This is not the first time this topic has come up - every time it is about throwing up thresholds for photographers because we believe that it increases quality. Actually, we learned that it doesn't. The lower the thresholds, the less restrictions we put on people, the more submissions we will get. Please note that we are not *just* caring about that one single perfect shot, but we want people to upload multiple pictures! If they want to upload 100 pictures of a church, who do they hurt other than the jury members? I have been told that many slightly different pictures could in the future even perhaps be used for 3D image generation. But even for now I have more than once searched for a slightly different angle of a photo because I wanted it for a specific purpose. And I can tell you from experience that a jury is very good at ignoring a set of 100 very similar photos. That is much easier than choosing between two good quality photos.
Everyone who didn't read it yet, I'd recommand https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments/Philosophy . It gives a consise overview of what Wiki Loves Monuments is all about, and why we have made certain choices. In that same philosophy, I believe that imposing upload restrictions is bad - bad for moral, bad for quality and bad for free content. Another popular restriction I strongly oppose is requiring a minimum amount of pixels. The only thing it helps for, is to make it easier to manage the work load. Throwing up a threshold is a very effective way to scare off especially the newcomers - Wikipedians will upload anyway. And that is one of my main goals this contest - get more people to do their uploads to Wikimedia Commons instead of Facebook. Get people to realize that it is quite doable to upload your pictures on Commons, and that they even may get used on Wikipedia that way. That free licenses are not evil.
So please, lets try to keep the thresholds low - lets give people freedom in uploading as many photos from monuments as possible.
Best, Lodewijk
2012/6/22 Jan Ainali jan.ainali@wikimedia.se
While making it as easy as possible for the jury, let's not forget the purpose of the contest, to get educational pictures of as many monuments as possible. There need to be an incentive for photographers to not be satisfied with just uploading their best image. Uploading with metadata is a pain, and if they are not entering the contest the risk is that we will miss out of some educational pictures that may not be the prettiest. The contest is our carrot to make people upload, and if the carrot is smaller not all will chase for it.
I think Racso is on to something though, by limiting it to a certain number per monument. The limit must be higher than one, eg. for a church the interior is at least as interesting as the exterior for one thing and while the photographer thinks one of them has better chance to win, maybe the other is of most value to the projects. Perhaps ten is enough, that could make those photographers that upload hundreds of picture of each monument less overwhelming. Can we do such a limitation technically, or do we make it as a strong recommendation to the contestants or solve it in another way?
-- Best Jan Ainali Chairman, Wikimedia Sverige http://se.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huvudsida
2012/6/22 Nicu Buculei nicubunu@gmail.com
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:19 AM, Peter Ekman wrote:
It seems to me that you can't possibly give a jury a 1,000 photos and
expect
them to come up with anything reasonable. That type of system would
also
drive away quality jurors - the best jurors simply wouldn't have time
for
all that. And if we're talking about 10,000 photos, it just gets worse. There has to be some sort of pre-screening, whether we like it or not.
A jury put in front of 1000 or more photos would have a difficult job, but with a pre-screening you can get to a few hundreds of images and a reasonable amount of work.
A couple of suggestions for pre-screening:
- Let the photographer decide which of his photos is best - say 1 for
the
entire contest or 1 for each day he/she uploads. 2. Have a contest each day, with a each photographer who uploaded that
day
nominating a single photo, and letting the community vote (I'd say +1
for
each photo you like) then after a few days a selected screener from the community selects 2 or 3 photos from the group that has the highest
score.
After 30 days, you'd have 60-90 photos that the jury can deal with,
each
photog would have had the chance to nominate his best photos (multiple times), the community would have their say, and the screeners would not
have
to deal with 1,000s of photos.
Something like that would require a large organizational effort and a large community, which is not the case for most of the participating countries. Small teams and small communities will have to "Keep It Simple and Stupid". [1]
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle
-- nicu :: http://photoblog.nicubunu.ro/
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
I couldn't agree more with Lodewijk. Please have a look to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fa%C3%A7ade_et_parvis_de_l%27%C3%A9gl..., it is a gateway to a hundred pictures of the same church (with notes). This is the kind of awesome thing we would NOT have if we throw up a threshold.
Caroline
2012/6/22 Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org
Lodewijk
I agree with Lodewijk about the Philosophy of the contest. But also for a practical reason: how much is 'too much'?
Probably for a small statue or house, 10 is more than enough. But there are other monuments that can be much more complicate. In our case, Easter Island as a whole is a national monument. You can't expect someone travelling thousands of kms to just upload 10 pics.
El 22-06-2012 3:14, "Caroline Becker" carobecker54@gmail.com escribió:
I couldn't agree more with Lodewijk. Please have a look to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fa%C3%A7ade_et_parvis_de_l%27%C3%A9gl..., it is a gateway to a hundred pictures of the same church (with notes). This is the kind of awesome thing we would NOT have if we throw up a threshold.
