BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: New Questions

Photography Question 
Scott Bricker
BetterPhoto Member Since: 6/5/2005
 

B&W vs. the flower category...


Has anyone given any thought yo having a category for just black & white photography (permanently, not just a monthly theme)?

With no offense to flower shooters (I can be one of 'em), it seems such a very specific category, even very seasonal for many photographers. Could many of the flowers fit in the details or macro category, leaving a slot open for a black & white category?

Just a thought.


To love this question, log in above
4/13/2006 7:21:55 PM

 
Brendan Knell
BetterPhoto Member Since: 4/17/2005
  Lately there's been a lot of debate about the categories.

I personally do agree with you that it would be a good idea to combine flowers and detail and macro(I've always been somewhat curious as to why there's two categories as most flower shots are macro). I also agree that a b&w category might be nice. But I know that a lot of people have been asking for a sports category so that would probably come first.


To love this comment, log in above
4/13/2006 7:28:42 PM

 
Scott Bricker
BetterPhoto Member Since: 6/5/2005
  Or perhaps an action/photojournalism category.


To love this comment, log in above
4/13/2006 7:47:06 PM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  whataya mean lately? There's always a new category to include.


To love this comment, log in above
4/13/2006 8:15:15 PM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  Candid architecture.


To love this comment, log in above
4/13/2006 11:41:47 PM

 
Carolyn  M. Fletcher
BetterPhoto Member Since: 10/6/2001
Contact Carolyn
Carolyn 's Gallery
PickYourShots.com
  They just took the flowers OUT of the macro/detail category last time they redid categories. Nobody's ever gonna be happy with the categories. I'd like to see the "catch all", "open" or "miscelleneous" category back in there for all the stuff that doesn't fit anywhere else, if they must have another category.


To love this comment, log in above
4/14/2006 6:04:26 AM

 
Bob Chance
BetterPhoto Member Since: 2/19/2006
  Yeah the categories can be a bit confusing sometimes.
I do a lot of wild birds, so I'm never sure whether to post in the 'Animals' categorie or the 'Nature' category.
I figure they should expand nature to include wildlife and make the 'Animals' category for pets and domestic animals.
I agree too, that flowers are almost synonimous with macro. Sure, occassionally you may see an expansive shot taking in a whole garden, but mostly are up close and personal.
I don't know if they should have a category dedicated to B&W. Afterall, whether it's color or B&W, the subject will still fall into one of the othe categories. Not sure about that one.

Bob


To love this comment, log in above
4/14/2006 6:20:35 AM

 
Brendan Knell
BetterPhoto Member Since: 4/17/2005
  Carolyn, when they redid the categories and made the flowers category, did they give a reason? The reason I ask is like Bob said, most flower shots are macro. After I posted my first response, I went and looked at the Feb. finalists and winners. In my opinion, 99% of them were macro. There were also a couple of flower shots in the macro category.


To love this comment, log in above
4/14/2006 8:57:11 AM

 
Carolyn  M. Fletcher
BetterPhoto Member Since: 10/6/2001
Contact Carolyn
Carolyn 's Gallery
PickYourShots.com
  No, they didn't, but my best guess is that it was such a huge category they probably felt the need to split it up. It seems to me the Digital Darkroom and Special Effects could easily be combined, as there aren't all that many in Special Effects anyway, and that would free up a space for another category.


To love this comment, log in above
4/14/2006 9:36:10 AM

 
Brendan Knell
BetterPhoto Member Since: 4/17/2005
  That's probably why they split them up. Now that you mention it, combining DDarkroom, and Special effects would be a good idea.


To love this comment, log in above
4/14/2006 9:41:56 AM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  When you have a category for animals, how in the world can somebody be confused about putting a picture of a bird in that category?


To love this comment, log in above
4/14/2006 11:13:34 AM

 
Bob Chance
BetterPhoto Member Since: 2/19/2006
  It's not a matter of confusion. It's a matter of whether it is a pet animal, or an animal found in the wild.
To me anyway, wildlife is considered part of nature.
People go on 'Nature' trails in the hopes of seeing wildlife. Not the family pet.

Bob


To love this comment, log in above
4/14/2006 4:35:28 PM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  Would you be as lost if you had a picture of a flower in your backyard, and a picture of a flower found out and about? An animal in the zoo, backyard, nature trail, or under the kitchen table waiting for somebody to accidentally drop some food is still and animal.
This is worse than the urban corn field confusion.


To love this comment, log in above
4/14/2006 8:37:53 PM

 
Bob Chance
BetterPhoto Member Since: 2/19/2006
  Well now that takes us to the discussion of whether or not they should do away with the flower category since most of them end up under macro anyway.
And if you don't like the discussion, no one is forcing you to respond.


To love this comment, log in above
4/15/2006 4:28:46 AM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  Who said I didn't like or dislike a discussion. In fact, it's an intriguing discussion topic, how somebody could say they find it a bit confusing(your words), when you knowingly have a category title animals, you'er talking about a picture of a bird(animal), and even with the mention of birds in the category explinations of the contest. I could give somebody some lee-way(only some) if they said they didn't know where to put insect photos. But birds?
You may have been avoiding my question, but flower pictures that are in the flower category are mostly close-ups of one or two flowers, and groupings. There's a tendency for people to choose flowers for macro, so the argument would seem better to do away with macro. But the whole notion of doing away with categories is still unnecessary since they tell you a photo can fit into more than one category. But that sure dosen't provide any more confusion than if they had a vegetable category and would it be a choice between that or nature for a squash picture.


To love this comment, log in above
4/15/2006 2:05:21 PM

 
Peter Hundley
BetterPhoto Member Since: 3/23/2006
  Well, since I shoot mostly B&W, and never flowers, It seems like a "no-brainer" to me!!

But I may not represent the majority of the masses.

And Candid Archetecture sounds great to me!


To love this comment, log in above
4/17/2006 2:38:02 PM

 
Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/11/2003
gregorylagrange.org
  Except there'd be a some people confused about where to put photos that have more gray in then than black or white.


To love this comment, log in above
4/17/2006 4:20:37 PM

 
Larry Lawhead
BetterPhoto Member Since: 11/15/2002
  Perhaps you're right, Gregory... How about B&W and Greyscale?


To love this comment, log in above
4/17/2006 5:40:35 PM

 
Log in to respond or ask your own question.