Are these really "low quality photos"?

I'm getting rejects recently wich all have the same issue marked:

"low quality photo"

I actually don't understand that. I have made many contributions with the same camera and never had any issues like that, but the last rejections I got all have this very same rejection cirteria marked.

All of those Photos look good on mobile, only if you enlarge them by a lot on PC Monitors they become a little (!) blurry, but stay recognizeable still.

Isn't the option "low quality photos" for pictures that are so blurry you can't see anything on them or are pitchblack even? Not for photos where people think "hey, get a abetter cam before you submit here, we're the photo submitters elite!"

I'm really upset about my wayspots getting rejected left and roight because the photos MIGHT get blurry when extremely enlarged, wich doesn't happen on phones(!) and isnt a reasonable criteria for PC; because niantic games aren't played on PC.

I also want to add that i successfully submitted 50 wayspots in my Area and all the pictures on them look good in game. They all were taken by the same camera.

Here are some of the rejected pictures.

And the Enlarged Versions:


  • SeaprincessHNB-PGOSeaprincessHNB-PGO Posts: 735 Ambassador

    1) I need more context. I think you're nominating the written script, but I don't know why.

    2) The message board is pretty obscured by the surrounding plants. Framing the photo more tightly on just the board would be better.

    3) I think people just think the item is ugly. The photo could have a little better lighting but it shouldn't be rejected as a poor quality photo.

    4 and 5) Again, those images are fine but I think people are rating the item as ugly. Bad reviewing.

    6) I have no idea what you're submitting. That looks like a photo of a street to me.

    7) I think people are being picky.

  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 2,694 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I would not reject any of them for being low-quality but you would do much better if you shot some of them in better light and/or framed some of them better. It's not talked about much but there's an emotional quality to reviewing and reviewers seem to rate higher or lower based on whether the main photo feels good or bad to them.

    The board that's hiding in the bushes would be more appealing if the framing was tighter-- more sign, less foliage.

  • kawin240-INGkawin240-ING Posts: 317 Ambassador

    Wenn du willst, ich kann dich in die deutschprachige Gruppe (discord, Telegram, Facebook) einladen @Beneathar-PGO

    Du hast dir einige Sachen ausgesucht, die sowieso nur sehr schwer oder gar nicht akzeptierbar sind, und manche Bewerter handeln gegen die Regeln.

    Schriftzug am Haus: manche würden sagen zu viel Qualitätsverlust beim reinzoomen, finde ich jetzt aber nicht so. Wenn dein 2. Foto nicht das haus mit ganz viel Umgebung zeigt, kannst du auch dafür Low Quality Photo bekommen, das gilt hier generell, auch wenn es nicht der richtige Ablehngrund dann ist. Wenn das Haus ein einzelnes Privatgrundstück ist kann es sowieso nicht akzeptiert werden.

    Schwarze Bretter sind nur zulässig, wenn es Informationen für die Gemeinde von kultureller Bedeutung gibt. Du hast da nur Totenanzeigen, das wird dir niemand akzeptieren mit egal welchem Ablehngrund, obwohl die Fotos in Ordnung sind bis auf das eine Schild, wo man vielleicht etwas näher ran könnte.

    Ein Wehr, was ist daran etwas zum entdecken, bewegen, sozial sein? Damit wirst du große Probleme haben. Das Foto ist leicht verschwommen, und es gibt Bewerter da draußen, die alles ablehnen was nicht im Tageslicht gemacht wurde (was natürlich Blödsinn ist, aber bei Fotos in Dämmerung oder Abends wird dir das oft passieren mit der Low Quality Photo Ablehnung)

    Bei dem Gebäude sieht man so jetzt gar nicht was das sein soll und da ist ziemlich viel Straße drauf, das geht bestimmt besser. Ist immernoch kein Grund für die Fotoablehnung, aber da kann man was tun.

    Bei dem Brunnen würde mich dein 2. Foto interessieren. Hier passt alles und es sollte nicht für Foto abgelehnt werden

  • PinkSn0rlax-PGOPinkSn0rlax-PGO Posts: 5 ✭✭

    I agree I would also need context. For example, if the script was the item of interest on the first pic, then yes, I would likely reject it. 2nd one I would definitely reject, regardless of context. Third and fourth I need context, but its not clear to me what the object of interest is- the framing is not great and the photos are very dark and the saturation is poor. I'm not sure if I would reject then without more details, but if they came through as photo approvals with other photos that were better, I would definitely overturn them for something better since they are iffy.

  • X0bai-PGOX0bai-PGO Posts: 1,636 ✭✭✭✭✭

    “Low quality photo” doesn’t mean only what appears in the Niantic description, it also is used by reviewers to say that your image doesn’t clearly show the subject, isn’t centered/square, or just isn’t very good in general. Reviewers have very limited feedback tools, and sometimes it’s difficult to use the reasons available to convey the necessary message. Almost all of these images have too much space at the bottom, with the exception of the first one, which has too much at the top. That’s not to say that this rises to the level of rejection, but to indicate that there is room for improvement.

    The bridge image is tilted and taken at dusk; while the sky is not yet dark, I think the lights of the car in the background did this is in. Also, this doesn’t look to my eye like an eligible subject.

    I agree that the info board votes are because the subjects are ugly, covered in bits of old papers with little on them now, they appear unkept and unimportant.

    The image of the street does not clearly show an eligible subject. I’m not sure what you’re nominating, but if it’s depicted there, that image does a poor job of conveying it.

    The last one, I think, is disorienting because it’s so off center the eye just follows the bricks right off the image to the bottom left. I don’t know that I would reject this image outright, but definitely room for improvement here.

  • Babarushki-PGOBabarushki-PGO Posts: 165 ✭✭✭

    No. They’re not low-quality photos. This is true especially because Niantic defines “low quality” as “pitch black” or taken from a car.

    i would laugh at niantic’s definition of “low quality” if it wasn’t so wantonly abused in reviewing.

  • Shilfiell-INGShilfiell-ING Posts: 1,197 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 19

    "Pitch black" or "taken from a car" are two examples Niantic uses to illustrate what makes a low quality photo: that does not mean it's a complete list of reasons why a photo can be rejected as Poor Quality. Images can also be quite blurry, the photographer's finger could be partially over the lens, or as it happened in pre-Wayfarer days the image could be rotated 180º or even completely inverted. However, "taken at dusk" or even "taken at midnight" are not rejection reasons - the key is that the subject must be clearly identifiable. If the subject can easily be identified by a quick look, and the candidate is the visual focal point of the photo, and there are no obstacles (like the aforementioned finger) blocking a clear view, then Poor Quality Photo is not likely the rejection reason one should choose. A slightly tilted image of an ineligible object should be rejected for what it is...our old friend Does Not Meet Criteria, disguised in the modern parlance as Other Rejection Criteria. Other rejection reasons may make people think that if they just get a better, more perfect, high-noon-no-reflections-no-license-plate-straight-angle photo, their candidate might be accepted. That's not the case.

Sign In or Register to comment.