Returning here after a lengthy absence

[Country_Wife]

I last did Waymarking about 10 years ago, and it looks like I will be starting up again. I’ll be reading the forums to catch up, but I never really felt confident, even when I was active before. I’m proud of my waymarks, just feel like I don’t know nearly enough about the entire process. I’m also one of those absentee officers, deleting emails about Ice Cream Palours because I was (and am) afraid of doing the wrong thing.

 

What would you suggest are the biggest Dos and Don’ts at this point in time, both for officers and for folks submitting new waymarks?  

[+Max and 99]

4 hours ago, Country_Wife said:

I last did Waymarking about 10 years ago, and it looks like I will be starting up again. I’ll be reading the forums to catch up, but I never really felt confident, even when I was active before. I’m proud of my waymarks, just feel like I don’t know nearly enough about the entire process. I’m also one of those absentee officers, deleting emails about Ice Cream Palours because I was (and am) afraid of doing the wrong thing.

 

What would you suggest are the biggest Dos and Don’ts at this point in time, both for officers and for folks submitting new waymarks?  

Biggest Do for officer:

Re-read the category description and understand what the requirements are.

 

Biggest Do for someone submitting a waymark:

Re-read the category description and understand what the requirements are.

 

[+FamilieFrohne]

As Max and 99 said: Read the category description carefully (before posting and reviewing).

If in doubt, your fellow officers will surely help you on reviewing waymarks.

Also for posting a waymark - if something is not right the officers will help you to get it approved.

 

Welcome back to Waymarking.

[Country_Wife]

Thank you both for your responses. I’ll give a very generic example of a waymark approval question. Most waymarks require two photos. What if the second photo is clearly cropped from the first photo? I seem to recall that this was frowned on.

Edited July 9, 2023 by Country_Wife

[+Max and 99]

7 minutes ago, Country_Wife said:

Thank you both for your responses. I’ll give a very generic example of a waymark approval question. Most waymarks require two photos. What if the second photo is clearly cropped from the first photo? I seem to recall that this was frowned on.

If I want to waymark something or think there's a chance I might want to in the future, I will always take more than one photo, from different angles. You'll soon remember the requirements for your favorite categories, and know what to take out in the field. 

Regarding your photo question, it depends on the category but I would say generally speaking that doesn't suffice for photo requirements. I'm sure there's an old category or two in which they don't care. 

[+FamilieFrohne]

6 hours ago, Country_Wife said:

Most waymarks require two photos. What if the second photo is clearly cropped from the first photo? I seem to recall that this was frowned on.

The image quality gets reduced - sometimes drastically - when cropping an image. This cropped image delivers seldom additional detail to enhance the waymark, so it may considered useless. But that depends on the waymark and on the images provided. It would be acceptable for me as an officer if this cropped image is an additional image to point out some detail (i.e. making it the third image then ...). 

 

So taking more pictures at different angles or showing other details of the object in question is always a good idea. 

[Country_Wife]

Okay, thanks! This kind of common-sense approach is very helpful.

 

I’m leaving on a trip to a tourist hotspot today. You’d think that all the waymarks there would be done to death, but I’m spotting a lot of possibilities for new ones. The ones that have been done are all on the main tourist circuit, but I’m not a tourist

[+ScroogieII]

On 7/9/2023 at 9:07 AM, Country_Wife said:

I last did Waymarking about 10 years ago, and it looks like I will be starting up again. I’ll be reading the forums to catch up, but I never really felt confident, even when I was active before. I’m proud of my waymarks, just feel like I don’t know nearly enough about the entire process. I’m also one of those absentee officers, deleting emails about Ice Cream Palours because I was (and am) afraid of doing the wrong thing.

 

What would you suggest are the biggest Dos and Don’ts at this point in time, both for officers and for folks submitting new waymarks?  

 

Don't know you and never did, so why should I care?!?!?!

 

SORRY, just kidding!!!  Guess I'm just in a whimsical mood today.

 

WELCOME BACK TO THE FOLD.!

 

My initial advice to you is just this - Have Fun!

After all, this is an Avocation, not a Vocation. Don't let anyone mire you down in feuds, personalities or opiniated discussions. They're few, after all!

 

This WELCOME is, actually, somewhat ironic, coming from a Waymarker currently on hiatus. After creating something like 20,000 Waymarks and, at least in the latter years, giving them my all, I am just burnt out. I waymarked initially with my wife as BK-Hunters, which became T0SHEA, then later, for a very short time as ScroogieII.

 

Today, as I walk or drive around my home town I see structures and objects I know never to have been Waymarked and, contrary to inclinations of former years to dig out the camera and the GPS, simply file them away in my (less reliable by the day) memory, in hopes that, one day soon I will again find the desire to Waymark them.

 

So, for at least the nonce, between yourself and myself, we are managing to retain the number of active Waymarkers as it was yesterday. WELL DONE there Country_Wife.

