I've found as of late that a large percentage of people in the road community only post Google Maps Images to road media sites. While in certain circumstances I can understand why Google Maps image may be useful the trouble is that I see it becoming watered down in terms of meaningful content. Example; the "There is no way that is MUTCD Compliant" Facebook group has probably a 70-80% rate of people posting images from Google Maps.
Personally, I much rather use Google Maps to find something interesting. From there I would probably go see the interesting item for myself and take a photo. I get it that a great many people in the hobby aren't interested in taking road photos, but I would have thought more would be into going to see items of interest. Most of the best stuff I've found isn't even on roads that have Google Car images. How is doing nothing but cropping images from Google Maps or posting links fun? At this point I'm just trying to get an understanding from outside my point view.
With topics like this, you're more likely to get better answers if you don't poison the well beforehand. For example, phrasing the title as "overuse" instead of "preference" and so on.
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on February 13, 2022, 05:03:37 PM
With topics like this, you're more likely to get better answers if you don't poison the well beforehand. For example, phrasing the title as "overuse" instead of "preference" and so on.
That's just it, I kinda see the well as already poisoned from my perspective. Perhaps not "poisoned" isn't the right word, but rather the hobby morphing into something I perhaps don't understand?
That's why I asked for what others might think on the topic. I did leave the topic phrased as a question, I know full well my thoughts will likely be far from consensus opinion. Perhaps if I can get some more insight from others than maybe I can have a basis of understanding as to why the topic at hand has become so pervasive? I don't intend to reply critically of others if they somehow enjoy the hobby more through Google Maps images, but I would be interested in knowing why they they do.
Similarly when I entered this hobby a long time ago I was under the impression most people in it liked driving. In the intervening years I've found this not to be a universal truism in the road community for various reasons presented by others.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2022, 05:14:15 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on February 13, 2022, 05:03:37 PM
With topics like this, you're more likely to get better answers if you don't poison the well beforehand. For example, phrasing the title as "overuse" instead of "preference" and so on.
That's just it, I kinda see the well as already poisoned from my perspective. Perhaps not "poisoned" isn't the right word, but rather the hobby morphing into something I perhaps don't understand?
No, he's saying
you're poisoning the well (http://wiktionary.org/wiki/poison_the_well).
I'm not quite yet at the point in my life where I have the ability to travel much on my own. That's why GSV is so convenient- I can explore the world from my couch.
I have a few posts where I used GSV to point out something interesting.. and the only reason I know of said point of interest is not by browsing GSV but rather traveling by the point of interest myself. I started taking road pictures in 2019, when I was 15. From then up until now, I have taken my pictures with my Galaxy S9+, from the backseat of the car on family road trips. From having to zoom in to less than ideal windshield conditions, image quality is often crushed. Stopping on the side of the road in some cases, especially with said family, is often very inconvenient. This is why I sometimes supplement my garbage photos with legible ones from Google.
I would like to actually be able to take quality road pictures myself, though I have some questions about going about doing so, such as "what is the safest way to go about taking an image along a limited access highway?".
Quote from: 1 on February 13, 2022, 05:19:32 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2022, 05:14:15 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on February 13, 2022, 05:03:37 PM
With topics like this, you're more likely to get better answers if you don't poison the well beforehand. For example, phrasing the title as "overuse" instead of "preference" and so on.
That's just it, I kinda see the well as already poisoned from my perspective. Perhaps not "poisoned" isn't the right word, but rather the hobby morphing into something I perhaps don't understand?
No, he's saying you're poisoning the well (http://wiktionary.org/wiki/poison_the_well).
Yes, I'm very much aware of what the term "poisoning the well" means.
Edit: And for what it's for what it is worth I took out some of the text in the original paragraph which I could see argued as a leading opinion.
Max sounds like he's not Mr. Happy today. :hmm:
My only camera is in my phone, and I don't know how to use it properly. I have a photographic memory and use Google Maps to verify what I've seen before.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 13, 2022, 05:30:12 PM
Max sounds like he's not Mr. Happy today. :hmm:
Bored would be a more accurate descriptor.
The problem is inanity. An interesting post would be just as good whether taken by the submitter or cropped from the Goog. But people love to post inane nitpicks because they think it's helpful.
I generally find actual photos taken by a roadgeek to be of greater value than GSV screenshots. The reason being that a photographer will usually make an attempt to compose a nice-looking photo or at least make the sign the focal point of an image. GSV is not attempting to take a photograph of anything in particular, so what it returns is not particularly well-suited for examining road features with any degree of detail. I also appreciate a photographer taking the time to produce an image for others in the hobby to enjoy. Some members of this forum are excellent photographers, and I appreciate the artistry that can go into that.
That being said, while I prefer to post photos of my own whenever possible, there are times when a sign near me has been relevant to a conversation, yet before that conversation I haven't ever taken the time to actually take a photo of it. Situations like that is why you'll never see anything like a ban on GSV imagery on this forum. But I do add the rule "no GSV" to any photo challenge thread I start, since if I wanted to look at GSV, I can do that without needing a forum thread on it.
