We have recently been working on updating all the galleries on deviantART and right now we would like to give you a chance to have your say and have some input on each respective gallery. Ideally we would like to simplify/reduce them, so your feedback as a community is crucial to us!
So with regards to the Film & Animation side of it, at the moment these are the ideas so far (please feel free to dispute them if you don't feel they are good ideas!):
Merge Stop Motion into a top level category
At the moment we have 2 stop motion categories:
Animation > Stop Motion
Video > Stop Motion
Now really I think stop motion animation is simply stop motion animation, so having it as a sub-category in animation and video seems a bit redundant. So I think having a merger so that all stop motion animation is in the animation category alone makes more sense?
Merge Demo Reels and Logos & Production IDs
Similar to the stop motion proposal I have both Animation and Film have a Demo Reel and Production ID category, and turn them into a top level category so you don't have to distinguish strictly between animation and film. At the moment it looks like this:
Animation > Demo Reels
Animation > Logos and Production IDs
Video > Demo Reels
Video > Logos and Production IDs
But the thing is some individuals and studio demo reels would have both film and animation in. And really things like Logos and ID's often have a mix of film and animation in so I don't think it makes it any easier that you have to choose between a film and animation category for this.
Merge 'Film > Super 8' with 'Film > Video'
This is one I'm considering because although Super 8 film is a great classic medium in itself, the gallery has very few submissions, and those that are there are mostly miscategorised submissions.
Some of them are near empty with only a couple of deviations and one of them has actually nothing in at all! So it seems to me that in order to the Super 8 films are just in one dusty corner, so why not simply merge it with the video category?
In many other categories such as digital art cateories, artists often list what software and kit they've used and they don't have a particular category for it. So perhaps if you wanted to stress that you used Super 8 film you can just say in your description? For example we don't have digital art > Photoshop, so in a similar manner why keep Super 8 as a separate category when it only has a handful of submissions there?
What suggestions do YOU have?
So those are my preliminary ideas and major concerns so far, which are all mergers of some nature. But as mentioned earlier it's important for us to have your feedback on the gallery structure so far. Ideally we want to make it easier for you to choose categories in particular because there are are a lot of miscategorised submissions in many galleries.
Perhaps you think my ideas are terrible?
Maybe you have a suggestion of your own?
Any categories you believe shouldn't be there, or alternatively do you think something deserves its own category?
If you have ANY suggestions or ideas at all, we want to hear your voices! Please share this amongst your film/animation groups and lets get talking here, your gallery needs you! 
Update: A list of all the journal links available for other galleries can be found here!
What you've been saying!
"Well, the most important thing, in my opinion, would be to separate techniques / media / content of deviation from their copyright status.
My main issue is that anything, virtually, could be fanart, so why not creating a category system in which the "fanart status" (let's call it like this) can be checked/unchecked, the same we already do with the "mature content" status of deviations? The best thing would be to have three option, actually: fanart / derivative artworks / original art. The middle option could be used for fan-characters or other derived designs or whatever that is based on a pre-existing scenario, but that are still original for the most part. Maybe this middle option could create legal issue for the website, though, so even a simple fanart / original art checkable box could work.
That said, the "Manga and Anime" main category doesn't make sense at all. "Manga" are just comics produced in Japan, not a media or a genre or even a style by themselves; similarity, "Anime" is just animation produced in Japan.
If the DA category system were coherent, it wouldn't have a "Manga and Anime" main category at all, or it would have separate categories for comics and animations produced in every Country in the world too, and that isn't possible of course.
Furthermore, I often report fanarts of manga and anime wrongly uploaded in this "Manga and Anime" category, and I bet many people get confounded by it (when they don't do it on purpose).
Another idea I have, and that I hope it will be implemented, is to separate means of use of a deviation from its media/material, from the technique/style used to make it, and from its content; I mean, separate them completely in the category selection phase, in a way the can overlap when necessary.
