Re catagorized image ??!!!!!

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 6 years ago
  • Acknowledged
I have just received an email, ?

The image below has been reported as being in the wrong category. We
took a look and agree so we have taken the liberty of recategorizing it
for you.

http://www.pixoto.com/images/113603189

can someone explain to me, how an image in animals, birds, needs recategorizing to animals, birds ?

and which Muppet reported it because all it has done has dropped me from a top 10 position to the bottom and working my way back up again !!!

Also who is dealing with these reports if they actually did it !!!
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes

Posted 7 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Sherry Andreason

Sherry Andreason

  • 4466 Posts
  • 218 Reply Likes
Hi Ralph,

Image reports are anonymous, but I will check in to the reason the image was relocated to the same place. I am sorry about the problem.
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
at the time it was in the top 10 i know it has to run through till tomorrow but i have had to start over from the bottom up again

Admittedly it is doing Ok at the mo but that could just as easily kept it where it was or even get higher ?
Photo of Sherry Andreason

Sherry Andreason

  • 4466 Posts
  • 218 Reply Likes
Ralph, I need to know if you want us to restore it to the way it was before or leave it alone. I know I can not undo what has been done and the "What If" will always be there. Please let me know how you would like to proceed.

I really am sorry this happened and we will find out why.
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
Leave it where it is it has worked its way back to the top, just thought you should look into how or why it happened ?
Thanks
Photo of Sherry Andreason

Sherry Andreason

  • 4466 Posts
  • 218 Reply Likes
Ok and we definitely will, I have already escalated to Jason
Photo of Clare Rodgers

Clare Rodgers

  • 54 Posts
  • 17 Reply Likes
Hi, pretty sure the same thing just happened to me. I had a picture which I'm sure was categorized in Artistic Objects > Other Objects to start with which has just been recategorised to Artistic Objects > Other Objects??

http://www.pixoto.com/images-photogra...
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
That's the point right there "if it's not photographed with an animal body." if there is no living body then its not an animal ! or to take it literally should a house be placed in people because that's what lives in there !!!

The only sensible solution to this is to add shells and feathers etc to the existing category reinstate the ones moved with points and that's that !

I cant see you moving a top placed image with 1st place for day, week, month points let alone a list of 20+ similar images and points, and to move them allowing the points and badges to stand would definitely be unfair !

There's only the one real solution to this really ???
Photo of Darrell Raw

Darrell Raw

  • 635 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
I agree with Ralph. There's no point in trying to force these into Nature up Close, they simply don't fit. They will then be duelling with flowers, beaches, waterdrops and waterfalls and Nature up Close will be even more screwed up than it is already. Surely the easiest and most sensible route would be a natural subcategory under Artistic Objects (or several new subcategories) and simply remove "man-made" from the description. The idea that artistic compositions can only be made with man-made objects is inherently flawed in the first place.

As for the other elephant in the room - you still need to reinstate the moved images (with points and awards) in whichever new category they go in, OR you need to strip all awards and points from ALL other natural objects in Artistic Objects when they move. Fair is fair....
Photo of Darrell Raw

Darrell Raw

  • 635 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
This thread has gone ominously quiet. Is there any progress?
Photo of Darrell Raw

Darrell Raw

  • 635 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
As there is no further action on this, I want my snail shells re-instated with points and awards until such time as you decide what you're doing. You have thousands of natural objects with high scores in Artistic Objects and have failed to move even one of them despite the links all being provided. Furthermore I will be posting more natural objects in Artistic Objects as you are condoning this for others. I dare you to move them while this unfair condition continues!
Photo of Darrell Raw

Darrell Raw

  • 635 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
Well? Someone going to resolve this?
Photo of Clare Rodgers

Clare Rodgers

  • 54 Posts
  • 17 Reply Likes
Hi Sherry,

Yes I did, I got an email apparently from yourself stating:

"The image below has been reported as being in the wrong category. We took a look and agree so we have taken the liberty of recategorizing it for you.

You can find descriptions of all of our categories at http://blog.pixoto.com/category-descr...
View recategorized image: http://www.pixoto.com/images/113164516

We are sorry for the inconvenience.

Sincerely,
Sherry
Pixoto Report Images Team
"

I put it in Artistic Objects > Other Objects originally as it seemed appropriate - there being no animal but a pretty yellow shell.

It seemed the right place as images submitted in that category so far this year include several snail shells, a lot of feathers, a nest of eggs, several sea shells, lots of rocks (or does the stacking make it man-made? In which case, I put the shell on the stick.....) Many of those images have number one daily/weekly/monthly awards. So were they all wrong too or is that in fact the right place for inanimate but natural objects? Just so I know for future reference.....
Photo of Clare Rodgers

Clare Rodgers

  • 54 Posts
  • 17 Reply Likes
So what is the remedy going to be then please? Are you moving all of them into Nature up close or introducing a workable category they can be put in?

