "Awesome"? Well, his car might be pretty great, but awesome is a pretty subjective term and once again doesn't actually do much to describe the car. Tagging his car "Awesome" or "Great" might also be kind of a letdown when the person on the phone actually sees the car and maybe it's not something they personally think is so great.

"Blue"? Well, that works, but we have a system that does a good job of sorting subs by colors already, but if it's a superior blue car, okay. Same goes for his black interior.

Here's some good tags for Larry's car: Car. Coupe. BMW, German, Fast, Sporty, Sleek.

Well put Tab. Use your best judgment, and common sense when tagging. And remember the Golden Rule, "tag unto others what you would tag to yourself."

brian: that's a good point.

tagging a piece with the author's name is what i was referring to, but if there was components in a screenshot or whatever you wanted to promote, it'd probably be a good idea.

I already addressed Brian's issue in another thread...the ingredients feature does this already. You can see other works that feature a work just by looking at it.

It makes no sense to tag something with an author because of this.

yeah, i'm with aero. The usernames as tags should be accepted just in a few cases like VictorC, J3, ether, 4imp, VL, et al, artists with a singular style.

Saying someone has a singular style and therefore deserves their own tag is pretty subjective. I declare that notion hooey.

what's everyone's opinion on the 2d tag?

Everything that isn't made by a 3d app would be 2d. What about things (like this particular sub tagged 2d) that have a convincing illusion of depth?

I think that sub is poorly tagged. I can see 2d being applied to other work though.

Actually, everything here is 2D. Only some subs have an illusion of 3D, making them notable.

What do you guys think?

Sub in question:


I'd agree that 2d doesn't make a lot of sense. To me, 2d makes me think of a simple vector or a doodle/sketch. I don't think anyone searching for 2d would expect that sub, which is the purpose of tags.

i'd say no to 2d. Unless "2-D" refeers to the Gorillaz' Character

this is what im talking about:


"future", "sight", "of", and "london" should not be tags. neither should "good" or "liqachu"...and i don't even know why "sky" is there.

whoever is doing this; i want to punch your face.

well, I think 'sky' is in reference to one of the other pics in the pack, but the others... yeah.