Category talk:Image processing software
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Category:Image editing programs[edit]
Apparently this category is for "raster graphics editors" (confusing enough since Category:Raster graphics editors is actually for users) but its subcategory is Category:Vector graphic editing programs. I would suggest a new subcategory Category:Raster image processing software or Category:Raster graphics processing software or something similar? Themightyquill (talk) 21:49, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: Why not "raster graphic editing programs", similarly to the existing vector one? 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:58, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- @1234qwer1234qwer4: That's more readable, I agree, but it's in the Category:Image processing software tree, not the Category:Programs tree. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: So you rather suggest the vector category be renamed to something similar to your suggestion for the raster one? 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- @1234qwer1234qwer4: That's more readable, I agree, but it's in the Category:Image processing software tree, not the Category:Programs tree. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- I guess that would make sense. I'll tag Category:Vector graphic editing programs in case anyone wants to comment on that. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:31, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
- WARNING: 2 years later Category:Raster graphics editors moved to Category:Bitmap graphics editors (editor = user = wikimedian) and there is Category:Graphical software too. Taylor 49 (talk) 02:19, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- It seems that Category:Programs has been changed to something besides media related to software in the meantime. Also, Category:Graphical software is a nonsensical non-sequitur, which is why it seems to be being (be being? lol) used as a dump for everything from selfies to images of Fantasy maps. So I don't think it's a viable alternative to this category. Really it should just be deleted. Although I'm not sure what would be a good alternative, but it should at least be more specific then "graphical" and end in "software." I don't see why up merging it to Category:Image processing software wouldn't work, but then I haven't really put that much thought into it either. Maybe something like Category:Raster image processing software or Category:Raster graphics processing software would be adequate, but then I don't think the distinction between a raster or vector image is one without a purpose, at least at this and point on our end. Let alone does "processing" versus "editing", or really "graphics" versus "images." If I'm being frank, categorizing something by if it's an image or graphics program is actually rather pedantic. Same goes if an image (graphic? Argh!) is being edited or processed. Just pick one (if I were to guess "editing" is probably the more colloquially of the two) and use it constantly. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:40, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- principle: rename cats to ".. software" for software, "commons users who edit .." for commons users (similar to Category:Commons users by use of technology).
- proposed structure:
- Category:Bitmap graphics editors, move to "commons users who edit raster graphics"
- @Themightyquill, 1234qwer1234qwer4, Taylor 49, and Adamant1: here's my proposal. RZuo (talk) 08:52, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
ย Support I'm a little hazy on the details of this since it's been so long, but your proposal sounds like an improvement. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)- Seems sensible enough, though I suppose Category:Vector graphic editing programs would need to be moved to Category:Vector graphic software too then? That does seem broader, so maybe both the raster and vector categories should keep the "processing" part? ๐๐ค๐ฏ๐บ๐ช๐ค๐๐๐ท๐ฎ๐ฅ๐๐บ๐ด๐๐๐ฐ (๐๐ฎ๐ญ๐ ) 10:46, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
- i think it might only introduce more problems if we try to categorise them as "processing" or "editing" etc. using a broad term can include all kinds of software: readers/viewers, cataloguing/database management, editing...
- "processing" is rather vague. importing photos from cameras should be considered processing? editing photos with photoshop/lightroom is also processing? RZuo (talk) 12:00, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with that, but "processing" is used on a lot of other, higher level categories that have the same issue already. For instance Category:Image processing. So it's really discussion for another venue. It would be weird to have a category for "image processing" (whatever that means) without having one for "image processing software" in the meantime though. That said, I'd probably be in favor of getting rid of the whole "processing" category structure in general if you were to propose it. I just think this is the correct place to draw in the sand about it. --Adamant1 (talk) 05:35, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
- ย Support <<rename cats to ".. software" for software, "commons users who edit .." for commons users>>
- ย Support verb "editing" rather than "processing" (the latter can be import or converison of file type)
- "raster AKA bitmap" and "vector" must be besides each other, not parent and subcategory. Taylor 49 (talk) 13:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
- WARNING: Currently Category:Bitmap graphics editors is for users here but connected to WikiData item for software. Taylor 49 (talk) 13:41, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
new category scheme is as follows:
for users: Category:Commons users who edit raster graphics. other cats are redirected accordingly.--RZuo (talk) 09:48, 29 August 2023 (UTC)