 

And now an aside about photos - - - -  Don't reduce size below around 2k in width. I have always used sizes that have come off the camera when set to, in my case,  about 2272 or 2048  in width, with the appropriate aspect ratio - sometimes 16X9, sometimes 4X3 or 3X2, depending upon the subject. JPEG Compression to 70% is perfectly acceptable for Web pix, as there's no appreciable, or noticeable, difference between 70% and 90% compression, when viewed on the Web, and it saves space, both for you AND Waymarking. Retaining at least 2k in width allows reviewers more detail than does a smaller size, should they need to view your pics full size to better understand a Waymark. This from a reviewer who's many times been presented with tiny photos accompanying a somewhat confusing Waymark!!!

 

EDIT: Just can't leave this without also addressing image quality. If you're really interested in producing top-of-the-line Waymarks, image post processing must become part of the process. In spite of what you may feel,  the images that come off your camera/smart phone could almost always be improved, especially with regard to contrast and saturation. I have used a quality camera or a smart phone whose cameras have received rave reviews for their quality for all of my Waymarking life, yet found that precious few pix they produced weren't improved with a bit of post processing.

 

As I review Waymarks I encounter a great many photos (in truth, almost all) which are washed out, and lacking in both colour and clarity. In the past I have, on many occasions, encouraged Waymarkers to obtain an image processing app, of which there are many. At the risk of having all hereabouts coming to believe that I am somehow associated with it, I shall, once again, recommend that, should you not already be using one, you download and put into use a free app entitled Faststone. I have been using it for years and find it to do essentially everything I wish to do to a pic, save for morphs and similar advanced operations. It is just the most intelligently designed bit of photo processing software I have ever come across, period!

 

And YES, always take more pix than you feel you'll need. They're FREE, after all, and provide you the ability/opportunity to pick and choose later when creating your Waymark.

Waaaay TOO MANY is ALWAYS Waaaay Better than too few!!!

 

On 7/9/2023 at 4:37 PM, Country_Wife said:

What if the second photo is clearly cropped from the first photo? I seem to recall that this was frowned on.

 

You are ABSOLUTELY correct in that recollection!

 

Now get out there and Have a Ball!

 

Keith

Edited July 15, 2023 by ScroogieII

[Country_Wife]

Thanks for the words of encouragement! I do tend to get tangled up in dos and don’ts, so I shall take heart and just give ‘er! I think my own quality control is not bad, but I appreciate your comments about photo size. I usually try to leave photos as large as possible, but I was shooting a neon sign yesterday and it had to be cropped a lot in order to fill the frame with sign instead of the building it was on. 

 

Enjoy your break!

Edited July 19, 2023 by Country_Wife

[+ScroogieII]

On 7/19/2023 at 3:27 PM, Country_Wife said:

I was shooting a neon sign yesterday and it had to be cropped a lot in order to fill the frame with sign instead of the building it was on. 

 

ZOOM?!?!

[Country_Wife]

Digital zoom would have turned it into blurry blobs; I’ve had that problem before and prefer to just crop. 

[+ScroogieII]

1 hour ago, Country_Wife said:

Digital zoom would have turned it into blurry blobs; I’ve had that problem before and prefer to just crop. 

 

BUT - wasn't analog zoom also available?

If not, I would suggest that a new(er) phone/camera should be quite near the top of your wish list. 

(ScroogieII - AKA Keith)

Edited July 29, 2023 by ScroogieII

[Country_Wife]

A new phone would be nice but I’ve got other budgeting priorities at the moment.

 

However, I also have a proper camera with better resolution and analog zoom; I just didn’t happen to have it with me as I wasn’t planning on Waymarking on that trip. Isn’t that always how it goes?!

[+ScroogieII]

 

1 hour ago, Country_Wife said:

Isn’t that always how it goes?!

 

Yup! Pretty much Always! I can testify to that's happening on many occasions.

Example: on the trip Papy and I took to Alberta last year, the one item which held ALL our GPS information I managed to leave behind, on the kitchen table.

 < That's me, an hour down the road.

Edited July 30, 2023 by ScroogieII

[+PISA-caching]

Welcome back, Country_Wife,

 

I also think that Having fun is the most important Do, both as an officer and poster/visitor.

 

On 7/10/2023 at 8:49 AM, FamilieFrohne said:

The image quality gets reduced - sometimes drastically - when cropping an image. This cropped image delivers seldom additional detail to enhance the waymark, so it may considered useless. But that depends on the waymark and on the images provided. It would be acceptable for me as an officer if this cropped image is an additional image to point out some detail (i.e. making it the third image then ...). 

 

That's true in general, but not all the time.

 

When I take pictures with my camera, the resolution is 5472 x 3648. If I uploaded the original size, it would be decreased by Groundspeak to 2048 x 1365 or something like that. Therefore I decrease the resolution to 2250 x 1500 before uploading them and most of the time, the photos will have that size in the end. On very rare occasions I crop 2250 x 1500 pixels (or more) of the original photo (with no loss of image quality) and I end up with one photo with original 2250x1500 pixels cut out of one my photos and exactly that photo decreased by me to 2250x1500. 

