Photo log verification - why this is not common?

[+Ellteejak]

Am not doing this myself YET, and just getting back into caching after taking a break from it for a few years.  But why has photo log verification not become a standard thing?  You can post a NOTE on every cache right after your FOUND IT.  Else people can just say they found the cache, without actually being there (unless it has a puzzle that requires you solve it). Just curious, and again not saying I will pick up doing this myself. 

[RuideAlmeida]

5 minutes ago, Ellteejak said:

But why has photo log verification not become a standard thing? 

 

It is considered a ALR (Additional Logging Requirement)... optional only, most of the times.

[+K13]

My GPSr does not take photos, nor connect to any internet/app/etc. My phone stays in the car when I am geocaching.

I can only imagine that a Photo of a log would be for you, the finder, and only useful IF a cache owner thought you were a liar and cheat.

[+Goldenwattle]

It's up to the CO to check logs. I do and then deal with any missing signatures.

[+Ellteejak]

makes sense

[+cerberus1]

4 hours ago, Ellteejak said:

Am not doing this myself YET, and just getting back into caching after taking a break from it for a few years.  But why has photo log verification not become a standard thing?  You can post a NOTE on every cache right after your FOUND IT.  Else people can just say they found the cache, without actually being there (unless it has a puzzle that requires you solve it). Just curious, and again not saying I will pick up doing this myself. 

 

There's a few photo-location games around.  This isn't one.    

We only "checked" our simple cache logs when it appeared to be an issue (fake loggers in the area, or it appears ours were confused for another's...).

 

But if you take a picture of a rural mailbox high up in a tree, it doesn't mean you "found" it. 

We do look at those sigs, because people did a bit more than flipping a lid...

[+cerberus1]

4 hours ago, Ellteejak said:

You can post a NOTE on every cache right after your FOUND IT.  Else people can just say they found the cache, without actually being there (unless it has a puzzle that requires you solve it). 

 

Most we know who faked logs ("no pen" the most popular...), eventually they got caught, and word went out to others.

Some decided to play the game/hobby as intended, others took a hike.  Not as much fun when you really have to be there I guess...

The hobby is simple.  To show you were there, you sign the log.  

[+Max and 99]

This discussion reminds me of a 5T cache in my area. The FTF log said she could see the cache (and probably took a photo to prove it), but said she couldn't reach/retrieve it. Her Found It log was deleted.

[+frostengel]

19 hours ago, Ellteejak said:

But why has photo log verification not become a standard thing?

 

Pictures of the cache box or the logbook are usually boring and don't add usefully to the game in my eyes.

Pictures of the surrounding don't proove anything (but you being there - so that is useful and allowed with virtual caches) and pictures of the hide are spoilers.

 

What should a photo verification show in your opinion?

 

So I do not see a useful photo log requirement (as rule) for normal caches. For virtual caches (were you can't proove your visit via logbook) that is something else. I think they should reinvent the rule for earthcaches (Or do they have? I have lost track.) as it is allowed for the new virtuals.

 

But please do not make any rules for the normal caches; who wants to add a picture does so (e. g. for terrain 5 caches were the picture is somehow useful and doesn't spoil too much).

 

Jochen