To make an example, instead than selecting, for example "wallpaper > digital > drawing > people" consecutively, it would be better for each choice to be made as a stand alone from 2-3 separate categories that "reply" to these questions:
- What the deviation for or was made to be used for? (optional, since not all deviations have a "use", and possible choices could be "printable graphic / design", "wallpaper", "journal skin", "icon/avatar")
- Which material(s) was/were used to make it (it should be possible to choose more than one category since many deviations are made from more than one media/software; possible choices could be the classic "oil", "watercolour", "acrylics" for the traditional area, and "Sai", "Flash", "Photoshop" for the digital one; or even having a simpler choice between "drawings, illustrations and paintings", "animations and movies", "sculptures and crafts", "literature" and so on)
- What is the style/genre of the deviation? (it would be better to leave the style part aside for simplicity reasons, and only classify deviations according to genre, for example the classic "science fiction", "fantasy", "drama" etc.)
- What are the content of the deviation? (not really important, since there are the keywords for that after all).
Maybe, a tag system would work better than the current categories system, now that I think about it... but I still believe that a basic category system should be implemented, to keep things in check, for what is possible."
My main issue is that anything, virtually, could be fanart, so why not creating a category system in which the "fanart status" (let's call it like this) can be checked/unchecked, the same we already do with the "mature content" status of deviations? The best thing would be to have three option, actually: fanart / derivative artworks / original art. The middle option could be used for fan-characters or other derived designs or whatever that is based on a pre-existing scenario, but that are still original for the most part. Maybe this middle option could create legal issue for the website, though, so even a simple fanart / original art checkable box could work.
That said, the "Manga and Anime" main category doesn't make sense at all. "Manga" are just comics produced in Japan, not a media or a genre or even a style by themselves; similarity, "Anime" is just animation produced in Japan.
If the DA category system were coherent, it wouldn't have a "Manga and Anime" main category at all, or it would have separate categories for comics and animations produced in every Country in the world too, and that isn't possible of course.
Furthermore, I often report fanarts of manga and anime wrongly uploaded in this "Manga and Anime" category, and I bet many people get confounded by it (when they don't do it on purpose).
Another idea I have, and that I hope it will be implemented, is to separate means of use of a deviation from its media/material, from the technique/style used to make it, and from its content; I mean, separate them completely in the category selection phase, in a way the can overlap when necessary.
To make an example, instead than selecting, for example "wallpaper > digital > drawing > people" consecutively, it would be better for each choice to be made as a stand alone from 2-3 separate categories that "reply" to these questions:
- What the deviation for or was made to be used for? (optional, since not all deviations have a "use", and possible choices could be "printable graphic / design", "wallpaper", "journal skin", "icon/avatar")
- Which material(s) was/were used to make it (it should be possible to choose more than one category since many deviations are made from more than one media/software; possible choices could be the classic "oil", "watercolour", "acrylics" for the traditional area, and "Sai", "Flash", "Photoshop" for the digital one; or even having a simpler choice between "drawings, illustrations and paintings", "animations and movies", "sculptures and crafts", "literature" and so on)
- What is the style/genre of the deviation? (it would be better to leave the style part aside for simplicity reasons, and only classify deviations according to genre, for example the classic "science fiction", "fantasy", "drama" etc.)
- What are the content of the deviation? (not really important, since there are the keywords for that after all).
Maybe, a tag system would work better than the current categories system, now that I think about it... but I still believe that a basic category system should be implemented, to keep things in check, for what is possible."
"There needs to be an intuitive way of separating skill level, genre and technique by one clear definition. the goal being to help people find the right material and encourage the exploration of other materials.
What I would like the see would require additional page features.
I would create a "one at a time" drop bin at the top of the main page and viewers would rate the film in categories. The film would move to the gallery it is rated highest in or be included in a top rated gallery.
Once the film has left the bin the user would be permitted to submit a new one."
I would create a "one at a time" drop bin at the top of the main page and viewers would rate the film in categories. The film would move to the gallery it is rated highest in or be included in a top rated gallery.
Once the film has left the bin the user would be permitted to submit a new one."
"I feel the Development area of dA is really lacking support for Animation - it's got a big focus on Game Development - but there's nothing for Animation development. Ideally a main gallery would be great for this, but I'd love to see a big focus on Storyboards, designs, characters, layout etc. It's kind of unfair to suggest that only games have development.
