About pictures.

[ame]

Ame, I appreciate Maggy's contributions to our forums enormously!
We who depend on reading the chat and seeing the pictures and videos to keep up with our nests.
We can't always follow the nest live, different time zones, job, etc etc.
If or when I see too many pictures that anyone has posted, I just scroll through them, no worries.
I like the regulars who take the time and effort to keep a great record, I like the new people who chat and post pictures, and the people who rarely chat in the forums too!
Everyone is made welcome here, and any new people that are attracted to the nests and lives of the birds is just the best!!!

Cessie
i could not agree more with you.

those who have a lot to say about 'too many' pictures are usually those who post very few pictures or even none at all. it is very easy to give negative criticism. positive contribution takes more effort.

[Hagnat]

time stamps are quite essential. i think that everyone should understand it if one thinks about it just a little. why would the clock be ticking in the picture otherwise in the first place?

how can you know that the camera time is wrong? what is your standard clock?

When the cam time is not in accordance with the time in time zone UTC+2, the time of the cam is wrong.
I am pretty sure that you have noticed differences several times yourself.
Usually it are only minutes but I have seen much more.

Of course this is not the subject of this topic.

even if the question is off-topic i must repeat my question: what is your standard clock? how do you know what is the correct UTC time + 2 hours?
i have noticed differences of a few, maybe even 10 s - 20 s, but that happens when the stream is not very stable. i compare the camera time with the pc time which is certainly not a time standard. even the grandfather's cuckoo clock on the wall keeps time better than the computer. nowadays they are supposed to get their time signal/reference from the internet but that is no proper reference. i'm sure that the camera time is better. there's probably more or less delay from camera to our time but that's only natural delay in the transmission. i think that the camera time is the best reference time that we can have.
i am certainly not asking anyone to add the time stamp by hand. i am only asking to keep it in the picture in some way. in a post here i have described a simple method with which the time stamp may be kept in the picture:
viewtopic.php?p=463901#p463901

I don't understand what your problem is. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in zone UTC+2. If the timestamp of a Baltic webcam is beside that time it is wrong. Very simple. What the time over here is makes no difference, but it is easy to convert to eastern European time. It is also easy to show two or more clocks with different time zones on your computer in case you forgot.
For you it is extra easy because you live in the same zone as the Baltic, so for you there is nothing to convert and little chance to make mistakes in a timestamp.

My screenshots are automatically saved with the actual date/time in the filename. When I post a picture here I add one hour to that time, although I sometimes forget to do it. But usually the camtime is also shown in my pictures and sometimes also in the caption. When I add a timestamp by hand I just look at the filename and ad one hour to it or look at the timestamp in the picture if it is there. To me adding an timestamp by hand is easier than preserving the original one.

Only a couple of days ago I mentioned 2-3 minutes difference between real time and the stamp on a cam. As I said earlier, on other cams we sometimes have seen much greater differences, but with the help of your own time it is easy to know what the real time must be. But this does not work with the pictures and videos in the archive. Wrong times there will stay wrong.

[Hagnat]

...those who have a lot to say about 'too many' pictures are usually those who post very few pictures or even none at all. it is very easy to give negative criticism. positive contribution takes more effort.

This again is a very unfair remark. Value does not depend on the number of posted pictures.
It is very easy to post hundreds of pictures a day. I can do this every day. Some days I take 250 srceenshots or more, but your appreciation for mega-posters is for me no reason to post them all.

[Hagnat]

I understand that the time stamp AS SHOWN ON THE CAMERA is necessary for anyone wanting to retrieve the archive film.

You need to know the time you are looking for to know which video you need. My experience is that the starting time is not always exactly the same as the time in the file name. This can be annoying because it can mean that you heave to make another long download.

[aita]

................
Only a couple of days ago I mentioned 2-3 minutes difference between real time and the stamp on a cam. As I said earlier, on other cams we sometimes have seen much greater differences, but with the help of your own time it is easy to know what the real time must be. But this does not work with the pictures and videos in the archive. Wrong times there will stay wrong.

Precisely because of that, it is important that we talk about the camera time. Each topic has its own time.
When I became member of the LK forum, it was written in the RULES.

It has happened that we write a half-page, about two seconds. (WTE winter feeding, probably Goshawk attacked the crow).
Two seconds to what? Ofcourse, the camera 2 seconds. Thus, it is not relevant time zone. Also archive is correct.

@ Hagnat
I highly appreciate your posts. However, now it is a strange thing.
I know you're wise, Please, stop it before it's too late.

