When registering observations, I often rely on the GPS location from my camera, and my memory of where i was when the image was taken. For observations of plants and insects, the GPS location and the location of the observed object are close to identical. But for birds and larger animals, the locat…

as far as i know, there is no standard for this. ideally, you would note what your coordinates + accuracy represent in your observation description (and elaborate on those, as needed, with angle and elevation, etc.), but short of that, i think you should just do whatever you prefer to do, consisten…

You are marking the point of the organism, so you should mark the point of the observed. Of course, as you point out, most of the time they are close enough that it doesn’t warrant the time and effort of “amending” the camera GPS point to an estimate of that of its subject, but ideally you want to b…

Without a rangefinder and geodesy skills, good luck getting the accurate* location of a polar bear in the middle of ice floe :polar_bear: :meat_on_bone: *as in “to less than 100m”, which seems a common demand by various iNatters when it comes to “accurate” data

Hence why I say “in an ideal world”. In any case, polar bears themselves range over such vast distances that the odd 1km of inaccuracy is neither here nor there for most purposes. But my point would have been the same if the subject was some very rare super-localised tree in the middle of the Okavan…

One of the few times this might make a difference is when the subject, such as a bird, is in one nation, state, or county and you the photographer are in another. Such as being on one bank of a river and shooting a bird on the other at some border. Biologically it makes no difference but for recor…

I’ve encountered this when observing near county lines so I’ve learned to pay a bit more attention to where I place my markers. I don’t have accurate GPS coordinates so I usually pick a spot on the map with an accuracy circle and sometimes have been surprised that this resulted in observations being…

I have a project for doing this. I usually have the accuracy cover both territories but sometimes it’ll show up as either side. I’ve never observed anything really substantially unique or exciting either, so I don’t really worry about it making a difference. It’s a neat phenomenon, though.

On eBird, I have a record of a bird in Côte d’Ivoire, a country where I have never been, not because my coordinates in Liberia were inaccurate, but because the country border that eBird uses is inaccurate.

My personal standards are as follows. I use all of them. Best: The location is where the organism is, with a moderately small accuracy circle. 2nd best: The location is where I am but with a large enough accuracy to include both me and the organism I’ve photographed. 3rd best: The location is…

Agreed. Generally, if you can get a diagnosable photo of some organism and even if you’re using a telephoto lens to get it, your location and the subject’s location are for practical purposes the same. I will still adjust the location circle a little to capture the actual location of the subject.

Position of observation - by observer or observed? - #20 by system - General

Topic		Replies	Views	Activity
When photographing very distant organisms, what should I mark the location as? General question	19	2308	December 11, 2019
iNat's Preference for Location when Photographing Distant Animals General	30	1263	March 2, 2026
The importance of location precision General	47	3268	January 2, 2022
Where to place observations? General	8	914	August 16, 2019
What exactly is a location? General	10	841	February 2, 2023