Low Quality Photo, but wayspot still identifiable

I've recently had two nominations rejected for "low quality photo". Both of these photos are blurry and unideally angled, but the object I'm nominating is still very identifiable and visible. I thought this rejection criteria was only used for severely bad photos where the object isn't identifiable.

I'm not really sure how to get a better photo of either candidate since both the trail markers are high up and I'm... Not a very tall person lol. My phone doesn't have the best camera when zooming in either (clearly)...


Comments

  • dman41689-PGOdman41689-PGO Posts: 205 ✭✭✭

    the trail marker photo looks fine its just some reviewers tend to reject trail markers becausefor some reason they thinkit doesn'tmeet the criteria even tho they do. the first one however probably should've been a picture of the footbridge instead.

  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 1,949 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited June 4

    I have a friend who uses a selfie stick if they want to take pictures of an object quite high up or simply to get a better view to encompass a POI.

  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 1,949 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Sometimes a blurry photo makes reviewers think it is that way because of it being faked. Not sure of exact location so didn’t check out street view - if it’s not on street view make a photosphere

    In the second picture the part that stands out is the simple blue rectangular bike sign which isn’t acceptable with the London loop signs in background. So you need to try and find a way of getting a better picture. Having looked on streetview I think you are best sticking with the sign. Not sure if the plaque on the bridge says anything interesting, and although the bridge looks as though it is not used by cars some reviewers may think that the bridge does have a dedicated footpath therefore reject it. If you have an appeal You could use it on that submission.

    unfortunately some people don’t like the markers and will get very picky looking for reasons to reject.

  • X0bai-PGOX0bai-PGO Posts: 1,375 ✭✭✭✭✭

    This is a case of criteria vs reality

    I’d say the images presented here adequately meet the bottom of the criteria threshold. But criteria alone does not necessarily generate an approval. The primary image is the first thing the reviewer sees, and your chance to make a first impression. Blurry, off-center, crooked, or steeply-angled images put reviewers off, and you can generally believe that when a reviewer has a rejection reason at the ready, they’re going to use it. Clear, centered, square, well-lit images will do a better job of telling the story of your nominations and impressing your reviewers (at least to the point of moving them away from the first available rejection reason).

    Overall, raise the standard of your effort from the bare minimum to the best that you can do. Reviewers will respond.

  • Angeljho-PGOAngeljho-PGO Posts: 82 ✭✭✭

    "Overall, raise the standard of your effort from the bare minimum to the best that you can do."

    I don't understand why I'm being accused of submitting lazy nominations I honestly did my best with the limitations I had? These nominations are just high up and my phone camera couldn't zoom in on them well enough so they're taken from a low angle and are blurry. It was my understanding that this wouldn't affect the eligibility of the nominations but I suppose I was wrong.

    I'm probably just going to invest in a selfie stick since that seems like an inexpensive way to get better wayspot photos which are higher up. Thanks.

  • Angeljho-PGOAngeljho-PGO Posts: 82 ✭✭✭

    Just for clarity, I submitted a photosphere of the first one and the second was visible on street view (I checked beforehand).

    The plaque on the bridge does have cool information on it but the road is used by cars as there is a car park on the other end unfortunately.

  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 1,949 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That sounds all good then pity about the plaque as people obviously walk there safely but it wouldn’t be acceptable.

    I think it’s worth trying to appeal or try the selfie stick or bribe a tall friend.

    In essence they both are potentially good so keep trying 👍

  • ElwynGreygoose-INGElwynGreygoose-ING Posts: 244 ✭✭✭✭

    No i think the issue here is that, obviously, the reviewer doesn't actually know how much effort you put into the nomination, they can only go by what they see in front of them, and make assumptions based on that. Your title and description are great (which I have to say is never the case on the trail markers I get to review) but it's the photo that will create the first impression, and often what members of this forum say is try to inform nominators of how their submission will be perceived by reviewers. So nobody thinks you're lazy, I hope, but rather, that's what somebody seeing that photo might think.

  • RandomExploit-INGRandomExploit-ING Posts: 446 ✭✭✭✭

    The submission and picture are fine, it's pedantic reviewers at fault here. Common problem with wayfarer.

    Resubmit it and you might get less picky reviewers. Alternatively appeal it but the wait could be long.

    Or you can bend over backwards spending hours getting the perfect picture, description and essay to please reviewers who think you need to do this to reach 'their' idea of what is needed instead of accepting what Niantic want.

    Choices...although it's a shame reviewers put you in this position in the first place

Sign In or Register to comment.