Jump to content

GC.com References in NGS Reports--OK?


pgrig

Recommended Posts

After reading about the Waymarking.com reference in another thread, I'm looking for some guidance.

 

When a site has changed a lot since the last report, or when there's some other complexity best explained through photos, I've been putting something like the following in my NGS reports: "See photos of this site on Geocaching.com."

 

Now I'm wondering--s this frowned upon for some reason?

 

-Paul

Link to comment

In my opinion, we shouldn't be referencing geocaching.com in recovery reports. First, the recovery reports might be around a long time, longer than geocaching.com will be around, so the remark may not be useful for very long. Second, geocaching.com may not always be a free service, so it may not always be accessible to the public. Third, geocaching.com may not always have a benchmarking community -- they seem to only reluctantly support benchmarking now. Finally, the NGS already has a capability to store photos (even though it is inconsistent, only partly supported, and rather difficult to submit to).

 

The internet is such a rapidly evolving place that I would hesitate to make references to it in any document that is expected to be useful for a significant length of time.

Link to comment

Thanks, Holograph.

 

Has NGS ever been approached or expressed itself concerning making it possible for folks to submit photos to it for use in a publicly-accessible database?

 

Is there any validity to the notion that "some availability (through GC.com) is better than none at all" as far as photos are concerned? [i'm assuming here that an NGS report first and foremost should stand by itself, and is only augmented by the ability to see photos of a given site. I can actually think of a lot of sites that can use this sort of clarification, particularly ones that have not been recovered for many years and have been greatly affected by development.]

Link to comment

Paul,

 

Do a search here. The NGS already accepts photos by email for future inclusion. Their inclusion is not an automated process, like submitting recovery reports. I've been emailing photos to Deb for quite a while now. There should be one close-up of the station, and one wide shot of the area, including the station in the photo.

 

There are some specific requirements though. If memory serves, she indicated the first portion of the file names must be in all caps, and include the PID and "A" for area and "C" for close-up. The last four characters in the file name must be the .JPG extension. In my submissions, I include the date, which I like for my records.

 

For example:

 

RL0015A_101108.JPG (Wide shot including the station and surrounding references)

RL0015C_101108.JPG (Close-up of the station itself)

 

For my own records, I will photograph the station with my gps displaying averaged coordinates on stations with scaled coordinates, and label it RL0015G_101108.JPG. This photo is not submitted or posted, but is solely for my records.

 

I will usually send Deb an email occasionally with a batch of photos covering a day to a month, depending on how active I've been, and if I expect to be out in the near future for more recoveries. Generally, I submit the same photos I post here--I shoot them in such a manner that they're acceptable.

 

One other requirement is that there are no recognizable people in photos submitted. I can't recall off the top of my head if there are other requirements--the email is at home and I am not. :D

Link to comment

Thank you!

 

Andylphoto--That sounds doable; I already include at least a "Detail" (C-type) photo and an "Area" (A-type) photo with each of my GC.com reports.

 

But how do you send them to Deb? As individual e-mails (like I do with Destroyed stations)? Does this mean if you file 10 NGS reports she gets 10 emails, each with two or more JPEGs attached? (What a pile of e-mail on her end!). And what do with think she does with all these?

 

Also, my Area shots are starting to include a fair amount of info added to them via SnagIt--they come out looking something like this. Does this make sense?

 

-Paul

Link to comment

After reading about the Waymarking.com reference in another thread, I'm looking for some guidance.

 

When a site has changed a lot since the last report, or when there's some other complexity best explained through photos, I've been putting something like the following in my NGS reports: "See photos of this site on Geocaching.com."

 

Now I'm wondering--s this frowned upon for some reason?

 

-Paul

I have also done that on occasion, not a substitute to a proper log, but as an added line. I do understand how this might be dated information (and yes I also send in photos to Deb), but usually I have more photos here than are allowed in the NGS format. It's easy enough to stop doing it but I thought it did more help than harm. Edited by Papa-Bear-NYC
Link to comment
But how do you send them to Deb? As individual e-mails (like I do with Destroyed stations)? Does this mean if you file 10 NGS reports she gets 10 emails, each with two or more JPEGs attached?

Yeah, that would be the least confusing method--one email message per station, with the PID in the Subject line. If you have a slew of photos, you might ask her whether she would prefer receiving a CD.

 

Also, my Area shots are starting to include a fair amount of info added to them via SnagIt

I just looked back over the main discussion with Deb about submitting photos. She said that an indication of the station's location would be helpful in the location photo, if the station is not easily visible. So some of us have been using arrows or circles for that. But I would be hesitant to add any text beyond what is shown in the sample photos on the NGS site, which I believe is only the PID. I forget--is the direction of the photo indicated in the file name, or via an annotation on the text? Follow the examples on the NGS site, whatever they show. As I recall, they have very little text.

 

Patty

Link to comment

 

But how do you send them to Deb? As individual e-mails (like I do with Destroyed stations)? Does this mean if you file 10 NGS reports she gets 10 emails, each with two or more JPEGs attached? (What a pile of e-mail on her end!). And what do with think she does with all these?

 

I will send a single email with multiple attachments, basically all that I've done during a period of benchmarking (a day/week/month) or a reasonable (5MB?) attachment limit per email. I had questioned her about submitting a significant backlog of recoveries, and she suggested "send me an email with a hundred attachments." I took that to indicate she was fine with multiple recovery photos in a single email.

 

My guess is that for the time being they get put into a folder, and as time permits, they'll be added and linked to datasheets.

Link to comment

The latest version of the NGS photo specs are at: http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/ContractingOpportu...xt_V13B_new.pdf , page 359 (Version 13C, January 31, 2008). The main difference is that I changed the order of information in the file name to place the PID first (at the request of the NGS database folks). These are the specs. for our contractors and the specs. cover both new marks and recovered marks.

 

Note the comments on cleaning off the disk prior to taking the photos. I have seen a lot of photos lately with dirt and debris covering a portion of the disk. The photos are much more useful if all the stamping can be read.

Thanks,

 

GeorgeL

NGS

Link to comment

Just looking for some input on this subject.

 

In the reports I submitted (I've done very few), I included a note that "Photos are available at (URL to the page)". In all honesty, I did not expect this phrase to be listed in the official NGS recovery page. I just figured Deb (or whomever read it) would see the photos and verify the mark.

 

I am a single, working mom, and I hunt for benchmarks for fun. I started my blog just to keep track since I'm not always able to log benchmarks on GC.com. From now on, I will attempt to e-mail my photos. But, for the ones not previously e-mailed, should I go through and e-mail them all? Or, is the "damage" done since the link is already in the datasheet?

 

Just for reference, you can find my blog with finds and photos at http://benchmarkhunting.blogspot.com/

 

Thanks for your input!

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...