Re: IMatch Categories Q?

Jason:

Thanks for the ideas.  I have decided (at the moment) to add a 
gender subcategory to each bird that can be identified as such.  It 
takes a little more work, but I think that it is worth it.

George

--- In [email protected], Jason S <arghman@y...> wrote:
>  <geopappas2 <at> yahoo.com> writes:
>  
> > My question is what to do with the gender of birds. The gender 
of 
> > many birds can be told by their plumage. For example, the male 
> > Northern Cardinal is bright red, whereas the female is mostly 
light 
> > brown.
> > 
> 
> You're dealing with a tradeoff here. #2 (male/female categories 
beneath each
> species) is more work & takes more categories, but is unambiguous. 
#1 (a
> parallel set of categories for male/female) works best for a 
single subject
> matter but breaks down when you have to specify multiple subjects. 
I think when
> you have multiple subjects, it's probably best to use #1 but also 
start tagging
> those images with descriptions ("male mallard (top left) and 
female northern
> pintail (bottom right)") or keywords (e.g. "mallard (M); northern 
pintail (F)"),
> depending on whether you want to use these tags for human-readable 
purposes or
> data-processing purposes (or both!).
> 
> You could have the most information-packed scheme for annotating 
images that
> goes into things like outlining graphically where each of the 
subjects are
> located in the image -- but it requires lots of work to set up. I 
started
> spending lots of time tagging my images, then realized that the 
only reason to
> go to that level of detail was for things I would be unlikely to 
easily
> remember, or for things that I specifically wanted to process 
automatically in a
> script. If I have a series of images in the same place on my hard 
drive called
> "boiler01.jpg", "boiler02.jpg", etc., adding a category like
> "Home.appliances.boiler" doesn't add much additional value if all 
I want to do
> is find the photos I took of my old corroded boiler.
> 
> My collection is of plants & I'm facing similar issues in dealing 
with multiple
> subjects... what I was thinking of doing was getting in the habit 
of tagging
> each picture with its original filename coming from the camera 
(e.g. DCP0001.jpg
> or P00000001.jpg), then renaming as necessary, and making cropped 
copies of each
> subject. E.g. if I have a photo of a blueberry flower right next 
to a mountain
> laurel flower, I'll have both my original picture and a cropped 
copy of each of
> them individually. For my purposes the cropped copies then have 
one subject each
> and are simpler to deal with, and since they have a tag that I can 
use to find
> the original image, then I can go back later and see those images 
in their
> original context if I want. I have the same issue w/ my bird 
feeders, it's very
> difficult to ensure that one bird at a time is in the photo.





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imatchuserforum/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/