Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Rathergohiking

It is time. BRING BACK WEB CAMS in a limited way

Recommended Posts

Time to have new web cam caches. It has been done with virtuals, similarly with the evolution of lab caches. Limited amount of hiders resulting in above average quality. WHY NOT WEBCAMS??

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Rathergohiking said:

WHY NOT WEBCAMS??

They will never come back because of Privacy issues.

 

Also because the webcam 'owner' doesn't even own the webcam 90% of the time.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Lynx Humble said:

Also because the webcam 'owner' doesn't even own the webcam 90% of the time.

Why should that be an issue? I don't own any of the locations where my caches have been located. It is enough to have permission.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, niraD said:

Why should that be an issue? I don't own any of the locations where my caches have been located. It is enough to have permission.

You have control over the container that you place but you don't have any control with an url owned by city/university/private company.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Lynx Humble said:

You have control over the container that you place but you don't have any control with an url owned by city/university/private company.


I can’t really prevent the container from being muggled (or the webcam URL changing) and I can’t prevent the entire hiding spot from being destroyed (or the webcam being taken offline). Unless I own the land (or the webcam). What exactly is the meaningful difference?

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

It is not a "cache", by dictionary definition, something tangible you can actually put your hands on.

 

We already have intangibly weird geology lessons pretending to be something real.  You want more of this?

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

Mmm, I know of a webcam that's the cache owner's land and camera.  I wonder if on that basis, "bring back webcam" might be possible. 
 

It's extremely low on my list of stuff the site should be spending energy on. I'm behind Viajero Perdido on this.

 

Edited to add that there is Waymarking webcam category.  In case the interest is in webcams, rather than webcams as geocaches. 

 

I'm not going to hammer anybody on "only for the stat". Caching for stats is part of caching,  more a part sometimes and less a part sometimes. I chase oldest cache in state when I can, and spent a fair amount of effort and energy on Jasmer and Double Jasmer, as well as bringing my average T rating to +2. This is pure stats caching.  

 

Edited by Isonzo Karst
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

From time to time, I've heard or read from cachers that they like to do webcams, and make sure that whenever they come close to a Webcam cache, they'll go there and log it. The reason behind was always(!) that webcam caches are a "rare icon", and they do it for their stats. For all other cache types, incl. Virtual, I've heard other reasons why they can be fun to do. Stats may play a role for types like Virtual or LBH, but there are always cachers who love these types for their unique characteristics. Not so for Webcam. Nobody ever said to me, like, "I love to do Webcams, because it's fun to find the best spot for the photo, or do antics requested by the owner, etc." .

 

Bottom line: Nobody loves webcam caches for what they are. It's only about statistics. Therefore, in my view there's no reason to bring back webcam caches.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Lynx Humble said:
7 hours ago, niraD said:

Why should that be an issue? I don't own any of the locations where my caches have been located. It is enough to have permission.

You have control over the container that you place but you don't have any control with an url owned by city/university/private company.

 

But neither does the CO have any control over the feature chosen for an Earthcache or a Virtual (most of the time).

 

 

 

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

When webcam caches were introduced they basically all required teamwork: someone in the field and someone at home at a computer. With petty much everyone having a smartphone most of the challenge is gone.

 

Webcams also seem like they have the highest rate of bogus logging. "The webcam is down so here is a selfie" is their equivalent of throwdowns.

 

There's also privacy concerns. ALRs are gone. Earthcaches can't require photos. Virtuals, when brought back in limited numbers, essentially discourage requiring photos of the cacher at GZ with this restriction: "Photos of the geocacher at the location; a face cannot be required in the photo." That last part probably sinks webcams single-handedly or at least kind of defeats the point. It's much easier to have a proxy in a regular photo than a webcam.

Edited by JL_HSTRE
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Rathergohiking said:

Time to have new web cam caches. It has been done with virtuals, similarly with the evolution of lab caches. Limited amount of hiders resulting in above average quality. WHY NOT WEBCAMS??

I love your sense of nostalgia.:wub:

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

Bring back webcams! Bring back locationless caches! And we need more APE caches! Why? Because they are all listed in the list of cache types and the zero in those fields are annoying! Not to mention that there are badges for APE and webcam in project-gc! And I must have that diamond badge! I want a tight trail of super easy APE and webcams! (Note: irony.)

 

Isn't that the "problem"? I am really not that eager to stand before a slow webcam and wait until it takes a really poor photo with me down in the corner, if I didn't do it for the "many types in one day" badge.