How this would work I'm not sure but I feel we need to focus on it a lot more
Not only that but to find Game Development Art as a category is so hard! Because it's in Design & Interfaces it seems lumbered with things like web design, graphic design etc and it just doesn't seem to fit - and with it being specific to games there are those that design for comic, animation, film etc who are left excluded.
Personally I feel Development would be a lively gallery, people are always submitting character turnarounds to folders like digital art, game development art, traditional art and they all get lost to the wind!
How this would work I'm not sure but I feel we need to focus on it a lot more
Not only that but to find Game Development Art as a category is so hard! Because it's in Design & Interfaces it seems lumbered with things like web design, graphic design etc and it just doesn't seem to fit - and with it being specific to games there are those that design for comic, animation, film etc who are left excluded.Personally I feel Development would be a lively gallery, people are always submitting character turnarounds to folders like digital art, game development art, traditional art and they all get lost to the wind!
We don't really have a category for storyboards or character reference sheets (can you imagine how popular that would be, nearly every dA has a reference sheet of some sort haha) expression sheets, colour scripts.
For example
<da:thumb id="303768081"/>
is in 'Manga/Anime' - to suggest such work for a DD would mean it would have to be suggested as a Manga/Anime DD. Storyboards and development work that aren't film or moving (ie like you said animatics) are all miscats, technically. Plus, some people don't always make animatics.
I don't think there is a single category for storyboards on this site, actually. Unless it's in the comics as it's a sequential art?
For example
<da:thumb id="303768081"/>
is in 'Manga/Anime' - to suggest such work for a DD would mean it would have to be suggested as a Manga/Anime DD. Storyboards and development work that aren't film or moving (ie like you said animatics) are all miscats, technically. Plus, some people don't always make animatics.
I don't think there is a single category for storyboards on this site, actually. Unless it's in the comics as it's a sequential art?
A good subcategory to both animation 2D an animation 3D would be Shortie
-Filme & Animation
--Animation
---2D
----Shortie
---3D
----Shortie
A Shortie is not a full animation.
Some examples of Shorties
- A character walk cycle animation
- Animation tests, such as animating fire.
- Animation of a model with different textures on it for comparison.
- An WIP animation for an upcoming scene.
- Incomplete Animations
-Filme & Animation
--Animation
---2D
----Shortie
---3D
----Shortie
A Shortie is not a full animation.
Some examples of Shorties
- A character walk cycle animation
- Animation tests, such as animating fire.
- Animation of a model with different textures on it for comparison.
- An WIP animation for an upcoming scene.
- Incomplete Animations
Maybe it's something like this:
1. Pure Animation (no video) - currently there is stuff like this (how the various *ation categories fit here, I'm not qualified to discuss - I don't understand all those subtleties!)
2. Pure video - FX limited to titles, coloring, edits and overlays. Stills fine, but no CGI
3. Hybrid - might well have a better name. This is where 90% of modern commercial "film" would sit anyway - ask the 300+ ex-Life of Pi FX crew!
Personally, I think the that art of telling a story from shot footage, well edited, be it narrative or documentary, is worth the focus and effort.
1. Pure Animation (no video) - currently there is stuff like this (how the various *ation categories fit here, I'm not qualified to discuss - I don't understand all those subtleties!)
2. Pure video - FX limited to titles, coloring, edits and overlays. Stills fine, but no CGI
3. Hybrid - might well have a better name. This is where 90% of modern commercial "film" would sit anyway - ask the 300+ ex-Life of Pi FX crew!
Personally, I think the that art of telling a story from shot footage, well edited, be it narrative or documentary, is worth the focus and effort.
Another observation is that both stock and nature are totally missing as categories. In still photography, the APN (Animals, Plant & Nature) category is huge, because they make easy subjects (no release forms, will do many retakes, etc) Good subjects for beginners!
Separately, I suspect that some of the issues mentioned below on categorisations are really group issues, but there is not a large enough moving-image community on dA to sustain all of this. Categorise by content, simply, and then use groups to look at newbie vs collabs vs crits vs tools vs techniques.
Separately, I suspect that some of the issues mentioned below on categorisations are really group issues, but there is not a large enough moving-image community on dA to sustain all of this. Categorise by content, simply, and then use groups to look at newbie vs collabs vs crits vs tools vs techniques.
