"Nothing Here"
-
by
L.Rowan
I come across images like this occasionally. There's obviously something here, but it is far too close to the camera to identify. However, there is no way for me to indicate that as my classification, so I have to mark it as "nothing here," which is bad data. Either that or I could guess ("Hmm, that looks like wildebeest hair!"), which is also bad data. In that line, I also have to mark "nothing there" when it's obvious there's creatures of some sort moving on the horizon, but they're too far away to identify.
Think there's a solution to this in the works? If not, could there be, please?
Posted
-
by
parsfan
See http://talk.snapshotserengeti.org/#/boards/BSG0000006/discussions/DSG0000dxb
Posted
-
by
areinders
moderator
As explained in the post linked above, just do your best. Even in the image shown there is some useful information: The animal is large and it has brown fur that is relatively short. That excludes quite a number of possibilities, i.e. it is not a bird or reptile, not a small animal like a mongoose or hare, not a cheetah or lion or spotted hyena, not a zebra or a hartebeest. So you guessed wildebeest, which seems like a good choice here. In the other case, when animals can be seen far away on the horizon you can make a guess in a similar fashion: They are far away but you can still see them, so they are not very small animals. If they are in a herd that tells you that they are not cheetahs for instance and so on. In difficult cases answers are going to be diverging, requiring a second look by experts. In the end, the scientists working on the study will have to decide which data they can use for whatever question they want to answer.
Posted
-
by
L.Rowan
Meant to say thanks when I first read this. Didn't realize I didn't actually post the thanks.
So, thanks! That helped 😃
Posted