[Hagnat]

.. It has happened that we write a half-page, about two seconds. (WTE winter feeding, probably Goshawk attacked the crow).
Two seconds to what?] Ofcourse, the camera 2 seconds. Thus, it is not relevant time zone. Also archive is correct..

In 99% of the posted pictures a difference of a couple of minutes has no relevance at all, but for some it seems to be more important than the subject of this topic.
The kind of cases where it can matter is when you want to record (short) intervals and durations. Then you need to use always the same time source and it must be a time source that is not changing.
I have also timed biological events in real life, even with the help of a stopwatch, so I know what it means.

[ame]

... how can you know that the camera time is wrong? what is your standard clock?

When the cam time is not in accordance with the time in time zone UTC+2, the time of the cam is wrong.
I am pretty sure that you have noticed differences several times yourself.
Usually it are only minutes but I have seen much more. ...

... Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in zone UTC+2. If the timestamp of a Baltic webcam is beside that time it is wrong. Very simple. What the time over here is makes no difference, but it is easy to convert to eastern European time. ...
My screenshots are automatically saved with the actual date/time in the filename. ...

Only a couple of days ago I mentioned 2-3 minutes difference between real time and the stamp on a cam. As I said earlier, on other cams we sometimes have seen much greater differences, but with the help of your own time it is easy to know what the real time must be. But this does not work with the pictures and videos in the archive. Wrong times there will stay wrong.

do i understand correct: you take your computer time as the real, correct time (after converting it to EET)?
i think that if the camera time and the computer time differ then the pc time is wrong. the pc takes it time from the internet when the computer is turned on. then the pc clock begins to tick in its own pace. after a while it will go wrong. (this is amazing because there should be an absolutely accurate atomic oscillator in the computer which clocks the functioning of the pc. however, the program which controls the clock that we see will go wrong.)

another thing puzzles me: how can you tell if the archive times are wrong?
in the archive the videos and pictures are named with approximate times. the 1-min pictures are taken at intervals slightly longer than 60 s so the camera time on them slowly shifts. in the end the minute reading in the camera time will be different than the minute reading in the file name. that is no problem: the camera time is right. the videos are named with the hour and minute readings. i haven't noticed any disagreements in those readings.

i use VLC for recording videos and taking snapshots and they are named automatically with the time taken from the pc. there is usually a small difference of a few seconds between the camera time and the file name taken from the pc time. if i think that the difference is too large i set the time in my pc according to the camera time. pc time may be whatever else, either set automatically or by hand. when i post videos i name the video file according to the start time of the video's camera time.

my point here is that contrary to you i think that the camera time is the correct time for timing events in the nest. the pc time may be almost anything, and i think that it can never be right to more than to an accuracy of a few seconds.
(but i haven't seen disagreements of the order minutes... that sounds very large. how can that be possible?)

... Then you need to use always the same time source and it must be a time source that is not changing. ...

i totally agree on the necessity to use one single time source. in the case of the live cameras the source must be the camera time. it is universal to all viewers. the pc times for each of us are different.

[Hagnat]

Ame, why this obsession with time? Look here: http://www.centralx.com/time/index.en.html
The clock of my computer is 03.332 seconds behind UTC and CUT.

[ame]

Ame, why this obsession with time? Look here: http://www.centralx.com/time/index.en.html
The clock of my computer is 03.332 seconds behind UTC and CUT.

yeah, and mine seemed to be 0.488 s off-set. and i still think that the universalt time for the nest events should be the camera time. that we all share.

the 'obsession' must come from my background in physics. i have worked in a field where nanoseconds are very important.

[Janne+Ais]

People, sorry, no time to write here much. But I agree with Hagnat!
And I think, it's interesting, that Maggy doesn't write and explain here, WHY she does, what she does.

[ame]

Janne+Ais, no-one needs to explain one's doings or not-doings here. it is not required to give reasons or explain motivations.

[Janne+Ais]

@Ame
You misunderstood me. I agree, no one must explain. But it's simply interesting.

[Hagnat]

Well, after all the complaints that were made one could wonder why it had no effect and therefore the motivation may be of interest.
Also interesting to note is the consequent 'misunderstanding' by certain people in this topic. Never to the point, but beside it and always assuming bad people with bad intentions. Of course I don't ask for explanations.

[Trine]

A complicated issue. I scroll over most of the pictures, preferring the direct cam stream instead. But I also can understand why so many people find many pictures annoying.

I suggest to avoid posting at least such pictures that show some elements that clearly do not belong to a picture, for instance messages and signs from your computer (Press Esc to exit the full screen). Unless posting is really necessary (i.e. the picture shows an important event and a better version was not available).

