ohgood

1) Do you have any idea how many photos uploaded to cache pages back then were geotagged and how many among those were unintentionally geotagged? 2) I have never encountered a problem with geotagged photos at my caches in the first couple of years. The advent of smartphones (and in particular the Iphone) has changed a lot. 3) when I started to cache I did not even own a digital camera and had to wait for photos to get developed to be able to scan them. 1 there is no way for me to know that figure, buy i would imagine with the last decade and a half, a bunch. 2 is it a widespread problem? i googled for complaints about geotags, but couldn't find anything pertaining to caches. 3 i remember those days before digital stuff. man, it's so easy now :-)

lol! thanks man that was an epic laugh :-)

Yes. And your point is? You missed the second question after that.

Well that's nifty. I'll have to update and see how it works. That could really make caching easier, just upload a tagged photo, and BAM! it's pretty much self explanatory. Can stand alone GPS units handle navigating to geotagged photos?

On the GS forums, there are individuals who feel: 1) Nothing should be done... ever 2) If it doesn't impact them, the suggestion is invalid 3) No one should care what any other cacher does and they will be the defender of all those that can't defend themselves 4) Provide valuable insight and responses Often the same individual is 1, 2 & 3 in the same or different threads as it suits them. As for me, I feel something should be done by GS but as I posted early on, that's like waiting to win the lottery. The original poster should just delete the image. But we should still, as a community, lobby to have that info removed where it shouldn't be exposed. If you don't care, don't post. But if you don't care, don't tell others they shouldn't either. You contradicted yourself by telling me what I should do, but said that I shouldn't to people what to do. Odd, but I'm OK with it, since I'm not telling anyone what to do. The post of mine you quoted only asked a question. I'm pretty good at questions. Here's another one: Do you realize geotagged photos have been around since at least 2002 (according to Wikipedia) And the game survived in spite of tagged photos for the last fifteen years ? Have you considered the impact that geotags will have today vs fifteen years ago, to geocaching ?

you don't have to pay unless your caches are subscription only. there are plenty of applications that will find all the non subscription caches, easily. we save the waypoints of the places, caches, hikes we go on, just in case someone trips over a power cord and deletes everything one day. :-)

I think I must be missing your point for all the hand wringing and arguing in this thread, you won't see tons of people clamoring for geotagged photos of puzzle caches. it's really not that big of a deal. Why bother to post at all then? (Just out of idle curiosity) look at the arguments here. they go on and on. it doesn't appear that anyone has stopped and thought for a second "hey, will this ever really impact caches?" my guesstimating comes up with : no, it will not impact caches at all.

I think I must be missing your point for all the hand wringing and arguing in this thread, you won't see tons of people clamoring for geotagged photos of puzzle caches. it's really not that big of a deal.

1) technology has matched on at a pretty good clip since the days of protective cases. we don't need cases anymore: :-) 2) sweet! i just found someone that didn't know maps easily downloaded in seconds, updated weekly (or sooner!) and free! :-) just like stand alones, we've had offline maps for quite a long time now. we can even use those old Garmin maps if you want to hang on to the past. :-) you can always turn off the phone portion, and still use the maps/camera/GPS/music/etc , while you're fishing if you like. even shoot underwater video of the catch and release ! :-) i figure if you're already dirt biking to the fishing hole, you're pretty far ahead of the game. :-)

man if this new hack hits social media... millions of people are going Google what Geo caching is, install an app, leave work early today, hike to the final waypoints, and in the process ruin the puzzles forever! OK, maybe ten people? OK really, maybe three, in a couple of weekends from now, if they remember.

just don't say "geepee esss" or "dirtbike" and you're golden. everyone with a gps or dirtbike has to up to something evil.

Have you forgotten this is a puzzle cache? The whole point of a puzzle cache is the additional layer of rules to follow in order to determine the final coordinates. Sheesh. If you don't want to do a puzzle cache, then don't do a puzzle cache. Don't accuse the person that invented the puzzle cache for you of being unfriendly for doing it. it shouldn't be embarrassing for a puzzle maker to realize a new way of breaking their puzzle... it should lead to a better understanding of puzzles. ;-)

brilliant!!! that's a tough one for some people to answer truthfully. good job.

please leave the geotag data in the photos. I've been using this for years to keep up with family adventures, and it's really nice to have, for the date/time/location. the location and found status of a cache is pretty insignificant, to me.

if you have the phone mounted, the compass will normally be thrown off by a combination of rattling around and or the metal surrounding it (bikes/motorcycles/dash/etc) so it's a good idea to calibrate the compass when removing it from a mount. no special apps are required, just wave it in a figure eight + ellipse a few times. if you're using the compass while moving you will get erroneous inputs from the metal things you pass like gates/derricks/ore. it's better to set the application to use GPS direction as the heading and then switch to compass at slower speeds. good applications do this automatically. the apps you mentioned work well, but i also use locus for recording, plotting, planning, and executing route and track records.

I'm completely lost as to what you're saying, or not saying. sorry.

