Today's Rejected Photographs

[KentJohnson]

I think we could really use some transparency or at the very least some decent feed-back from Google Maps on why perfectly good photographs keep getting rejected. Here are three I tried uploading today which were apparently rejected (1 view). One view and then nothing seems to mean immediately disqualified. PLEASE don't tell me the watermark is illegal; its not, and every other of my 254 photograph so far accepted (254 of 407 submitted) have the same watermark. It's all very well to ask the guides to be nice et cetera but could we have some answers, please. here's the link to the review with the accepted images and then the rejected pictures below.
https://www.google.com/maps/contrib/109664788608581255754/place/ChIJ3yTW25OUC0cRdn29LaC5Qyc/@50.0831...

Station dome detail (though its all of it)Stained glass over station entryCarved sandstone doorway with oak doors.

[KentJohnson]

PS, two from yesterday also rejected; sculptures, František Bílek House and Studio. Phone camera too so should have relevant GPS meta data too I suppose. **####** review and other images (all watermarked) - HERE.

[Bruce_Ferjulian]

That is a good question, I too would like to know the answer.

[KentJohnson]

---

@Bruce_Ferjulian wrote:

That is a good question, I too would like to know the answer.

---

Bruce we need to know; I like this guides programme but it is a lot of work and the rejection of good work without explanation is galling to say the least.

[VBenedict]

@KentJohnson  Nice to meet you. Welcome to our family of fellow Local Guides🎈here on Connect.

These are outstanding photographs 🤔 

How can you tell these photos are being rejected?  Are you certain that these photos are being rejected?

I totally agree with you that we should receive transparency from Google and more specifically Google Maps.  Not just regarding images; we need better feedback (not just sometimes a flash we barely have time to read, we need a tungsten that we can understand) but also in general. 

After all we are an integral part of Google Maps and we should be recognize as such.  We make Google Maps happen.

I do not believe that the watermark is the issue. 

Unless...

Lets just hope that it is not mistaking your watermark for some form of Steganographic deviant since the implementation process is similar.  Just a though... process of elimination.

Additionally, Google Maps does not like variations of the same frame.  That is look alikes with some minor variation. 

BTW, if you wish to get a response... and they are very good about responding; you must TAG a Googler, a Google Moderator, or a Connect Moderator. 

You can search for them. Let me know if you need help.

[Bruce_Ferjulian]

Found this information at the following URL

https://support.google.com/contributionpolicy/answer/7411351?hl=en&ref_topic=7422769

I am thinking the bullet item below that I underlined might be interpreted that a watermark does not satisfy the criteria "Superimposed text or graphics must be relevant.". A watermark is not relevant? Superimposed text or graphics

Superimposed text or graphics, including promotional content such as logos, are subject to the following requirements:

• For 360 photos, superimposed content must be limited to either the zenith or nadir (top or bottom 25% of the equirectangular image), but cannot be present in both.
• For traditional digital photos and videos, superimposed content cannot take up more than 10% of the image or video, and must be limited to a single edge.
• Superimposed text or graphics must be relevant.
• Distracting superimposed text or graphics are not permitted.

[Bruce_Ferjulian]

Or to test if my theory is correct submit the same picture again, doing everything the same  but instead of a watermark with your name, annotate the picture with something like "Praha Hlavní Nádraží Train Station" and see if the picture still get's rejected then you will know it's your watermark/signature that is getting rejected.

[KentJohnson]

@VBenedict  Thank you,
In my experience Maps is very happy to have endless variations of the same shot, just look at the photographs uploaded at any famous landmark - you will see plenty of shots all nearly the same. 
It's easy to see if an image has been rejected, simply use Chrome 'Incognito' or another browser where you are not logged in and take a look at the same page. Blocked/rejected photos will not show up - only you can see them on your 'homepage'.

If you know an admin that can help please do tag them. I'm already putting in a lot of work for free for Google and MAPS and digging around studying all their material (I've already read a lot of it) seems like another Masters Degree I don't really have additional time for. 

Thanks for your insights.

Kent.

[KentJohnson]

Hi Bruce_Ferjulian 
I have done the odd cross test with no logo, it was actually inconclusive (and not very scientific - I don't know enough of the rejection parameters).

I think part of the issue here is that LOGO is not well defined - and a logo is hard to define - I know a little on this subject having studied it and having made a number of logos myself for various causes over the years.
In a pure design sense, a logo should be a graphic design that becomes synonymous with a brand; perhaps today the Nike 'Swoosh' would be arguably best know and most famous. But anything, text or graphic based or a combination of the two can be a logo if it is presented consistently across 'marketing' platforms. (Marketing, now there's a dirty word on MAPS)..

I suspect I may have a better grasp of the Logo concept than the employee who was tasked with writing the guidelines you outline above - which I have read over many times before. Clearly the A.I. is letting some uses of my Logo through while disallowing others. Of course my Logo is a stylised signature with a text , a URL below so that's a potential problem for them - but it is still a Logo so it's permitted in the correct position on the image. 
Thanks for your thoughtful feedback.

Cheers, Kent.

[VBenedict]

@KentJohnson

You are welcome and thanks for the "incognito" trick.  I will have to try it.  Although, @LuisRG  (Google, whom usually works with Feedback & Feature Request, though not exclusively)   I recommend Maps should mark them as private with a hyperlink explaining why it was marked as such.  This would fall under Google Maps transparency efforts.

The images in a famous landmark:  are you certain that the variations of the same frame are from the same author?

Regarding all the work we are all putting in...  that's the way it is.  On top of Local Guiding some of us are members of the Beta Community. So you can imagine.

I recommend you pay attention to who is who in the Google Maps and Connect world so that you know who to tag for which concern.  

You can search and bookmark "Meet the Google Moderators" and "Meet the Connect Moderators".  I usually save the lists in a gMail draft to maintain the hyperlink live for efficiency sake.

Best Regards,

~ Virginia Benedict 🕊

---

@KentJohnson wrote:

@VBenedict  Thank you,
In my experience Maps is very happy to have endless variations of the same shot, just look at the photographs uploaded at any famous landmark - you will see plenty of shots all nearly the same. 
It's easy to see if an image has been rejected, simply use Chrome 'Incognito' or another browser where you are not logged in and take a look at the same page. Blocked/rejected photos will not show up - only you can see them on your 'homepage'.

If you know an admin that can help please do tag them. I'm already putting in a lot of work for free for Google and MAPS and digging around studying all their material (I've already read a lot of it) seems like another Masters Degree I don't really have additional time for. 

Thanks for your insights.

Kent.

---