Overuse of Google Maps Images?

[Max Rockatansky]

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. 

[CtrlAltDel]

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.

[Max Rockatansky]

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. 

[hotdogPi]

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.

[ozarkman417]

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?".

[Max Rockatansky]

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.

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. 

[1995hoo]

Max sounds like he's not Mr. Happy today. 

[Big John]

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.

[Max Rockatansky]

Max sounds like he's not Mr. Happy today. 

Bored would be a more accurate descriptor.

[NE2]

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.

[Scott5114]

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.

[tolbs17]

Considering I don't drive, me sending pics from Google maps is the only way I can present things.

[Scott5114]

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.

[Tom958]

Welp, I'm probably the most prolific poster of road-oriented GSV images on all of Facebook, so I suppose I should say something...

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.

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.

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.

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.

[SSOWorld]

Welp, I'm probably the most prolific poster of road-oriented GSV images on all of Facebook, so I suppose I should say something...

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.

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.

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.

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

[CanesFan27]

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.

[NE2]

steal from GSV

I wasn't aware these images were being removed from GSV.

[Duke87]

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.

[CanesFan27]

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.

[74/171FAN]

It's like I heard a lot about this concern while binging the Gribblenation Roadcast on my roadtrip yesterday.   

[Max Rockatansky]

It's like I heard a lot about this concern while binging the Gribblenation Roadcast on my roadtrip yesterday.   

I totally forget, did I mention it in one of the Roadcasts?  I hardly ever remember the things I say when I do one.

[74/171FAN]

It's like I heard a lot about this concern while binging the Gribblenation Roadcast on my roadtrip yesterday.   

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.

[CoreySamson]

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.

[Scott5114]

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.

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.

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.

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.

[Scott5114]

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.