ShipSpotting.com
Login: Lost Password? SIGN UP
Ship Photo Search
Advanced Search
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: New category.  (Read 1689 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
MattyBoy
Just can't stay away
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 98

It's me and you may find me annoying.


View Profile
« on: July 22, 2017, 10:03:28 am »

I've read through some previous notes on the forum re: new categories. Wondered if such a category could be for "Vessels at anchor". I seem to take a lot of photo's of vessels in such a circumstance.

Report to moderator   Logged
Bob Scott
Just can't stay away
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 139



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: July 22, 2017, 01:53:05 pm »

Please, please, no more categories!
Report to moderator   Logged
Tuomas Romu
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 300


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: July 22, 2017, 02:07:30 pm »

Please, please, no more categories!

Agreed. What next? Vessels underway? Vessels moored at pier? Vessels going backwards? Vessels turning?

Anchored ships can be categorized by ship type.
Report to moderator   Logged
MattyBoy
Just can't stay away
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 98

It's me and you may find me annoying.


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: July 22, 2017, 05:55:09 pm »

ok, just a thought tho. I must stop having those.    Wink
Report to moderator   Logged
Emmanuel.L
Not too shy to talk
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: July 23, 2017, 03:54:39 am »

No please no such category as Mattyboy requested, if we have to add  another category I rather it will be "photos by Drone", and how about ditching the category "examples" ? I cannot comprehend its use.
And please may the contributors or Administration that after a photo is identified in the Mystery category ,it will be transferred to its relevant category. As for the "historical/Unidentified funnels" , it is the same ,transfer to "Shipping Companies Funnel..." after identification. Contributors should follow up their postings and amend accordingly, and not leave a photo in the Unidentified category.
Thanks and regards
Emmanuel.L.(Malta)
Report to moderator   Logged
pieter melissen
Photo Corrections
Home away from home
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 219


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 23, 2017, 06:59:51 am »

A category should be based on WHAT the ship is, not WHERE it is. This approach would also imply that for instance  "casualties", "ships in drydock"  and "storm pics" should no longer be continued. I would not be opposing that. 
Report to moderator   Logged
MattyBoy
Just can't stay away
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 98

It's me and you may find me annoying.


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: July 23, 2017, 09:39:11 am »

Some interesting and genuinely positive ideas here. Yes Pieter, I can see where you're coming from.

Emmanuel, yes I agree. I wonder how many postings by contributors are still in that "dead zone" and not in the obligatory category.


Report to moderator   Logged
Clyde Dickens
FAQ Administrator
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,480



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: July 23, 2017, 11:02:10 am »

Hi Pieter

Re "A category should be based on WHAT the ship is, not WHERE it is. This approach would also imply that for instance  "casualties", "ships in drydock"  and "storm pics" should no longer be continued. I would not be opposing that. "

If your suggestion was adopted, how would you suggest dealing with those vessels now categorised as Inland Vessels?
Report to moderator   Logged

To view some of the shipspotting sites I use, see the listing at  http://www.shipspotting.com/modules/myalbum/photo.php?lid=510326.
Bob Scott
Just can't stay away
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 139



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: July 23, 2017, 12:19:24 pm »

I see absolutely no problem with categorisation of inland vessels. ie: just as they are now. The idea of a category for vessels at anchor is little short of daft.
Report to moderator   Logged
MattyBoy
Just can't stay away
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 98

It's me and you may find me annoying.


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: July 23, 2017, 12:23:08 pm »

I am daft. Thank's Bob.    Cheesy Wink
Report to moderator   Logged
MattyBoy
Just can't stay away
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 98

It's me and you may find me annoying.


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: July 23, 2017, 12:28:04 pm »

But, saying that, if a photo was to be taken of a vessel directly from behind, you wouldn't necessarily see it at anchor, therefore if historical accuracies are what we're after on this site maybe it's something which could have been considered. (Not one to press my point home though!)  Cheesy  Wink
Report to moderator   Logged
pieter melissen
Photo Corrections
Home away from home
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 219


View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 23, 2017, 02:24:55 pm »

Hi Pieter

Re "A category should be based on WHAT the ship is, not WHERE it is. This approach would also imply that for instance  "casualties", "ships in drydock"  and "storm pics" should no longer be continued. I would not be opposing that. "

If your suggestion was adopted, how would you suggest dealing with those vessels now categorised as Inland Vessels?

simply as inland vessels, i.e. everything that is not seagoing..
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.046 seconds with 19 queries.
Copyright © 2010 All rights reserved