definitively untitled
Six to Close Theme by Richard Woodson
Home  |  Info
About: concentrating on the whatever
नमस्ते
bits&bites: An open letter to vintage editors A quick search on the term reveals that the popular use of the term vintage is definitely NOT agreed upon. One web site said it was something that is so old that it’s now in fashion again… For me it’s a nearly useless term when used as a tag. It’s kinda like calling something ancient. It’s original use as a designation for a specific year as in wine is THE definition. In my humble observation once a word gets a hashtag it no longer has an agreed upon meaning. It evolves in many different ways and each use has it followers. BTW I have now been following your Tumblr so long that it’s vintage on my dashboard.

billyjane:

[considering this post of mine that was ‘featured in vintage’]

I’m just curious, do you ever take a second [or two or ten] to stop and think if something that was tagged as vintage [and this post certainly wasn’t] is really vintage?

I don’t want to sound ungrateful but if something is from…

  1. slang-king said: technically the 70’s might be vintage, but for someone my age vintage is 1930’s or before
  2. thetranscendentalmodernist said: Ya, to me vintage is 40s and before, whereas 50s and above is retro. Though, I have a tendency to not tag any of my 1940s posts as “vintage”, but tag the ones that are 1930s and before. 20s years isn’t enough for me either :)
  3. cottonm reblogged this from billyjane and added:
    A quick search on the term reveals...the popular use of the term vintage is definitely NOT...
  4. numbereight said: 25+ years is vintage 75+ years is antique
  5. mudwerks reblogged this from billyjane and added:
    [couldn’t agree more - although everyone apparently has their own idea...what constitutes...
  6. siobhansterling said: I agree with you in that I don’t see those decades as really *vintage* yet. However, the 1970s were 40 years ago now, which with the generally accepted terms of vintage being 20-75 years & antique being 75-100+… the editors are technically correct.
  7. lushlight said: Total agreement- I posted a concert imagine of Prince recently- 1998- found it reposted and tagged ‘vintage’ - and as to credits!! If someone is chosen to curate our images they should have some understanding as they have a ‘covert’ authority-
  8. hoodoothatvoodoo said: Oh I totally agree. 20 years is not long enough to have become vintage, that is just crazy!
  9. theloudestvoice said: Explore is just a disaster from start to finish, as far as I’m concerned. The more people who speak up about it the better. Thank you for this!
  10. tuesday-johnson said: I definitely agree with you. However, I’ve been smugly told that 20 years is the cut off, as well. My biggest issue is the sourcing, or lack thereof.
  11. sp-a-m said: I’ve noticed this too, and not only in the ‘vintage’ tag. Another thing I see, if none of those editors follow you, you will never be listed, even though it might be properly tagged, no one will ever “explore” your blog. A new form of censorship?
  12. billyjane posted this