 

Is there any other reason for virtuals? What do they do that a multi-cache or a Wherigo can't do?

 

The solution is not to bring back a cache type that didn't turn out well and was removed, the solution is to tidy up the lists and taking out some old history, moving them to some out-of-the-way place.

Edited by Ragnemalm
  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post

One thread a year on the subject ('17,'18, '19) isn't too bad I guess.    :D

 

IIRC we had three people trying to capture our one webcam for us.  :)

 - That one was at least archived by it's Owner (building sold), and not by a Reviewer like many.   

Much easier now with sorta-smart phones, but we see the same issues as the old ones with downtime.

A selfie or any pic other than the webcam isn't a "find".   If it's down you go elsewhere.

 That's still not happening.  You'd think if they're so popular, folks would refrain from creating the issues that get 'em archived.   Sheesh...

Guess there's a stat somewhere on caches you've placed ...

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, baer2006 said:

Bottom line: Nobody loves webcam caches for what they are. It's only about statistics. Therefore, in my view there's no reason to bring back webcam caches.


I loved this one: https://coord.info/GCJ6R5

 

(Otherwise, I do agree with most of what you say.)

 

Edited by IceColdUK
Otherwise...

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

When webcam caches were introduced they basically all required teamwork: someone in the field and someone at home at a computer.

I think "required" is a bit strong. Sure, that's the recommended approach, but I got webcam photos of my first 2 webcams without teamwork and without a mobile device.

 

But yeah, a smartphone makes it a lot easier.

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, Rathergohiking said:

WHY NOT WEBCAMS??

BECAUSE I STILL HAVEN'T WORKED OUT HOW TO DO THEM - EVEN WITH A SMART PHONE! :wacko::(

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

Webcams also seem like they have the highest rate of bogus logging. "The webcam is down so here is a selfie" is their equivalent of throwdowns.

 

3 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

A selfie or any pic other than the webcam isn't a "find".   If it's down you go elsewhere.

 

Having done a number of Webcam caches this past summer and looking through the logs to prepare, I can confirm that there's a significant amount of bogus-logging occurring on Webcam caches. It seems like some cachers simply can't stand the thought of walking away from a Webcam cache with a DNF.

 

Part of the problem is that many of the Webcam owners are no longer active anymore, or aren't policing the logs if they are. As a result, the bogus logs remain in place and give the wrong impression to future "finders". New Webcams may not experience the issue as badly due to active owners.

 

Honestly, I'm on the fence about whether to bring back Webcam caches or not. My gut feeling is to say "no", but I can't really put my finger on specifically why.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

Honestly, I'm on the fence about whether to bring back Webcam caches or not. My gut feeling is to say "no", but I can't really put my finger on specifically why.

 

Maybe it's just my little area, but a bunch feel the new virtuals aren't the same as the original ones that were scarce.   Rarity is the draw.

I'd feel the same if "new" webcams came out.  Rarity gone, no longer a big deal, and still the same ol' issues.

 - There is already a web cam category in Waymarking...

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, Rathergohiking said:

Time to have new web cam caches. It has been done with virtuals

 

Virtual caches may offer a variety of tasks to fulfill and they may show you great places.

Webcam caches have always the same task and usually show crowded places in cities.

 

I wouldn't compare these two - like apples and pears.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

Maybe it's just my little area, but a bunch feel the new virtuals aren't the same as the original ones that were scarce.   Rarity is the draw.

 

By the 2010s, nearly all surviving Virtuals had a "wow" factor. Many are in places a Traditional still wasn't feasible. 

 

Most of the Virtual Rewards have been pretty good, but some of them have felt a bit wasted and many have been in places where a Traditional could have gone. I don't think rarity is the issue, but that the average quality of the new Virtuals is less than the average quality of the surviving old Virtuals.

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

Maybe it's just my little area, but a bunch feel the new virtuals aren't the same as the original ones that were scarce.   Rarity is the draw.

 

Agreed, however I think also because of the rarity, quite often people go out of their way still to do the minimal requirement just to get the icon. Sometimes even the most rewarding of Virtuals got logs 'in passing'. Rarity is a double-edged sword.

 

1 hour ago, JL_HSTRE said:

Most of the Virtual Rewards have been pretty good, but some of them have felt a bit wasted and many have been in places where a Traditional could have gone

 

Well, then, traditionals could still go there ;)

 

15 hours ago, frostengel said:

I wouldn't compare these two - like apples and pears.

 

Or pears and bears!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I rather think it´s time to get rid of the remaining ones.