What really baffles me are when I stumble upon a post here that bemoans the lack of recent GSV imagery in an area, especially when it's discussing a recent sign installation or project completion or something like that. If you want to see what an area looks like...go there? Sure, not everyone can travel as readily as most people on this forum, but, like...decide on if you have an interest in travel or not. Either find a way to make it happen (offering to buy a friend lunch and pay for gas if they'll take you down there is a pretty good way to accomplish it, and you get to spend time with your friend), or deal with the fact you'll have to wait for Google to show up.
Considering I don't drive, me sending pics from Google maps is the only way I can present things.
Quote from: tolbs17 on February 13, 2022, 07:28:30 PM
Considering I don't drive, me sending pics from Google maps is the only way I can present things.
Not everything on Google Maps needs to be presented.
Welp, I'm probably the most prolific poster of road-oriented GSV images on all of Facebook, so I suppose I should say something...
Quote from: Max RockatanskyExample; the "There is no way that is MUTCD Compliant" Facebook group has probably a 70-80% rate of people posting images from Google Maps.
Last weekend I made
a GSV-illustrated post there. It got 68 likes and 17 comments for the OP alone. The previous weekend, I made
a post illustrated with my own photos. It got eight likes and two comments. Before that,
another GSV-illustrated post, with 27 likes and seven comments. The last was about some signs on I-75-85 that were changed from Olympic-era Series C to 20009 MUTCD-compliant, then changed to noncompliant, then changed back to compliant, plus some other related stuff. For the last, I have my own photos of some of it, but using GSV allowed me to compose a coherent narrative, include "before" shots that no one would've anticipated a need for, and verify the dates when various things happened without the hassle of slogging through old Facebook post for dates and photos. It's just better. Easier, too.
Quote from: Scott5114I generally find actual photos taken by a roadgeek to be of greater value than GSV screenshots. The reason being that a photographer will usually make an attempt to compose a nice-looking photo or at least make the sign the focal point of an image. GSV is not attempting to take a photograph of anything in particular, so what it returns is not particularly well-suited for examining road features with any degree of detail. I also appreciate a photographer taking the time to produce an image for others in the hobby to enjoy. Some members of this forum are excellent photographers, and I appreciate the artistry that can go into that.
I disagree stridently for the obvious reason that it's a lot more difficult to compose a photo from a moving vehicle, much less from behind the wheel, than it is to do the same with Streetview from a chair in front your screen. And if the lighting's bad in December 2021, try another month and year. There are usually plenty. While it's true that good (or lucky) photographers can get some excellent shots, Streetview can produce acceptable shots a high proportion of the time. And, occasionally, Streetviews can be surprisingly arty themselves.
Don't get me wrong: the last few longish road trips I took, I took many, many photos and posted them, elaborately captioned, to Facebook. My trips from Atlanta to Asheville and to Greensboro each yielded about fifteen posts, each with ten to twelve photos, almost all of them captioned. I anticipate doing it again someday, too. But Streetview lets me delve into areas that I could never hope to visit in my dwindling lifetime, and pretty much whenever I feel like it.
One more thing: People here commonly illustrate their posts with Streetview links. It's so much easier to do than uploading a photo to Imgur or whatever, if there's even a photo to upload. How is uploading a Streetview to Facebook any different? Not to mention how I feel when I go to the trouble to take photos, upload them to Imgur, post about them here, and get no reaction whatsoever.
Last thing: A few months ago, I did a four-part feature at Road Enthusiasts (that's where most of my Streetview posts are) about the mega-widening of I-35 between Austin and the I-35W-35E split, using archived Streetviews to show the before and after. It would've been possible for a Texan to do that, but AFAIK no one did. Unfortunately, my posts went all but unnoticed, but I enjoyed making them and I'm proud of them nonetheless.
Quote from: Tom958 on February 13, 2022, 09:08:46 PM
Welp, I'm probably the most prolific poster of road-oriented GSV images on all of Facebook, so I suppose I should say something...
Quote from: Max RockatanskyExample; the "There is no way that is MUTCD Compliant" Facebook group has probably a 70-80% rate of people posting images from Google Maps.
