Live in Wayfarer 3.1 is a new set of acceptance criteria! Please browse the information in this category with caution as it is in reference to the previous review guidelines. To learn more about the new criteria, see here:

When is it worth rejecting a nomination over the photo?

There was a post in one of the semi-notorious Facebook groups yesterday, but it seems to have been deleted. Maybe you saw it while it was up briefly. I guess the OP was frustrated at the commenters' insistence that their submission's photo was worth rejecting the whole nomination over.

Except... the OP was technically correct on all counts as far as I could see. The reviewers and commenters were being overly pedantic and overly harsh.

In brief, the nomination was of a trail entrance, and the named trail was clearly readable on the sign. And the OP was just griping that the only rejection reasons were due to the photo, not the nomination itself. Unfortunately the photo was admittedly not perfect: 1) you had to zoom in on the picture in order to read the trail's name, and 2) the photo was (fairly nicely composed) of the entire structure at the trail entrance instead of focused on the teeny tiny little sign. And I guess 3) this being a "meta" trail, where a larger country-wide trail followed a series of local trails, the official marker for the "local" trail was more easily visible, and that sign was only a graphic, no text.

It got me thinking a bit, and I confirmed via all the information available on the Wayfarer website about photos. We already know that pictures are correctly supposed to be rejected if the picture is out of focus, angled, have people in it, etc. But none of that applied.

The only other information about photos in the Wayfarer site is:

Should I consider the quality of the photo when analyzing a nomination?

If the photo is so poor-quality that you are unable to judge or verify the nomination, taken from a third party, or ineligible as defined in the acceptance criteria, provide a one-star vote for the question “Should this be a Wayspot?” and select the relevant rejection reason.

This didn't apply either. The photo was very definitely identifiable as a trail entrance.

I guess, if that nomination had come up in my queue, I would have lost "agreement" points, because I would have accepted it:

  1. the nomination was of a trail entrance, and the photo was of a trail entrance
  2. the trail was named, and I could read the name of the trail in the given photo
  3. If I were at the location, I would definitely be able to recognize the POI from the photo. The tiny little sign on a wooden post? Not so much
  4. photo was perfectly clear, good daylight, no watermarks, no people or even people's shadows

Given Niantic's own language (quoted above), I couldn't see a reason to outright reject the nomination based on the picture alone.

In short, the reviewers and commenters in the thread were rejecting the nomination based strictly on their opinion of the composition alone, not on the nomination's validity.

When should a nomination that follows all the rules be rejected based solely on the photo?

Best Answers


  • KatyCro-PGOKatyCro-PGO Posts: 2 ✭✭

    I think for those cases there is a catagory missing. Something along the lines of: Photo missing the purpose.

    If a trail is only allowed, when it has a name, but the name can only be seen if you zoom in, then the photo isn't great for its purpose. Pokestops, Greenhouses, Portals and such do not have a zoom in function.

    At the same time, this does not equal a bad quality photo for me. Bad quality photos to me are all those with so much direct sun light or the opposite so much shadow that you simply cannot see anything or all those hand in picture or blurry pics.

  • nineko84-PGOnineko84-PGO Posts: 47 ✭✭

    For the record, I always give 1★ to those photos with the "taken with my xyz phone" watermark in the bottom left corner.

Sign In or Register to comment.