Please stop tagging the exact location of your outdoor photographs.
I'm just as guilty of it as anyone else. I used to share mountain, lake, river, and scenic vista names for all of my Facebook, Instagram, 500px, and Flickr audiences to see. Through my own outdoor and landscape photography, I always want to encourage others to have their own outdoor experience and to understand why nature is worth loving. But then I realized the impact I was most likely having.
Not only was I potentially getting other people to explore their backyard, but I was most likely also a cause for the backyard's degradation and eventual destruction. There is no doubt that ad agencies and individuals alike on social media play a role in promoting outdoor activities and locations, but have you ever thought what the impact is of those posts?
In recent years, the Center for Outdoor Ethics, Leave No Trace, has asked that we stop geotagging our locations on social media. If you're an outdoor sports, lifestyle, or landscape photographer, consider asking yourself before sharing a location with an image if it's worth it:
Will this place be negatively impacted if I share the location on social media?
Another point worth considering regarding tagging locations is that true adventure, in my opinion, is slowly being lost. It's now easier than ever to see an image of a place, then Google the location and find exact coordinates. It's very rare that we take out a map and compass in order to find a spot that's worth discovering for ourselves. Why not walk in the woods to discover your own beautiful location? Most of the time, putting in effort, blood, and sweat can make a place much more magical.
So, if you are going to share an image of a beautiful landscape or outdoor location, consider tagging the region instead. Instead of tagging Mt. Marcy, for example, you could say, "Adirondack Park." Additionally, consider adding a caption about positive leave no trace principles, like carrying in what you carry out. You can help be a steward for the places you love while also promoting your work and encouraging others to get outside.
I applaud your motives but am unsure of the impact that omitting the tags will have. For most images, other photogs can get a fair idea of the location and my fear is that they'll wander more widely across the area looking for the site than would be the case with the tags. This may vary by site, but for a shot in a canyon in Zion, for example, seeing an outstanding image may just be a motivation for ducking into many of the side canyons to explore rather than just going into the one canyon. If you could keep them from knowing it was in Zion, it may work better.
I understand the point you're trying to make, but I think that you still shouldn't take an exact location. I think "Zion" is better than "Insert specific vantage point here." I think that posting a photo and tagging the general area is much more responsible. Plus, a caption could include the importance of staying on trails in National Parks.
As I said, I'm unsure which would have the bigger impact - it may vary by locale. Perhaps the problem is just too many of us landscape photographers out there and we're just debating whether a more broadly diffused impact is better or worse than a more focused one, though they're both bad.
Tim, one added thought. As I said in another reply, the geotagging dilemma depends on the impact of disbursed traffic versus concentrated traffic. The full solution would be not to post the pictures at all. Yes, we'd lose the street cred from posting photos of unusual sites, but we wouldn't fan the flames of people looking for out of the way locations. We could still enjoy the images and share them in less public forums with people of shared wilderness sensibilities. Perhaps a justified trade-off?
Very, very good point. I honestly think that's a great idea! Just out of curiosity, do you share the sentiment of this article in that you don't geotag your locations when posting? Or, do you not even post images to large social media platforms at all? I definitely agree with your point, but I almost wonder if not posting at all is the best solution. And if it is, I feel like our shoot-and-post culture wouldn't be ready for that suggestion.
I do post landscape images (on 500PX) but generally from the recognized trails or well known sites. In part this reflects my focus on the southwest where you mostly need to stay on trails due to the risk of damaging cryptobiotic soils. You can use slick rock or washes to get an angle on a subject, but you can't really go exploring too far. For example, I have a shot from inside Tower Arch in Arches NP that required a little slick rock climbing from trails end but no real exploring. I did explore more widely in Badlands NP, for example, where the official view is "go anywhere" since the top couple of inches washes off every year. Also, I only generally tag the image locations but more out of laziness and the lack of a GPS add on.
I would guess that you're correct about the culture, but even if we only reduced the volume it's progress. Also, we could work to make the challenge the quality of the shot, not the uniqueness off the location.
Check out this article https://www.theringer.com/2016/11/3/16042448/instagram-geotagging-ruinin...
I’m tagging all of my photos “planet Earth” from now on. How’s that?
unless you get to ride on that rocket with that chinese billionaire
Stuff to laugh about.
I live in and am a product of the mountain western US. I do a lot of traveling and hiking into wilderness or near wilderness areas. I take photos. I often times geotag them. I plan to keep doing so.
In my opinion it strikes me as a bit condescending and selfish to keep something hidden from others simply because some may be irresponsible; behaving as some sort of on high gatekeeper. Also, if someone uses my geotag to locate an area and they behave irresponsibly, I in no way share blame or responsibility for the actions of others. Also, who am I or anyone else to impose my sense of "true adventure"? Personally, I love going on adventures. But there are times in which I want to go to a specific location and I don't want to go on an adventure to get there.
We can't control the behavior of others but that doesn't mean that others don't have as much of a right to visit public spaces as me or anyone else.
Bingo. Why should we assume the worst of everyone? Why should we assume 1) anyone would even go there after seeing the tag and 2) they would actually harm the land? The desire to share this beautiful planet with others should come before the tendency to assume the worst and "hide the sweet spots."
