Someone (who is free to identify herself if she chooses) posed the question:
Why tag?
Tagging isn't important in the near-term, to be honest. If you're looking for pictures from IRI this year, you can probably view all the images and click backward soon enough to get to most of them. However, you'll have a nightmare finding them in a few months (or years!) down the line when you're looking for them.
Case in point: Let's say you're looking for an image of one of the most dominant FRC robots in history, 71 in 2002. Searching (in the traditional sense) could require a whole range of terms, probably including permutations of beatty, team hammond, 71, 2002, and robot. Not every search is guaranteed to give you the photo you were looking for.
By having a set of standardized tags, one can use known tags to whittle things down quickly. Even the most photo-attracting teams don't have that many shots on CD, and 71 is no exception: only 73 photos at the moment, arranged chronologically by upload date. Odds are that most photos of that robot were uploaded around (wait for it!) 2002. So look up photos tagged frc71, either by finding it in the tag cloud on the tags page (which, admittedly, could have an easier interface for jumping to a specific tag), or just type it in directly:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/pho...agwithnospaces. Personally, I made a Firefox bookmark with keyword "phototags" and URL
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/tags/%s, which lets me type just "phototags frc71" in my address bar. However you get to the page of tagged images, just click over a few pages and
there it is.
When you're looking for an image of
historic robots,
legendary plays,
the old school,
the new school,
blue hair,
no hair, or just
a friendly game of catch, tagging can save the day.