What are we supposed to do when reviewing "artsy" wayspot photo submissions?

I just got this in the queue. Are we supposed to accept black and white photos? I don't think it can be considered "vandalised", but I'm not sure if obvious colour/effect filters are allowed.

Tagged:

Comments

  • patsufredo-PGOpatsufredo-PGO Posts: 2,078 ✭✭✭✭✭

    As long as they're not taken from another source in the internet, they should be fine, I guess.

    If you're unsure a photo is from another source or not, try to search the photo using Google Lens.

  • Jtronmoore-PGOJtronmoore-PGO Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Do they meet the criteria should be your biggest concern. As long as whats in the picture is identifiable it should be fine

  • CipherBlakk-PGOCipherBlakk-PGO Posts: 308 ✭✭✭✭

    As long as they aren't misrepresenting the object and meet criteria, it seems like it should be fine. The b&w photo is arguably much better at showcasing the wayspot in this case, anyway.

  • Yacatect-INGYacatect-ING Posts: 70 ✭✭

    Thanks. I think that the black and white photo is actually really good too, but I wanted to make sure there wasn't any rule disallowing them.

  • SPD85-PGOSPD85-PGO Posts: 163 ✭✭✭✭

    I think the focus of photos should be the wayspot/object. Many of the the more artistic ones are focused on something else, in which case, despite their aesthetic strengths, would probably result in a lower rating if not rejection from me.

  • CipherBlakk-PGOCipherBlakk-PGO Posts: 308 ✭✭✭✭

    That's true. This particular case is pretty clear. I'm not sure I've seen an artistic one that really puts the focus into question, but they're probably out there.

    Also not sure what I'd do if I ran into some kind of sparkly rainbow photo filter. That artistic merit is definitely questionable. 😂

  • Great feedback y'all!

    Like some of you said, the first photo (b&w) is much better quality than the second photo (sunset w/ silhouette). If the first photo were in color I don't think I would have anything against it. The object being nominated (I assume) is the focal point of the potential wayspot.... I think I would give it a 3-4 star since accepting a filtered photo creates the precedent for other filtered photos to be accepted. This is a great point for our team to take into consideration. Thanks for bringing it up @Yacatect-ING

  • auntergoaf-PGOauntergoaf-PGO Posts: 149 ✭✭✭


    @NianticTintino I was wondering if a photo with altered color tones would meet the "is obviously doctored" in the rejection criteria. Thank you for your valuable opinion.

  • HaramDingo-INGHaramDingo-ING Posts: 1,321 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I would like some clarification as well.

    There's quite a few photos in the city (particularly in this area of Darlinghurst) which have white borders around them, and I know they look quite bad especially when they appear in Niantic games. I've asked a few communities about other photos with like Instagram or Snapchat colour filters applied to them (or even some sort of sepia or greyscale, like the "artsy" example above) and consensus say they're ok. But like you've said, a filtered photo being added creates that precedent, and the last thing I want is to see every wayspot around my area getting the greyscale treatment because someone has added one to each and its been upvoted simply because of its "artsy"-ness or the fact that it's edgy.

    I don't remember where it came from, but I recall reading that a wayspot photo should directly correlate with what wayfinders expect to see when visiting the wayspot in question. So that the photo is natural and does not look like it's taken from a third-party source. But yes, photo guidelines say that photos that are "obviously edited or doctored" or also under/over-exposed should be considered as rejection criteria. In my area there were a lot of photos which were edited with a green tinge (a nod to the Enlightened team in Ingress) but other than that, yeah, would like more guidance.

    Someone has been adding sepia-coloured photos to some old buildings to make them look more historical, but in-game it just looks so awkward.

  • RandomExploit-INGRandomExploit-ING Posts: 437 ✭✭✭✭

    I have used filters on just one submission so far as no matter how many photos I took, it was hard to get an acceptable picture due to the subject matter and the one place you could stand to take a photo.


    Without the very obvious filters there was no way this was going to go through. Still in voting so fingers crossed.


    Another submission that keeps getting rejected I intend to use a filter on too. It's a flint wall (on national trust site) with its build date of 1861 shown using cracked flint in the wall. It's a total pain in the **** to get a good photo of it because of reflections and moss growing around it, even if wiped away. Tried at all different times of days and angles to no avail. This will never go through without filters to enhance it.

    So I think filters should be allowed within reason while keeping the image manipulation rule for what it was originally intended, which was to stop people faking images or adding/removing things to fool wayfarer voters.

  • Johnsonsine-INGJohnsonsine-ING Posts: 161 ✭✭✭

    I was looking for this topic and even though I'm late to join the discussion, I would like to add/ask something.

    I have been slightly annoyed with the very obvious filtered photos since they, as @NianticTintino says, create the precedent for other filtered photos to be accepted. We don't want that (right?). So why accept the distorted or black/white photos?

    In my city we have a huge series of highly distorted photos all over the place. Here are a few examples:

    So distorted that they have a massive white outline and they look somewhat psychedelic to me. Each to their own, but I thought and still think this type of manipulation of Wayspots is a 100% good enough reason to reject something. Honestly, I'm just following Niantic's guidelines - that are very clear on this subject, I might add...

    So what's with the vague signals here? I know I'll keep rejecting these "loud" photos since they do not reflect the actual appearances of the POIs. But I also see how one could keep doing that for eternity if these are whitelisted by Niantic...

    Sorry for reviving a quite old discussion, bus IMO this is semi-essential.

  • X0bai-PGOX0bai-PGO Posts: 1,336 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It’s funny, sometimes commenters around here like to say “Wayfarer isn’t a photography contest” but here we have some “artsy” images that are closer to the kinds of things you’d find in a photography contest and we’re talking about how they don’t meet criteria.

    Yeah, obvious filters should be rejected as doctored images. I’d include the black and white from the year-old OP in that.

  • flatmatt-PGOflatmatt-PGO Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭✭✭

    When they make it through the system, I think the best approach to the photos that @Johnsonsine-ING posted may be to submit your own photo (if there isn't already a "normal" photo associated with the wayspot). Once that photo is approved, you can request removal of the altered photos through the Photo Appeals forum. Depending on how many are like this, though, it is a lot of work for something that wouldn't be an issue in the first place if reviewers had properly rejected the photos.

  • Johnsonsine-INGJohnsonsine-ING Posts: 161 ✭✭✭

    I agree totally. But when Niantic contradicts themself, how is anyone to know what goes and what doesn't?

    Niantic: obviously doctored and over/under exposed photos are both under Rejection criteria.

    Also Niantic: "I think I would give it a 3-4 star since accepting a filtered photo creates the precedent for other filtered photos to be accepted."


    I mean, come on.

  • RandomExploit-INGRandomExploit-ING Posts: 437 ✭✭✭✭

    I thought sometime this year something changed and slightly modified /filtered images were allowed as long as they were only to improve the look of the image such as HDR, contrast etc? It might even be you can digitally remove a person from a photo within the new rules.

    Cannot remember where I read it now though.

    Obviously faking a photo or adding items that are not there is abuse still.

    P.S, my awesome sunset POI images are using no filters or modifications at all ;)

Sign In or Register to comment.