I don't see it as selfish, I found a location by doing my own research, and I have no doubt if I found it, other people will also. I don’t want to keep an area all to myself; I want other people to experience the beauty of any given location. I have found the more effort I have to put into finding a new location to explore, the more connected I become with that location. If people have to put in a lot of effort to find a location then 1) it will help keep the foot traffic down, which will help pressure the environment, and 2) people that put effort into finding the location will usually be a lot more respectful of the environment, and 3) if they are lucky, while they were researching this location, they also found two or three other places to explore, which will also help spread people out.
Personally, I get much of the same personal pleasure as you do in finding and exploring places, but projecting what you or I want onto others just seems a little, for lack of a better phrase, off putting. Deciding what is best for others comes across a bit arrogant in my opinion. Plus it doesn't take into account the fact that there may be those who for whatever reason aren't able to wander around the countryside looking for a particular place; they just want to go to a specific location.
It is not about deciding what is best for others but what is best for the environment. People are pigs and ALWAYS discard items rather than take it with them. A pristine condition that took decades or centuries to get can be destroyed by uncontroled heavy foot traffic alone.
All I'm suggesting is that we use general locations rather than specific ones, as mentioned in the article. And a caption could include positive LNT practices.
I get what you're suggesting. I would be on board with the LNT practices, but the obscuring of the location I'm not really on board with. I think your intentions are in the right place, but I just don't see how a photographer tagging the location is in any way responsible for knuckleheads that abuse the land.
Plus, what about those who may not be as physically fit for whatever reason and are not able to traipse around the country side in the hope that they may find a particular location?
Daniel, you're overlooking two important aspects of the whole equation: Firstly, if someone is disabled or not physically fit, and wishes to see a beautiful location that is very obscure but still within their reach somehow, there are PLENTY of ways for them to contact the right people, make a few new friends online, earn trust, and get to a location.
Secondly, regarding the not seeing how "photographers geotagging is in any way responsible for knuckleheads..." ...it's just a matter of statistics. Every photo that gets tagged, every thousand or ten thousand people that see that photo, ...there's going to be 1% or even just 0.1% of people who are reckless, disrespectful, or just self-absorbed and unwelcome in the outdoors.
So yeah, part of it is "you're not welcome here". But if they're the type of crowd who loudly parties in the wilderness with their beer and annoying electronic music, even though other people are trying to truly experience the wilderness just around the bend in the river, then I have no sympathy for them if they get frustrated about having to "work a little harder" (on the internet, from the comfort of their own homes, I might add) to find an exact spot.
Why? If it is so important to prevent others from visiting the same location, why did you go there? You probably stepped on wildflowers, insects and destroyed their habitat with your big old foot. Sorry, but this is just virtue signaling. "I can go and not disturb pristine locations, but others cannot be trusted". BS. Bad people will be bad regardless of where they are located and responsible people will be responsible.
This is not the point of the article, and a wild assumption to make. The point is to be better stewards of the land, and think twice before posting. Buy a guide book - no one is obligated to share a specific location to thousands of people on social media.
Why do you believe you are a better steward than someone else? I agree you make assumptions of others. No one said anyone was obligated. I just disagree with your big brother logic and I am not the only one. Too much virtue signaling going on.
There's nothing "condescending" or "gatekeeper" about it. The bottom line is that people put in the hard work to find a spot, and they don't owe anybody anything when it comes to sharing that location with strangers. The unfortunate truth is, YES, there are "bad apples" out there who ought to be slightly less able to find certain delicate locations.
So, yeah, go tag the heck out of places where other humans often go, where there's a decent infrastructure in place to accommodate the foot traffic. But when it comes to delicate hoodoos or high-value petroglyphs or flora/fauna, DO think twice before just putting GPS coordinates out there.
Also, at the same time, everybody should be earnestly working to ensure that the next generation is raised with more respect for the outdoors, and any location/property that isn't theirs, for that matter. With populations increasing everywhere, the %% of "bad apples" increases too. Which is why we need to work hard to educate our kids so that they don't turn into the next A-hole who goes ATV-ing across delicate soil, or defacing delicate rock art, starting fires where it's extremely risky, etc. etc.
All I know is, my parents raised me right, and I know there are way too many others out there who were NOT. So boo hoo, I'm not sharing exact details about every spot I go to...
"... there are "bad apples" out there who ought to be slightly less able to find certain delicate locations."
Yes, nothing gatekeeper about that.
I believe Galen Rowell called it "good stewardship".
Again, this is just a matter of a sense of entitlement VS an honest, earnest passion for conservation and stewardship. Just because I post a photo on the internet of somewhere I go, doesn't mean I owe the internet anything more than the picture itself. I captured the photo for the purpose of helping the general public realize that the places ought to be preserved, not necessarily trampled over by every epic-selfie-spot-seeking millennial.
Well put. Many are calling me something along the lines of entitled for this article, but I couldn't disagree more. I think they're misreading it. I'm simply suggesting second-thinking location sharing to thousands or even millions of people, for the good of the land that we take so much from.
you should join the "Let's reduce the population to 500 million squad" because your alludes lean in that direction. All the land for me and a special few, F-@#$ the rest.
