Missing photo uploads?

[pxl8]

Hi,

Is there something up with the gallery? I uploaded 4 shots today but only one has surfaced - no error message or emails about them...

Any ideas?

[Beryl]

Originally Posted by pxl8

Hi,

Is there something up with the gallery? I uploaded 4 shots today but only one has surfaced - no error message or emails about them...

Any ideas?

Yeah, patience

[Fourwings]

I moderated a Broad-bodied chaser image earlier but that was the only one in the moderation area?

[eeyore]

A broad boddie chaser - sounds dodgy to me

[pxl8]

Originally Posted by Fourwings

I moderated a Broad-bodied chaser image earlier but that was the only one in the moderation area?

Weird, there were two shots of that dragon, one of a frog, and a candid of a bloke on a bench looking out across a pond... I'll upload the others again...

[Jon]

Originally Posted by pxl8

Hi,

Is there something up with the gallery? I uploaded 4 shots today but only one has surfaced - no error message or emails about them...

Any ideas?

I have had a lot of problems too. I submitted a lot last night but they have not appeared, it could well be the line that is causing problems. The two winged fly has appeared however. Jon

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by Jon

I have had a lot of problems too. I submitted a lot last night but they have not appeared, it could well be the line that is causing problems. The two winged fly has appeared however. Jon

There is no problem. It is just that we're getting so many unidentified uploads..we would rather id them before putting them into the gallery, but due to such comments I've released a load into the wildlife unidentified.

[Kev Lewis]

Dont lower the requirements Graham otherwise the site will become a reference for unidentified images . It also means that the membership will have to look up IDs on the internet before uploading which isn't a bad thing and it certainly doesnt take long.

Of course there is always the mystery beasty which needs uploading for identification

[pxl8]

But that doesn't help explain why the 2nd dragon shot didn't appear in the moderation list, or the shot of Wellington Basins which doesn't need an ID ?!?

[Beryl]

Originally Posted by Klewis

Dont lower the requirements Graham otherwise the site will become a reference for unidentified images . It also means that the membership will have to look up IDs on the internet before uploading which isn't a bad thing and it certainly doesnt take long.

Of course there is always the mystery beasty which needs uploading for identification

Yup.
Good idea to look up unidentifieds , flying or other wise via google

[StuartDH]

It's just taking us a while to get through them all. Last time I looked, there were about 30 pics to moderate and I'd just done about ten. Please give it at least 24 hours, and longer if the pics need an ID.

Stu

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by Klewis

Dont lower the requirements Graham otherwise the site will become a reference for unidentified images . It also means that the membership will have to look up IDs on the internet before uploading which isn't a bad thing and it certainly doesnt take long.

Of course there is always the mystery beasty which needs uploading for identification

Thanks Kev, it's just that theres been three posts about delayed uploads..I think members will have to realise that the fact their images don't show within a few hours doesn't mean there's a problem.

I think all members should re-read the uploading guidelines.. If an image doesn't appear for a few hours, especially if it's not been identified or named correctly it doesn't mean there's a problem, nor should they upload them again!

Anyone that names them correctly will not have long to wait.

[pxl8]

Originally Posted by StuartDH

It's just taking us a while to get through them all. Last time I looked, there were about 30 pics to moderate and I'd just done about ten. Please give it at least 24 hours, and longer if the pics need an ID.

Stu

I admit I didn't add the latin name to the upload but I didn't know it was required (only desired) and for that I apologise. However, it's natural to assume that when one of the shots has gone through the others won't be far behind esp. as I was seeing shots uploaded several hours after mine appearing. So I wondered where the others were, hence this thread and Fourwings has already said there was only one shot waiting moderation, ID or not it wasn't there for moderating.

Does this meand the Wellington Basins shot was still in the list and it did get uploaded twice? If so how should I ID shots like that to help the moderators?