To me, the comparison is not based as much on the device as it is on the software -- really, what I want the device to do. During an 18 mile hike, I used a high capacity/waterproof/rugged android and had well over half the battery available at the end of a long day without charging. I used it the same way that I would have used my Oregon 600, but the caveat is that I generally do not track unless I am on water or bushwhacking off trail. On this trip, my friend kept a track on his 60 csx to record the stats, so I saw no need to do it. Along the way, we stopped an an earthcache that required us to compare graphics that were on the cache page. My friend did not have that on either his gpsr or his phone. But I had the tools to do that, both on my iphone and android, because the apps I used saved the images on the cache page for offline use. Even when I used to cache with the Oregon, I always brought my iphone just for that reason. My preferences have always focused on the maps, display, graphics, and filtering capability of the device, which are largely software issues. Over time, I began to use the Oregon less and less -- now it is primarily a kayaking device since I can strap it on the cockpit's console and map where we are going or track where we have been. Both devices will get you where you need to go for the purposes of this game. Whatever positives you have with either a gpsr or phone may make it the right device for you. Yeah, one of the things that drives me nuts about the phone apps is a very small functionality thing that probably only matters to me, but really really matters and prevents me from even using my phone for occasional caching on the fly. But I get why someone looking for other functionality would prefer a phone over a handheld GPS. what functionality do you miss? which app ? It's not anything missing, it's just a quirk that is present in my iPhone and my Galaxy. I am quite certain that in some fashion they have the same general functionality as my Oregon, they're just not comfortable for me to use. Hmm, well I'm curious by nature. Just wondered what it was, now even more interested since the quirk is cross platform.

To me, the comparison is not based as much on the device as it is on the software -- really, what I want the device to do. During an 18 mile hike, I used a high capacity/waterproof/rugged android and had well over half the battery available at the end of a long day without charging. I used it the same way that I would have used my Oregon 600, but the caveat is that I generally do not track unless I am on water or bushwhacking off trail. On this trip, my friend kept a track on his 60 csx to record the stats, so I saw no need to do it. Along the way, we stopped an an earthcache that required us to compare graphics that were on the cache page. My friend did not have that on either his gpsr or his phone. But I had the tools to do that, both on my iphone and android, because the apps I used saved the images on the cache page for offline use. Even when I used to cache with the Oregon, I always brought my iphone just for that reason. My preferences have always focused on the maps, display, graphics, and filtering capability of the device, which are largely software issues. Over time, I began to use the Oregon less and less -- now it is primarily a kayaking device since I can strap it on the cockpit's console and map where we are going or track where we have been. Both devices will get you where you need to go for the purposes of this game. Whatever positives you have with either a gpsr or phone may make it the right device for you. Yeah, one of the things that drives me nuts about the phone apps is a very small functionality thing that probably only matters to me, but really really matters and prevents me from even using my phone for occasional caching on the fly. But I get why someone looking for other functionality would prefer a phone over a handheld GPS. what functionality do you miss? which app ?

Choosing what kind of device to use for geocaching based solely on it's accuracy is kind of like buying a care only based on how much horsepower the engine provides. aGPS doesn't help during triangulation. aGPS *uses* triangulation to establish an initial satellite fix after a cold start. That's especially useful when the GPS is turned on a long distance from when it was last turned off. Once the satellite fix is obtained, aGPS doesn't "help" triangulation or improve accuracy except under the rare condition when satellite links are lost but there is still access to cellular towers. In that case, it's only academic as the accuracy of triangulation by cellular triangulation isn't good enough for geocaching. yep, i'm familiar, thanks for the explanation though, i'm sure someone could understand it's uses better because of that.

is particularly strange as it suggests that it's significantly more accurate under dense tree cover than it is under medium tree cover. Which does make me wonder how the tests were performed. maybe there were more than a couple times the paid folks went fishing, and let hte highschoolers finish up ?yes, i agree, several of the results are odd and counter what i would expect to see. for instance, the 680t vs the motorola.

yep. odd, ain't it ?

Thanks for the links. I don't see a description of the actual measurements. Accuracy of GPS is not a constant over time and varies depending on the available satellites. I also wonder how the canopy types were achieved beeing identical for all measurements. What exactly do you draw from this report? Here e.g. the measurements for a Garmin 650T and a Samsung Galaxy S5: My interpretation would be that both have approximately the same accuracy in the open but that the Garmin is better with restricted reception conditions. yep, that's what it shows for the s5 vs 650t... but then i compared the motorola vs the 680, and i think someone might have handed the project over to a highschooler to finish up, while the paid folks went fishing. the main thing was to pass on yet another supposedly trustworthy, and fully documented, accuracy study. people can draw whatever they want from it, or go out and test for themselves. either way, it's fine by me.

ahem, people tested stuff. how why - https://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/accuracy/part3/chapter3 results - https://www.fs.fed.us/database/gps/mtdcrept/accuracy/ i noticed the thread got quiet earlier when i asked if people thought that agps helped during triangulation (yep, still calling it that) and instead argued other things. shall we ignore the results above now, and argue about the colors of the gps ? sweet, happy 2017

The good phone apps will decrypt the hint by touching it twice. (The hint)

It is documented here 8^) This is pretty much my point. It's known well enough to be documented on wiki's but it's not in official Garmin documentation such as their User Manual http://static.garmincdn.com/pumac/Oregon_6xx_OM_EN.pdf I ended up learning more about my device from the garminoregon6xx.wikispaces.com than I did from Garmin (i.e. manual and their webpages.) I don't know when that page came about, but I didn't find it until sometime after Geowoodstock 2013 at which point I had it a couple weeks before going to Geowoodstock 2013 and then got to spend a lot of time getting very familiar with it's capabilities as we had a long roadtrip from Houston, TX to Lakeland, FL Overall I still love my Oregon 600, but there's just those couple of things that I need to complain about on occasion. My pet peeve was probably more about the fact that Garmin didn't document that you need to calibrate it every time and also implied that it was calibrated from the factory and would auto-calibrate over time in their manual which either it did a crap job of it or didn't do it at all. I won't give Garmin any credit for a community driven wiki page that has it documented well. Just about every device out three could use a quick compass calibration. I wouldn't beat up Garmin about that. No telling if is the changing environment around the device, the poles, or vibration, but they all get better after a quick calibration.