 

As an officer I decide depending on the quality of the photos. If the first photo has low quality and the second one is a part of that, I might deny it. If there are two photos in very good quality and one is obviously cut out of the other, but both are in good quality and showing either details of the object in question or additional surroundings, it's ok for me. If I just had my mobile phone I would take a picture of the object, zoom out and take another photo at the same position. That's almost equal to what I get when I crop something out of a big photo.

 

Just to avoid misunderstandings: I almost always make two or more distinct photos, just to be sure, but there are situations, where the fotographer took two photos and lateron finds out that one of them is not good or he/she thought that only one photo in necessary for a visit and lateron finds out that nobody has made a WM for that object yet etc. And my advice is: Ask yourself, what other WMers will think about the WM, if they see it. Will they be angry, because the WM has a cropped photo, or is the long description so well written, that nobody cares for the "missing" photo? There are WM where there are 2 distinct photos, from far away, taken within 3 seconds, some text copied from somewhere and obviously the WM owner spend only little time to create it. In these cases I would search for a reason to deny it. 1. to teach the WM owners to invest more time and effort 2. to keep the category interesting.

 

AND, it's not just the number of photos. The category description of the Ice Cream Parlors says "At least TWO photos are required! One must show the entire shop, the other needs to be a clear close-up showing a sign or lettering identifying the shop. Additional photos are encouraged." and the category description says "This category now requires a minimum of two unique sentences describing the establishment and/or your personal experience (if you actually patronized the place) in the long description. Failure to add the minimum two-sentence requirement will result in your waymark getting declined.". So, it's not just the number of photos that separates good WMs from not so good ones.

 

But I'm sure, that you will do just fine and if you're uncertain, you can always find advice here or by PN.

 

[Country_Wife]

Thanks for that, Pisa-caching! Yes, there are some interesting maths behind what factors to use / avoid when resizing photos. I’ll have to do a quick refresher, I seem to recall there was a very simple rule.

 

“Having fun” for me has meant having a reason to learn new things. I’m a word magpie, so I was thrilled to learn the meaning of “triodetic”. https://Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmCQC2_Bloedel_Conservatory_Botanical_Garden

 

I have also learned

- why 50 goals in a hockey player’s first 50 games of the season is such an amazing feat:  https://Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmXMMX_PREMIER_a_marquer_50_buts_en_50_parties_FIRST_to_score_50_goals_in_50_games_Gatineau_QC

 

- the too-brief biography of Vancouver artist Alan Hung Chung: https://Waymarking.com/waymarks/wm18GE0_SS_Beaver_monument_Fort_Langley_BC_Canada

 

- the surprising connections between the 4th Earl Grey and Canada’s national parks system: https://Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmHPB7_Albert_H_G_Grey_Qubec_Canada

 

And so much more!

 

 

 

 

[+ScroogieII]

On 7/31/2023 at 10:23 PM, PISA-caching said:

... I decrease the resolution to 2250 x 1500 before uploading them...

Just to avoid misunderstandings: I almost always make two or more distinct photos, just to be sure, but there are situations, where the photographer took two photos and later on finds out that one of them is not good or he/she thought that only one photo in necessary for a visit and later on finds out that nobody has made a WM for that object yet etc. And my advice is: Ask yourself, what other WMers will think about the WM, if they see it. Will they be angry, because the WM has a cropped photo, or is the long description so well written, that nobody cares for the "missing" photo? There are WM where there are 2 distinct photos, from far away, taken within 3 seconds, some text copied from somewhere and obviously the WM owner spend only little time to create it. In these cases I would search for a reason to deny it. 1. to teach the WM owners to invest more time and effort 2. to keep the category interesting.

 

Once again reinforcing the contention of my prior missive about a 2k minimum width and that "Waaaay TOO MANY is ALWAYS Waaaay Better than too few!!!" - Thanks Andreas

 

On 8/1/2023 at 8:12 AM, Country_Wife said:

“Having fun” for me has meant having a reason to learn new things. I’m a word magpie, so I was thrilled to learn the meaning of “triodetic”. https://Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmCQC2_Bloedel_Conservatory_Botanical_Garden

 

I have also learned

- why 50 goals in a hockey player’s first 50 games of the season is such an amazing feat:  https://Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmXMMX_PREMIER_a_marquer_50_buts_en_50_parties_FIRST_to_score_50_goals_in_50_games_Gatineau_QC

 

AAAAAHHHH - a coupla things here:

1 - "triodetic", as best I can ascertain,  is not yet a word in the English language. It appears to be, as yet, a marketing word, possibly a trademark word, a corporate word. Triodetic, the company, seems to be, among other things, simply expanding on the concept of the geodesic dome. I have yet to find further information on their methodology, though, so I'll not go on.

... ... Wait for it ... ...

HOWEVER, after another click at "Triodec", the company, I come across the Ontario Place Cinesphere, quite apparently simply a geodesic dome. Others of their projects appear to employ other construction or design methods, not really setting themselves apart from other designers or builders of the world.

2 - Now I forget the other thing. dadgum that "age thing".

 

CW - I do love your deep desire to continue to LEARN!!! Given our present societal and political condition, that is the one of the most laudable and admirable characteristics to be found in human kind. - Keith

 

[+ScroogieII]

dadgum - was that you, Wayfroggie? LOL and LOL