I appreciate the marvelous work you do there. You hv absolutely hit the bull’s eye. Kids were not in my mind. Kids r gifts of God. The hv every right to photograph and upload anything in any way they can. Yes, whether the photos they take r fancy, blurry, dark, distant, unrecognizable or anything else, they deserve to get IDs through this outstanding site or otherwise like from a person like u. Warm regards.
Don’t get me wrong. I do get your point. Some picture ARE un-IDable for sure. And yea, sometimes they unrightfully get RGed, for example in school projects when the students don’t really know or are interested about how the site works. In many cases they will sooner or later be corrected. I am still on an ID sweep through your beautyfully biodivers country (I think, from having had a look where you observe) and got a lot of falsy IDed observations so far - some years old. Eventually those were corrected… it takes time. There are to many observations, to few IDers in comparison. So if you want to help tackle this and other challenges IDers of this site face, help us clean it up 
5 Likes
U r most welcome in this country. I appreciate the marvelous works you r doing for all of us here as well as in iNAT. I joined the site only a few weeks back and overwhelmed with its potential.
1 Like
One more perspective. iNaturalist attracts a lot of neurodivergent naturalists. This includes people who can’t easily imagine what another viewer sees in the photo they took, but it is still highly satisfying to make the observation and fit it into their personal framework. We welcome these observations and you never know when one may turn out to be something special.
7 Likes
Yes, as advised I hv posted one image of a Mongoose now without much detail only with a note. Let me see what the Experts suggest.
Yes, as advised I hv posted one image of a common species Mongoose (not so unclear but confusing to me) today without suggesting any specific Id only with a note. Let me see how and what the Experts suggest.
I often submit multiple photos of the same bird/insect/etc., and usually the suggested identification is consistent, but sometimes it is not. I then use what was the most-suggested identification and request confirmation or correction. Of course, it doesn’t hurt to check the range map or see if the species has been reported before from the area. Some of my House Sparrow photos (always males) are identified as Italian Sparrows. On the other hand, none of the Italian Sparrow photos I was able to take last year in Italy were identified as House Sparrows!
1 Like
It may happen for various reasons:
- the observer could have seen the organism well and is sure about the identification. Anyway other users should keep from identifying it.
- The observer trusts too much in the CV and, again, other users should keep from identifying it.
- Simply some users/identifiers seem to have the urge to make thousands of observations/identifications independently from their quality.
Of course, in my opinion, it is not. Nor from the community’s point of view since we alreay have so many observations so that I think it would be preferable to aim for quality observations. Nor from the user’s point of view since it is possible that some or many of these blurred observations may be wrongly identified by the CV.
2 Likes
Now I want to say straight. What I intended to tell throughout my topic post was that there is no such Expert in this world who can accurately identify any creature from a unrecognizable dark blurry STILL Picture (where size, behavior nothing can be determined) whether anybody admits it or not.
I have uploaded three pictures of a Mongoose which are neither dark nor too unclear. Yes, it is an Asian Mongoose. But is it Small Indian Mongoose or Indian Grey Mongoose? Both are seen at the same geographical location, both are present in the most suggested id, they look almost same. In this situation it is almost impossible to decide accurately which species this is.
Now consider these pictures have been captured in dark light from a far distance away, the situation will become worser. It will be further confusing whether it is a Rat, Mole, Mongoose or something else. Why should anybody believe that the dark blurry creature is an Indian Grey Mongoose and not a Small. Indian Mongoose,even if I say I am the world’s best Mongoose expert?
I do make critical comments to have the results better not to hurt anybody. Getting a huge number of likes is not my objective…
However, I admit and accept that all of us has the right and freedom to upload anything.
1 Like
@Birdraghu-youtube just a heads-up that you can respond to multiple posts in one of your own posts, rather than make several posts to reply. Select the text you want to reply to, then click on “Quote”. That will add the text to your new post and you can write a reply below. It keeps the discussion more clean. Cheers!
2 Likes
Thanks a lot Friend. Being a very new user of iNAT, I didn’t know it. Warm regards.
1 Like
To be clear, the forum is run on software by Discourse, iNat just runs the forum. And this is kind of a different setup than many online fora, so it takes some learning. No worries!
1 Like
Got it now. Thanks again.
