Photograph Effort Thread
 

http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:Ak_54.jpg

This picture pisses me off. It's the default photo used for original AK-47 entries, but it looks like absolute garbage. It's too orange, it's taken from a weird angle which makes the stock look tiny, and it's very "shadowy".

http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image...TechLegend.jpg

This one is much nicer looking, but it just doesn't feel right having the default AK-47 photo be of an American made example.

Also I've noticed that alot of photos are captioned as "Firearm - Caliber" or something similar. To me, this seems unnecessary. Most of the photos of standard, unmodified firearms don't need any further explanation of what they are.

Thoughts? Feelings? Opinions?

This thread is for discussing IMFDB photograph policies.

For someone who know guns, that's not an issue. But for people who aren't, it's necessary.

If you don't know about guns then what do you care? This isn't a firearm encyclopedia, thats what world.guns.ru and wikipedia are for. If the individual firearm pages have a bunch of information, that makes sense. My point is it's not necessary to caption every picture of an AK-47 in the movie pages to let us know that it is A: an AK-47 (as already stated in the section title AND the normal page text) and B: chambered in 7.62x39mm (somebody who doesn't know guns isn't even going to know what "7.62x39mm" means, there's no additional information for context, it's just a string of numbers and letters).

No I don't really care, but one of the purposes of this site is to educate. Also I own guns and know a little bit about them. A lot I learned from this site.

Also what about the Type 84? If it doesn't have a mag I can't tell that it's chambered in 5.56mm. You get me?

It's still nice to have a caption for it, whether people know what it is or not. It gives the picture a little more personality. If you go to a museum and see famous paintings, there will be a tag somewhere that says what it is, who painted it, and maybe some info about it. We're doing the same thing here. We're not an encyclopedia, but we still provide rare and interesting information on guns if it relates to films, which the AK obviously does.

As for the picture in question, I don't really like it either. It's a leftover image, no doubt ripped from Google, from before the page got filled with MPM2008s images. I don't think anyone would care if it was deleted, we've got other images that do what it does and look better. Captions should definitely stay, though.

Another thought: Why are 12 guage shotguns the only guns with an ID guide on the site? It would be useful to have them for other types of guns as well, particularly revolvers.

Revolvers have a lot more differences between the makes/versions. Shotguns are pretty generic looking and have less differences, so the few that are there need to be pointed out. It's a neat idea, but I can think of a lot more revolver makes and a lot of differences between them all, and doing a chart for them would be difficult.

Also about ID guides for other guns. Just effort. If no one wants to do it, then there won't be an ID page for other guns.

A history of M16 page was made and it was very informative, but if no one wants to do one on MP5s or AKs, then there won't be any.

Glad to see that you're volunteering for the effort! :D So when are you going to make the revolver page?

For the record, I did the shotgun recognition guide and I STILL have to add other models to it. But I don't have the time.

Revolvers bewilder me. I have no idea how you people can tell the difference between S&W and Ruger, let alone individual models. :confused:

I can pick out Colt Pythons, that's it.