Question for those who value order and efficiency

[Minde]

So I went (rather quickly) through my (very large) collection of photos from the past couple of years, trying to pick out ones to put up on a certain newly-born social networking site. I narrowed it down to about 200 to start off with. I feel that is too much for one album, especially all at once, but I don't know how to split it up. The subjects are various but many overlap, and I will want to add more later. Too many little albums, though, get confusing to both viewers and myself and I'll be less likely to keep adding pictures (confusion is an obstacle to progress).

Divide by subject? If so, how to accurately yet concisely categorize? Throw all in one or two albums? If so, how to still keep it semi-orderly? Or should I just throw organization to the wind?

What to do?



Yes, this isn't strictly socionics-related, but I feel the people who frequent this subforum are the most likely to give me an answer I can use.

[moredhel]

I've always favoured organsing based on a time line as I feel the age of the photo is more relevant than the activity. If it's kind of a best of collection of photo's you could do albums by year only or by year and general activity (2010 Party album for instance).

I have recently organsied my photos with a folder for each event with a name that states the year, month and event, but that's not really practical for an assorted collection of photos.

Good luck any how, sorting photos can be a time consuming process. I take it the network you are refering to is Google+? What do you think of it so far?

[Minde]

That's a good idea; I think that's what I'll end up doing, though I might have one or two subject-based ones, like for my city (for people who are curious about where I live) or my puppy or something like that.

On my own personal computer I have my photos organized in folders by date, similar to how you describe: year -> month -> date-event. And then I have the names of the folders look something like this, 110716picnic, so it's easy to sort and know the basic subject.

So a file structure example would be:

2009
2010

01January
02February

2011

05May
06June
07July

110701thetempest
110716picnic

110716picnic-0001.jpg
110716picnic-0002.jpg

That system (plus Lightroom) makes managing my photos pretty easy, but it also makes for way too many folders for anyone to care to keep track of except myself. So that level of specification doesn't work for online albums. I really like the by-year idea, though.

Yes, I was indeed referring to Google+. It's ok so far. At first I was kind of put off by the fact it's by Google, king of search engines. But I think as long as I use common sense and think before I share anything (which I should be doing anyway) it'll be ok. I like the circles idea. Most of my contacts in it so far are techies, which seems to be a common trend. Have you tried it?

[Beautiful sky]

Did your mom help you come up with the date order? I though you said you found her to be LSE.

I recommend:

Event, so you can find the picture; if you put a bunch of dates without identifying or linking to an event, then you won't be able to find the picture quickly and efficiently.


Wedding, 2011

[DirectorAbbie]

I suggest doing it by time period or other people in the pictures.

You have a lot of photos!

[Minde]

Did your mom help you come up with the date order? I though you said you found her to be LSE.

That's my current typing of her, yes.

No, I came up with the organization on my computer through trial and error. This is the system that's worked best over the long-term for me so far.

I recommend:

Event, so you can find the picture; if you put a bunch of dates without identifying or linking to an event, then you won't be able to find the picture quickly and efficiently.


Wedding, 2011

That would work except when sharing pictures with this particular audience and in this specific context, they don't usually care about finding a specific one. (I believe) they care more about easily and conveniently viewing pictures that they enjoy looking at. Or, in other words, they want a good experience.

I suggest doing it by time period or other people in the pictures.

You have a lot of photos!

Thanks!

And, yes, I do. Many thousands. It's super hard to choose favorites.

[moredhel]

That's a good idea; I think that's what I'll end up doing, though I might have one or two subject-based ones, like for my city (for people who are curious about where I live) or my puppy or something like that.

On my own personal computer I have my photos organized in folders by date, similar to how you describe: year -> month -> date-event. And then I have the names of the folders look something like this, 110716picnic, so it's easy to sort and know the basic subject.

So a file structure example would be:

2009
2010

01January
02February

2011

05May
06June
07July

110701thetempest
110716picnic

110716picnic-0001.jpg
110716picnic-0002.jpg

That system (plus Lightroom) makes managing my photos pretty easy, but it also makes for way too many folders for anyone to care to keep track of except myself. So that level of specification doesn't work for online albums. I really like the by-year idea, though.

Yes, I was indeed referring to Google+. It's ok so far. At first I was kind of put off by the fact it's by Google, king of search engines. But I think as long as I use common sense and think before I share anything (which I should be doing anyway) it'll be ok. I like the circles idea. Most of my contacts in it so far are techies, which seems to be a common trend. Have you tried it?