Caroline
2012/6/22 Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org
Lodewijk
_______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Awesome, I didn't know we could that :-) -NT
Em 22-06-2012 08:13, Caroline Becker escreveu:
I couldn't agree more with Lodewijk. Please have a look to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fa%C3%A7ade_et_parvis_de_l%27%C3%A9gl..., it is a gateway to a hundred pictures of the same church (with notes). This is the kind of awesome thing we would NOT have if we throw up a threshold.
Caroline
2012/6/22 Lodewijk <lodewijk@effeietsanders.org mailto:lodewijk@effeietsanders.org>
Lodewijk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
On 06/22/2012 10:09 AM, Lodewijk wrote:
This is not the first time this topic has come up - every time it is about throwing up thresholds for photographers because we believe that it increases quality. Actually, we learned that it doesn't. The lower the thresholds, the less restrictions we put on people, the more submissions we will get. Please note that we are not *just* caring about that one single perfect shot, but we want people to upload multiple pictures! If they want to upload 100 pictures of a church, who do they hurt other than the jury members? I have been told that many slightly different pictures could in the future even perhaps be used for 3D image generation. But even for now I have more than once searched for a slightly different angle of a photo because I wanted it for a specific purpose. And I can tell you from experience that a jury is very good at ignoring a set of 100 very similar photos. That is much easier than choosing between two good quality photos.
As a member of the jury, I would like the work to be less, as a Wikipedian I would like the images to be of best quality.
But with my photographer hat on, I am strongly against setting a hard limit. If we limit the images to N, then I am sure there is somewhere a monument deserving N+1 pictures.
With this said, I do want to encourage quality over quantity, for example I think is a *bad idea* do advertise a prize for "most images submitted", as it can encourage low quality submissions..
For the international contest there are only quality prizes - countries are of course free to choose to give a quantity prize. WLM-nl has always done this though - but not for the most photos, but for the person who submitted photos of the most individual monuments. That seems to have worked well, but is something that is very country dependent.
Lodewijk
2012/6/22 Nicu Buculei nicubunu@gmail.com
On 06/22/2012 10:09 AM, Lodewijk wrote:
This is not the first time this topic has come up - every time it is about throwing up thresholds for photographers because we believe that it increases quality. Actually, we learned that it doesn't. The lower the thresholds, the less restrictions we put on people, the more submissions we will get. Please note that we are not *just* caring about that one single perfect shot, but we want people to upload multiple pictures! If they want to upload 100 pictures of a church, who do they hurt other than the jury members? I have been told that many slightly different pictures could in the future even perhaps be used for 3D image generation. But even for now I have more than once searched for a slightly different angle of a photo because I wanted it for a specific purpose. And I can tell you from experience that a jury is very good at ignoring a set of 100 very similar photos. That is much easier than choosing between two good quality photos.
As a member of the jury, I would like the work to be less, as a Wikipedian I would like the images to be of best quality.
But with my photographer hat on, I am strongly against setting a hard limit. If we limit the images to N, then I am sure there is somewhere a monument deserving N+1 pictures.
With this said, I do want to encourage quality over quantity, for example I think is a *bad idea* do advertise a prize for "most images submitted", as it can encourage low quality submissions..
-- nicu :: http://nicubunu.ro :: http://nicubunu.blogspot.com
______________________________**_________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.**wikimedia.orgWikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/**wikilovesmonumentshttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.**eu http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
+1 to Lodewijk post.
Moreover, some monuments like cathedrals or museums could easily reach the 10 photos limit.
But I think the proposal is flawed from the beginning. It comes from the assumption that it would significantly reduce the number of photographs the jurors need to review without a loss of quality images. I went to the data of WLM-ES 2011 and looked at the count of instances of the pair (monument, photographer) where they were more than 10:
11 pairs: 33 12 pairs: 31 13 pairs: 19 14 pairs: 11 15 pairs: 12 16 pairs: 16 17 pairs: 11 18 pairs: 10 19 pairs: 12 20 pairs: 8 21 pairs: 8 22 pairs: 4 23 pairs: 4 24 pairs: 6 25 pairs: 1 26 pairs: 2 27 pairs: 8 28 pairs: 3 29 pairs: 1 30 pairs: 1 31 pairs: 3 32 pairs: 2 33 pairs: 3 34 pairs: 4 35 pairs: 1 36 pairs: 2 37 pairs: 4 38 pairs: 1 40 pairs: 2 41 pairs: 1 46 pairs: 1 56 pairs: 1 58 pairs: 1
FYI, the 58 photos of the same monument is a monastery, with many details being photographed: http://toolserver.org/~platonides/wlm2011/gallery.php?bic=RI-51-0000058&...
I analysed direct uploads to commons only, that's a total of 15063 files. Had we put a maximum of 10 files per user and monument we would risk having 1951 files less. That's a shocking 12.95%
Most of them appear to show clearly different images, but I haven't reviewed them all, you can view the list at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Platonides/MultipleMonumentPhotosPerU...
