Photrio Photographic Arts Standards
This group proposes the creation of a set of standards that can be used by Photrio members and encourage other to use to convey the nature of the photographic work they are presenting. An example of such standards are the f/64 group; though I am not proposing rigid standards of this type (there could be a class as such within the standards).
The initial objective is to create a series of descriptions that can be used as tags on images on the internet, printed work, or wherever users want to use them. The purpose of the tags wold be to lead back to standards related to how images were created and post processed. The tags would indicate to the viewer in a non-judgemental way to what degree the image has fidelity to the original moment in time and space. It would help people decide for themselves whether the image meets their expectations for a photograph, a work of graphic arts, a composite image, etc.
The idea would be to use the tags ourselves (on Flickr, photo-sharing sites, social media, print, what ever); have links to pages where the tags and the standards they represent are defined; to encourage other people to use the tags, and to lead them to the descriptions.
The standards are not intended to define "real photography", rather give the public the information they need to understand how modified an image may be (analogous to food labeling).
The tags could describe general classes of modification (say "Photrio Level1"). They could indicate specific features, e.g., "Photrio: Content added subtle", "Photrio Content added significant", "Photrio: Clouds added", etc. People with special interests could create standards for their own classes, e.g., "Photrio: f/64 digital equivalent".
Clearly this is most useful for images ultimately distributed digitally, but could also be used for gallery prints etc. (say in the description).
The proposal would be to create a committee/committees to start defining things, then create standards and tags. If such adequate standards already exist, we could adopt them.
This group proposes the creation of a set of standards that can be used by Photrio members and encourage other to use to convey the nature of the photographic work they are presenting. An example of such standards are the f/64 group; though I am not proposing rigid standards of this type (there could be a class as such within the standards).
The initial objective is to create a series of descriptions that can be used as tags on images on the internet, printed work, or wherever users want to use them. The purpose of the tags wold be to lead back to standards related to how images were created and post processed. The tags would indicate to the viewer in a non-judgemental way to what degree the image has fidelity to the original moment in time and space. It would help people decide for themselves whether the image meets their expectations for a photograph, a work of graphic arts, a composite image, etc.
The idea would be to use the tags ourselves (on Flickr, photo-sharing sites, social media, print, what ever); have links to pages where the tags and the standards they represent are defined; to encourage other people to use the tags, and to lead them to the descriptions.
The standards are not intended to define "real photography", rather give the public the information they need to understand how modified an image may be (analogous to food labeling).
The tags could describe general classes of modification (say "Photrio Level1"). They could indicate specific features, e.g., "Photrio: Content added subtle", "Photrio Content added significant", "Photrio: Clouds added", etc. People with special interests could create standards for their own classes, e.g., "Photrio: f/64 digital equivalent".
Clearly this is most useful for images ultimately distributed digitally, but could also be used for gallery prints etc. (say in the description).
The proposal would be to create a committee/committees to start defining things, then create standards and tags. If such adequate standards already exist, we could adopt them.