Wow that's even more organized than mine, I approve. I'm particularly fond of the sortable file names, I was always a bit lazy to name the individual files...probably a program that could do it...or I could write one myself .

Yep I'm on Google+. I quite like it, particularly the photo albums, I think they have been implemented very well. Having an android phone I quite like Google but yes it's good practice to be careful what you put online no mater the company that's hosting it.

[Minde]

Wow that's even more organized than mine, I approve. I'm particularly fond of the sortable file names, I was always a bit lazy to name the individual files...probably a program that could do it...or I could write one myself .

I use Adobe Lightroom for organizing and most of my editing of my photos. It lets me batch rename the files (as well as do other really cool and time-saving stuff).

This is off topic, but since it's my thread it's ok - In what languages do you program?

[Absurd]

Divide by subject? If so, how to accurately yet concisely categorize? Throw all in one or two albums? If so, how to still keep it semi-orderly? Or should I just throw organization to the wind?

What to do?

[Day-month-year Event name]
1
2
3
4
5
[Repeat]

I keep some of mine in alphabetical order.

[moredhel]

This is off topic, but since it's my thread it's ok - In what languages do you program?

C++ and Java mostly, plus all the basic web languages javascript/html/css etc.

I'll get around to learning C# one day

Not to continue too far off topic...but do you ask because you also do some programing?

[Park]

If you want to keep it simple, maybe you could set up a two level structure with basic, unspecific categories, something like People/Nature/Misc or pre-2010/post-2010, (or even Color/B&W if you have a lot of unsaturated ones,) and then subdivide one more time. If you've used different cameras, you can create categories by camera model too, I guess. Or just go with the timeline approach, but narrow it down to years.

[UDP]

So I went (rather quickly) through my (very large) collection of photos from the past couple of years, trying to pick out ones to put up on a certain newly-born social networking site. I narrowed it down to about 200 to start off with. I feel that is too much for one album, especially all at once, but I don't know how to split it up. The subjects are various but many overlap, and I will want to add more later. Too many little albums, though, get confusing to both viewers and myself and I'll be less likely to keep adding pictures (confusion is an obstacle to progress).

Divide by subject? If so, how to accurately yet concisely categorize? Throw all in one or two albums? If so, how to still keep it semi-orderly? Or should I just throw organization to the wind?

What to do?



Yes, this isn't strictly socionics-related, but I feel the people who frequent this subforum are the most likely to give me an answer I can use.

................ Why are you selecting 200 photos for a social networking site? How many photos do you actually need?

10?


I'm sure this is a bit late to ask that question, but, oh well.

[UDP]

This depends on the type of site and why you are using it, but, if you are spending more time fussing about what photos and how to arrange them, as opposed to

actual social networking

You might be going about things wrong...


Related questions
- how many photos should you be uploading ?
- what is the 'norm' for the site or purpose
- what do you want to show via these photos / albums
- why do you want to upload photos to begin with?

[pianosinger]

That would work except when sharing pictures with this particular audience and in this specific context, they don't usually care about finding a specific one. (I believe) they care more about easily and conveniently viewing pictures that they enjoy looking at. Or, in other words, they want a good experience.

Then how about this: Pretty Pictures, Humorous Shots, People, Art that makes a Statement, whatever other titles you can think of. And some pictures might be included in more than one category...

[Airman]

So I went (rather quickly) through my (very large) collection of photos from the past couple of years, trying to pick out ones to put up on a certain newly-born social networking site. I narrowed it down to about 200 to start off with. I feel that is too much for one album, especially all at once, but I don't know how to split it up. The subjects are various but many overlap, and I will want to add more later. Too many little albums, though, get confusing to both viewers and myself and I'll be less likely to keep adding pictures (confusion is an obstacle to progress).

Divide by subject? If so, how to accurately yet concisely categorize? Throw all in one or two albums? If so, how to still keep it semi-orderly? Or should I just throw organization to the wind?

What to do?



Yes, this isn't strictly socionics-related, but I feel the people who frequent this subforum are the most likely to give me an answer I can use.

I think this IS socionics-related. It looks like you're trying to organize something in a coherent system (Ti). I would say, for my part, you organize them by letters, this will give you at least 26 categories to spend your time on methodically organizing uselessly. lol. Organize them by importance to you or by subject, I would say seriously, something fast that doesn't take too much time but is nevertheless good enough.

[Minde]

[Day-month-year Event name]
1
2
3
4
5
[Repeat]

I keep some of mine in alphabetical order.

