"Recruiting" a new photographer -- and more about tagging
I've just had a wonderful evening of wandering on Flickr, looking for new photographers to introduce here. I got deeply involved in the subject of tattoos (inspired by Melissa's tat of a sad little girl!), and perhaps that will result in a few posts eventually. I also found a terrific young Asian girl doing such great stuff that -- well, that I wrote her an unabashed "mash note." I won't tell you lovely readers her name just yet, but I think I can share the text with you -- a tease for the work that I hope I can show you soon.
***********************
I just saw your marvelous work in a Flickr photo-group called "i started to collect light in little matchboxes." Actually, I can take it back one earlier step, to Isabelle Bertolini, a Paris girl who"s ALSO in "...matchboxes."
And, explaining further, I love Isabelle's work -- and have been privileged to get her permission to feature some of her photos in my blog. Here's a recent one: http://devifemme.livejournal.com/1356519.html
I've been "collecting" Flickr work -- always showing aspects of contemporary femininity, the theme of my blog -- and showing it for 8 years now. (Yes, that's hundreds of artists and thousands of photos!)
So, may I have permission to show the two shots above on my blog? Both of them are quite extraordinary -- the style and energy you convey in them is amazing! (And, no, I don't say that to all the Flickr members I contact...)
Thanks, Justine
*****************************
BTW I am still playing with tags, this being the third post in which I've talked about it. My impression is that LJ has changed a rule from three or more years back, where one couldn't use more than, I think, 200 tags without becoming a paying LJ super-member. So I backed off. (You sweet longtime readers know what grief I get from Joanne for blogging at all -- much less paying to do so. And, yes, she long ago took on the bill-paying for our household, and -- controlfreak that she is -- she would notice a payment to LJ!)
Anyhow, a week ago, I chanced to see that the "tags" line in the "new post" format now says (in blue) "select" -- and that, amazingly, all my OLD tags from years ago are STILL available in a nice alphabetical list. If you DON'T see them on the formal page you're reading (which I don't think you do, because -- in fact -- I don't), here are the ones for this post -- "sharing, shot of the photographer, pending, intimacy." I AM finding that 200 ratty old tags SEEM to make ME smile as I arbitrarily click on the 4 tags (pick a number, any number) that seem to epitomize what I just posted.
I asked a week ago if any of you adorable readers KNEW anything about what LJ is doing with these tags and, in short, What It All Means. No replies as yet...so, as we nowadays resist saying after fabulous sex (!), may I ask re my tagging these posts, "was it good for you, too?"
***********************
I just saw your marvelous work in a Flickr photo-group called "i started to collect light in little matchboxes." Actually, I can take it back one earlier step, to Isabelle Bertolini, a Paris girl who"s ALSO in "...matchboxes."
And, explaining further, I love Isabelle's work -- and have been privileged to get her permission to feature some of her photos in my blog. Here's a recent one: http://devifemme.livejournal.com/1356519.html
I've been "collecting" Flickr work -- always showing aspects of contemporary femininity, the theme of my blog -- and showing it for 8 years now. (Yes, that's hundreds of artists and thousands of photos!)
So, may I have permission to show the two shots above on my blog? Both of them are quite extraordinary -- the style and energy you convey in them is amazing! (And, no, I don't say that to all the Flickr members I contact...)
Thanks, Justine
*****************************
BTW I am still playing with tags, this being the third post in which I've talked about it. My impression is that LJ has changed a rule from three or more years back, where one couldn't use more than, I think, 200 tags without becoming a paying LJ super-member. So I backed off. (You sweet longtime readers know what grief I get from Joanne for blogging at all -- much less paying to do so. And, yes, she long ago took on the bill-paying for our household, and -- controlfreak that she is -- she would notice a payment to LJ!)
Anyhow, a week ago, I chanced to see that the "tags" line in the "new post" format now says (in blue) "select" -- and that, amazingly, all my OLD tags from years ago are STILL available in a nice alphabetical list. If you DON'T see them on the formal page you're reading (which I don't think you do, because -- in fact -- I don't), here are the ones for this post -- "sharing, shot of the photographer, pending, intimacy." I AM finding that 200 ratty old tags SEEM to make ME smile as I arbitrarily click on the 4 tags (pick a number, any number) that seem to epitomize what I just posted.
I asked a week ago if any of you adorable readers KNEW anything about what LJ is doing with these tags and, in short, What It All Means. No replies as yet...so, as we nowadays resist saying after fabulous sex (!), may I ask re my tagging these posts, "was it good for you, too?"