Hi. I’ve been noticing recently a lot more users have been changing taxon photos. Some of the changes are good and I don’t have an issue with them, however some (in my opinion) are poor choices for taxon photos.
Examples might be a picture of a butterfly which has a very wide wingspan and it’s wings spread open, meaning it’s wings are cut off in the taxon photo. Another might be side view of blue hoverflies breeding, sure the picture itself is very good, but is it perfect for the taxon photo where it’s representing the family as a whole? Wouldn’t a hoverfly showing off it’s batesian mimicry look better here as that is generally what the family is best known for? Another one I saw is someone using a picture of a close up domestic cats face with different coloured eyes, again it looks cool, but is it good for a taxon image? Most recently the taxon photo for frogs and toads has been changed, it was originally a very clear image of a frog. Now it’s a brown toad which is hard to make out when the image is shrunk down for the icon. The image isn’t bad, but it doesn’t really seem suitable to be the taxon image and definitely doesn’t hold up to what the original frog image was.
I have occasionally changed the taxon photos myself, but every time I do I try to make sure it’s an image that seems fitting and represents a majority of the species within said taxon. A majority of the time however another user disagrees and it can easily turn into an edit war where the taxon photo is changing multiple times within a short time span.
What would be an appropriate way to select taxon photos? Should there be guidelines or rules made for this process? I feel as though one of the most important aspects of the photos used is that they are clearly identifiable with said taxon, even when the image is shrunk down to a much smaller icon. In my opinion a lot of the more familiar taxon photos that I originally knew were pretty perfect representations of the taxa and did not need to be changed. Some of the more recent additions seem a lot less suitable and like downgrades rather than upgrades.
Since new pictures have been added I’ve not been very happy with the changes, so I thought I’d post on here and see what others might think. I really liked the original frogs and toads image, which sparked me to post this post. Many of the original taxon photo images seemed like great representations of their respective taxa so the changes seem unwarranted.
I was honestly surprised to find that anyone could change the taxon photos, that seems like a curator-type role.
I’ve recently changed a bunch of bee species taxon photos - a lot of them were still using poor photos from the first few observations of the species, and now that there’s dozens if not hundreds, I went back in to choose pictures that were clearer, closer, and more representative, showing characteristic features. I agree it’s important to be thoughtful if you’re going to change the default photos for them to be the best ‘type’ facsimile possible, so anyone who looks at it even quickly, as many users do when comparing ID suggestions, will be able to get an accurate sense of the gestalt of the species.
There has been a spate of trolls changing taxon photos to inappropriate things recently. Many of the changes you’ve seen are likely the result of someone hurriedly replacing something inappropriate with the nearest photo to hand that at least depicts the correct species. Staff are working on a more permanent solution, but in the meantime, feel free to change things around to improve photos - I doubt anyone will mind.
I frequently change taxon photos since I use them when IDing.
If the taxon specialist says - this sp has russet hairs - I make sure a good photo of russet hairs, is among the first few taxon pictures.
If the limit of 12 pictures is filled with tiddly variations - I chuck out some, and make sure, again the first few, show the various useful field marks.
If the taxon is a flower, I don’t want to see a enchanting beetle in glorious detail.
If the edit wars get nasty, iNat staff can lock the taxon pictures - as they have for Homo sapiens for example.
We have history, so you can see who added or removed the taxon picture. I would prefer changing taxon pictures to be restricted to a small barrier - so many obs, so many IDs for others, some proof of ongoing and thoughtful use of iNat. Or an option to flag for bad behaviour?
There are trolls that recently changed a lot of the taxon photos to roadkill or some blurry blob, so people changed them to better photos. However, these better photos might not be the original taxon photos.
I’m changing things because a troll is changing them to bad photos of random stuff not because I feel like it. Staff have already locked species like Cape May Warbler. If you see a messed up species, feel free to change it (unless you’re a troll, LOL) A not-as-good picture is better than a troll picture.
Please please change taxon photos whenever you find photos not showing representative characters of the taxon.
Artsy photos or cool close ups of a detail are not good for the purpose of identifying.
The apt way to choose a photo is first of all you are knowledgable of the taxon and make sure that the photo shows the diagnostic features of the taxon.
Whenever you come across uninformative photos for a species you know how to identify please don’t hesitate and change the photo.
If the taxon is anything like frogs and toads Anura or birds or things people know well, I would not waste any time to ponder over photos on level of order or higher taxa like spiders. Noone uses a taxon photo on iNat to come to the conclusion that the organism is a frog.
The problem is relevant for species, genus ranks and lesser known families only.
One thing I noticed while identifying a few months ago was that several ladybug and moth species had only taxon photos of adults so I went through and added larva (and occasionally cocoon) photos in the second, third, or fourth image slot so that those could be referenced by anyone doing identifications. I’m hoping that hasn’t caused issues for everyone else.
I will also say that there has been a time or two when I’ve noticed a taxon photo has been changed to an image I would consider more artistic than diagnostic – with the taxon history page showing that the photographer is the one who changed the taxon photo – but I’ve been reluctant to change those back.
If you want to go down the taxon photo rabbit hole, look through the lepidopterans of Central and South America. There are hundreds of species that don’t even have taxon photos even when there are 10 or more individuals that have been identified/observed. It certainly makes finding a match for your moth less efficient.
Does anyone know if there is a way to see if one of your photos has been used as a taxon photo? I highly doubt any of mine will be, but wondered if I would get a notification if one did happen to at some point.
It’s unfortunate that there’s no way to leave a comment about why a photo was chosen or removed when editing the taxon photos.
I often “fave” really good photos, and if they show something really useful, I may add a comment to the observation like, “Great shot of the diagnostic whatever.” That way, at least when people sort by faves to see some good photos of a taxon, they should see some that are useful for ID rather than just pretty or unusual shots.
I would love it if there were a way to include a short comment when you make a change, kind of like in a wiki. (This would also help to distinguish thoughtful changes from…less thoughtful ones.)
Currently the history page is hard to interpret, both because there is no context and because whenever you move one photo, you move all the photos, which obscures which change you actually made.
I will also say that there has been a time or two when I’ve noticed a taxon photo has been changed to an image I would consider more artistic than diagnostic – with the taxon history page showing that the photographer is the one who changed the taxon photo – but I’ve been reluctant to change those back.
Yes this is a recurring issue that can be quite annoying in some cases. Obviously, birds, mammals and some marine taxa are the most affected by this. Some of them have a default picture that changes several times per month. Quite exhausting
This issue is recurrent.
I feel a possible fix would be to have a pop-up window that shows up anytime you change the default picture (at least if you’re not a curator) reminding a short set of general rules:
the default picture has to be informative, with a neutral pose;
the diagnostic characters have to be visible as much as possible in the first few pictures;
ontogenetic variation (larvae/juveniles/adults) and sexual dimorphism should be visible in the first few pictures of animals;
when relevant, major geographical variation (e.g., subspecies) should also appear readily;
in plants, the first few pictures should show leaves, flowers, fruits etc. when possible.
As others have said here, I wouldn’t be reluctant. Not only is the photographer obviously not entitled to this, but I would guess that most of the ones doing this wouldn’t act offended either, because they know they’re going out on a limb a bit and fully expect their actions to be reversed sometimes at the discretion of the community.