vlad wrote:Which lava beach(es) did you visit?
In rural Iceland. Fortunately, the lava is now hardened.
Seriously, if you enjoy seeing and photographing landscapes, Iceland is a must-visit place, though very expensive.
2) What do you use 'silhouette' for?
Examples of items that can be in silhouette include a tree, forest, rock formation, animal and/or people.
3) I see several adjectives in your list ('high', 'large', 'steep' and 'tall') - how do you deal with those?
My compositions often include a sense of scale that conveys height, size and the like. So, I think about those adjectives on their own: An object can be high in the scene regardless of its size. It can be anywhere in the scene if it is large. It can be steep, such as the face of a cliff. It can be tall even though it's not steep (though admittedly I can't think of an example at the moment). Even so, it never hurts to catalog an object using two labels if the object might be tall and steep. That's because
tall refers to the relative height and
steep refers to the relative rate of ascent from bottom to top or descent from top to bottom.
I think I'd have trouble making up my own mind if something is really large or steep, for example.
As explained above, it can be both. However, it really doesn't matter how we think of a particular object when we catalog it. It only matters how we think of it when the image is returned in a search. If I catalog an object today that I think of as steep but a decade from now that I don't think of that way, no harm is done when the image is returned in a search. On the other hand, if I don't find an image because I was overly restrictive ten years earlier about how I thought of it, I might not be able to find the image.
To me, such adjectives appear to apply - or not - to just too many photos, depending on what (subjective) "standard" I am inclined to consider at a particular moment.
As alluded to above, I have no problems with more images being returned than I prefer because I can always cull them, such as by viewing only 5-star photos. The problem is when I can't find an image because too few are being returned. That explains why I try to err on the side of assigning labels that might be questionable rather than not assigning them and having the consequence of not being able to find an image.
As far as I can tell, 'clouds' is the only label in your list featuring the plural form ('outdoors' not withstanding)
Thanks for catching that. I'm using the David Riecks Controlled Vocabulary Keyword Vocabulary, which includes the singular and plural forms of many nouns. I recently began deleting the plural form from my hierarchy and just now made a note to do the same pertaining to the use of
cloud and
clouds. By the way, I think
outdoors is classified as a singular noun, not a plural noun.
Do you have any landscape images without the 'outdoors' label?
Hopefully not. However, I have images that are assigned the
outdoors label that aren't landscapes. Coincidentally, up until about two weeks ago I had thousands of images that I had mistakenly forgotten to assign the
outdoors label. I think that was partly because at the time I had not included
outdoors in my
Landscapes label set or my Favorites. As a result, I wasn't being reminded to assign
outdoors.
You didn't ask if I use the
indoors label.
I don't. That's because I can always conduct a search of all photos that aren't assigned
outdoors.
Do all your landscape labels generate keywords, or are there some private labels here too?
I don't remember ever configuring a private label.
)