[Only registered members may post.] [Threaded View] [Translate]
photos inactivated zeca Gold Star Critiquer/Silver Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 373 W: 14 N: 539] (2887)::2006-08-07 4:32
Hello dear fellows!

I just had my second photo inactivated since Iīv signed TN.
The first one was inactivated last may, and I didnīt agree with that because it was a picture showing a landscape with many interesting things on it, but since there was a cammelia in the FG and cammelias are forbidden here like all cultivated plants, after almost 50 points (so it was approved by many members!)the site take it off my page. In that picture there is a nice cloudy weather, some mounts a nice araucaria and the typical view of the second plateau of my state, named "Campos Gerais". So, I should cut off the cammelia to be ok for TN, because the cammelias are forbidden.

Now Iīve posted a dewy lemon, a few hours ago. Well, I donīt know who had cultivated it, but I agree that someone had cultivated it before and I just take my picture when I found it with that dew morning drops on the fruit. Inactivated. Ok.

The question is: How many members had posted so many garden flowers? And what about that botanic garden flowers we have seen? Well, I canīt forget that Iīve seen a papaya tree from the US Botanic Garden! Wild in the botanic garden? This is not cultivated?

Well, I would like to say that I understand TN's reasons and I sincerely respect TN's decisions about inactivations, but I just would like to complain a little bit, because I really donīt understand why people can post garden flowers, zoo animals and suddenly my cammelias (with all that nature on BG) and my close up dewy lemon are cultivated and forbidden.

I donīt know if you understand what Iīm trying to say, but flowers, fruits or animals can be cultivated by the man's hands and even cultivated, everything belongs to nature and needs nature to grow up.
If the manīs hand on it (cultive) is the real problem, so I canīt understand what are the zoo animals doing here and not living in the nature.
When the aquarium's pictures are for TN the same that are the underwater photos... when the daisy flower in the garden with a bee on it is the same of an unknowed name flower founded in the amazon... when the zoo parrots or the park ducks are the same that the wild hawks flying on British Columbia... why not the lemon could be the same of the botanic garden papayas, or garden flowers?

Iīm so sorry for all this complaining words. I really understand that TN is just trying to have some good rules to their nice site.
I just donīt understand the criterion, the standard, the common-sense to decide whatīs nature...

A few hours ago Iīve posted the forbidden dewy lemon. A few minutes ago Iīve posted some papayas, just because there are some already posted from a picture taken in US Botanic Garden...commom-sense!

All the best!

Re: photos inactivated klemmg Gold Star Critiquer/Silver Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 302 W: 40 N: 484] (1719)::2006-08-08 15:46
Hi Zeca,

let me try to explain the rationale behind the TN rule as I see it.

First off, I agree that the rule is inconsistently applied, but not because there is no consistent rule, but because some pictures simply slip through the net. There are so many posts, and if nobody takes the time to report it, a post in violation of TOS may well be overlooked and in the meantime draw many points and comments, simply because it happens to be a good photo.

So let’s all try to actually use that “Report” button more frequently, to keep possible frustration down.

As to the rule: forget about “nature” in the broad sense (that would also include homo sapiens by-the-by!). Instead, TN is about wildlife and natural phenomena that focus on that part of nature that came into being without human purpose or intent behind it.

So no animals or plants specifically bred for human purposes. Therefore no cultivated fruit or veggies, no dogs, sheep, horses, no feral animals that also were bred and just happened to have escaped into the wilderness after having been changed purposefully according to human needs.

On the other hand, most zoo animals are OK as there is that conservation aspect; zoo animals may also be bred, but obviously not to produce more milk/wool whatever (i.e. human purposes in the narrow sense), but to preserve these animals as they occur/have occurred in the wild.

Similarly, a wildflower that has not been bred/changed for human purposes but is propagated to show an exotic species/for conservation purposes is also OK, even if it happens to grow in a botanical garden.

Star constellations, stone formations etc. are OK as they occur without human hand.

Destruction of nature by human impact I believe is also OK as the main theme is the loss of wilderness, not the human hand in to (two sides of one coin, but usually it is pretty clear what the focus is on).

If your main focus in an image is a cultivated plant (lemon, papaya, cammelia) then the inactivation was according to TOS.

Obviously cultivated plants are also an attractive part of nature, as well as many adorable pets and farm animals.

However, I believe most TN members appreciate that the owner of this site decided to focus on the wildlife aspect of nature, which the Terms of Service and previous threads on the matter reflect.

For the other part of nature shots, the sister-site TrekLense is an option which has not similarly restrictive TOS.

Why not post a link in the TN forum so that interested TN members will know about your TL post of the “cultivated” variety?