Last weekend I made =AZWxDFqT9m4Uohb8WFTPNG_ocIt7drp6FMsQ6QD4gkjZc5u0N-rdipKolnHbFJzNe0-xZd88FbT6lE6bK2Apioi6wwB4RRBsjJqx_CIJuN53e2MVJkAzUwAbdy5dSvwfC_8DV624jiRryGW_G4oQhxGK&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R]a GSV-illustrated post there. It got 68 likes and 17 comments for the OP alone. the previous weekend, I made =AZWSxKFZ9U6e3HSdAmsvoUdLTdRh-a3NMjcKW2PIy73mKXi3ir4tkCIbWOtVjy3hvl7OJTwI6CPcevUfk2E2vjNGtS3pW_3r1hAFBIIieR5t6baiC-0jHWxtEvu0F31yyakbpLqGWmoEsW7KXyBK8St8&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R]a post illustrated with my own photos. It got eight likes and two comments. Before that, =AZUn4ANCJDbz6gG51DeXIUNl5RjbT7Ygs1ajI90nEet5nQF3l2MHSOOxZUGi-am3QrMXkv2aq7QgCx8AUmP70f9rUeJ_L5jC8l4sN3uCM1_jKxNUTweC549JmJ7Np0ZGOqY1kv6RwUxP4neSLy9772AA&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R]another GSV-illustrated post, with 27 likes and seven comments. The last was about some signs on I-75-85 that were changed from Olympic-era Series C to 20009 MUTCD-compliant, then changed to noncompliant, then changed back to compliant, plus some other related stuff. For the last, I have my own photos of some of it, but using GSV allowed me to compose a coherent narrative, include "before" shots that no one would've anticipated a need for, and verify the dates when various things happened without the hassle of slogging through old Facebook post for dates and photos. It's just better. Easier, too.
Quote from: Scott5114I generally find actual photos taken by a roadgeek to be of greater value than GSV screenshots. The reason being that a photographer will usually make an attempt to compose a nice-looking photo or at least make the sign the focal point of an image. GSV is not attempting to take a photograph of anything in particular, so what it returns is not particularly well-suited for examining road features with any degree of detail. I also appreciate a photographer taking the time to produce an image for others in the hobby to enjoy. Some members of this forum are excellent photographers, and I appreciate the artistry that can go into that.
I disagree stridently for the obvious reason that it's a lot more difficult to compose a photo from a moving vehicle, much less from behind the wheel, than it is to do the same with Streetview from a chair in front your screen. And if the lighting's bad in December 2021, try another month and year. There are usually plenty. While it's true that good (or lucky) photographers can get some excellent shots, Streetview can produce acceptable shots a high proportion of the time. And, occasionally, Streetviews can be surprisingly arty themselves.
Don't get me wrong: the last few longish road trips I took, I took many, many photos and posted them, elaborately captioned, to Facebook. My trips from Atlanta to Asheville and to Greensboro each yielded about fifteen posts, each with ten to twelve photos, almost all of them captioned. I anticipate doing it again someday, too. But Streetview lets me delve into areas that I could never hope to visit in my dwindling lifetime, and pretty much whenever I feel like it.
One more thing: People here commonly illustrate their posts with Streetview links. It's so much easier to do than uploading a photo to Imgur or whatever, if there's even a photo to upload. How is uploading a Streetview to Facebook any different? Not to mention how I feel when I go to the trouble to take photos, upload them to Imgur, post about them here, and get no reaction whatsoever.
Last thing: A few months ago, I did a four-part feature at Road Enthusiasts (that's where most of my Streetview posts are) about the mega-widening of I-35 between Austin and the I-35W-35E split, using archived Streetviews to show the before and after. It would've been possible for a Texan to do that, but AFAIK no one did. Unfortunately, my posts went all but unnoticed, but I enjoyed making them and I'm proud of them nonetheless.
So you'd rather steal from GSV than get originals?
Failure mode in epic fashion
My personal opinion is GSV images should be supplemental/complimentary. It could also be helpful for "going back in time." While I understand some of the why's of using Streetview (don't have a camera - or now use a camera phone well - can't travel there or easy access to a vehicle), it's not my cup of tea. I'd further say I think that is also goes on the level or type of interest in the hobby. If you are into technical details, or just want to see ROADS, or in a lot of cases, signs - then I guess GSV is your thing.
In the case of Tom's work on facebook with GSV images - I would say that is close to what I feel is a good use of it. But a personal preference is actual photos and/or actual research into the story of what is featured. My viewpoint is coming from being involved in the old era in the hobby when there were more dedicated hobby pages than there are now. Or if you didn't have one - you sent your photos somewhere and it either was then in a sign gallery or became part of a feature.
All of which leads to another rant (and did a podcast episode about this) is the lack of dedicated pages and everything getting lost in a facebook timeline. I've been wanting to do one on urging people to do less GSV for a while now.
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 13, 2022, 09:13:34 PM
steal from GSV
I wasn't aware these images were being removed from GSV.
To me the big issue is not that people are using GMSV instead of their own photos... it is specifically that they are taking screenshots of GMSV and posting those. This presents two problems:
1) If not specifically attributed as being from GMSV, this is plagiarism
2) Even if specifically attributed... it's tacky.
If you want to use GMSV as an image source, please just post a link. Taking screenshots is putting in extra effort to deliver something inferior since unlike with a link you can't then look around... you just have a screenshot.
Quote from: NE2 on February 13, 2022, 06:04:23 PM
The problem is inanity. An interesting post would be just as good whether taken by the submitter or cropped from the Goog. But people love to post inane nitpicks because they think it's helpful.