Also note that in several cases that user has been the only one providing images for that monument.
I also don't think you should put limits.
In NL we have even discussed the other side. The pictures you normally get are the outside pictures of the whole monuments and sometimes some details. What you want as well, certainly from the bigger monuments is a lot more detail pictures, inside and outside, describing the whole monument, which fits with one of the purposes of Wiki Loves Monuments and Wikipedia, to document for later generations.
So we certainly do not want to limit the number of pictures, and have even been talking if we could do a price for the best set of pictures completely describing a monument. We didn't decide on that yet, as it is not easy to have a good setup for that, and makes the job of the jury more difficult.
But I really don't think it is a good idea to limit the number of pictures. And remember, in NL in the first year, we het 12.500 pictures, and with 5 man in the jury, they weren't to happy of course with the number, but it was doable. As Lodewijk said, profesional photographers are used to weed out the best pictures out of big amounts of pictures.
Regards,
Andre
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 09:09:33AM +0200, Lodewijk wrote:
This is not the first time this topic has come up - every time it is about throwing up thresholds for photographers because we believe that it increases quality. Actually, we learned that it doesn't. The lower the thresholds, the less restrictions we put on people, the more submissions we will get. Please note that we are not *just* caring about that one single perfect shot, but we want people to upload multiple pictures! If they want to upload 100 pictures of a church, who do they hurt other than the jury members? I have been told that many slightly different pictures could in the future even perhaps be used for 3D image generation. But even for now I have more than once searched for a slightly different angle of a photo because I wanted it for a specific purpose. And I can tell you from experience that a jury is very good at ignoring a set of 100 very similar photos. That is much easier than choosing between two good quality photos.
Everyone who didn't read it yet, I'd recommand https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments/Philosophy . It gives a consise overview of what Wiki Loves Monuments is all about, and why we have made certain choices. In that same philosophy, I believe that imposing upload restrictions is bad - bad for moral, bad for quality and bad for free content. Another popular restriction I strongly oppose is requiring a minimum amount of pixels. The only thing it helps for, is to make it easier to manage the work load. Throwing up a threshold is a very effective way to scare off especially the newcomers - Wikipedians will upload anyway. And that is one of my main goals this contest - get more people to do their uploads to Wikimedia Commons instead of Facebook. Get people to realize that it is quite doable to upload your pictures on Commons, and that they even may get used on Wikipedia that way. That free licenses are not evil.
So please, lets try to keep the thresholds low - lets give people freedom in uploading as many photos from monuments as possible.
Best, Lodewijk
2012/6/22 Jan Ainali jan.ainali@wikimedia.se
While making it as easy as possible for the jury, let's not forget the purpose of the contest, to get educational pictures of as many monuments as possible. There need to be an incentive for photographers to not be satisfied with just uploading their best image. Uploading with metadata is a pain, and if they are not entering the contest the risk is that we will miss out of some educational pictures that may not be the prettiest. The contest is our carrot to make people upload, and if the carrot is smaller not all will chase for it.
I think Racso is on to something though, by limiting it to a certain number per monument. The limit must be higher than one, eg. for a church the interior is at least as interesting as the exterior for one thing and while the photographer thinks one of them has better chance to win, maybe the other is of most value to the projects. Perhaps ten is enough, that could make those photographers that upload hundreds of picture of each monument less overwhelming. Can we do such a limitation technically, or do we make it as a strong recommendation to the contestants or solve it in another way?
-- Best Jan Ainali Chairman, Wikimedia Sverige http://se.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huvudsida
2012/6/22 Nicu Buculei nicubunu@gmail.com
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:19 AM, Peter Ekman wrote:
It seems to me that you can't possibly give a jury a 1,000 photos and
expect
them to come up with anything reasonable. That type of system would
also
drive away quality jurors - the best jurors simply wouldn't have time
for
all that. And if we're talking about 10,000 photos, it just gets worse. There has to be some sort of pre-screening, whether we like it or not.
A jury put in front of 1000 or more photos would have a difficult job, but with a pre-screening you can get to a few hundreds of images and a reasonable amount of work.
A couple of suggestions for pre-screening:
- Let the photographer decide which of his photos is best - say 1 for
the
entire contest or 1 for each day he/she uploads. 2. Have a contest each day, with a each photographer who uploaded that
day
nominating a single photo, and letting the community vote (I'd say +1
for
each photo you like) then after a few days a selected screener from the community selects 2 or 3 photos from the group that has the highest
score.
After 30 days, you'd have 60-90 photos that the jury can deal with,
each
photog would have had the chance to nominate his best photos (multiple times), the community would have their say, and the screeners would not
have
to deal with 1,000s of photos.
Something like that would require a large organizational effort and a large community, which is not the case for most of the participating countries. Small teams and small communities will have to "Keep It Simple and Stupid". [1]
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle
-- nicu :: http://photoblog.nicubunu.ro/
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org