A few days ago I submitted a outdoor gym by the beach as it’s a great place for exercise. This area is extremely busy so it was hard to take a good photo, but I ended up choosing one that, in my opinion, does not have any identifiable people in it. The photo guidelines state that photos are not allowed if they include “prominent people, body parts, or live animals”. I do not think the people in my photo are “prominent”, they are shown in the distance and just from behind (and one, I think, is a dog? It’s hard to tell since they are so far away). They are not the focus of the photo or nomination.
I appealed the ML rejection, and my appeal was rejected since “the nomination main image contains some peoples”. This to me does not seem to be in line with the photo guidelines which specify they need to be prominent features of the photo to be rejected. It’s going to be hard for me to resubmit this since I’ll leave the island tomorrow and am unsure whether I’ll be able to take new photos, especially ones without any people in them.
I would love everyone’s input on this issue. What counts as “prominent”?
3 Likes
I hope that Niantic will take a second look at this, and settle the issue around people in photos:People in photos
Assuming this looked good on satellite/street views, I would have accepted an outdoor gym at the beach.
2 Likes
Thanks Cyndie! Yes it is visible on satellite imagery and street view
3 Likes
I do not think these people are recognisable or prominent and would not have rejected this nomination
I think the appeal should be overturned
1 Like
Hi is it possible to see the full photo please it’s hard to tell from the screenshot?
I think the line here is between the main photo and the supporting photo. The main I would accept, because you cannot see anyone’s face, but the supporting photo has someone central to the picture and you can see their face, so if this was the main I’d say the rejection was correct, but I don’t think the main photo you chose was problematic
1 Like
Yes this is why I chose the photo I did as the main, even if it meant ML didn’t quite understand what it was looking at (unless it detected people and can reject for that). As far as I am aware there is no rule for people in supporting photos
1 Like
Seems like someone saw this and agreed with our assessment 
Thank you!
7 Likes
Glad you got a positive result .
Yes you certainly can have people in the supporting…..I sometimes deliberately have them to illustrate popularity ( but I do explain that😂)
Personally I found the 2nd supplementary better as with 2 items it looked a more substantial area. And either waiting 2 seconds or a crop like this would have removed the element of doubt about people - which must be a good thing.
Ideally more centred on the poles.
2 Likes
I personally do not see a gym in this photo, just random poles. The other photo has the weights in the frame, which is what makes it clearly a gym to me. I do agree with you that it is always best to try not to have people in the photo.
1 Like
Yes that was my train of thought as well, I agree that the supporting plus crop is more beautiful but it didn’t read as “gym” to me
I love that we look at things differently. 
I saw the weights as items easily moved and placed anywhere. So the focus was just 2 poles. And that didn’t look like a gym to me
I will say this sort of arrangement is not one I have seen before. So by having more permanent t looking items in the picture to me made it looked more of a place.
The supplementary were doing a good job of showing it was more than the first impression but that first impression does matter.
Yeah I think these are really cool tho! There is another one a kilometer or two away, as mentioned in my supporting statement, which is a bit more easily identified as a gym (not my nomination/photo) but it overall is made from the same materials etc. Not sure who installed them but they are permanent and very popular
2 Likes
