The main advantage of the photo browser over the explore-observations page is that it shows all the photos without needing extra clicks. But at genus and above, it doesn’t, which can be really annoying when you’re doing certain searches. E.g. https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/324076-Criorhina/browse_photos?place_id=78388 , where there are only three observations, and the best photos are hidden. One issue here is that many species are difficult or impossible to ID to species, so a lot of very good photos won’t ever show up in the photo browser.
I suggest adding the rest of the photos after all the 1st photos, to avoid issues with observations with 20+ photos dominating a stretch of the page. This would also mean that the photo browser experience wouldn’t change until you reach what previously would have been the end of the page. Making the species-level pages behave the same way would be nice too, and probably simplify the code a bit by getting rid of a special case.
Weird. Is the place id in the URL still present ("?place_id=78388")? When I logged out just now to test the link like that, the place filter got cleared, even though the filter in the upper-right still reads “Great Lakes Basin”.
I also only get to see the first images (Chrome on Windows 7) , so I second this request. I’d like to broaden the request to be given a photo browser for any filtered list of obs so one can easily view all the photos taken on a particular day, or location or whatever rather than having to open each and every obs.
The place is shown in the UI, as per @Star3’s screenshot above, but it has disappeared from the URL, for me (also Chrome, on Linux - but it seems equally broken on Firefox). And one of the obs I see is from Ch. Pierre a Fabien, Cocagne, Kent County, NB, Canada, which I’m pretty sure is not in the intended region. Compare: if you remove the region, and then filter by it again, you do get only 3 results.
So, the request is legit and there’s a separate bug here.
@reosarevok seems to be correct, there’s a bug which changes the place_id in the URL to whatever place_id you have stickied, even if that’s nothing. An explicit URL parameter should take priority, otherwise sharing a link with a place_id is useless and confusing.
Going through older feature requests. Aside from the weirdness of the place_id in the URL and UI, wanted to just re-spell out the request (partly for myself to work through this haha. Does a separate bug still need to be made for that issue?).
There are relatively few observations with tons and tons of photos, so I wouldn’t mind, and would personally prefer that photos are displayed all next to each other when they correspond to the same observation.