Within the hobby yes, I can agree - outside of it I don't think as much.
15-20 years ago, the "ENDS" pages done by myself and many others were successful and fun because people were going out and taking photos on their own. It also included interest from outside the hobby.
GSV is a good resource and helpful for in hobby discussion. I just don't think it's as appealing to those outside of it.
It's like I heard a lot about this concern while binging the Gribblenation Roadcast on my roadtrip yesterday. :nod:
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2022, 09:58:02 PM
It's like I heard a lot about this concern while binging the Gribblenation Roadcast on my roadtrip yesterday. :nod:
I totally forget, did I mention it in one of the Roadcasts? I hardly ever remember the things I say when I do one.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2022, 10:05:35 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2022, 09:58:02 PM
It's like I heard a lot about this concern while binging the Gribblenation Roadcast on my roadtrip yesterday. :nod:
I totally forget, did I mention it in one of the Roadcasts? I hardly ever remember the things I say when I do one.
Actually I am pretty sure it was Adam on the one talking about the research for the I-79 routing and the Twin River Scenic Route.
I am in a similar situation as ozarkman417. I would really like to travel more via road trip but given my current situation it would not work. Once I'm in college and better opportunities arise I'll definitely do some more traveling.
I will say that posting a GSV link with little context as to what the image entails (especially if the poster neglects to trim the link or posts several links back-to-back in the same post... I used to be bad at this) puts me off a little bit now. One thing I'm trying to do to make my posts a little better and intuitive is to supplement the link with a picture (be it GSV screenshot or personal photo) so that one can more easily follow what I'm trying to show.
I totally understand how a lot of people would be irritated by someone using GSV to illustrate their posts rather than photos. After all, GSV didn't exist prior to 2006; prior to that, you either had photos of interesting road stuff, you looked at other peoples' interesting photos, or you simply just visited the area, stuff that requires some effort. Now that GSV exists, new roadgeeks can bypass all that and look at basically any road without much effort at all. That's definitely gotta rub the wrong way on somebody. I can also see how it can be watered down via overuse.
But I still feel that GSV is a great tool. It allows people to look anywhere in the world basically whenever they want. You can get a feel for a certain area before you even visit. You can share interesting stuff with others that wouldn't have necessarily been found before GSV became a thing.
Maybe I'm just out of touch. I'm not very interested in photography, and I have no intention of ever wanting an expensive camera to take great pictures or an account on Flickr for posting those pictures on. After all, this is just a hobby for me. I'm not anticipating roadgeeking being a permanent staple of my life; it's not going to be my job or my passion.
Quote from: Tom958 on February 13, 2022, 09:08:46 PM
I disagree stridently for the obvious reason that it's a lot more difficult to compose a photo from a moving vehicle, much less from behind the wheel, than it is to do the same with Streetview from a chair in front your screen.
I mean, yes, but putting the effort in to learn how to do it is worthwhile. It is a skill that takes practice. But even imperfect photos are often better than GSV, since it's rare that a GSV capture exists at the precise correct distance from the sign to make the details of it come out. The sloppy automated stitching and information-blurring algorithms also ruin images far more than a little bit of motion blur or windshield glare would.
If you just can't get the timing down...stopping the car and getting out is always an option.
Quote from: Tom958 on February 13, 2022, 09:08:46 PM
One more thing: People here commonly illustrate their posts with Streetview links. It's so much easier to do than uploading a photo to Imgur or whatever, if there's even a photo to upload.
I mean...if something isn't worth the effort of clicking through the Imgur interface, chances are it's not actually interesting enough to post.
Quote from: Tom958 on February 13, 2022, 09:08:46 PM
How is uploading a Streetview to Facebook any different? Not to mention how I feel when I go to the trouble to take photos, upload them to Imgur, post about them here, and get no reaction whatsoever.
Rule one of posting any sort of content to social media or forums is never let a failure to get a social media reaction dictate how you conduct yourself in the future. On social media, there is usually an algorithm of some kind gating your content off from the people who actually want to see it. A lack of reaction usually means that the site never even showed the content to anyone.
I used to share art that I did on social media, and never got any engagement with it. It was very discouraging, every time, because it takes a pretty big leap of confidence to put something that you spent hours working on out there, and getting no reaction sucked. But I soon realized what was going on...and now when I draw something I don't post it on social media, I just send it to my friends directly, which is much more satisfying.
Quote from: Duke87 on February 13, 2022, 09:46:14 PM
To me the big issue is not that people are using GMSV instead of their own photos... it is specifically that they are taking screenshots of GMSV and posting those. This presents two problems:
1) If not specifically attributed as being from GMSV, this is plagiarism
2) Even if specifically attributed... it's tacky.
If you want to use GMSV as an image source, please just post a link. Taking screenshots is putting in extra effort to deliver something inferior since unlike with a link you can't then look around... you just have a screenshot.
