i mostly just wanted to agree with cassi here but… despite what some users seem to believe, there is no rule against blurry or ‘unpretty’ photos. If nothing can be identified beyond ‘plants’ then it will be a ‘plants’ observation with ‘no further ID needed’ marked. However lots of people, myself included, can gather a lot of biodiversity data fast using ‘ugly’ photos and for many of us, the data, rather than the photo quality, is the most important thing.
Likewise with sketches. Someone could trace a sketch but people also take photos directly of field guides or steal from wiki websites, etc. In all cases they tend to get caught.
Not a big deal if you flagged things that were sketches, as this isn’t very clear and needs to be more so. it could use standardization and a better explanation available to everyone. But given the history of naturalists throughout the history of science, and indeed the importance of art as a means of communication throughout pretty much all cultures, excluding field sketches and illustrations would be a huge mistake in my opinion.