PDB Photos

Ummmmmmm, maybe it's just me, but it seems like it's taking a long time for photos to be working their way into the Plants Database. Just curious as I want to keep adding more, but don't want to overload anyone.

Thanks,
Carla

This message was edited Aug 31, 2004 2:00 PM

Actually it's because there are a lot of people entering images into the queue - there are 500+ images in there currently; that number will soon reduce (hopefully) to around 300.

Here's what happens "behind-the-scenes" in case you're curious:

1) I select one image per person, and see how many images that totals. If it's in the neighborhood of 50 images, then I know that only one per person will appear in the newsletter.

2) For each person, I then look to see how many they have in the queue. If they have a half-dozen or so, then I figure they probably want to see most (if not all) of them in the newsletter, so I don't select any others (which is another reason yours have been taking a bit longer.)

3) If they entered several images of one plant, I look at the entry to see if it already has a multitude of images (If so, I delete all but one, per the guidelines we present at the time images are submitted.) If there are few/no other images, and these submissions represent various aspects of the plant, I choose one for the newsletter and the rest are released directly to the PDB at the same time.

4) If a person has several different plant images, then I typically release several (anywhere between 5 and 100 images, depending on the volume they have submitted) directly to the PDB, choosing one to feature in the newsletter.

5) For newer submitters, I also double-check the accuracy of their images. A quick scan to make sure it's a valid plant name, that the image hasn't been "borrowed" from elsewhere, and that it's right-side-up.

This process takes anywhere from 20 minutes to an hour-plus each day. I apologize - today's is taking a bit longer than ususal because of some other administrative issues I've been working on but I'm just about ready to release the daily batch.

Egads, Terry. What a challenge. I had no idea that there were THAT MANY photos recently submitted. I should have given that more thought, I guess.

None of mine need to be put into the newsletter at all, if that helps. Also, many of them are from the Natural Resources Conservation Service - Plants Database. They are used with permission from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (web site) which allows for liberal use of their photos for educational purposes provided proper credit is given. They have an amazing database of plants, but not a great deal of the specifics, such as bloom time or zone hardiness. Right now, I'm just trying to capture the basic information (about each plant) and photos, then hopefully, I'll be able to go back and add more details as time allows. Even just doing this is insanely time intensive. I'm practically obsessed with it right now, though. I wish this had hit me last winter. :)

LOL- Winter will be upon us soon, smilin and imagine what we can accomplish! I am eying my libraries garden books for my winter doings!

Terry- as for mine- I don't need a newsletter entry either. Not my bag, as they say. ; )

One more question- if I see many pictures on one item and they are pretty thorough showing all aspects, I do not bother to submit a photo. But, if you do deep-6 a submitted image, is the user notified?

I'll need to re-read the USDA's exact wording. Now that the PDB is going to be integrated with PlantScout, I don't know if it still falls under the "educational" umbrella....

It certainly is still educational, but it is also commercial. In fact, the PDB has been commercial since October, 2001, when we added subscriptions.

dave

I have the same question as daisyavenue. I think that sometimes there may be what seems to be repetition with some of the photos I add with those that are already there. But I try to see what is there and add something new with my photos.

For example, there might be a close up of a flower and that might seem to be what I'm aiming at with mine but my flower is slightly out of focus. What I'm really aiming at is those IN-focus leaves in close-up that I didn't spot in any of the other photos already there in the PDB. See what I mean? I guess I should be better about labeling my photos, but sometimes I am eager to get all 30 up that I took that day and the labels just make it take soooo much longer.

Maybe when you delete a photo in cue, there could be an automatic form letter sent to the person who added the photo. Then they can either decide to explain further why they think the photo is adding something to the PDB for that plant or they can leave it at that.

There have been several times when I've added a close up of a flower that looks like there are already abotu 2 dozen of practically identical shots. But I'm thinking "slightly different bloom color/close-up of leaf detail/profile of bloom/etc" as these are things that very often help me to make the final identification for my own plants. In any case, if the form letter for "file 13" is a hassle, then I'll be sure to label my photos better in future so it's clear what I'm aiming at with them.

-Julie

Ok, I'm not loading up any more of those images until I get some clear input from ya'll. I had no idea that subscriptions made a site a 'commercial' one. Phooey. I hope this doesn't make extra work for anyone.

Sometimes there are quite a few images of a plant, but most of them just show the blooms. By going through the photos of a certain plant, you can see what is needed before you actually shoot.

I've done this on occasion...now, do I only submit one of those? Or do I still submit images of the seeds, undersides of the leaves, roots,new spring shoots, leaf joints, etc? I've got several things I'm working on, and it seems that there is a need for images such as this.

We've got Autumn just around the corner and there are quite a few trees that have no images of Fall foliage...those are needed too...right?

What guidlines should I use? There seems to be a need for really good macros of these things and I've submitted quite a few...with tons more on my list. Lots of folks don't have the capabilities in their cameras to get these really close shots and what images there are, don't seem to have the clarity that is needed...

Don't want to bog you down with images...in fact, I've not entered quite a few that seemed similar to what was there...even if I felt like my shot might be in focus a touch more.

I've just got this great new camera, and I'm actually enjoying photography again...after several years of a 'point and shoot' type digicam (that I tried really hard to learn to like.)
Tell me if I need to put the brakes on....I'm going hog wild!

A picture that is out of focus or has bad exposure is definitely better than none. But as soon as a better and more descriptive picture comes along it would be nice if the inferior ones were purged. There is such an accumulation of redundant and ineffectual photos cluttering the PDB it is in bad need of pruning.
Also, as melody says, more pictures of plant shapes and details would be very helpful.

I'm sure there will be those who will misunderstand the intent of this and cry "foul", but c'est la vie.

I agree with you Ulrich. I'm wondering, though, how time intensive it would be to review all of those pictures in the PDB. Shall we each take it upon ourselves to review the pictures as we have time and report anything we think needs to be looked at? Or, do the administrators get to have all the fun? :)

Also, does the person who submitted the photo need to be notified in any way?

It would have to be up to the judgement of a select few, I suppose.
The person who submitted the photo would hopefully be mature and understanding enough not to have any conniptions when theirs is superseded.

Edited to ask whether I should start a new thread with this.

This message was edited Sep 1, 2004 5:06 PM

Due to the underwhelming response and to the relief of the administration I will quote Roseanne Roseannadanna by saying: "Never mind".

Sorry y'all. Right now most of my available time and energy is focused on helping the new PlantScout companies get their offerings matched to the PDB ;o)

I agree in theory, but it's a tremendous amount of work to go through and edit out duplicative/poor quality images.

Carla, as to your other question hopefully it's answered itself. Over the past two or three days, I've systematically released about 50% to 66% of what you had submitted up to this morning.

That's great, Terry. I noticed that they were being added. I just hoped you were the one doing it or that whoever was doing it understood that there was a question as to whether they could be posted or not. I will continue to search for pictures in the USDA database, then, and add them as time permits. I'm thrilled. Thank you for checking into this.

Terry, I didn't mean YOU regarding the response, but the general DG public out there.
Anyway, I appreciate very much your commitment and all that work you are doing for DG.

Edited to ask whether it is legal to use pictures from USDA.

This message was edited Sep 4, 2004 8:13 PM

Personally I'd prefer that to see us stick with images that members have the copyrights to use. But as long as Dave's okay with the USDA images, it's okay with me.

It's not preferable, but in cases where we have no picture for that plant then it's better than nothing.

dave

Ok, I will only use the USDA photos, then, when no other picture is available in the PDB.

Sounds like a good plan ;o)

Agreed!