I feel the opposite here. I would much rather have a screenshot. GSV tends to bog down the browser, and it can take quite a long time to load. For a while there (I think they fixed it) links made on mobile devices would always load with the camera pointed at the pavement, and then you had to pan around and kind of guess what the person was wanting you to look at.
With a screenshot, at least you know what the person is wanting you to look at, and the image takes a lot less time to load than GSV does. I can glance at it and decide whether I find it interesting or not, rather than clicking a link, waiting for it to load, and then be irritated because whatever was in the link wasn't worth the wait.
Also, a thing for the pro-GSV posters to consider: GSV must be very expensive to keep updated and running. What happens if Google decides GSV does not actually result in enough profit to justify its existence, and they take it down? They've done it before with other services they own, even popular ones.
We would then have a 10-year period left greatly undocumented, and broken links all over the forum. It would be devastating to the hobby.
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2022, 10:15:00 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2022, 10:05:35 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 13, 2022, 09:58:02 PM
It's like I heard a lot about this concern while binging the Gribblenation Roadcast on my roadtrip yesterday. :nod:
I totally forget, did I mention it in one of the Roadcasts? I hardly ever remember the things I say when I do one.
Actually I am pretty sure it was Adam on the one talking about the research for the I-79 routing and the Twin River Scenic Route.
Yup, that was me. Nice to know we have listeners! Wish I had more time to record more!
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 13, 2022, 10:36:31 PM
If you just can't get the timing down...stopping the car and getting out is always an option.
That's my preference, but not always an option. What I have in mind is an overhead sign above a dangerous interchange with narrow lanes, almost no shoulders, lots of fast-moving traffic, and no passenger with me to take the photo. In that case, I found an adjacent park, and used playground equipment to get high enough that a fence wouldn't obstruct my camera's view. Usually, what happens instead is that I don't get the shot at all.
A dashcam (which I don't have) might be another option. Too bad my windshield seems to be a magnet for bug splats and bird crap.
Quote from: oscar on February 13, 2022, 11:02:25 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 13, 2022, 10:36:31 PM
If you just can't get the timing down...stopping the car and getting out is always an option.
That's my preference, but not always an option. What I have in mind is an overhead sign above a dangerous interchange with narrow lanes, almost no shoulders, lots of fast-moving traffic, and no passenger with me to take the photo. In that case, I found an adjacent park, and used playground equipment to get my camera over a fence. Usually, what happens instead is that I don't get the shot at all.
A dashcam (which I don't have) might be another option. Too bad my windshield seems to be a magnet for bug splats and bird crap.
Road Guy Rob had a pretty cool drone shot of a gantry in his video about the MUTCD sign colors. That could be an option for something like that. The owner of the OKCTalk forum has been taking drone shots of the progress on the I-235/I-44 interchange reconstruction, and they look fantastic.
I think drone technology is something that you would have seen the hobby really embrace had it been widely available before GSV was.
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 13, 2022, 11:07:40 PM
I think drone technology is something that you would have seen the hobby really embrace had it been widely available before GSV was.
Are you referring to photos like these?
https://vintageaerial.com/photos/north-carolina
1986 shot of the Carolina East Mall well, not really. It shows the parking lot more than the building... lol
(https://cdn.vintageaerial.io/file/va-public/PghMOLDx/1000x.jpg)
I mean, I literally gave two examples in my post of what I was talking about, but if you insist on making me lead a horse to water:
https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=24127&page=88
https://youtu.be/pVkzCbFLA9k?t=900
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2022, 04:48:45 PM
I've found as of late that a large percentage of people in the road community only post Google Maps Images to road media sites. While in certain circumstances I can understand why Google Maps image may be useful the trouble is that I see it becoming watered down in terms of meaningful content. Example; the "There is no way that is MUTCD Compliant" Facebook group has probably a 70-80% rate of people posting images from Google Maps.
Personally, I much rather use Google Maps to find something interesting. From there I would probably go see the interesting item for myself and take a photo. I get it that a great many people in the hobby aren't interested in taking road photos, but I would have thought more would be into going to see items of interest. Most of the best stuff I've found isn't even on roads that have Google Car images. How is doing nothing but cropping images from Google Maps or posting links fun? At this point I'm just trying to get an understanding from outside my point view.
I use Google Maps because I can't drive, It's the best that I can do right now. I do have some road pictures that my family had taken on road trips, years ago, but those pictures have, mostly, not been digitized & most of them aren't of old roads. Google Maps is the best that I can do right now.
Quote from: tolbs17 on February 13, 2022, 07:28:30 PM
Considering I don't drive, me sending pics from Google maps is the only way I can present things.
Sounds like there's an easy solution that involves a trip to the DMV.
:bigass:
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 13, 2022, 07:12:04 PM
...
That being said, while I prefer to post photos of my own whenever possible, there are times when a sign near me has been relevant to a conversation, yet before that conversation I haven't ever taken the time to actually take a photo of it.
