NEW: Places
Have you seen this? https://tookapic.com/places Looking great! Thanks Tookapic Team. I am motivated to edit all my pictures.
Edited by Pawel: Only for Hero users right now.
Paweł Kadysz This is in Beta right now so we have restricted the access only for Hero users. If you are a Hero and don't have access to Places - view your account Settings and turn on Beta features: tookapic.com/account/settings
And those of you who haven't upgraded yet - well, now is a great time to get your Hero badge: tookapic.com/account/hero
Magda Korzewska
I was too fast, but could not resist to share it. Love it!!
(PS. I am so happy I visited so many places last 500 days and now can add locations)
Abderrahim
Hi Pawel,
Can the localisation retrieved from the photo Exif data if it exists?
Paweł Kadysz Not at the moment.
Abderrahim Thanks :)
Michał Superb feature! What I miss in the map view, are the labels of bigger cities and country borders. In default view it's fine, but when the map is zoomed it may be confusing. Until you hover over a green pin, you've no idea which area actually is visible. Or at least that's what I experienced.
Daniel Borth lack of borders ,maybe is actually good idea :)
Michał Good point. So let's stick with big cities labels only :)
Satoshi T It's really cool! Tookapic members who are not yet Hero will definitely become Hero on this occasion!
vera That's fantastic! Thanks Pawel and the team! You're so dynamic and creative! So now we can even travel across the world with Tookapic! That's great! Soon B&B Tookapic?... 😂😝
vera Looking at the photos on the map, I wonder if it is really relevant to locate all my photos. If I photograph my telephone for example, what interest to know that it is New York or Dublin? Is there not a risk of being invaded by photos without geographical interest? And to finish the window becomes less interesting? For my part I only labeled the photos that seemed to me interesting geographically, landscapes, buildings. What do you think about it? It depends what you want to achieve through this function?
Satoshi T Even if people are main subjects, I will positively register geographical information if there are things that characterize the area on the background. However, still life or tools ... I do not register a place.
Magda Korzewska I agree with Vera, some of my photo from garden, studio or portrait would spoiled the idea. Good point Vera.
Satoshi T I think the map on the header is good in this state, but Japan, Australia and New Zealand are not displayed in my environment. I hope I can expand the area with the [-] button ...
Satoshi T Currently, there are many locations in Japan on "cities" lists on the left side. eg. Shibuya-ku and Shibuya are the hierarchy under Tokyo. In order to represent the same Shibuya hierarchy, with -ku and without -ku are mixed. I think that this may be a problem when Google made location data rather than Tookapic. This hierarchy is doubtful whether it is meaningful from a global perspective. I think most of the pictures of city I took are "Tokyo" is good.
Marek Szymczuk Fixed.
jazzie It is awkward to set places to older pics. Bulk editing would be great, or the possibility to add a location without going into the editing-mode in every single pic. Also, after editing and updating a pic, there is no arrow to the next pic available, which means going back to my profile and scrolling down every time 😏
Paweł Kadysz Bulk editing will be available next week.
jazzie great :D
Ian Prince Cool! I've been using tags for the locations for quite a while now, e.g 403 pics of Nyon.... tookapic.com/tags/nyon ... so if in any way of getting those tags into *real* geo-locs would be awesome :)
Ian Prince Oh, and what would be also really cool is a map of where we all come from :)
Satoshi T Oh! I found a wonderful version upgrade! :) On the right side the places that are being taken up especially in that city are listed now!
Paweł Kadysz It's still beta, so I guess @Marek is experimenting... on a Saturday afternoon (I have no problem with that 👏). The thumbnails on the left got a bit too small now, but I already let him know about that.
Paweł Kadysz You can now add location to multiple photos at once in the Mass Editor: tookapic.com/account/mass-edit... (it might be a little slow if you have 365+ photos).
Paweł Kadysz Places is now available to all users! Enjoy!
Magda Korzewska Great! Will green dots show automaticaly or You need add it by "hand'?
Paweł Kadysz These will show up automatically once there's enough photos in that particular place.
Satoshi T Now @Ian visits Seoul , South Korea. but I can't find green point on world map on tookapic.com/places . Why?
Paweł Kadysz If we showed every place on the map, it would've been all green. A place needs to be in top X cities to be put on the map. Currently it has to have more than 12 photos taken in that city.
Ian Prince Mmmm, I might have to extend my stay by two days then ;)
Jennifer I'm late, but I'm on it! Most of mine are in Daegu, but I have several from Seoul I can add as well. I'm determined to get Korea on the map!!!
Jennifer So I added a bunch of mine, but they still aren't showing up :(
Nilson Menezes Places is a very good feature. I'm trying to put locations in my old photos. Extraordinary is that's possible to locate precisely the street, square, named-places, metro-stations, everything recorded into Google Maps!
ponzu Thank you for opening the places to non-Heroes and for making new enhancements.
Is this a good place to point out some issue? Not so much with the functionality or interface (I did that in another thread), but with geography. I don't know what database you are using and whether you have control over how cities and places are interlinked. I am seeing some issues.
I open this "Big boys' toys", click on "Where was this place taken..." and start typing "Or...", I get a dropdown that includes "Orange County, CA, United States". I select it, and the page now reads "Orange County". So far so good. I hit "Save changes".
When I come back to the photo later, it shows as being taken in a place "Orange County, Tustin" (is that what you are seeing when you click on it?)
