bulletin boards have sections and sub-sections like an endless sales list– down into parts list– the way some part of the web was built. The bulletin boards.
The photo forums segregate as well. this camera, that camera, by size. Cause or attraction.
When Merg and Friends attempt to discuss, they defer. They await another gathering. They want the return of something. Perhaps the better nature of a prior century. Perhaps the Academy or the Salon. An authority to provide rankings, structures of value. Some way to say that this is a work worthy of more attention than that one. Something to study. To put into the study. To have others study.
stumbling over words. Pick an answer from your world. Or skip the question Mr
you seem to be able to load your own work into a forum divided into categories… even expressing “like
for images like you own.
The salons provided the list of categories: Landscape, Portraiture, Genre-Scenes, History, and Still Life. As well, they gave us a ranking system: (1) History Painting; (2) Portraiture; (3) Genre Painting; (4) Landscapes; (5) Still Life.
These guidelines came from the assumption that they reflected the inherent moral force of each genre. Beauty is a moral message.
Or, if the categories you seek are based upon formal, rather than subject, Freart provided:
Liking things that are like you; not uncommon. We rarely see beyond our shadow.
there’s nothing worse than a sharp cliche of a fuzzy idea nothing worse than a cliche from someone else a stolen cliche value judgements/ justifications, usually negative to distinguish himself from you. to stand apart. you are meant to stand in awe they think they're talking to the ages. they aren’t. they’re just talking to the aged
// making it simpler: only 2 even read the question https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?171626-10-greatest-living-photographers/page3