It's Panoramio, not a personal photo album

[HollyAnnSmith]

Said about Panoramio: "The site's goal is to allow Google Earth users to learn more about a given area by viewing the photos that other users have taken at that place."

I know for GE and GM the rule is "Portraits of people, or photos of people posing" are rejected unless the presence of people is unavoidable in that particular location.  That part I get.  However, I see Panoramio as a site for sharing locations, to promote people to visit those places.  Even if photos don't meet that criteria for GE and GM, I don't think Panoramio should allow people to use the site as a personal photo album for sharing close ups of their kids at home in their living room, they still end up in different places on Panoramio for the public to view.  If I did want to see that person's family, I'd friend them on FB (not trying to be rude, just my opinion).  I was browsing someone's album from my phone the other day and it was photo after photo of their family at home and a few really nice ones of their vacation, showing not only the family but the scenery in the background so I was able to get the feel of what that place was like, and the family looked like they were having a good time.  That user had very little accepted for GE, which shows that they aren't here for the original purpose of Panoramio.

[hvbemmel]

many users, among them the moderators, report hundreds of galleries on a daily basis. many of them advertising (please read this thread ) but also the me-me-me photos as we call them. The PA team is removing nearly all of those reported accounts because they are not in the spirit of PA! So we do what we can and you are welcome to join us. when you find galleries like that, don´t be shy, report them on spam<at>panoramio.com or send me a PM, i will put them in the special thread in the moderator forum then.

you can actively look with Andre Speek´s (one of our moderators) Random gallery viewer or look in the live userfeed, www.panoramio.com/userfeed (you need a reader for that)

[Tomas K☼h☼ut]

You are right Ann,

galleries with personal photos only shall go to Picasa albums, G+ or whatever else, not to Panoramio.

On the other side, showing places with people is interesting and IMHO perfectly fits into Panoramio spirit. The places without people are dead... And some personal photos shared for memories could be acceptable.

So - common sense is needed. 

P.S. I am guilty of publishing couple of "me at something" shots. I hope they are forgiven...

[jellyfish949]

I compeltly agree. Even with the randowm viewer it will not be possible to catch even a small amount of "non Panoarmaio" pics. In a short test I could report 2 or more photos (close ups, business singns, etc) in every selection. Taking into account the 88'000'000 Photos, I alow myself to think there schould be an automated process to remove the worst "Non Panoramio" things. Face recognition for sample to remove all the baby pics.

[Hans Sterkendries]

Face recognition only recognises different faces. It doesn't tell you anything about age. Or about intention because I have baby pictures in my gallery. They are strapped on their mother's back in an African vilage and they tell more about Kenya than the pictures I took of the elephants.

What disappoints me is that some time ago we were told by the team that Panoramio's reviewers have three options: they can select/deselect pictures but they can also immediatly remove them. When I flip through the Random Gallery Viewer there are a lot of things that trigger my attention: perfectly lit hotel rooms, pisture of bathrooms, people in a suit that are casually posing on their desk, a dentist or an electrician at work... And yes, I understand that the reviewers don't have the time to look into those galleries. However, what I cannot understand is the number of logos, the number of drawings, the number of 3D renderings, the number of GE screenshot... that slip through the review process! OK, 99,99% are not selected for GE but they should have been removed all together.

I understand that Panoramio relies on the assistance of community members but if it wasn't for Andre Speek's Random Gallery Viewer we wouldn't even have a decent tool to find these galleries :-(

[Tomas K☼h☼ut]

I am glad Hans appeared here. ;-)

His gallery contains excellent examples of people and people portraits which definitely do belong to Panoramio (and pity, they are not selected for GE by current rules).

As about "delete option" for reviewers - I guess they are instructed to remove porn and NSFW pictures only.

Seems to me, there is much less of them now. Even much less of them in news feed... not sure how it is possible - is porn filter immediately at the hub and applied instantly after upload?

Well, once my photo was deleted very quickly, before I've completed tagging and titles. ;-)

[hvbemmel]

Please, don´t start to report photos. Sorry if I was not clear about that. Of course it should be possible to have a little amount of person photos in your gallery. I have two explicit personal portrait photos in my 5000+ gallerey. They are even explicitly mentioned in my profile. And surely photos that fit in the context of a certain country are not an abuse of PA, as much as flowers or wild animals are not an abuse of PA.

