NGS pulling photos from GC.com logs?

[+HotRod205]

Look at my log for this BM...

GC.com DH2379

 

Then look at this datasheet and click on the "Photographs are available" link...

NGS DH2379

 

I had no idea they would pull photos from GC.com! Too bad they don't update the coords also. I don't mind... just good to know. Maybe I should submit my "GOOD" find to the NGS so they will have a find on there also.

[+HotRod205]

Here's another...

DH0942

 

This one has my HH2 coords added, not sure why since the next posted find was in June I wouldn't have thought they would have updated yet since DavidD said they like multiple coords...

 

I guess I should start submitting more to the NGS.

[foxtrot_xray]

Yes.

There's a couple NGS employees that, when lacking anything better to do, will look at the recent logs and pull images.

 

HH2 is less accurate than HH1 - if there's one reading, then they'll be updated to HH2. If a second pair of coords are found, they'll upgrade them (if they match) to HH1.(*)

 

(*) I'm only 90% sure on this one, I may have HH2 and HH1 backwards.

[DaveD]

I have been harvesting photos and coordinates from this site for several years to update the NGS database. Since we don't have a dedicated staff to do this I work on it as time allows between various projects. In general the process is subjective. I evaluate the photos to make sure they're clear and provide both good horizon and up close up views - I don't generally take photos with people in them or other obstrutive objects such as those where they've included their GPS receiver in the image. When someone indicates that they've recovered a station I look at the history. If someone has posted a HH position I will usually accept that as an HH2 value. If it differs by more than 10" seconds in any component I have several methods to validate that the HH value is correct. If there has been more than one recovery and perhaps several posters have given their HH values then I will mean them and call the value HH1.

 

Again this is a subjective process, but I think it's worked fairly well. I have captured more photos and updated positions for something like 10,000 stations over the past three years. I think this is a great way to take advantage of the fun that geocachers are having to help us improve the quality of stations in the National Spatial Reference System and enhance the ability of other users to find the marks either for their professional needs (surveying, engineering, GIS etc.) or just the fun of mark recovery.

[AZcachemeister]

I have been harvesting photos and coordinates from this site for several years to update the NGS database. Since we don't have a dedicated staff to do this I work on it as time allows between various projects. In general the process is subjective. I evaluate the photos to make sure they're clear and provide both good horizon and up close up views - I don't generally take photos with people in them or other obstrutive objects such as those where they've included their GPS receiver in the image. When someone indicates that they've recovered a station I look at the history. If someone has posted a HH position I will usually accept that as an HH2 value. If it differs by more than 10" seconds in any component I have several methods to validate that the HH value is correct. If there has been more than one recovery and perhaps several posters have given their HH values then I will mean them and call the value HH1.

 

Again this is a subjective process, but I think it's worked fairly well. I have captured more photos and updated positions for something like 10,000 stations over the past three years. I think this is a great way to take advantage of the fun that geocachers are having to help us improve the quality of stations in the National Spatial Reference System and enhance the ability of other users to find the marks either for their professional needs (surveying, engineering, GIS etc.) or just the fun of mark recovery.

 

Thanks Dave, we appreciate your efforts.

[+HotRod205]

Thanks Dave, we appreciate your efforts.

 

Yes Dave, thanks for your work and I'll try to take into account your tips in the future! Feel free to use as many as you want. I'll also be submitting more recoveries to the NGS now that I've figured out how easy it is.

 

Quick question Dave, yesterday I photographed one on a roadside that would not have shown up in a photo from 20-30 feet away, witness post was gone. Is it acceptable for your needs to draw in an arrow pointing to the mark location, or should I just center the mark location in the shot?

[DaveD]

Drawing arrows, boxes or circles on pictures for marks that are not easy to see is fine - make sure it's in a contrasting color - yellow usually works well. These kinds of references are also good to use on marks in buildings, bridges or other structures that have been painted over and may be hard to see.

[+GrizzFlyer]

That's pretty neat, using gc photos for official records. Haven't checked to see if you've used any of mine, but feel free to do so. Photos are important in this pastime of ours. On tri-station recoveries, do you also use photos of reference marks and azimuths if they do not have their own PID? I did MC1496 yesterday, and wound up with 12 photos. Usually I only post 3, one close-up, one close-up with the GPS, and an area view.

[UltimateCacheFinder]

Look at my log for this BM...

GC.com DH2379

 

Then look at this datasheet and click on the "Photographs are available" link...

NGS DH2379

 

I had no idea they would pull photos from GC.com! Too bad they don't update the coords also. I don't mind... just good to know. Maybe I should submit my "GOOD" find to the NGS so they will have a find on there also.

 

So, you're saying the NGS used 2 of your pictures?

[+HotRod205]

So, you're saying the NGS used 2 of your pictures?

 

Actually more than that, and it is fine with me!

[ArtMan]

Picking up an old thread ...

 

I looked at a few of the photos Dave has used, and many (most?) of them don't conform to the NGS 2003 Digital Photo Requirements document.

 

Does NGS welcome submission of non-conforming photos that nonetheless might be helpful in the future to those seeking to recover these marks? Pictures, in other words, that may be worth 700 or 800 words, if not a full thousand. If so, how should they be submitted?

 

-ArtMan-

 

PS - There is a great tool that might be helpful in captioning. It's called ImageMagick. I've used it in the past for converting file formats. But it will also do a good job of adding captions to photos. (See below.) It's a command line tool, so there definitely is a learning curve, but it's worth exploring if you're interesting in captioning benchmark or other photos. Contact me for more details if interested.

 

[+monallo]

Using AA8616 as an example, the proper caption for the close-up photo would be SL-09,AA8616,1,20101028 and the proper file name would be SL-09-AA8616-1-20101028.jpg

 

1 is close-up taken vertically

2 is eye level taken vertically, approx 1 M radius view

3 is Area view taken horizontally with direction of photo appended such as 3S.

 

Proper caption for area view would be SL-09,AA8616,3NE,20101028 assuming photo was taken looking to the Northeast. Note the specified date format. It is YYYYMMDD not MMDDYYYY. Note also the commas in caption are replaced by hyphens in the file name, not underscore.

 

Unfortunately, gc recoveries do not retain the file names for uploaded photos but assigns new filenames for the resized images.

[+Student Camper]

I think it's great to have some of our work integrated into the NGS database, but I think credit should be given and noted on the NGS datasheet.

I would not use someone elses photographs without permission, it could be considered a copyright infringement.

To some, this might be small potatoes, but I think some credit is due for the effort.

[andylphoto]

I'd say credit is always welcome, but given the circumstances, I (personally) think not necessary. Consider...

 

-The photos have been posted publicly on the internet in the first place.

-The photos have been posted with the specific intention of making the station easier to find.

-The NGS, through George, Dave, Deb, and perhaps others, has joined OUR community, offering assistance at great length to help US in OUR hobby.

 

I think having photos used by the NGS in the official data sheet is an honor. I've got several linked to datasheets...RJ0383 and TY7765 are ones I know of off the top of my head.

 

As a professional photographer, I understand copyright restrictions. However, the simple fact that the NGS has copied the photographs to their own server (as opposed to direct linking) and made them available free of charge (just like geocaching.com) to both professionals and amateur benchmark hunters like ourselves doesn't seem to be anything to get worked up about.

 

Just my $.02

 

Andy

 

I think it's great to have some of our work integrated into the NGS database, but I think credit should be given and noted on the NGS datasheet.

I would not use someone elses photographs without permission, it could be considered a copyright infringement.

To some, this might be small potatoes, but I think some credit is due for the effort.

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

They can use all of mine they want as well.