Bit Literacy - Mark Hurst [31]
One drawback of metadata is that it can leave users dependent on one particular tool. After all, users are less likely to switch to a different tool—even a better one—if they’ve invested significant time entering ratings, tags, or other metadata in their current system. Bit-literate users need a system that avoids this dependence.
Another problem with metadata is that it’s valuable only if users commit to entering it into all their photos. Tags, ratings, and other metadata require too much effort for regular, non-techie users who just want to organize their photos.18 Some people might do it occasionally, and a tiny minority might do it enthusiastically, but the majority will store their photos unrated and untagged, which will leave them with a mountain of unorganized data.
This results in the pattern from the previous chapter: an unbounded bitstream tends toward irrelevance. I see this occasionally when people share photos (via e-mail or a photo-sharing website) without filtering them first. The photo set contains dozens or hundreds of mediocre shots, with many near-duplicates showing the same item, scenery, or posed group. It’s tedious to look through. A dose of bit literacy, for the sender, would help a lot.
The bit-literate approach, as always, is to avoid overload by letting go of irrelevant bits—deleting, filtering, and pruning them—and then organizing what’s left. The method may not be the easiest course of action in the short term, but the payoff is significant. The photos are higher quality, better organized, more easily shareable, and best of all, the bits are yours. You can access them when and where you want them, and you need not be afraid of changing computers, photo programs, or operating systems. When you’re bit-literate, your bits are yours alone, and technology operates on your bits on your terms, or not at all.
Of course, users need to use some tools, and there are some good options available. But in the end, technology must function as a tool, not as a gatekeeper or owner of the bits. Users who take responsibility for their bits are free to take the bits elsewhere if they choose.
Bit literacy offers just such a system, which allows users to...
navigate and find photos, and sets of photos, quickly and easily
easily share a set of high-quality photos—via the Web, e-mail, or a slideshow on their computer
avoid the extra work of entering ratings, tags, or other metadata into photos
avoid being locked in to any particular software, tool, or company
manage hundreds or thousands of incoming photos per year
I know that bit literacy fits these criteria because I’ve used the system for years to manage my own photos. Though I have thousands of photos going back over five years, I can usually find a given photo in seconds—without ever having entered metadata. (I manage my photos with Apple’s iPhoto software, but if I ever need to, I can take them to Google’s Picasa or some other service.)
The bit-literate photo management system has three steps: maximizing, filtering, and two-level storage.
1. Maximizing bits
The “film” in a digital camera is free, so there’s no reason not to take lots of photos. In fact this is one case where it’s bit-literate to accumulate lots of bits, initially. The old mindset, remember, was to take a few, tightly-controlled shots and then save nearly every print that got developed. In contrast, the bit-literate user should take many photos, in order to maximize the chances that one will be worth saving.
There are various ways to maximize bits when taking photos. For example, in a group shot: there’s nothing wrong with posing and counting to three, but try taking shots the entire time. People often smile more naturally when they don’t think a photo is being taken. When I take a photo of a group, I sometimes chatter like this: