Digital Artwork Gallery Organizational Preference?

[Fred Weiss]

A basic question that requires some explanation.

My new web application for displaying and selling clipart and stock photography files is finally ready and I have a question as to what would be the best way to organize the categories for browsers.

I can organize it by the type of work or by the subject matter. so, for example, in a type of work system a browser would click into branches of images that would be divided as

• Illustrations
• Cartoons
• Vehicle Graphics
• Photographs
• Ornaments
• Design Elements
• Etc.

In a categorize by Subject Matter, the categories might be named

• Animals
• Plants, Flowers & Trees
• Objects and things
• People
• Places
• Ornaments
• Design Elements
• Etc.

Understand also that the application has a basic and advanced search engine so that most users will find images using that. But about 25% of visitors will browse rather than search by keyword ... for a variety of reasons. How I organize it matters in terms of how intuitive and user friendly it is.

If I do use the Type of Work approach then there will still be subcategories divided up by subject matter. For example: Illustrations / Animals / Wild Animals.

So, if you were browsing, would you rather look a all of one type of work and then click down into subcategories based on subject matter or all of one kind of subject to begin with?

The application can be viewed here although it is still rough looking. It has the initial framework for a Type of Work organization.

Thanx for your feedback.

 

[Pro Image]

JMO but I like the Subject Matter listings........I don't like looking and clicking to find what Im looking for.................

Hope this helps out Fred.......

 

[Fred Weiss]

So in that scenario, you would be looking at illustrations and cartoons and photographs side by side. That is your preference?

 

[Pro Image]

Yes
Say if I were looking for a Dog in vector.....I go and look and you have all the dogs together vector and jpeg, I might see a jpeg that catches my eye and "BAM" ......you my friend just got a "IMPULSE" sale........Like I said before that is just my personal taste.........

 

[gerald]

I agree, subject matter. If I'm looking for a dog, I want to type dog. Then I can browse thru jpegs, ai's, eps's ect.. Would be nice to be able to search for "dogs" then have a "file type" drop down for further speed in finding exactly what I want.

Good luck.

 

[Fred Weiss]

Yes but that would be a keyword search such as THIS.

That is different from what I am asking about and is the way most people will use the application. If you click on any thumbmail at the above link, you then see the downloadable files available.

It's kind of like here at Signs 101. You can search or you can watch the new posts coming through the Active Threads. But if you want to browse nothing but threads and posts about Adobe products, then you would go to the Adobe forum.

I think you need to take a few minutes and explore what is set up as a temporary, trial structure. If you have the time it would be appreciated.

 

[gerald]

OK, I think I see what you're sayin. For instance, If I'm looking for a dog.

Illustrations
animals
dogs

If I wanted a cartoon of a dog:
cartoons
animals
dog

In this case I think I like type of work.

Although it still may be good to have a keyword search to bring up all file types and browse thru. Sometimes I browse to get ideas or a particular look, then I worry about the file type. Does that make sense?

 

[iSign]

I'd vote for classifications by subject matter first like Dustin said. I may have an illustration in mind... but I know I need a dog & I just want to go animals>dogs... & then I would be fine with seeing them all together. Just the other day I was searching for a roofers hammer. I only needed a siloutt... uh.. I mean an outline ...but I found the best look for my needs was a photo, so I used that.

 

[3CGraphics]

Definitely subject - although I know most folks going to your site looking will know the difference, in an illustration, cartoon, etc many will not and most won't care - I rarely look for an illustration but rather look for a house or lion or whatever - then sift through the different types

jmo - Steve

 

[Pro Signs & Graphix]

Okay, Fred - you'll hate me BUT.....subject matter, with subs of types. Or vice versa. Just seems to be faster for me....but this is all subjective anyway, and what really matters is what is an easier method for you to provide.

The more difficulty for you, the less we get to see and choose.

JMO.................

 

[Flame]

Another one for subject matter. I'd rather look for all my choices of animals rather than look under cartoons, illustrations, vector etc.

JMO

 

[TC49010]

Subject here too!!

Trixie

 

[signage]

I also agree subjective here too!

 

[Raniece]

Yes Subject would be my choice.

Raniece

 

[bob]

Keywords, lots of keywords. Both contextual and specific keywords. All else is a distant second to having lots of keywords. How many keywords? In computers there are only three values: 0, 1, and n. n is the proper number of keywords. Any given image should have as many keywords as is necessary to identify it from all angles.

In fact, categorizing for a menu list is functionally identical to providing a keyword. Multiple levels of categorization is nothing more than providing each image with as many keywords as there are levels of classification.

Free form keywords require more effort on the part of the librarian and whatever system it might be using to assist it in its labors in order to ensure tense, plurality, and contextual consistency, but the result can be a system that can give the illusion of reading your mind.