Tustin is a city in Orange County. Orange County is a county (place) in California. Tustin is not where I took the photo, it is not what I geotagged the photo to, and it is not what the page said when I first saved the geotag. It looks like a bug.
The photo was taken in the city of Aliso Viejo, which is in Orange County, which is in California. Because Aliso Viejo is a small city, and because I want to put Orange County on the map, I have been tagging the photos to "Orange County" rather than to a specific city.
If the photo page read "Aliso Viejo, California" or "Aliso Viejo, Orange County, CA", or "Orange County, CA", or "Orange County, CA, United States", or "Orange County", any of these would be accurate. "Orange County, Tustin" does not make sense geographically -- even if I *had* tagged the photo to Tustin, which I did not.
What would be great is if your database and your algorithm supported the concept of inclusion of one place into another, as well as of a city into a place. So if I tagged a photo to "Aliso Viejo, Orange County, CA, United States", it would count for, and show up when exploring Orange County, California and the United States. Is this possible?
Thank you!
P.S. I saw another issue of improper geography, I think also in the US, and I think it also had to do with city and a larger place it belonged to being switched around, but I can't think what it was. When I see it, I will post it to give you more to work with.
Paweł Kadysz Thank you for the feedback.
If you look at the dropdown that lets you geotag your photos - you'll see that it's powered by Google. Most of apps' geotaging features are based on Google Maps and Google Places API. We have no way to change what their database include.
What I would suggest is actually tag the photo with actual place it was taken at. You should even be able to tag the gym you were in. It will still put the pin in the correct place on the map.
ponzu I understand, and will consider doing that. But can you explain how we go from "Orange County, CA, United States" when tagging to "Orange County, Tustin" when actually viewing the place? It could be a unique bug in Google, or could you be using their metadata wrong?
Thank you!
Paweł Kadysz @Marek do you know what's going on here?
ponzu Another example:
I am selecting "Shaws Cove, Laguna Beach, Laguna Beach, CA, United States"
The first "Shaws Cove, Laguna Beach" is bold, this must be the place. The rest "Laguna Beach, CA, United States" is faint, that must be the city.
After saving, it reads "Shaws Cove, Laguna Beach". So far, so good.
After reloading, it has changed to " Shaws Cove, Laguna Beach, Laguna Beach", which is no good.
I think I am beginning to see a pattern. I guess it is possible that Google Maps and Google Places are messing you up, but maybe you can somehow guard against putting awkward place names up on the page. I don't know how you would do that. This is the photo:
But never mind, I already changed geotag to "Orange County, CA, United States", which then became "Orange County, Tustin".
I used the sample Google Places searchbox implementation at developers.google.com/maps/doc... and having searched for "Orange County", I can tell that the marker for it (its center, I guess) is, indeed, in Tustin. That's probably, how your display name "Orange County, Tustin" is generated. Looking at to examples
"Orange County, Tustin" and
"Shaws Cove, Laguna Beach, Laguna Beach"
I would recommend simply not including the name of the city in the display name. Then it would be come
"Orange County" and
"Shaws Cove, Laguna Beach"
and it would look right. I don't know how the rest of the world would be affected, whether names of places would become more or less helpful without the city.
ponzu @Paweł Now that Feed is done ;) can we take another look at Places?
First of all, it looks great and works great, very helpful, informative and fun. Thank you!
I am looking specifically at the map. I realize there is a whole lot going on below it.
The way I would expect the map to work, and the way it works in other photo sites, and the way I would hope it will work one day on Tookapic, is the dots representing the most popular places should be relative to the zoom level and rectangle selected.
As I keep zooming in more and more on the US and California I see the same dots for the cities where we have active (and long established) members: San Francisco, Oakland (one being a satellite of the other), San Diego and Carlsbad (which have roughly the same relationship).
I am probably being selfish and petty, but I am trying to put on the map the two or three places I am active in. Granted, I have just started, but the simple math, paired with my understanding of the algorithm, suggests that "my" places will never show up as long as people who started before me remain active: they will keep adding photos at the same rate as I, but adding them to a larger initial number.
One of two approaches would make "my" dots show up.
1. If the site recalculated the "top X" places relative to the zoom level and rectangle selected. That way, if I (or anyone) has taken one photo in a particular place, that photo will eventually show up if I zoom right down to it.
2. If the "top X" calculation were done not from the beginning of time, but for the past N days, maybe 30, maybe 365, or maybe the timespan can be user selectable.
Would either of these be hard to implement? I would prefer the first, but ideally both.
Thank you!
Satoshi T I am also pleased with the specification of details displayed according to zooming. However, consider the performance of the server and the financial situation of Tookapic - tookapic.com/tookapic-hero -, please implement it in a reasonable range.
ponzu So, Places moved from Photos to ... in the menu. You must be keeping statistics on the usage of various pages/features, and Places was not very popular? It is one of my favorite pages. I am still waiting for "my" places to start showing up, still thinking how I would change things up. Hopefully, you have not given up on it.
Top Contributors
People who started the most discussions on Talks.
-
138 -
25
-
22
-
21
-
20
-
19
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
15
Unanswered Talks
Discussions with no comments. Be first to post a comment.
-
Paweł Kadysz posted
-
jazzie posted
-
ponzu posted
-
Jan Buchta posted
-
Mason Luce posted
Daniel Borth so cool :)