If you want to keep it simple, maybe you could set up a two level structure with basic, unspecific categories, something like People/Nature/Misc or pre-2010/post-2010, (or even Color/B&W if you have a lot of unsaturated ones,) and then subdivide one more time. If you've used different cameras, you can create categories by camera model too, I guess. Or just go with the timeline approach, but narrow it down to years.

Absurd, yours is very similar to what I do on my personal computer, but it'd be too complex for regular viewers who just want a quick overview of pretty pictures.

Parkster, that's pretty close to what I was originally thinking, though I don't think the site allows for subfolders.

Then how about this: Pretty Pictures, Humorous Shots, People, Art that makes a Statement, whatever other titles you can think of. And some pictures might be included in more than one category...

Yeah, that's the route I started on - simple categories - but then I have the hardest time deciding which picture should go in which category. They're all so unique and special to me! So, haha, for my own sake I need something simple where I don't end up over-thinking it.

................ Why are you selecting 200 photos for a social networking site? How many photos do you actually need?

10?


I'm sure this is a bit late to ask that question, but, oh well.

This depends on the type of site and why you are using it, but, if you are spending more time fussing about what photos and how to arrange them, as opposed to

actual social networking

You might be going about things wrong...


Related questions
- how many photos should you be uploading ?
- what is the 'norm' for the site or purpose
- what do you want to show via these photos / albums
- why do you want to upload photos to begin with?

Thank you, UDP, for totally doubting not only the legitimacy of my question but my reasoning capabilities and ability to understand my own goals. Not to mention the value of my skills (in this case, photography). I think you win the black star of helpfulness here...

Because not only have you not helped me figure out an efficient and orderly process/method, you've insulted me.


For the record, I'm putting old photos up because someone very specifically asked me to. They're very nice people and the request was very nice, too. They've been sharing what I've put up with others, they like them so much. Believe it or not, some people actually enjoy looking at my photos.

Edit: Just checked, you currently have at least a thousand photos on your own facebook... kind of more than 10.


I'm a photographer. If there was any question about putting a selection of my work up, a part of who I am, to share with people with whom I'm connected, it would be: why not?

I think this IS socionics-related. It looks like you're trying to organize something in a coherent system (Ti). I would say, for my part, you organize them by letters, this will give you at least 26 categories to spend your time on methodically organizing uselessly. lol. Organize them by importance to you or by subject, I would say seriously, something fast that doesn't take too much time but is nevertheless good enough.

Um, I think you're missing my point. I want help in not making it complex. Easy and simple and does the job is the goal. And, especially in this case, alphabetical would be waaaay too complex and hard to organize. Worse than by simple subject...

My goal: Quickly organize -> people enjoy it -> done.

[Beautiful sky]

Minde,

Matt has been dualize, so you'll notice that his messages tend to have a lot of possibilities in them. But, here's his suggestion and addition to this thread.

"Everyone divides their photos in different ways. Some do them chronologically, grouping them by time (summer 2010, winter 2010, etc.). Others will organize all photos with a particular other person together. Most people, though, seem to group generally thematically. All the photos from a particular location or event will be together; people will have particular albums with their children or pets. So that's probably the way I'd go."

[Minde]

Thank you, Maritsa. I appreciate you asking him on my behalf.

Any pics of you, Minde?

Yes, my profile picture, so people can recognize me. I may add more later.

[Creepy-]

I would do it according to month or season for general pictures, and then do it according to events where there are events.

[Month/Year]\[files]
[Event]\[files]

Don't bother with individual dates.

By the way, would this social networking site be Google+ by any chance?

[Absurd]

You're full of theory Maritsa.

[Beautiful sky]

Minde, don't you wonder why you're more organized than Moredhel and UPD? Or am I the only one still thinking about this?


This specifically:

"I was always a bit lazy to name the individual files...probably a program that could do it...or I could write one myself ."

it screams Si to me.

[moredhel]

Naming individual files is time consuming and inefficient, I ignore Ti which is nit picky detail. Writing my own program to do this is strong Te .

[Beautiful sky]

I don't doubt that you have a strong Te. It's the Si that I don't see in the suggestive function. One thing about LSE is that they take a very very long and meticulous time perfecting whatever they do, they are very detailed as they are an S type.

[moredhel]

Your attributing Ti traits to Te again. Nothing about Te mentions attention to detail or perfection, obsession with order is a Ti thing. Sure we like quality in our work, I often spend way too long perfecting features in projects I care about but this is partially related to Ni PoLR.

OK lets work using Marista's framework, we agree that Te is associated with efficiency right? Please tell me how renaming 100's of individual files by hand (files which aren't even that important) is in the least bit efficient.