[matt_xyz]

one comment I would make is that when shots get delayed, for whatever reason (not always a lack of ID), they appear in the gallery in the order in which they were uploaded by members rather than in the order that they were moderated. So, if pxl8's shots are moderated today they will appear in the gallery behind all the shots that were uploaded since yesterday. As a result they tend to get overlooked and buried somewhat (and never feature on the 'latest 15 uploads section'). Would it be a better idea for the order of shots in the gallery to reflect the time that they were moderated rather than uploaded?

Just a thought and there may be reasons why this isn't possible or desirable. I realise this is a slightly different issue to what's being discussed above.

Matt

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by pxl8

I admit I didn't add the latin name to the upload but I didn't know it was required (only desired) and for that I apologise. However, it's natural to assume that when one of the shots has gone through the others won't be far behind esp. as I was seeing shots uploaded several hours after mine appearing. So I wondered where the others were, hence this thread and Fourwings has already said there was only one shot waiting moderation, ID or not it wasn't there for moderating.

Does this meand the Wellington Basins shot was still in the list and it did get uploaded twice? If so how should I ID shots like that to help the moderators?

A little explanation of the moderating.

We have specialist moderators, Fourwings for example. He can only see the items in his section. We have other moderators that can see everything, but have limited specialist knowledge.
As Matt has said, if there is any delay, the images will not appear on the newest 15 gallery.

When I go to moderate, I pick out the ones I'm sure about and do them. That's why some will appear faster than others. I also do the ones that are correct in every way first, as they are the easiest to do. Then I attack the unknown and the ones with missing details, as they take the most time. I leave the others I do not know to the specialists.
Unfortunately not all moderators are available all the time, we're not paid to do this and have lives to lead. So this can lead to delays until the specialists come on line.
Sometimes it's not the details that's the problem, it could be the quality or size of the image or if the image should even be allowed for other reasons. Rather than just delete them we put them into temporary storage until a final decision is made.

The usual problems that stop immediate acceptance are the format used, i.e. Common Name - Scientific name. Also keywords; at least do the same as the title, minus the -.
Make sure the correct gallery has been selected and that's it!

To help get images accepted quickly, please read the upload guidelines at:,http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/fo...ad_information All this information is available from the upload pages.

[Ollie]

Originally Posted by glsammy

A little explanation of the moderating.

We have specialist moderators, Fourwings for example. He can only see the items in his section. We have other moderators that can see everything, but have limited specialist knowledge.
As Matt has said, if there is any delay, the images will not appear on the newest 15 gallery.

When I go to moderate, I pick out the ones I'm sure about and do them. That's why some will appear faster than others. I also do the ones that are correct in every way first, as they are the easiest to do. Then I attack the unknown and the ones with missing details, as they take the most time. I leave the others I do not know to the specialists.
Unfortunately not all moderators are available all the time, we're not paid to do this and have lives to lead. So this can lead to delays until the specialists come on line.
Sometimes it's not the details that's the problem, it could be the quality or size of the image or if the image should even be allowed for other reasons. Rather than just delete them we put them into temporary storage until a final decision is made.

The usual problems that stop immediate acceptance are the format used, i.e. Common Name - Scientific name. Also keywords; at least do the same as the title, minus the -.
Make sure the correct gallery has been selected and that's it!

To help get images accepted quickly, please read the upload guidelines at:,http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/fo...ad_information All this information is available from the upload pages.

Just to add my few words to what Graham has said. I only became a gallery editor for WAB less than a couple of weeks ago and I am still learning the gallery editing process, but I do things in just the same order as Graham has described above. While I can see and moderate all the images that are awaiting moderation my specialist area is realy the bird photographs so I obviously do any of these awaiting moderation first. Even when doing these I often have to look up the latin name, even I can't remember the latin name for every bird let alone the spelling. This does take time, and there is no point in me moderating an image and giving it an incorrect latin name. This would just cause work for another editor having to rename it later.

As for images other than birds, again as Graham has described, If I am certain of it's name etc I will moderate it, otherwise I leave it to someone with more knowledge than me.

Hope this helps you all to understand the process a little better
Roger

[FungiJohn]

Can I just echo Graham and Roger's comments.