 

I came across some, where the online availeability was long gone and people loged selfies instead :rolleyes:

Yes, I also had great fun with a few, but I feel it´s not realy a geocaching thing any more. There´s no real task with it. It´s easy to temper, I mean you could randomly take a screenshot from any webcacm and claim that you are tat person with the red cap on.

Edited by DerDiedler
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/2/2019 at 6:19 AM, JL_HSTRE said:

There's also privacy concerns. ALRs are gone. Earthcaches can't require photos. Virtuals, when brought back in limited numbers, essentially discourage requiring photos of the cacher at GZ with this restriction: "Photos of the geocacher at the location; a face cannot be required in the photo." That last part probably sinks webcams single-handedly or at least kind of defeats the point. It's much easier to have a proxy in a regular photo than a webcam.

 

I am not arguing for or against new webcams really, even though I believe existing webcams should be made maintainable.

 

And I know some would use privacy as the excuse. But the way I see it is, logging a webcam in and of itself is 100% optional. In this case, if you want your privacy then don't log the find.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/3/2019 at 5:21 PM, DerDiedler said:

I rather think it´s time to get rid of the remaining ones.

 

I came across some, where the online availeability was long gone and people loged selfies instead :rolleyes:

Yes, I also had great fun with a few, but I feel it´s not realy a geocaching thing any more. There´s no real task with it. It´s easy to temper, I mean you could randomly take a screenshot from any webcacm and claim that you are tat person with the red cap on.

What you say here apply to old caches in general. Many EC and virtuals don't have active  owners and you can just write any krappe in you answer or gimp your thumb on some old photo. No one cares. Lots of mysteries have been archived because URLs have become unavailable. It happens and it's not the fault of the CO or the cache type.

 

I've done 2 webcam caches. Both were easy and great experiences. Just needed a special tool (laptop) with me and that's it. I would gladly do more. I don't care about virtuals and ECs and honestly only do those because of challenges (or if they are really old). 

For me, rarity is not the reason. It's because they offer some variety to caching. The second WC also filled the last hole in my "hidden date" calendar so that was an extra attraction.

 

So my vote : more webcams please and I think we have enough virtuals already.

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, papu66 said:

So my vote : more webcams please and I think we have enough virtuals already.

 

Perhaps your region has enough virtuals but that's not the case everywhere. My region has no old virtuals, got none in the V1 rewards and just the one in the V2 release. Is one enough forever? This is the distribution of the V2s published so far in my state. As you can see, there are lots of places that missed out.

 

image.png.02d9ec5a0fc25f29e86e019adccb251c.png

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Perhaps your region has enough virtuals but that's not the case everywhere. My region has no old virtuals, got none in the V1 rewards and just the one in the V2 release. Is one enough forever? This is the distribution of the V2s published so far in my state. As you can see, there are lots of places that missed out.

 

 

That is of course subjective matter and depends on the area. My view is that virtual should be placed only if having a physical cache is impossible. They are handy here because this area is well saturated. They seem to be popular because easy place and demand minimal effort from both finders and CO.

But this is besides the point. The relevant question is, whether there's enough webcam caches in NSW?

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, papu66 said:

But this is besides the point. The relevant question is, whether there's enough webcam caches in NSW?

 

There are no webcams in NSW, in fact there are only four in the whole of Australia (one in Victoria and three in South Australia). The real question is whether there's any demand for them. The one in Victoria, published in 2005, has only had 278 finds.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

There are no webcams in NSW, in fact there are only four in the whole of Australia (one in Victoria and three in South Australia). The real question is whether there's any demand for them. The one in Victoria, published in 2005, has only had 278 finds.

There's a set of challenges I am doing and one of them requires a logged webcam. It's over 600km to the nearest one.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, papu66 said:

 Many EC and virtuals don't have active  owners and you can just write any krappe in you answer or gimp your thumb on some old photo. No one cares

 -snip -

I've done 2 webcam caches. Both were easy and great experiences. Just needed a special tool (laptop) with me and that's it.

 

Actually, their are many who care.  The site cares too.  They have to. 

If some would use logs provided, instead of staying quiet to pad "smilies" ,  all caches with issues would be fixed in a timely manner.

 

One nice thing about starting later is you have options not afforded years earlier.    :)

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/2/2019 at 5:19 AM, JL_HSTRE said:

Earthcaches can't require photos.

Actually, they can require photos. This type of requirement was taken away but has since been brought back.

