Concerns regarding the rise of heavily edited and non-representative photos in Wayspots

General Discussion
1

Hi everyone,

I am writing to express my concern regarding the growing trend of heavily manipulated and non-representative photos being submitted and approved as Wayspots, particularly within the Taiwan region.

Many submissions currently consist of:

*Composite Imagery: Photos merging night skies with daytime landmarks (e.g., star trails over pavilions/statues).

*Excessive Post-processing: Using heavy filters that turn photos into “artistic” paintings, which makes the landmark unrecognizable.

*Landscape-focused shots: Photos where the natural scenery dominates the frame, making the actual Wayspot difficult to locate for navigation.

While these photos may look visually impressive on social media, they violate the core principles of Wayfarer. Wayspot photos are meant to serve as reliable references for players to identify real-world locations, not as a gallery for digital art.

Current AI auto-approval mechanisms seem to favor high-contrast and saturated images, often overlooking these guideline violations. I strongly suggest that:

  1. The AI detection system be refined to identify common digital manipulation patterns (e.g., star composites, painting-style filters).

  2. Submissions flagged with high-level photo manipulation should be automatically routed to human reviewers for closer inspection.

I hope we can work together to maintain the quality and accuracy of our game’s map data. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Here is the analysis of the ten images based on Wayspot criteria, focusing on their adherence to the requirement for realistic and recognizable representation.

Image Analysis and Guideline Review

  1. Sunrise over Mountains: This is a landscape photography piece. It lacks a clear, identifiable subject, making it unsuitable for a navigation waypoint.

    1
    11200×781 157 KB

  2. Starry Night Pavilion: This image uses composite technology to overlay a night sky onto the pavilion. It is highly misleading and does not represent the landmark’s actual appearance.

    2
    21559×1050 543 KB

  3. Waterfront Pavilion Painting Style: The heavy use of filters has distorted the image, giving it an illustration-like appearance. It fails to show the real-world physical texture and appearance of the structure.

    3
    31280×836 266 KB

  4. Hydrangeas and Temple: While visually striking, the colors are likely oversaturated. If the real-world landmark does not match this level of intensity, it misrepresents the location.

    4
    4512×512 168 KB

  5. Sunset and Electricity Tower: The composition prioritizes the sunset and natural scenery over the electricity tower, which is the intended landmark. The subject is lost within the landscape.

    5
    51477×1108 619 KB

  6. Starry Sky over Landscape: This is a composite image. It is factually inaccurate as a representation of the site at any given time and is not a valid Wayspot photo.

    6
    62304×1536 386 KB

  7. Person on Bunker under Stars: This is a composite photo. It superimposes an artificial sky over the bunker, which violates the requirement for an accurate and honest depiction of the Wayspot.

    7
    7533×799 105 KB

  8. Sunset over Bridge: While the bridge is visible, the heavy post-processing creates dramatic, artificial lighting effects that do not reflect the actual appearance of the bridge.

    8
    81448×1086 265 KB

  9. jpg Observation Tower with Filters: The image has been processed with filters that degrade the physical details of the structure, turning it into a stylized, cartoonish image.

    9
    91080×1080 348 KB

  10. Sunset on Road: The photo is an extremely high-contrast, dramatic shot. While visually impressive, it focuses on the atmosphere rather than providing a clear, recognizable view of the specific landmark.

    10
    10512×512 53 KB

2

@NianticAaron Visual appeal does not override the fundamental necessity for accuracy and compliance with Wayspot guidelines.

3

Screenshot_20260717-130306_Firefox
Screenshot_20260717-130306_Firefox1080×2280 288 KB

You can reject them using this clause

4

So the issue is that the “automated process” is automatically accepting these when people submit them as additional photos?

5

I don’t see anything wrong with the hydrangea photo as long as those flowers are actually there. The rest are extreme.

6

Agreed, my neighbour has hydrangeas in their garden that are easily as bright as those!

7

This is the least obviously-enhanced photo of the ones posted (most of which were created for social media consumption, not for wayfarer), but there is a strong chance that the colours have been significantly enhanced. The green hydrangea leaves are a little saturated.

8

Significantly enhanced and a little saturated are contradictory statements. I don’t think we should be policing color enhancements that are still within the realm of possibility this much. We Wayfinders already have a bad reputation amongst the games players. We need to be reasonable and balanced in the way we apply the standards.

9

I agree, which is why I said this was the least obviously-enhanced photo. I am merely saying what I see as an indication that what the op is saying is correct, with the green saturation being suspicious, but I cannot state confidently that it is significantly enhanced.