How can you think that, Dana?
This is literally a matter of saying, "no, I'm not going to do an easy 10-20 minutes of internet research for you, and hand you something on a silver platter that you're not paying for and are asking of a complete stranger."
There is no "special few" here. There are just those who do the little bit of extra work to figure out something themselves, and those who are so lazy and selfish that they expect it to be handed to them, for free.
https://www.theringer.com/2016/11/3/16042448/instagram-geotagging-ruinin... A good article that explains the idea a little better. Not saying it will change your mind but its another way to look at things.
It doesn't change my opinion. It actually bolsters it. The headline itself is absurd; How Instagram is Destroying Our Natural Wonders. As if IG is responsible. I'm not sure how or why this approach ever gained traction, but IG is not responsible for destroying natural wonders. The people that treat the natural wonders without respect are responsible.
Compared to 30 years ago, there isn't a place around that doesn't have increased traffic; there are more people in higher concentrations. It's a matter of public policy being developed and implemented to address these issues.
Keeping locations secret is not the solution.
You're right, the social platform is not responsible, the people on the social platform are. But think - why is there increased traffic? People (myself included), advertising certain places to literally thousands of people through platforms like Instagram, Facebook, 500px, etc. are certainly a reason for increased traffic in certain places. Public policy is struggling to keep up. It's naive to believe that there's no correlation between the places we post about online and the amount of people that end up subsequently visiting them.
I understand that. But it's a band-aid fix that in the long run will fix nothing. It's not addressing the issue in a really meaningful way. Plus, it assumes that everyone is a bad apple.
Sometimes solutions to problems require real work. I know that keeping a place secret is easy and can make one feel as though they're actually part of a solution, but it's not a real solution. Plus, it's demeaning to those who behave responsibly.
Way too damn sensible Daniel... I hope you're wearing a spit shield.
Too easy to reverse image any IG photo and figure out the location
I'll be interested if you can determine the lat and long of the cover image of this article. He's given us the general location in the article.
It's in the Adirondacks, but not Marcy!
Where is the image from the cover photo taken, then?
"Too easy to reverse image any IG photo and figure out the location".
Sorry, but that really is up there as one of the most inane comments I've ever read. I could easily and quickly find a dozen (dozens, hundreds ...) of my landscape images and I'll guarantee you could not determine the location. If you think I'm wrong, answer Tim's question: where was the cover photo shot?
still wondering..?
The concern for the POTENTIAL negative impact on the places we tag is understandable and admirable. That being said, I think it is important that we DO tag the locations. More and more people are turning away from outdoor exploration and more towards gaming and online activities. If a person, who rarely gets out, sees a "rad photo" on IG and sees the location, and visits that spot...you may have just created a new outdoor enthusiasts. A person who starts to appreciate and respect the environment. Protected lands are under attack right now. We need land activists, not Instagram "stay away from from secret awesome spot" people.
I agree, somewhat. I think that you can tag a location: "Adirondacks," rather than a specific place: "Mt. Marcy." This is still promoting visitation to a place but not directly to one that could receive tons of traffic which potentially isn't healthy for the land.
Your point is flawed Tim, if you tagged the photo "Adirondacks" people could still potentially go there and drop litter. I completely agree with you John, geotagging is also a great way to plan a trip abroad where you simply might not have the time to go searching for specific spots. By using geotagging in the past, I've been able to fit more trips into my holiday because I know where I'm planning to go.
You're right, people can still go and potentially drop litter, or disrespect the land. But at least we can help mitigate the issue to some degree. If you want to plan a trip, by all means use social media, I certainly do. All I'm saying is think twice before sharing a specific location to thousands of people on social media. It's naive to believe that there's no correlation between the places we post about online and the amount of people that end up subsequently visiting them.
Nah, tagging spots isn't going to be what affects the couch potatoes who are stuck in their VR world.
Beautiful images in general ought to, and the vague reference to general locations should be more than enough.
For example, "Canyonlands is a breathtaking place!" ought to be more than enough; nobody needs to say, "OMG Mesa Arch is /the/ spot to check out!"
I agree, nice photo.
Nonsense.
Seriously?
So don't tell anyone where you made an image because they might go there and take one as well...maybe walk where they aren't supposed to...drop garbage etc??
How about just making more of an effort to educate people on why it's important to hold the environment in high regard?
Couldn't have said this more better.....
Your faith in this species is disturbing.
Walk to your local park. Pick an area that people regularly go. Plot a random 10mx10m square. Count the cigarette buts and trash.
You want that to happen to the spots they're too dumb or lazy to find on their own?
This may depend on where you live. Here in Japan, parks tend to be relatively spotless. I've never once had to pick up or remove trash from a photo. Think his point was that we can teach people to be better.
Dropping garbage and walking where one isn't supposed to is a huge concern in National and State Parks across the country. All I'm suggesting is not sharing specific locations, but keep in generalized. As to your last point, that's why I said in the article to try to include proper LNT practices and education in image captions.
Just No.