[Marfo]

A complicated issue. I scroll over most of the pictures, preferring the direct cam stream instead. But I also can understand why so many people find many pictures annoying.

It is not about 'many pictures'. It is about many pictures that have no content, no informative nor even aesthetic value or humour. I love pictures. Provided the above.
But the point is: I would like to be informed because I am interested in birds and other animals (yes, I love them too). Now in order to be able to judge weather I can scroll through them I still have to see them. So if these are pictures of for instance an 'egg roll' (281 to be exact) or a heap of unidentifiable feathers that doesn't illustrate what is happening it is very tiring. Like I said, it is 'visual blablabla'. But even if the majority of the pictures is wonderful, the value is lost in the enormous heap. Besides that it is impractical, try searching for a certain picture or text. I am not talking of only this forum, by the way.
There is a lot more to be said about this but for me there is no point in discussing this further (not "arguing", Anne7) because the outcome is already clear. But it remains a mystery to me why there are rules about the amount of pictures per post. It makes no sense.

Apart from this I resent that this discussion is put away by some people as being negative, tiresome, irrational, hurtful and rude. I do not want to 'impose' anything on anybody nor hurt anybody's feelings. If this is what people want, fine, I wish them all every possible pleasure with it.
But please, don't expect people who have limited time to be informed about all the ins and outs of these animals. It is impossible to read through all these hundreds of pages to search for an answer on a question. I have spent many many hours on it.

[ame]

... Now in order to be able to judge weather I can scroll through them I still have to see them. So if these are pictures of for instance an 'egg roll' (281 to be exact) or a heap of unidentifiable feathers that doesn't illustrate what is happening it is very tiring.
...
But it remains a mystery to me why there are rules about the amount of pictures per post. It makes no sense.
....
But please, don't expect people who have limited time to be informed about all the ins and outs of these animals. It is impossible to read through all these hundreds of pages to search for an answer on a question. I have spent many many hours on it.

i am not surprised if you have spent hundreds of hours on these pages if you really are counting the numbers of pictures of certain kinds of events. why to do that?

the number of pictures per one post is to keep the posts compact and thus easy to understand. at least i have understood the reason so. in fact i think that the number should be lower nowadays: max of 3 pics per post would be more appropriate in the time of smart phones with their small screens.

the "in's and out's" of the birds may be (and are!) of interest of ornithologists. one of the aims of these pages is to help them in their research. i don't know what the reason for reading these pages is for you. what are the questions for which you are looking answers for?

[Owlie]

Apart from this I resent that this discussion is put away by some people as being negative, tiresome, irrational, hurtful and rude. I do not want to 'impose' anything on anybody nor hurt anybody's feelings. If this is what people want, fine, I wish them all every possible pleasure with it.

Well said, Hagnat, nothing to add. Not only in this last post.
Good idea to tell people about cropping. Hopefully it will be of use to other members. It would make the forum (visually) far more attractive and informative. At least more 'readable' than this 'visual blablabla'.

[Hagnat]

You are right, Marfo (June 6, 2016, 21:14). And it is not only a problem to find certain events but it is even difficult to find something simple as a particular date in topics with for example 1000 very long pages (often 8 pages a day with 20 messages with three or more pictures per message plus videos). Because some people only arrived late in the season the Buzzard topic at this moment has reached until now 'not more' than 109 pages in just over two months of running, but I think you know what I am talking about.
To view one such message with three pictures of the most used size, I need to scroll over at least three screen pages on my computer of normal size. One for every picture. This means 60 screenpages needed to view only one page of the forum when one wants to see every picture.
It probably means that the mega-posters never look back. Only this moment counts and what is already posted is of no interest to them. Not their problem.
You could say that it is posting for the benefit of others in optima forma, but this others must made a lot of effort to find their benefit.

[Hagnat]

i am not surprised if you have spent hundreds of hours on these pages if you really are counting the numbers of pictures of certain kinds of events. why to do that? ...

"no-one needs to explain one's doings or not-doings here." Remember? It is only a couple of hours ago.
Why are you asking Marfo this while you self take note of thing like departures and arrivals?

[Rita]

... 'visual blablabla'. But even if the majority of the pictures is wonderful, the value is lost in the enormous heap. Besides that it is impractical, try searching for a certain picture or text.

I fully agree with what Marfo wrote above.

So far I did not dare make a comment because I am one of those who do neither post pictures nor write text. This is because, since I am no ornithologist, what I write might not be a helpful contribution at all and I can only look at the camera in the evening because of my work.

Anyway I am very grateful for pictures and text.