1 Like
This happens all the time. In most of North America, the only large wild cat is the puma. There are no verified records of melanistic (black) pumas; yet there are constant alleged sightings of them, even in areas where no pumas are known to occur. Invariably, the sighting was – just as you described – at a distance, in dim light. When analyzed carefully by experts, all photographs of alleged black pumas turn out to be black domestic cats or even black dogs. Tricks of the light play tricks of perspective, causing the animal to look bigger than it really is.
Yet most people who have made such “black puma” sightings are absolutely certain of what they saw and will not accept any other explanation.
2 Likes
Yes, exactly there my point is. If people go on uploading such dark blurry long distant images as a “Black Puma” (not for any bad intention, but because they innocently believe it strongly), or any person uploads such image of Bear (or whatever it may be) as a ‘Himalayan Yeti’ and get it confirmed by two of his friends based on their strong belief, the images will be accepted by the system as suggested and confirmed. Who will rectify such ids for how many times? For this reason, whenever I uploaded images(very clear) of Asian Monitor Lizards, the system identified it as a ‘Bengal Monitor’ each and every time (anybody may verify it). Also that, the system can not identify Vultures (almost every time it suggests “Griffon” because they can be commonly seen) based on perhaps location only. The system will never identify “Indian Vultures” or “White-rumped Vulture” accurately as this rarely seen Vultures may be seen, once in 10/20 year’s of observation anywhere in India. Identification of Large number of images of dark, long distant shots of Griffon Vultures (I think they are so but can not disagree as that is not clear to me from the unclear images) lead the system to accept any Vulture described as per my wish. But it is very important to know that these Critically Endangered Species, are genuinely there, so that conservation efforts can be taken.
1 Like
I have gotten a good look at something and known the species confidently, and then when I pulled out my phone or camera, it darts off leading to a blurry image. I’m still posting it and IDing it, although, I usually add a note. Data is data, and if someone comes back and finds it’s actually something else, I’ll change, but I’m not going to skip an observation if I can get some sort of photo.
2 Likes
Every time in my long years of observation, when I see a Vulture (example), I strongly start to believe that this time I got an Indian Vulture and remain 100% confident of it But after thoroughly scrutinising the Image, I get confused again (it is not easy to identify species of similar look from a distance, as they may be juvenile, in their breeding or non-breeding plumage etc). Now if I upload it and give it an Id as 'Indian Vulture", it will be a wrong message and will influence others (pl see the right opinion of vallespir below) . For these reason, the system can not identify a Monitor Lizard Species or a Vulture Species (examples only). I’m less concerned about IDing of LC creatures but it is very important to be 100% confident about a CR species for their conservation. “Data is data” concept will lead the system CV to identify the species wrongly (if 95 data is wrong and 5 including yours is right). Redundant and wrong data are harmful to a system than non-presence of them.
Why should I upload an unclear image which I could not take? I strongly believe that an unclear, dark, blurry long distant tiny STILL image tiny shots of birds of similar species are unrecognizable to everybody. An expert can only assume something. Thats all.
Exactly. I had that experience just the other day. I could not recognize a specimen in a photo needing ID although the photo was a quite good photo - it was just that I couldn’t make out what it was. Someone came along and made the ID and I learned.
2 Likes
It is completely fine if anybody uploads a Clear photo ( a quite good photo as u stated is enough, a clear photo will do). That will help everybody.
But clear to one may not be clear to another. I use a bridge camera and I have a 2.5x macroscopic lens adapter. I often take macro images of insects, some with just the normal macro lens, some with the macro adapter. However, when I compare the images I upload to others I see, mine, in many cases, are not clear enough for an ID, even though they are quite good. I have a friend who worked for Kodak as a scientist and who developed much of the digital photo technology - he takes incredible macro photos using stacking technology. He enjoys it, however, to me it sounds like work - maybe if I was doing a PhD on a particular species I would do it, but I want iNat to be fun for me and to continue to allow me to grow in environmental knowledge. So what is good enough for one may not be good enough for another. I also feel (although do not have actual knowledge) that if someone is going to mine iNat for specific information, it will/should be vetted again for its accuracy. So I feel I am contributing toward science, but, I also worked in rocket science for a quarter century and realize the difference between most citizen science and critical, vetted science.
2 Likes