Attribute Automatic Photo File Name IDs to iNaturalist instead of to the Observer

I agree. It was kind of frustrating trying to figure out what was going on with my own observations, because I had never paid any attention whatsoever to photo file names. A head’s-up on iNaturalist would have been nice even without a chance for input.

I think when the unintended side-effects are discovered, it would also be nice to have those announced on iNaturalist, too. I don’t mean full-fledged technical discussions, but just a brief heads-up that something may seem different and why.

(It’s possible there were notices on iNaturalist and I missed them.)

(There is nothing like a timely reminder, though, so I still like jdmore’s idea about pop-ups as observations are being made, especially since newer users might not notice general notices or understand their relevance.)

4 Likes

I always find this to strange. I know a lot of folks who don’t pay much attention to photo file names, but as a hobby photographer in my personal life and needing to maintain our photo archive at work I simply can’t understand it. If you don’t rename your photos it’s simply impossible to find them later on.

Generally the folder has the date and contents overview as a name (often camera type too), and within it each file/image has the number the camera assigned (letters removed, just numbers so that they remain in the order taken) followed by a brief description of the image in a Location, Subject, Note type format (eg. 02506 Cua Dong, South Group, New Baby or 18075 Lake Champlain, Ice Waves or 45986 Inle Lake, Myanmar, Butterfly, Species binomial).

If I don’t do that it is impossible to find images when you’re looking for them. A naming structure (of any sort) that includes the contents of the image also means that a search for that term will make it easy to find all bird photos or all butterfly ones, etc.

I know a lot of folks don’t do that, but I honestly can’t see how they can keep their photos organized without paying attention to the file names.

Tags (and comments) are one way. Even if not every photo has a tag, adding one to the first photo at a particular location will make it easier to later find a related batch of photos from a file explorer.

4 Likes

I’m not a hobby photographer and photography was never part of my work. I got interested in plants so I started taking photos so I could look up what they were. When I found iNaturalist it was perfect for me because I could put my photos on there and iNaturalist would do the organizing. I don’t even save my photos on my computer after uploading them to iNaturalist–I just let them go to Trash and after 30 days they’re gone. (I only wait the 30 days in case someone asks whether I have a photo from a different angle or something). So I never had any need to know anything about photo file names. If iNaturalist were to disappear, and all my nature photos are gone forever, that’s okay. I understand that many other people would have a need or desire to find their photos later, though–I’m just explaining why I don’t and so was impacted by the letters in my default file names when iNaturalist started using them for identifications on my observations.

6 Likes

Tags are a bit of a hassle. They’re an extra few steps and you don’t see them when you’re browsing a folder filled with images. It’s faster, easier, and more user-friendly to rename the image.

Tags certainly can be useful though, no question.

I am pretty sure this was discussed here and trialled before it was implemented. (Doesn’t affect me either way since I bring to iNat mysteries that need an ID)

1 Like

Yesterday I posted a Bull thistle. I had written that as the file name (bull thistle.jpg). I was entertained to see that the ID came up as a cow. I didn’t accept the proposal but changed it to the plant.

6 Likes

I had no idea that file names were used for IDs, probably because I use essentially a sequential number scheme for my file names. What I HAVE seen, though, is EXIF/IPTC data used for determining identification. I usually don’t want this.

For cases where file name is used, how does the file get that name in the first place? Isn’t it the user who set the name? This discussion seems to indicate that iNaturalist is setting it. If so, how is iNaturalist setting it? Or is it just using the name set for the file name BY THE UPLOADER?

If it works like the EXIF/IPTC tags, I’d like to see an option to commit/confirm the selection rather than it automatically populated. Used as a default is fine, but the user should have to do something to accept the default.

1 Like

Yes, I wish it were possible to see tags when browsing.

1 Like

see this topic: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/add-observation-automatically-tagged-my-observations-with-incorrect-names-based-on-photo-filenames/8203

4 Likes

For everyone’s information, here is the original request and discussion that ended up with file name parsing being implemented:

https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/extract-species-name-from-photo-filename-upon-upload/6510

6 Likes

Thanks for that link. I probably had not followed it since it started out talking about species names in the file names and I didn’t/don’t have any.

3 Likes

BTW, when I’m uploading a bunch of photos, in order to get around this, I preload a tag I’d like to have on the image and click the tag button immediately on uploading. In this way, I win the race to tag the photo with the utility that scrapes tags from the metadata. This is a real time saver, especially if I happen to have a lot of tags in an image. Much better would be to not auto-populate tags from metadata but offer it as a default value that the user can accept if desired. Still, this kludge works. I put it out there in case others wish to use it. You just have to be faster than the metadata parser, which usually takes a couple seconds.

If by “here” you mean the forums, then one could ask if that’s comprehensive enough: What percentage of iNat users also regularly check the forums?

I know I see a lot of names on the site that I never see here (assuming they aren’t lurking, that is).

3 Likes

I like the idea of this, but I think the people that it’s affecting adversely the most would not know how to manually correct. Maybe a “Reject” button should be on the identification during uploading. Then, if rejected, the observation would just be a normal “Unknown.”

Yeah, I guess it depends on how much information can be packed into (or linked to) the pop-up. Would love to take the opportunity to educate newer users. But if that’s not practical, then yes, your idea of a Reject button could be a workable alternative.

2 Likes

That is a chicken and egg situation. iNat can offer the information in the forum, and iNatters can choose to be informed. Or not. (You have to want to click thru to see what the forum is about. Can’t force people)

It’s nothing to do with chickens and eggs. If you take the same route to work everyday, and then one day you come across a roadworks that is going to detour you and make your trip take twice as long, you would rightfully think they should have warned you about the upcoming changes so that you could plan your commute around it. It’s a stretch to suggest that you should have been at the planning meetings that were held to discuss how it was going to be designed! Even if the new road (when it is finished) is going to be better than the old, it’s about communicating the changes to those that use it!

2 Likes

Yes. Roadworks. We are in the middle of that. There are updates on Facebook. But. They are only seen by people who choose to follow that.

How can iNat communicate with people who are not on the forum?

On the dashboard on the website, there are links to forum topics, so at least the ones where there are major changes to the way iNaturalist works could be advertised. I don’t know about the apps, though.

3 Likes