I agree, and I do the same.
I'll add that sometimes I would never take a photo because on its own the subject of that photo doesn't interest me; for example, service signs, traffic signals, and street blades. But if I know a location that is relevant to the topic, I see no problem posting a GSV link.
What bothers me is when someone views that their definition of roadgeekery is the only acceptable definition.
What bothers me is when someone views that their opinion of a topic is the only acceptable opinion.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 14, 2022, 09:28:45 AM
Quote from: tolbs17 on February 13, 2022, 07:28:30 PM
Considering I don't drive, me sending pics from Google maps is the only way I can present things.
Sounds like there's an easy solution that involves a trip to the DMV.
:bigass:
But I do have a license...
Expounding on my original post I do on occasion utilize Google Street View images even in my own writings when it serves a means to an end. I've actually found Google to be somewhat useful if I miss something important in my own photos on mainline highways. Trouble is though, a lot of lesser highways out west only have pre-2010 images or don't have images at all. Personally I would prefer to substitute a link to someone else's work or use something they have with their permission. Typically most things I write about start with a historic overview which is accompanied by a Route photo log if possible.
If I do utilize Google Images I will generally try to replace them when/if opportune with something I took. The below blog I did on CA 53 is a good example of this. I wrote the CA 53 blog during peak COVID restrictions at work (when I couldn't travel more than 150 miles) and I originally used Google Images to splice a Route photo log together. When I drove CA 53 a couple months later I uploaded my own photos into the Route photo log segment of the blog. CA 53 is a rare example where I kept the Google Images in addition to to my own given they illustrated different directions of travel and some changes along the highway:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2020/07/california-state-route-53.html?m=1
In the US 299/CA 299 blog I used Google images to patch holes in my own photo coverage in the highway. For the most part I started to get serious about Route photo logs around early 2017 and everything before that was decidedly way more laid back. Most of the photos west of I-5 in the blog were my 2016 images of locales on 299 spliced with Google Street View photos. I would like to replace these photos eventually but I have no idea when I'll be in the 299 corridor again and I wanted to illustrate the highway as best as I could given the huge volume of historic information:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2018/11/adventure-us-route-299-california-state.html?m=1
My preference for when I don't have a proper log of my own photos would be to do a substitution media such as CA 73. I had a photo for the blog cover but I utilized Roadwaywiz media with permission from the content owner:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/10/california-state-route-73.html?m=1
I think Tom hit on what I would view as ideal use of Google Maps images above for standalone road posts. He's generally very selective in what he posts and I think most would agree subjectively. But one could probably say something similar with any kind of media in that some things are worth sharing whereas others aren't.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 14, 2022, 01:59:51 PM
I think Tom hit on what I would view as ideal use of Google Maps images above for standalone road posts. He's generally very selective in what he posts and I think most would agree subjectively. But one could probably say something similar with any kind of media in that some things are worth sharing whereas others aren't.
That's probably the key problem–some people apparently can't live without vomiting GSV links everywhere, whether or not they're interesting to look at.
I wouldn't mind GSV links so much if they were paired with a screenshot instead of just the link with almost no context. On mobile, it overrides the Google Maps app, and on desktop it's easy to scroll past.
I used to use the Google Maps API, which let you embed map images and satellite images without people having to click a link, although getting the coordinates right involved trial and error. Unfortunately, they stopped allowing it a few years ago.
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 14, 2022, 02:22:07 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 14, 2022, 01:59:51 PM
I think Tom hit on what I would view as ideal use of Google Maps images above for standalone road posts. He's generally very selective in what he posts and I think most would agree subjectively. But one could probably say something similar with any kind of media in that some things are worth sharing whereas others aren't.
That's probably the key problem–some people apparently can't live without vomiting GSV links everywhere, whether or not they're interesting to look at.
I am probably one of the most frequent users of Street View links on this forum. I don't think they're a big issue unless they are severely lacking context. I normally try to embed them into the text of my post if possible, so readers have context and know more or less what the link is going to show, and then can make their own judgment if they want to open it or not.
Quote from: NE2 on February 13, 2022, 06:04:23 PM
The problem is inanity. An interesting post would be just as good whether taken by the submitter or cropped from the Goog. But people love to post inane nitpicks because they think it's helpful.
^ This.
A good post is a good post; there's always going to be those who take a different appreciation for the hobby, and won't care for it the same way you do. Unless someone's being a jerk about it, that's okay. After all, I can't get every shot with my camera (but I can take nicer ones than GSV can...for now), that's why we all play a part.
All I ask is that if you're going to take a screenshot of GSV, please don't take a photo of your monitor; that's just lazy and looks half-assed. Figure out how to make an image file right from your desktop.
For the fellow facebookers out there; if you're just going to criticize some trivial design flaw in someone's photo, and they're not looking for suggestions, please don't bother. It's actually kind of disrespectful. If it gives you the shakes so badly, print it out and destroy the paper in your spare time.