[Beautiful sky]

I'll continue my questions in either the Your Typing of Forum members or in your thread. Minde is particularly uncomfortable with cluttering up her threads. Thanks.

[Lobo]

So I went (rather quickly) through my (very large) collection of photos from the past couple of years, trying to pick out ones to put up on a certain newly-born social networking site. I narrowed it down to about 200 to start off with. I feel that is too much for one album, especially all at once, but I don't know how to split it up. The subjects are various but many overlap, and I will want to add more later. Too many little albums, though, get confusing to both viewers and myself and I'll be less likely to keep adding pictures (confusion is an obstacle to progress).

Divide by subject? If so, how to accurately yet concisely categorize? Throw all in one or two albums? If so, how to still keep it semi-orderly? Or should I just throw organization to the wind?

What to do?

Yes, this isn't strictly socionics-related, but I feel the people who frequent this subforum are the most likely to give me an answer I can use.

Ideally, you could have keywords for each picture file (like "winter 2010, Bunter, X lens") especially if your albums are going to overlap. I don't even know if this is possible atm or any use for google+ in the future, but that's the only solution I thought of to reconcile the overlapping albums . You can have the software or site create the folders based either on the time frame, subject, etc, using the keywords associated with each file.

[UDP]

Thank you, UDP, for totally doubting not only the legitimacy of my question but my reasoning capabilities and ability to understand my own goals. Not to mention the value of my skills (in this case, photography). I think you win the black star of helpfulness here...

Because not only have you not helped me figure out an efficient and orderly process/method, you've insulted me.


For the record, I'm putting old photos up because someone very specifically asked me to. They're very nice people and the request was very nice, too. They've been sharing what I've put up with others, they like them so much. Believe it or not, some people actually enjoy looking at my photos.

Edit: Just checked, you currently have at least a thousand photos on your own facebook... kind of more than 10.


I'm a photographer. If there was any question about putting a selection of my work up, a part of who I am, to share with people with whom I'm connected, it would be: why not?

I'm sorry.
I didn't quite understand what google+ was or know that was what was being discussed, and I spoke too hastily, assuming a fault in your reasoning that actually wasn't there.

Over a thousand photos, really? They must be old ones. I don't like that many old photos up.


I've never heard of a black star of helpfulness. It sounds fitting, and somewhat amusing, too.

[moredhel]

I'm sorry.
I didn't quite understand what google+ was or know that was what was being discussed, and I spoke too hastily, assuming a fault in your reasoning that actually wasn't there.

Over a thousand photos, really? They must be old ones. I don't like that many old photos up.


I've never heard of a black star of helpfulness. It sounds fitting, and somewhat amusing, too.

Nice save

[Birdie]

So I went (rather quickly) through my (very large) collection of photos from the past couple of years, trying to pick out ones to put up on a certain newly-born social networking site. I narrowed it down to about 200 to start off with. I feel that is too much for one album, especially all at once, but I don't know how to split it up. The subjects are various but many overlap, and I will want to add more later. Too many little albums, though, get confusing to both viewers and myself and I'll be less likely to keep adding pictures (confusion is an obstacle to progress).

Divide by subject? If so, how to accurately yet concisely categorize? Throw all in one or two albums? If so, how to still keep it semi-orderly? Or should I just throw organization to the wind?

What to do?




Yes, this isn't strictly socionics-related, but I feel the people who frequent this subforum are the most likely to give me an answer I can use.

I would start off with narrowing it from 200 to 20.
When you've done this step, let me know.

[Minde]

By the way, would this social networking site be Google+ by any chance?

Yep, you got it.

Ideally, you could have keywords for each picture file (like "winter 2010, Bunter, X lens") especially if your albums are going to overlap. I don't even know if this is possible atm or any use for google+ in the future, but that's the only solution I thought of to reconcile the overlapping albums . You can have the software or site create the folders based either on the time frame, subject, etc, using the keywords associated with each file.

I'm guessing that's a little to much for Google+ to handle right now.

I would start off with narrowing it from 200 to 20.
When you've done this step, let me know.

It's a little too late for that... Anyway, the people asking for the pictures wanted a good amount, perhaps less than 200 but certainly more than 20.

[UDP]

Nice save

I doubt it. It won't have any real impact, I'm sure. But it's what I wanted to say anyway.

[Minde]

Nice save

I doubt it. It won't have any real impact, I'm sure. But it's what I wanted to say anyway.

Actually it does help. It means you care enough to take the effort to write out an apology. Which is good. I can feel better about it.