These are getting ridiculous… They used two different LFL’s in their photos
The background of either one of them doesn’t match Street View.
I’m almost positive I’ve seen this house before, trying to do the exact same thing…
eMiLy!!! Come look at this one.
Main Photo:
Supporting Photo:
Street View:
The images are taken from here. I have taken necessary actions in this case.
This is one of the worst I’ve seen. Good catch! Also looks like it would have been SFPRP anyway.
I was NOT expecting that as the supporting photo…
As much as it seems obvious that the ML system should have picked this up, I can see why it didn’t.
Nearly everyone on this forum will shout from the rooftops that you should include the POI in the supporting photo, in order to assist reviewers, otherwise you might get a rejection for it not existing where you have put it.
This isn’t the official purpose of the supporting photo, which is there to show that there is safe and accessible space around the POI: “This will help reviewers determine whether the Pokestop location is safe and there is enough space for Trainers to play”. Niantic didn’t build the process to up-front handle the problems that cheating abusive players cause.
This means the supporting photo doesn’t have to include the POI. As a result, if the supporting photo doesn’t contain the POI and cannot even be matched to the main photo as it is taken in a different direction, the ML system cannot reject for this reason.
I could be that the supporting photo was taken from the same spot but looking the other way and there just happened to be another LFL there. Obviously, this isn’t the case, but for an automated system that works worldwide, this is definitely an edge case, and designing for edge cases is tricky.
I was referring to eMiLy because the photos were 3rd party.
The guideline on a supporting photo is: “Supporting photos should be composed to include more than just the Wayspot. Make sure it provides some surrounding context to help justify its uniqueness, outstanding qualities, or historical context. Make sure the actual Wayspot is still within the view.”
It says “More than just the photo”. You can’t judge safe access, or anything else, without the POI in the supporting photo. You can take a ton of creative supporting photos that hint at safe access when there is none.
The only time a supporting photo shouldn’t include the POI being nominated is when it’s being submitted via the web, with at least one other photo that does include the POI.
I was just quoting what you are shown in Pokemon Go when submitting a pokestop [sic].
I completely agree that you should include the POI in the support photo except in very specific situations (that I can’t actually think of, but can imagine might exist; I recently needed a supporting photo from behind a bench that had a wall behind it, so including the bench was tricky).
I had forgotten that one of the problems was the photos being stolen from elsewhere; I agree that that could have been picked up by the ML system.