My 2 cents
GSV is pretty much my main way of attaching some sort of image/visual representation to my examples in a lot of threads. I don't have a car right now, and full time in school, so I can't really go out to take road pictures of my own. I also think a GSV link or image is much more useful for pointing out locations than with nothing at all, if that's an alternative option you have in mind. For example, if a thread is about DDI locations, and I mention "I-70 exit 229B at 5th St" as one, it would be much easier for someone that's interested to see the location for themselves with a link than to manually open up Google Maps and type it in.
I remember this quote from another thread, and it sums up my thoughts pretty well:
Quote from: kphoger on April 21, 2021, 12:43:28 PM
Quote from: 1 on April 21, 2021, 12:37:10 PM
Given where tolbs17 lives ...
Pet peeve of mine. Sorry guys, but don't post something vague and then expect me to determine where it is based on where you live. That means I have to look at your profile (if you even have your location listed), assume you're not on vacation and posting about wherever you happen to be at the time, then break out a map and figure it out myself. Chances are, I'm just not that interested in whatever you have to say to make it worth it. Just include a Google Maps link and make life easier for the rest of us. Then we might actually enter the discussion.
[/rant]
Quote from: webny99 on February 14, 2022, 03:38:16 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 14, 2022, 02:22:07 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 14, 2022, 01:59:51 PM
I think Tom hit on what I would view as ideal use of Google Maps images above for standalone road posts. He's generally very selective in what he posts and I think most would agree subjectively. But one could probably say something similar with any kind of media in that some things are worth sharing whereas others aren't.
That's probably the key problem–some people apparently can't live without vomiting GSV links everywhere, whether or not they're interesting to look at.
I am probably one of the most frequent users of Street View links on this forum. I don't think they're a big issue unless they are severely lacking context. I normally try to embed them into the text of my post if possible, so readers have context and know more or less what the link is going to show, and then can make their own judgment if they want to open it or not.
This is how I look at streetview - I also tend to embed streetview links into my posts frequently, but being an extremely visual learner I look at it as a way of providing visual backup to what I'm typing up in my post. Furthermore, when I do link streetview it's typically something I first noticed while driving but didn't get a picture of, and then went back later to jog my memory (as opposed to, say, clicking around streetview and then posting stuff the instant I come across it). So I don't have an issue with streetview if it's being used to support a thoughtful post, but I can agree that the zero-context streetview spams (which seem to be disproportionally located in one state) get irritating after a while.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on February 14, 2022, 03:58:29 PM
This is how I look at streetview - I also tend to embed streetview links into my posts frequently, but being an extremely visual learner I look at it as a way of providing visual backup to what I'm typing up in my post.
That's also why I like when various rerouting and renumbering proposals have a map as opposed to a verbal description.
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on February 15, 2022, 11:15:23 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on February 14, 2022, 03:58:29 PM
This is how I look at streetview - I also tend to embed streetview links into my posts frequently, but being an extremely visual learner I look at it as a way of providing visual backup to what I'm typing up in my post.
That's also why I like when various rerouting and renumbering proposals have a map as opposed to a verbal description.
Yup, same here...sometimes, I need a visual picture in my head, and for this forum, map puts it into perspective.
Some posts are better than others about context; though sometimes, that's based on assumptions of the audience. If there's a new post in the
Maryland thread, then there's a good chance that there's not a lot of need for backup context about where it's located.
But if it's in the
Central Ohio thread, and somebody mentions something in Idaho that's very specific to a project in Idaho, then it helps to have a link or give the us some clues so we know what you're talking about.
I almost exclusively read the forum on my tablet. GSV links are a pain in the ass as the application on my tablet sucks as compared to using Google Maps on my PC. As such, I rarely go to a GSV link here unless it's something that seems like it might be interesting. Unfortunately the bulk of posts vomiting GSV links (that's funny), don't convince me to want to bog down my tablet loading up a GSV link that is likely not worth viewing.
I occassionally will post here indicating to members to provide more context as to what your GSV link is covering. Too often posts come off as "look at this" without much of anything else.
As for the Facebook posts with just GSV screenshots, I almost always ignore those. Seeing images with giant street name text overlaying the road is meh, and furthermore I can view GSV myself. I get that people can't get around on their own, or aren't in an area to shoot things themselves because they are located somewhere else in the country, but that doesn't mean I want to see posts with screenshots from their couch roadding either.
And the whining on the forum about the lack of updated GSV imagery is increasing. :thumbdown:
But otherwise, I can echo your sentiment Tom.
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 13, 2022, 10:39:40 PM
Also, a thing for the pro-GSV posters to consider: GSV must be very expensive to keep updated and running. What happens if Google decides GSV does not actually result in enough profit to justify its existence, and they take it down? They've done it before with other services they own, even popular ones.
We would then have a 10-year period left greatly undocumented, and broken links all over the forum. It would be devastating to the hobby.