When we talk about abuse, we talk about galleries with almost only portraits, personal festivities etc. So if you report, report galleries and then only when the fast majority of photos is not contributing anything to Panoramio. Next to showing the world we are allowed to have some fun too. ;-)

[Wim Constant]

Herman, I send you a PM with al link. I think this is what you mean

[Hans Sterkendries]

On Monday, May 6, 2013 11:23:19 AM UTC+2, Tomas K☼h☼ut wrote:

Well, once my photo was deleted very quickly, before I've completed tagging and titles. ;-)

 

What the hell were you uploading then? ;-)

My guess is that the deletion is done during the review process. Sometimes pictures get selected for GE before completing tags and titles, so I guess it depends on the workflow... 

As recent as today I found 15 escort services with pictures that left little to the imagination.

[hvbemmel]

@ Wim 

spijker - kop (for the non Dutch speakers, I can´t imagine, nail-head)

[Draken]

Am I being too naive if I think an automated process makes more mistakes than human beings?

[hvbemmel]

I think an automated process will leave us without photos

[Hans Sterkendries]

I don't know if it will make more or less mistakes but I just don't trust the judgement of an automated process. 

Some times ago I posted a number of pictures to G+. They were "porn for children": porn pictures covered with children's drawings so that all the actors and actresses (yes, that how they are called) appeared to be princesses and knights fighting dragons. Quite funny actually. However, one of them got marked as porn and apart from the people's heads you didn't see any skin.

[Tomas K☼h☼ut]

Humans make mistakes. Computers make less* mistakes, but much faster. ;-)

* I am not sure if computer driven photo review will be with less mistakes.

[Tomas K☼h☼ut]

On Monday, May 6, 2013 2:27:23 PM UTC+2, Hans Sterkendries wrote:

On Monday, May 6, 2013 11:23:19 AM UTC+2, Tomas K☼h☼ut wrote:

Well, once my photo was deleted very quickly, before I've completed tagging and titles. ;-)

 

What the hell were you uploading then? ;-)

It was a part of my Nordkapp adventure... our morning bath in the lake. Natural bath, of course, but from decent distance and from behind, with body immersed in the water... crystal clear water.

 

My guess is that the deletion is done during the review process. Sometimes pictures get selected for GE before completing tags and titles, so I guess it depends on the workflow... 

It could be that case, I don't remember the whole situation.

[Tom Cooper (AustinMN)]

On Monday, May 6, 2013 3:27:23 PM UTC-5, Tomas K☼h☼ut wrote:

Humans make mistakes. Computers make less* mistakes, but much faster. ;-)

* I am not sure if computer driven photo review will be with less mistakes.

 

I have been a computer programmer for more decades than I want to admit.  For "judgement" senarios such as image review, a great deal depends on how you count "mistakes."

 

If you mean never let a bad photo through, the computer can be programmed to do that - at the expense of rejecting many good photos.

If you mean never reject a good photo, the computer can be programmed to do that - at the risk of letting many bad photos through.

 

If you want something in between, where you minimize both rejecting good photos and passing bad ones, forget it.  Use a human.

 

Austin

[Panamon-Creel]

Agree with Tom C above.

IMO an automated system could be used to filter out clear cut cases like logos and repeatedly uploaded items (e.g. Wallpapers) that can be compared to an internal "blacklisted database" but the normal selection process will have to remain in human hands even if it has its inherit flaws.

[jellyfish949]

Face recognition can als determine the size of the face in relation to the picture. Even my Android phone can do that.. This would alow the elimination of many close ups. Other things are thinkable (logos etc). But we should not forget: Panoramio is also for fun. We are not emplyees of google or panoramio.

Taking the gigantic amount of ~80'000'000 pics and the horrible ineficience of the reporting process into account i think the enforcement of the rules would need an army of photo-policepersons. The strict enforcment of the rules needs an automated process. 

[RoarX]

Some news about automated photo processes.
Take a look at this new feature called "highlights" coming to Google+ photos: http://youtu.be/9pmPa_KxsAM?t=1h50m40s

What if this technology can be used to browse and find certain types of Panoramio galleries based on various quality criteria, and then report them automatically for review by the team. Just thinking loud here.

[Draken]

Good idea. At leas they could find a gallery full of faces, people, CGE, drawings, etc. Once those galleries are detected the reviewer (or the person in charge) can decide (with his own, human eyes) whether the account complies or not.

[Wim Constant]

Hi Draken, I sent you a PM about a few (mis)-users.

Greetings, Wim

[Adam Lasnik]

HollyAnn, I absolutely understand where you're coming from with this, and we on the Panoramio team agree that this service is not designed to house family dinner photos and the like ;).

With that said, some of this is our fault; we can (and will) do more to make it even more clear up front to users what sort of photos they should be contributing to Panoramio.  I don't have an ETA on this, but it's in the works...

[Geosergio]

I definitely agree!