Share this post


Link to post

I've done one webcam cache. I doubt that I will do another, as the nearest is over 200km away. The only reason I did one was I was trying for the most number of cache types in a day. (Got 9.) Like niraD, I did this one my own, without any mobile device.

 

I believe that Virtual caches were brought back because there are locations where a physical cache is not allowed, and a lot of those locations have a 'wow' factor. Can the same be said for webcam caches?

 

As has been pointed out, virtuals, earthcaches and webcams don't adhere to the dictionary definition of a cache. We might be able to stretch the definition and say that earthcaches, and some virtuals, are caches of information, but can the same be said of webcams? I don't see much of an opportunity for learning with a webcam.

 

IMO, I've not heard a great case for bringing webcam caches back. The main reason seems to be so that more people can find that cache type. Given the proportion of 'inappropriate' logging (amchair and selfies), I believe they should be archived after giving the caching community advance notice.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

As has been pointed out, virtuals, earthcaches and webcams don't adhere to the dictionary definition of a cache. We might be able to stretch the definition and say that earthcaches, and some virtuals, are caches of information, but can the same be said of webcams? I don't see much of an opportunity for learning with a webcam.

 

IMO, I've not heard a great case for bringing webcam caches back. The main reason seems to be so that more people can find that cache type. Given the proportion of 'inappropriate' logging (amchair and selfies), I believe they should be archived after giving the caching community advance notice.

 

Wherigo don't seem like valid caches.  They cannot be done with a GPSr.  At least I can find Webcams using my GPSr.

Webcams do take a lot of maintenance.  I've probably deleted 25% of the logs on mine.  But unmaintained Webcams are no worse than any other unmaintained caches.  I like Webcams!  I've logged nine so far.  I wish there were more.  I think they should be brought back.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/5/2019 at 2:04 PM, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

I've done one webcam cache. I doubt that I will do another, as the nearest is over 200km away. The only reason I did one was I was trying for the most number of cache types in a day. (Got 9.) Like niraD, I did this one my own, without any mobile device.

 

I believe that Virtual caches were brought back because there are locations where a physical cache is not allowed, and a lot of those locations have a 'wow' factor. Can the same be said for webcam caches?

 

As has been pointed out, virtuals, earthcaches and webcams don't adhere to the dictionary definition of a cache. We might be able to stretch the definition and say that earthcaches, and some virtuals, are caches of information, but can the same be said of webcams? I don't see much of an opportunity for learning with a webcam.

 

IMO, I've not heard a great case for bringing webcam caches back. The main reason seems to be so that more people can find that cache type. Given the proportion of 'inappropriate' logging (amchair and selfies), I believe they should be archived after giving the caching community advance notice.

 

I did the webcam cache that used to be at the Alamo.  I called my wife and she took the webcam photo from home.  In a way, she got to share the experience of the "find".  

 

I have suggested several times of bringing back webcams, but as a temporary cache during large events.  The webcam would only be accessible during the event.  It would be sort of like a Lab Cache.   For mega/giga events it would be way to log the event and would allow those that couldn't attend an opportunity to see some of those that attend.   

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

I have suggested several times of bringing back webcams, but as a temporary cache during large events.  The webcam would only be accessible during the event.  It would be sort of like a Lab Cache.   For mega/giga events it would be way to log the event and would allow those that couldn't attend an opportunity to see some of those that attend.   

An interesting idea, the only drawback I see is not all mega/giga events would have the required infrastructure to support a web cam. How many mega/giga events are held outdoors in a park?

 

At a minimum, we would need a web cam, a place to securely mount it, power, and Internet access. If the bandwidth is limited to the web cam, we may need a remote server as a caching proxy of some form. The event group would need to make sure they have the technical expertise lined up to support the system.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I have not done many webcams, but did enjoy doing them. They have different attributes which make them fun in my opinion.  Fond memories of each one, cannot say that about endless LPCs and endless micros. Web cams are rare and that is part of the challenge. That said, web cams are not necessarily for everyone so if you are a naysayer don’t find them!  Can say that about lab caches, virtuals, etc too. Bringing some more web cams into play would help keep the game fresh and more fun, the same effect lab caches and virtuals have had. Just my opinion anyway, for better or worse. 

Share this post


Link to post

Commenting on an early post in this thread. So what if webcams are a category on Waymarking?  I personally do not use Waymarking and do not see how that is even relevant to this discussion. When I am geocaching (99.9% of others probably too), I never utilize or have an interest in Waymarking.com. 

