Skip Navigation

Guess it's time to delete these photos!

Travel Forums System Talk Guess it's time to delete these photos!

1. Posted by Utrecht (Moderator 5596 posts) 8y

Did you know that Benin and Saskatchewan actually look very much alike

2. Posted by Sander (Moderator 4834 posts) 8y

We don't just randomly go deleting photos. Please stop suggesting that we should?
The only reason to delete a photo is if it clearly breaks the terms & conditions, and the only way for a photo to ever really do that is by being promotional. Copyright infringement cases are much harder to judge; if we know the source and know for certain that that source does not allow re-use, we might (after ascertaining that the person who uploaded it doesn't happen to be the original photographer); but there's also a whole lot of public domain and creative commons licensed photos out there, and it'd be really bad if we went and deleted those proactively. (We'd be as bad as the MAFIAA sending out takedown notices for content they don't hold rights to.)
This particular shot is a common stock photo, which these particular users probably uploaded in order to test the system. I haven't been able to track down an original source, but given its wide proliferation, there's a decent chance that the original photographer does not object to this use.

We've discussed the photo in question before, too.

[ Edit: Edited on Oct 17, 2008, at 1:28 PM by Sander ]

3. Posted by Utrecht (Moderator 5596 posts) 8y

Testing the system? Ok, you settle with that and I keep my own impression, thanks

The title wasn't meant literally though, sorry about that. But just personally I think this kind of photo activity should be banned. I know it's probably hard to take notice of everything, it was just a suggestion. Maybe sometimes rules can be changed or ignored.

Cheers

[ Edit: Edited on Oct 17, 2008, at 2:21 PM by Utrecht ]

4. Posted by luzian (Full Member 36 posts) 8y

Quoting Sander

I haven't been able to track down an original source, but given its wide proliferation, there's a decent chance that the original photographer does not object to this use.

If you want to know its original source, just open your "My Documents" (of course assuming you are using Windoze), and look for My Pictures\Sample Pictures\sunset.jpg ;) same if you find some suspicious pictures water lilies, blue hills or some trees in winter

I assume Micro$oft have some sort of copyright on this picture but most likely they don't mind it being used as a test image, since they have put it in "Sample Pictures"... and the whole world is using it as test image anyway

PS: this is my first post here. right now i'm just testing this site and still figuring out how things work... so far it looks like a great page with many features! :)

[ Edit: Edited on Oct 18, 2008, at 6:12 PM by luzian ]

5. Posted by Peter (Admin 5809 posts) 8y

Yeah, I tend to come down on Sander's side with this. Certainly if a photographer comes to our site objecting that their photos have been copied, we will take action (and have in the past). If it's just a case of testing, as I also assume these to be, then I think it's pretty harmless. And I'm vaguely certain that the images included with Windows are free to use however you please.. (could be wrong there by the way).

Basically, it's just too much work for us to check every photo to see if it's a potential duplicate.

That said, featuring one of these photos would not be appropriate in my opinion. That's happened accidentally before as well.

6. Posted by mrjames2k (Budding Member 32 posts) 8y

a

[ Edit: Edited on Oct 18, 2008, at 8:52 PM by mrjames2k ]

7. Posted by Sander (Moderator 4834 posts) 8y

Quoting luzian

(of course assuming you are using Windoze)

Heh, although I do have one machine left on which win2k is installed, if any sample pictures directory ever existed on that (I suspect this is winxp only, which I've never run), it was undoubtedly wiped by the end of the first day of that install. :)
But thanks for finding the source, anyway. Don't know what the distribution rights on that are, but it's pretty certain no one will ever come complaining about its use.

PS: this is my first post here. right now i'm just testing this site and still figuring out how things work... so far it looks like a great page with many features! :)

Welcome! Hope you'll stick around. :)


Utrecht, in general, to further clarify the policy and reluctance to go "clean up" photos: something like the guide has the primary purpose of being useful to every visitor - we all work together there (some people (like you) way more than others (like me)) :) to create a single resource which is as good as it can be. "Less perfect" content there gets cleaned up as a matter of course.
But the photos have a completely different model; the primary purpose here is for people to have their private galleries, which showcase just their photos for family and friends, or to serve just as storage for themselves. "We", the site as a whole, do get a peek at the 'collective wisdom' of all those uploaded photos - and get benefit of it through the featured photos filling up country galleries and being useful for guide articles and the like, but this is a distinct secondary purpose; a true web 2.0 network effect. The only judgment call we want to make about photos is "this one is really good"; anything else hampers the primary purpose of the photo galleries. (Just imagine for a second how few people would continue uploading photos if we deleted anything which wasn't featured; it's completely ludicrous; yet "featured" versus "not featured" is the only line we want to draw.)
We give general visitors the ability to see the stream of all ('public') uploaded photos - just like we give them the ability to see the stream of all ('public') blog posts - but this is completely secondary, and most regular visitors will never bother looking at it (where we do hope they'll browse the galleries of featured photos, or read the featured blog posts), so no one should be upset because of occasional lack of "quality" in these streams.

"Moderating" content is a very slippery slope, which no moderator ever wants to set out upon, for at the bottom lies out of control abuse of power (I've seen message boards where moderators edited posts for grammar; it wasn't pretty). The reason it works in a wiki model is because everyone has equal power to edit, and old content can always be retrieved (no changes are ever irrevocable). Those constraints don't hold for moderating photos, and so it's really far better to just leave them be.

8. Posted by Utrecht (Moderator 5596 posts) 8y

Cheers for the answers, comments and clarifications Sander, Peter and Luzian.
I guess I just wasn't informed well about this picture in general and the rules and the way you guys (Sander, Peter) operate and judge these kind of things.
Hope you didn't mind me bringing things up again, I just like to see and keep TP as 'pure' as possible, although it is difficult (at least for me) to define the word pure.
Cheers again!
Michael