Which is a good argument for taking GSV screenshots and posting them to the internet. :bigass:
Or archive them privately, but that wouldn't help the hobby much.
I fear I am guilty in this regard, and on two counts, as I also don't drive (due to physical limitations).
Authentic photos are no doubt far superior to those from GMSV, and look better. Since I rarely have the opportunity to get natural photos outside of my immediate area, Google Maps is often the only way I can present something if I don't already have the photo. However, I would probably do well do be more selective in what I derive from Google Maps, as my contributions aren't always the most compelling.
My YouTube channel and Flickr page have been stagnant for a long while, but I hope to change that soon. Bit by bit I am catching up on my backlog, but whatever happened a few years ago (partially an overload of videos/media at one time, compromising both my storage and my motivation due to being overwhelmed, and external factors as well) has taken far too long to clean up, and it is still being cleaned up. All that to say is I really should get on the ball with my road photos and videos and don't have much of an excuse, but still have a ways to go.
I do treasure the quality of authentic road photos, but often Google Maps is the most convenient way to go, and in certain cases the only way. To me, GMSV links can assist in what someone is trying to convey (about a road) in a post, and can be quite essential (although I agree with webny99's advice about how to incorporate them into a post smoothly). I definitely understand the argument that images from Google Maps just don't look good posted to the forum (compared to real photos), and with that said I will try to avoid doing this in the future.
Here's a good example of a bad Goog post (in the Old Highway Alignments group):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F9IcCmTT.png&hash=f112cd425611de8f0ece6592c3301ac8b05420d6)
No text, uncropped, just screenshot and upload.
Reminds me of the people who post road photos that are 70% car interior and 30% whatever they were intending to photograph.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 20, 2022, 02:45:16 PM
Reminds me of the people who post road photos that are 70% car interior and 30% whatever they were intending to photograph.
Which draws harsh criticism from the admins of one particular freeway group.
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 20, 2022, 09:38:56 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 20, 2022, 02:45:16 PM
Reminds me of the people who post road photos that are 70% car interior and 30% whatever they were intending to photograph.
Which draws harsh criticism from the admins of one particular freeway group.
That particular freeway group will criticize even minor issues; if not the admin, then some of the more particular members. One in a lifetime opportunity? Sorry - there's a little glare. You should've been more prepared with a towel over your dash.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 20, 2022, 11:17:54 PM
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 20, 2022, 09:38:56 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 20, 2022, 02:45:16 PM
Reminds me of the people who post road photos that are 70% car interior and 30% whatever they were intending to photograph.
Which draws harsh criticism from the admins of one particular freeway group.
That particular freeway group will criticize even minor issues; if not the admin, then some of the more particular members. One in a lifetime opportunity? Sorry - there's a little glare. You should've been more prepared with a towel over your dash.
I may hold my photos to a high standard (and there's definitely a few stinkers in my collection) but I honestly don't expect everyone to do the same. I think there has to be a line to prevent untidy junk, stolen images, meme dumps, and over-sharers, but you also shouldn't be overly exclusive if it's an open group...Not everyone has the same style.
I'm not sure what the group is, but they're free to make their rules. It's probably a reaction to some other groups' loose rules and looser postings.
Quote from: formulanone on February 21, 2022, 08:45:45 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 20, 2022, 11:17:54 PM
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 20, 2022, 09:38:56 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 20, 2022, 02:45:16 PM
Reminds me of the people who post road photos that are 70% car interior and 30% whatever they were intending to photograph.
Which draws harsh criticism from the admins of one particular freeway group.
That particular freeway group will criticize even minor issues; if not the admin, then some of the more particular members. One in a lifetime opportunity? Sorry - there's a little glare. You should've been more prepared with a towel over your dash.
I may hold my photos to a high standard (and there's definitely a few stinkers in my collection) but I honestly don't expect everyone to do the same. I think there has to be a line to prevent untidy junk, stolen images, meme dumps, and over-sharers, but you also shouldn't be overly exclusive if it's an open group...Not everyone has the same style.
I'm not sure what the group is, but they're free to make their rules. It's probably a reaction to some other groups' loose rules and looser postings.
The group everyone is referring to is Freewayjim.
This has been an interesting thread to read through. I do post StreetView links fairly frequently, and screenshots rather less often, but in all cases try to be clear about what is shown--never "Hey look at this cool thing" without context. I mostly think of StreetView as just one source of illustrations. Others include plan sheets, my own photos, and pattern-accurate sign mockups drawn from memory.
I hesitate to get worked up about what goes on in the Facebook road-related groups because they are extensions of Big Data, rather than volunteer-run communities like AARoads and Gribblenation. Why give Mark Zuckerberg more of our time and energy when he has already taken so much from us?
I use Streetview all the time; because I'm just too lazy to find a picture that I may or may not have taken and then transfer it to my PC to upload it.
I always try to use the image function on this forum because I know myself, I pretty much almost never open a Streetview link unless the post really caught my attention.