NABILazeez's post
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Limiting photo upload per each place for every user

  • Hello Google team
  • Local Guides

My idea aim to limit the number of photos uploaded /place to only 5 photos for each user .

Why :

1- we may find places with hundreds of photos can you imagine that the user who is looking for the place will see all these photos ? 

Of course not it's needs a lot of time but if we allow every local guide to share his best 5 photos only for the place we may have chance to be seen all . 

2- some local guides uploaded so many photos to a place just for getting lg points ( which doesn't matter ) far from the quality we expect to be in Google maps . 

Thanks for your time

 

- some refinements suggested by fellow local guides and I agree with them :

 

1- number of photos may vary according to the nature of the poi

so  photos number can be determined according to the poi category ( some poi need more photos to be covered properly )

 

2- local guide can upload more than 5 photos but without LG points ( only 25 point for each poi ) So people searching for points will not use photos to gain more points .

 

3- 360° photos needs more photo upload, may be 10 or 15 per poi to be connected probably.

 

4- number of photos could be determined according to  LG level so the higher level can upload more photos .

 

5- photos could be uploaded as 5 photos for menu, 5 for indoor and 5 for outdoor , with a total 15 photo per each poi .

 

6- In another way in street view app. there is an option in the settings allow you to auto detect faces so , what about using the same thing in the maps algorithm to detect personal photos and selfie photos ?

 

345 Comments
Level 8

@NABILazeez That's a good idea. This will be helpful for the people and we can reduce the number of useless condibutions 

Anonymous
Not applicable

I honestly don't agree so much. I actually share many photos but also videos, and that makes you aware of the fact you are going to post more than 5 photos. If I am in a hotel, taking all the photos at the room, at the hall and in other areas of the hotel means you are going to take minimum 50 photos. At the restaurant, taking high quality photos to more than 5 dishes, plus all the photos to the environment, to the menu (yes you can also take photos at the menu) and eventual 360 photos will be not possible if you limit the contributions to 5 photos.

 

I understand many local guides post photos just for points but this is not an excuse to limit the activity of also the honest local guides. Algorithms should be more severe against unfair local guides, cutting the limit to 5 is just like a "punishment" for the entire community because of the behavior of certain people.

Cutting photos to 5 means actually killing the potentiality of these contributions. If someone takes 30 high quality photos, I think he deserves to be able to share them, limiting also honest activity of the best Local Guides means automatically killing the entire Local Guides program in my opinion, cause nobody is interested to just share 5 photos, just like users are willing to see as many information as possible, so the more photos there are, the better this... They should be high quality, but there should be no limit to quantity. Users want to see the place, the menu, the videos, the 360 photos, they don't want to see just 5 photos of the few dishes you have ordered in a restaurant.

 

Happy New Year

Anonymous
Not applicable

I honestly don't agree so much. I actually share many photos but also videos, and that makes you aware of the fact you are going to post more than 5 photos. If I am in a hotel, taking all the photos at the room, at the hall and in other areas of the hotel means you are going to take minimum 50 photos. At the restaurant, taking high quality photos to more than 5 dishes, plus all the photos to the environment, to the menu (yes you can also take photos at the menu) and eventual 360 photos will be not possible if you limit the contributions to 5 photos.

 

I understand many local guides post photos just for points but this is not an excuse to limit the activity of also the honest local guides. Algorithms should be more severe against unfair local guides, cutting the limit to 5 is just like a "punishment" for the entire community because of the behavior of certain people.

Cutting photos to 5 means actually killing the potentiality of these contributions.

 

Am sorry to tell this because I understand what you are meaning by posting this idea, but as said before, especially in places like hotels, it is very easy to post high number of photos, and in general I think honest activity should be not limited because of the unfair people. So i think the idea should focus more on restricting people who often post spammy photos and on improving algorithms, but not on limiting activity of everyone.

 

Happy New Year

Former Google Contributor

Hi @Anonymous,

 

I have just released your post from the Spam Filters. I would like to apologize for your post being marked as spam. Our filters run 24/7 and they can be a little harsh at times.

 

You can visit this article to learn more - Why was my Connect post marked as spam?

Due to the volume of private messages Google Moderators receive, I do not read or respond to private messages. Please post publicly so others may benefit from your discussion. If you require urgent assistance, please tag a Google Moderator. Thank you!
Level 7

Im for and against this. Im for because, yes, I see a lot of images which are not clear, or not for that place. But Im more leaning to be against this constrainment. People can upload how many ever images they want, but they would automatically get sorted based on user likes, AI logic etc. For example, out of focus images could be automatically removed. Or we as local guides coudl flag images which should not be removed for being inapproritate or of poor quality.

Taking pictures of a places is also a creative work as we may want to take angles and things which others may have missed and a creative work neednt have a limitation.

What would be great though that these spam images when flagged are removed more faster. I have flagged several images but I have noticed that they still stay on the page for a long time.

Level 7

Im for and against this. Im for because, yes, I see a lot of images which are not clear, or not for that place. But Im more leaning to be against this constrainment. People can upload how many ever images they want, but they would automatically get sorted based on user likes, AI logic etc. For example, out of focus images could be automatically removed. Or we as local guides coudl flag images which should not be removed for being inapproritate or of poor quality.

Taking pictures of a places is also a creative work as we may want to take angles and things which others may have missed and a creative work neednt have a limitation. Besides there could be places where you need more than 5 images to showcase.

What would be great though that these spam images when flagged are removed more faster. I have flagged several images but I have noticed that they still stay on the page for a long time.

 

Level 10

I think the problem your identifying is being addressed when guides opt to answer questions regarding places we've frequented.... they're starting to have the guide pick the more appropriate picture of the place...

Joao
Level 10

I think we need be careful about this, because some places change all the time, so if we just can do 5 upload pictures,some places will not be updated all the time.

Level 9

I actually like having more pictures to look at for planning purposes.  The choice of pictures is subjective I'm what each considere to be best.  

I agree that a hotel would have more than 5 photos depending on the room you stay in. I stay at the same hotel, never in the same room.  They have different options and at each stay I take new pictures. If I revisit a place I may take new pictures.  

 

I am completely against the idea.

Level 10

@Twister411 I agree with you, a hotel it is a very good example.