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/6/2019 at 6:04 AM, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

I believe that Virtual caches were brought back because there are locations where a physical cache is not allowed

Unfortunately, most Virtuals that I have noticed appear to be used in ordinary places where an ordinary cache can go, and often there is an ordinary cache nearby too, and many more caches about too. I have never applied for one, but now I wish I had, because next year I might visit a town up on the Gulf of Carpentaria which has NO caches, but has an historic train; now only run for tourists. I would LOVE to be able to place a Virtual cache there for the SideTracked series. Okay, there are a couple of caches fairly close, at least for that part of the world, at about 70kms away. Another direction 157Kms, and another at 336kms. But it would be nice for Normanton to have a cache.

If Virtuals are going to really come into their own, maybe when people apply for them they should need to say where they are going to put them, and then those who will put them in places without caches get the preference.

 

:) Anyone reading this who can issue virtuals, if I travel to Normanton next year I could put a Virtual cache there, where there are no caches. It would be nice for travellers to find one. Virtuals are often being wasted now by being put where any cache can go and where there are many caches already. It's a shame they are not issued only for remote places, and true places that can only have virtuals, because it seems an opportunity is being wasted. Rather than issue them as has been done, maybe it would be better if people could apply and make the argument, such as I just made for a Virtual at Normanton, why they should be issued one. Rather than bulk issues of Virtuals, maybe individual virtual caches being issued on application with good reasons given.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

Virtuals are often being wasted now by being put where any cache can go and where there are many caches already. It's a shame they are not issued only for remote places, and true places that can only have virtuals, because it seems an opportunity is being wasted. Rather than issue them as has been done, maybe it would be better if people could apply and make the argument, such as I just made for a Virtual at Normanton, why they should be issued one. Rather than bulk issues of Virtuals, maybe individual virtual caches being issued on application with good reasons given.

 

About half the new virtuals I've done have been in national parks in places where a physical cache would have been difficult or impossible to get approved. Had I received one, my likely choice of location would have been the Emerald Pool in Popran National Park, but that may have been moot as it's about to be consumed by the Three Mile fire and access will probably be closed for the forseeable future.

 

As for individual applications with "good reasons", that sounds very much like the "wow factor" criterion that was used just before virtuals were discontinued and which apparently caused the reviewers a lot of grief.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

About half the new virtuals I've done have been in national parks in places where a physical cache would have been difficult or impossible to get approved. Had I received one, my likely choice of location would have been the Emerald Pool in Popran National Park, but that may have been moot as it's about to be consumed by the Three Mile fire and access will probably be closed for the forseeable future.

 

As for individual applications with "good reasons", that sounds very much like the "wow factor" criterion that was used just before virtuals were discontinued and which apparently caused the reviewers a lot of grief.

I don't know about the "wow factor", but just put them where physical caches can't be placed. Whether that's a National Park that bans physical caches, or a remote place with no or very few caches where a physical cache is very unlikely to be placed, as no geocachers (or many other people either often), live there.

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

An interesting idea, the only drawback I see is not all mega/giga events would have the required infrastructure to support a web cam. How many mega/giga events are held outdoors in a park?

 

At a minimum, we would need a web cam, a place to securely mount it, power, and Internet access. If the bandwidth is limited to the web cam, we may need a remote server as a caching proxy of some form. The event group would need to make sure they have the technical expertise lined up to support the system.

 

I have no idea how many mega events could support a webcam but it's more than the number of new webcams we have now.

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Rathergohiking said:

Commenting on an early post in this thread. So what if webcams are a category on Waymarking?  I personally do not use Waymarking and do not see how that is even relevant to this discussion. When I am geocaching (99.9% of others probably too), I never utilize or have an interest in Waymarking.com. 

 

Waymarking is a Groundspeak website.

 - It was created so people could continue the now-closed cache type, "Locationless".   We did a couple of locationless.   :)

Since,  after "brass cap" and similar benchmark caches in countries other-than the US were closed, many of them went to Waymarking too.

Webcams have been listed there since '09 or so.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

You gotta stand at the x mark or your log will be deleted! (Hint hint, Hawaii  web cam) 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Waymarking is a Groundspeak website.

 - It was created so people could continue the now-closed cache type, "Locationless".   We did a couple of locationless.   :)

 

I don't see any similarity between Locationless Caches and Waymarking.  

Locationless were: Go find an item listed.  Record the coords, and provide a picture.  Only one cacher is permitted to log a find per location.  For example:  Find a Viquesney Doughboy.  The one in my town was already logged, so I had to find another one that no one had logged.  