I use exactly the same process for moderating fungi images. If I can just add:

It is often very difficult for the average wildlife photographer to correctly ID fungi due to the changes in shape, size and colour of the fruiting body. There are also at least 10,000 species to be found in Britain and quite possibly 200,000 worldwide!

In general there are three types of fungi image uploaded.

1. The 'technical' fungi image, whereby the ID (in most cases) can be established readily.
2. The 'arty - aesthetic' image where the ID can be difficult to establish due to insufficient fungi detail i.e. lack of gill, cap, stipe, substrate etc information. These are usually quite stunning to look at!
3. Lastly there are images where bad lighting and framing result in a good general image but one where the fungi is almost impossible to ID.

Currently any new unidentified fungi images are been placed inside the 'unidentified wildlife' gallery until identified. Where a 'genus only' ID can be established it will be labelled as such e.g. Amanita sp.

Hope this helps

John

[Gill Catton]

Originally Posted by FungiJohn

i.e. lack of gill,

Hope this helps

John

Yes I personally think that 'lack of gill' should be avoided at all times !!! (sorry couldn't resist)

I totally undertsand what you are saying, and actually it's something i'm finding as I get better in my field skills is exactly what you need to see to get an ID.
Perhaps there should be an ID photograph tips page for example, how a lateral view in addition to a dorsal view may be important for dragonflies or damselflies. How flowers, stem or basal and leaves and sometimes even seed heads may be important for flowers. Spore shape important for ferns, wing veination and head shape for flies etc.....

[matt_xyz]

Originally Posted by Gill Catton

Yes I personally think that 'lack of gill' should be avoided at all times !!! (sorry couldn't resist)

I totally undertsand what you are saying, and actually it's something i'm finding as I get better in my field skills is exactly what you need to see to get an ID.
Perhaps there should be an ID photograph tips page for example, how a lateral view in addition to a dorsal view may be important for dragonflies or damselflies. How flowers, stem or basal and leaves and sometimes even seed heads may be important for flowers. Spore shape important for ferns, wing veination and head shape for flies etc.....

I think this is a good point. Some ID tips might be useful but it might be simpler to just provide a list of a few web-based ID sites. This would increase our ability to ID subjects and would therefore reduce the workload of the moderators. In particular, I wonder whether there are any good insect ID sites. I've done many searches but never found anything particularly helpful. I have quite a detailed insect field guide but I still find that most insects that I photograph are not in it!

Matt

[Fourwings]

Either view lateral or dorsal will be enough to identify either a Dragonfly or a Damselfly, the only requirements I'd ask for are;
1, Try and get the image(in-focus) as sharp as possible.
2, Try to include the whole insect in the shot if at all possible
3, If you are not too sure of the ID say so, don't be embarrassed about it they can be notoriously difficult to ID sometimes and will occasionally trip up the most experienced observer, me included!!! .
4, A note of the habitat in which it was found can sometimes help with ID's

I hope this helps, so keep those Dragon/Damselfly images coming please.

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by Gill Catton

Yes I personally think that 'lack of gill' should be avoided at all times !!! (sorry couldn't resist)

I totally undertsand what you are saying, and actually it's something i'm finding as I get better in my field skills is exactly what you need to see to get an ID.
Perhaps there should be an ID photograph tips page for example, how a lateral view in addition to a dorsal view may be important for dragonflies or damselflies. How flowers, stem or basal and leaves and sometimes even seed heads may be important for flowers. Spore shape important for ferns, wing veination and head shape for flies etc.....

Ooops, knew I should have put 'pores' Gill

Good idea Gill. I'm writing a 'photo technique' guide for fungi at present. It would be great if all the field experts could do something similar ...... It would make a great book

Anyway from now on Gill .... a gill will be a 'non pore'
John

[Gill Catton]

No it's fine!!!
I still mourn the day that my local pub stopped serving spirits by the 1/6th of a gill!!

[FungiJohn]

Originally Posted by Gill Catton

No it's fine!!!
I still mourn the day that my local pub stopped serving spirits by the 1/6th of a gill!!