Kind regards,
Re: photos inactivated zeca Gold Star Critiquer/Silver Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 373 W: 14 N: 539] (2887)::2006-08-09 12:15
Thank you for your nice answer, Gabi!
I accept all your explanation about TN purposes, and I strongly agree with it!
Iīve just questioned the criterions about what is or not nature or, like you correctly said, wildlife.
This question blowed up in my screen when I saw a cultivated papaya in TN, and so I thought that my dewy lemons could be accepted. Any difference? No. Both were cultivated.
Like lemons, papayas are widely cultivated, and if it is inside the botanic garden, its worse. Its true that there are lots of papayas growing up in the wild here, but that was not in this situation. Please understand that I am not talking about my lemon picture, because I understood what is in TOS. The question goes about "criterion". Iīm sure that some considered wildlife for TN sometimes could be cultivated on my garden, and sometimes what is exotic for me could be common in the China gardens. The whole world is giant! Its not TNīs members obligation to know the nature all around the world, but it is to observe TN's TOS criterions, so it should be accurate. If not, inactivations could be wrong here and there.
The first time I had a picture inactivated I didnīt complain about. I just was wrong about my own impressions about my picture, ok. It shows beautiful nature and wildlife, but the main subject in the FG is a cultivated cammelia. It was motherīs day and Iīve tryed to post it to celebrate it. I cracked.
This time I cracked also, but thereīs was an evidence inviting me: that papayas growing in the botanic garden...
Iīm sorry about it all, and thanks for your answer. I understand what TOS mean, and thereīs absolutely no problem to have my picture inactivated but, I just donīt see any reasonable criterions in this case. Maybe TN should think to exclude all fruits, excluding the criterions responsability.
All the best!
Re: photos inactivated klemmg Gold Star Critiquer/Silver Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 302 W: 40 N: 484] (1719)::2006-08-10 16:46
You're welcome Zeca. That papaya must truly have been tempting, but alas, it's forbidden fruit ;-)
This is not the first discussion of the application of TOS rules in practice and won't be the last. It must be difficult for the admins to draw the line sometimes, a perfect system is not possible. As is, it does a good job to focus on the wild uncultivated part of nature.
Happy shooting!
Re: photos inactivated Keitht (0)::2006-08-11 12:55

If you believe a picture breaks the rules of the site you need to report it and explain why. That doesn't mean it will automatically be removed because the final decision lays with the administrators.
Unless people start reporting problems more regularly the inconsistency will continue. The admins can't check each and every image.
Re: photos inactivated Avare Silver Note Writer [C: 8 W: 4 N: 75] (514)::2006-08-14 19:26

I think the rules are valid only someone, because one picture of mine has been removed two weeks ago. It was a picture of rose, so there are so many picture of roses in this site.
Why only mine has been removed?
Re: photos inactivated zeca Gold Star Critiquer/Silver Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 373 W: 14 N: 539] (2887)::2006-08-14 22:40
It is exactly the point Iīve questioned, Gursu. Sometimes we can understand, or find, equal criterions.
All the best!
Re: photos inactivated AdrianW Gold Star Critiquer/Gold Star Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 257 W: 185 N: 215] (710)::2006-08-15 11:10
There are some wild species of roses (which therefore belong on TN), and then there are cultivated varieties of roses (which don't). However there are some that may be open to uncertainty - or as Gabi suggested they may simply have slipped through the net.

Sometimes people are sneaky, and there's an aphid in the shot - they then give a note about the aphid, and explain that the flower is there as habitat ;) Sometimes the note can make all the difference!
Re: photos inactivated PlayPhotography Gold Star Critiquer/Silver Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 174 W: 49 N: 63] (213)::2006-08-16 21:01
Here's another opinion:

Isn't the goal of TN to learn more about nature through photography? I think the final say in approving photos for TN shouldn't be whether or not the subject is of a cultivated variety--but whether or not it TEACHES us something.

Believe it or not, I've never seen or heard of a dewy lemon before. I'd love to see one! I love looking at any aspect of nature up close (if you don't believe me just check out my gallery) because you can learn so much about your subject--textures, colors, light, and if your imagination is really wild, even sounds! I'd also love to see a picture of a papaya, as long as it isn't a papaya on the stand in the grocery store.

The goal here, as TN states, is to LEARN ABOUT NATURE, PERIOD. And because we're all from different corners of the world, who's to say that a picture of a strawberry won't teach somebody in South Africa something about native North American fruits?

Let's STOP reporting photos of lemons, papayas, roses... if you don't like the picture that you see, don't forget you have a "back" button on your browser.
Re: photos inactivated zeca Gold Star Critiquer/Silver Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 373 W: 14 N: 539] (2887)::2006-08-16 22:37
Thanks Brian!
I would like to say that I am not talking that I didnīt like papayas or lemon or roses pictures... Iīve been posted some! The target here is just the commom sense about..what is nature, or wild, or learn about nature?
Iīve seen a picture showing some papayas cultivated in the US botanical gardens...ok! So, I had the idea to post my dewy lemons, but it was inactivated. So... what the criterions? After this, Iīve posted my papayas, and nobody took it out. So...papayas, lemons, I canīt see difference, but the taste, of course. Just fruits! So nice to see on the tree! So beautiful to show on TN! Cultivated or not, both are nice and can teach something. A even like to eat papayas with some lemon drops on it! But suddenly my dewy lemons were inactivated.. (and you lost the "caipirinha's recipe on my note!";-)
I understand that its not easy to keep criterions working, otherwise... we canīt live in the silence.
If you want to see my papayas, take a look at my page. Iīve posted it with a nice recipe also.
All the best to you!