Waymarking has lists of things to find.  But anyone and everyone can find the same one.  After all, it's on the list.  In fact, it has to be one of the ones on the list.

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/7/2019 at 3:31 PM, Harry Dolphin said:

 

I don't see any similarity between Locationless Caches and Waymarking.  

Locationless were: Go find an item listed.  Record the coords, and provide a picture.  Only one cacher is permitted to log a find per location.  For example:  Find a Viquesney Doughboy.  The one in my town was already logged, so I had to find another one that no one had logged.  

Waymarking has lists of things to find.  But anyone and everyone can find the same one.  After all, it's on the list.  In fact, it has to be one of the ones on the list.

Unless you are the one adding it to the list....

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/7/2019 at 10:37 AM, NYPaddleCacher said:

I have no idea how many mega events could support a webcam but it's more than the number of new webcams we have now.

 

Temporary webcams, and interesting concept. Like Labs for Megas.

However, I could probably see them be more willing to make a webcam photo an feature of the Adventure Lab app rather than a full out webcam cache type allowance... it would be interesting if they considered somehow making temp webcams an allowable thing. After all they've been using the raffle-style approach to other rare types recently to get them back on the map in a limited fashion. Ltd/temp webcams would be an interesting concept, but would definitely need some logistical fleshing out.

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/6/2019 at 11:44 PM, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

 

At a minimum, we would need a web cam, a place to securely mount it, power, and Internet access. If the bandwidth is limited to the web cam, we may need a remote server as a caching proxy of some form. The event group would need to make sure they have the technical expertise lined up to support the system.

 
A wireless trail camera operates on AA batteriees and can email a ”good enough” image over a 2G connection every few minutes. You can post to a wordpress blog by email. Strap the cam to the head organizer’s chest :)

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, mustakorppi said:

 
A wireless trail camera operates on AA batteriees and can email a ”good enough” image over a 2G connection every few minutes. You can post to a wordpress blog by email. Strap the cam to the head organizer’s chest :)

Yes, a trail camera might work. It will have to have a fixed location, because the cache listing requires a specific location. 

 

Don't forget, you are talking about the reputation of a mega/giga event. That will require a monitoring system to make sure that it is working the entire time.

 

Someone has to setup and pay the cellular bill. For liability reasons, it may be preferable if all of this was in the organization's name, not an individual.

 

As blog by e-mail with wordpress creates an entry for every e-mail, for a 12 hour event, you are talking about 720 entries to look through for the one containing you. And, this goes against the spirit of a webcam cache, in that a webcam cache required some kind of timing (or coordination) to get the correct picture. To mimic this would require some kind of auto-delete function for the blog.

 

To get better control over advertising on the page, you may need to go to a business class wordpress account, which will set you back $300/yr. Don't want inappropriate advertising surrounding your webcam images.

Share this post


Link to post

And there've already been photo-op setups at megas where you can find your photo in the collection online eventually. I wouldn't call that a webcam

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/6/2019 at 11:59 PM, Goldenwattle said:

Unfortunately, most Virtuals that I have noticed appear to be used in ordinary places where an ordinary cache can go, and often there is an ordinary cache nearby too, and many more caches about too. I have never applied for one, but now I wish I had, because next year I might visit a town up on the Gulf of Carpentaria which has NO caches, but has an historic train; now only run for tourists. I would LOVE to be able to place a Virtual cache there for the SideTracked series. Okay, there are a couple of caches fairly close, at least for that part of the world, at about 70kms away. Another direction 157Kms, and another at 336kms. But it would be nice for Normanton to have a cache.

If Virtuals are going to really come into their own, maybe when people apply for them they should need to say where they are going to put them, and then those who will put them in places without caches get the preference.

 

I'm confused by your two ideas here.  Your first makes sense, although to some extent I disagree.  Virtuals are being placed where ordinary caches could go and others are close as well.  In and of itself, that doesn't mean that the location isn't worth a virtual.  Your next point, about placing a virtual in Normanton seems to be the exact type of virtual you are complaining about.  Saturation is NOT an issue in the area so a regular ordinary cache would be just fine being placed there.  You, personally, wouldn't be able to place a regular cache there unless you could show that maintenance from a proxy could be feasible, so the virtual makes sense.  What would you think of your virtual if a new cacher in the area started placing caches all around your virtual location?

 

As to the OP, I'm not sure where I fall on this continuum.  I like looking for webcams and have done quite a few since I'm fortunate enough to be able to travel but I'm not 100% sure they would be worth being brought back either.  

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

×
×
  • Create New...