Step 3: Add the photo, click on the field with the species name / identification
Result: the photo uploaded from flickr has a worse recognition (ID’d as coleoptera, but if I download the same photo and upload it separately, the photo is ID’d as Phyllopertha). I did not upload the photo yet with correct ID, so this is not an issue of the recognition being improved in the meantime.
Your tag on Flickr says Coleoptera, which is why iNat has assigned that name during the Flickr import. It’s not using computer vision to add an ID on that page.
This post begs question, albeit naive ones:
what’s the use of having observations on Flicker or facebook and then posting it on iNat?
If one’s usernames on iNat and FB or Flicker differ, how does that affect (the importance of) the date of observation or discovery?
My answer to this is that flickr is not a platform for posting observations, it is for posting photos. iNat observations are actually usable data, wheras Flickr photos are harder to use, it is harder to upload locations and identify species through there. Also, inaturalist data is easier to use and access by other people for their findings.
In my case, I have joined inaturalist in 2019, wheras I have been taking pictures of wildlife and uploading them on flickr since 2013. I have around 4000+ photos on flickr, majority of which depicts wildlife which could be properly ID’d at least to a genus level. iNaturalist is a great tool for that. Observations from 2013 are valuable too, and I had an opportunity to take another look at what I have found and re-discover some rarities that I could not identify a few years ago. I don’t get your second question about the importance of the date. Metadata like time, date, and location (if there is one) are also imported.