There's surely a clear need for some artistic category under Nature Up Close then? Where all these feathers, sea shells can go and can compete fairly with each other instead of against birds, mammals, cute baby animals, beautiful flowers - where clearly none of them will stand a chance?
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
How can you say a shell after all that's all you can see is an animal ?

Sorry but i agree if its not allowed where it was then there should be a category implemented !

There is no way i would vote a shell over most of the images in animals and i am sure i am not the only one, so it wouldn't really stand much chance !
Photo of Clare Rodgers

Clare Rodgers

  • 54 Posts
  • 17 Reply Likes
Is there any news on the solution for this, it's all gone quiet? Will a suitable category be introduced that can be used for these types of photos?
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
I think there's some serious thinking going on after Darrell pointed out the depth of the problem !

I like many others am waiting to see the solution to that one first !
Photo of Sherry Andreason

Sherry Andreason

  • 4466 Posts
  • 218 Reply Likes
I am waiting to hear back from Jason thank you for your patience while we work this out.,
Photo of Michelle Meenawong

Michelle Meenawong

  • 1297 Posts
  • 138 Reply Likes
this is funny. I asked months ago where I should upload shell photos and NEVER got an answer. The idea of having a category for shells and feather is good, this could help.
Photo of Charlie

Charlie

  • 636 Posts
  • 52 Reply Likes
I think the team should add more subcategory to artistic objects to be more specific rather than "other objects". 'coz the word object has a very broad meaning.
Photo of Dipali

Dipali

  • 1846 Posts
  • 94 Reply Likes
I think a shell without a living animal showing and taken in an indoor (studio) setting can be considered as artistic object. The same goes with feathers and rocks. Just my opinion, and I might be wrong.
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
That's the logical answer...... unfortunately Logic has taken a short break i think ?
Photo of Sherry Andreason

Sherry Andreason

  • 4466 Posts
  • 218 Reply Likes
After a lot of discussion, it has been decided that if feathers, rocks, shells etc are set up in a studio type shot that they will be allowed to remain in Artistic Objects, however if a stone, shell, etc is in a natural habitat then it needs to be in the proper category such as Animals or Nature Up Close.
Photo of Darrell Raw

Darrell Raw

  • 635 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
Wow nice save. Unethical and totally unfair, but quick thinking to save face. Fact is though, you forgot one tiny little detail. "Artistic Objects – Here’s where you put all of those artistic shots of man made objects of all types from coffee mugs to violins. Subcategories: Musical Instruments, Glass, Antiques, Clothing & Accessories, Jewelery, Toys, Other Objects".

If you permit natural objects, this needs to be changed. And you need to define what natural objects are allowed. Then you need to provide AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE CATEGORY as has been the point throughout this thread. NO ONE VOTES FOR SHELLS IN ANIMALS! Do you understand what I'm trying to say Sherry?

I'm SO sick of the run-around and dodging issues that's going on lately. Snail shells CANNOT compete with living animals, they CANNOT compete with Nature Up Close images, THERE IS NO PLACE FOR THEM! The simplest and most logical solution would have been a Natural Objects sub-category in Artistic Objects.
Photo of Sherry Andreason

Sherry Andreason

  • 4466 Posts
  • 218 Reply Likes
This was not my decision Darrell
Photo of Darrell Raw

Darrell Raw

  • 635 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
Then you shouldn't be answering me. Time for a decision maker to comment.
Photo of Dipali

Dipali

  • 1846 Posts
  • 94 Reply Likes
Natural Objects within Artistic Objects looks like a good solution, only then you would have to define Natural Objects as that's a wide range. Also the inclusion of Natural Objects in indoor settings or studio settings should be mentioned along with the description in my opinion. Outdoor settings, natural Object would mean placement of logs etc in Artistic object as one example though in outdoor setting they belong in Nature up Close.
Photo of Darrell Raw

Darrell Raw

  • 635 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
I disagree with you Dipali. Where would you put an artistic shot of a log? Under trees? Flowers? Sand, Rock, Water? Other plants? You see, there is no fitting category for them. Natural settings do not mean they are not artistic and the subject doesn't fit in the defined categories. There's no difference between a stack of rocks (or a shell) in the studio or the same in the outdoors, merely the choice of setting. Lets say I took a piece of driftwood (a log, wouldn't you agree?) and arranged it on a rock with some stacked stones and maybe a shell, and set this arrangement in a forest. Where would you put it? Then I move the set to a studio and take a picture of the same arrangement. Now where do I put it? It doesn't work. The key word here is artistic - and that's a word wide open for individual interpretation. You may think my snail on a stick is not artistic, and I may think your stacked rocks are not artistic - but neither fit in any other category.

What I find vaguely amusing and extremely annoying is that the stacked rocks in artistic objects are going to stay, because they are in a studio setting - however there is already a rocks category in Nature where they would do just as well. Yet the snail shells are moved despite there not actually being any reasonable category for them...double standards all round.

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.