Ontario Abandoned Places

(But we're really an archive of ALL Canada's forgotten places)

Home

Forum

Search

User Search



New Category - Ontario Abandoned Places - Page 1
Ontario Abandoned Places Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

New Category

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
bigpaulsmall View Drop Down
Full Member (T)
Full Member (T)


Joined: 01 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 179
Post Options Post Options   Quote bigpaulsmall Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: New Category
    Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 9:30pm
Ok here goes my little rant. I have lots of "Crap" I could upload, sheds,  barns, streetviews. For every good location I post there are 2 or 3 "Fails" where I don't get inside. My first priority when I get onsite is to get inside. If I am successful, I shoot the inside, then on the way out I take exteriors and streetviews. If I can't get inside, I leave without taking a single picture. I hold myself to a higher  standard. I emulate phrenzee and doom, they are my idols, (ok Timo too).
I suggest a new category. Something like the "Other" category. We could call it the "No POE" category. Lots of people post streetview and long distance shots with no interiors (even full members). They could post them in this new category and after 30 days if there aren't any interiors then it gets deleted. If the location owner returns within 30 days and gets interior shots then they can move it to the appropriate city. If someone else bothers to get interiors, they can move it to the appropriate city and the original owner can keep the location. This is a quality site not a quantity site. Come on folks, let's get a little professionalism here.
phrenzee has the quote of the decade.
"If there are no interiors, it never happened"
Back to Top
f.o.s. View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 205
Post Options Post Options   Quote f.o.s. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 10:42pm
Originally posted by bigpaulsmall bigpaulsmall wrote:

If I can't get inside, I leave without taking a single picture.  


Really? A lot of times the place is demo'd before anyone else can see it, like loc 6220 which was gone just 3 months after doom and phrenzee went (after only getting exteriors). In that case, part of the draw and appeal was the lakeside location, and lowkeyimagedesign posted an interior gallery at a later date.

Then there are places which are way more interesting on the outside anyway due to retrofitting flubs.  I do get what you mean though, boring is boring, but not every place will be a gut wrenching thriller. I don't think it's anything to do with a lack of professionalism.
Back to Top
ground state View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member


Joined: 05 Apr 2012
Location: Niagara Falls
Status: Offline
Points: 371
Post Options Post Options   Quote ground state Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 11:04pm
I don't think you need me to say, "I know what you mean."
My Google Earth Myplaces.kml file currently has 46 thumb-tack placemarks coloured blue - that's the colour cold I use for 'cold'... as in, abandoned but awaiting POE. They cover the entire Niagara Peninsula. I'd love to post all 46 of those with the exterior shots I took, but that would just be idiotic and what purpose would it serve? To attract other explorers to the location to get interiors? Bullsh*t!!!!!! Leaving a place un-posted is far more beneficial for other explorers, particularly new ones, because it leaves the thrill of discovery open. I can't imagine anything worse than to have come on here a few years ago only to have found every abandoned place in my area already posted with a handful of "sidewalk shots". 

The problem, of course, is that some places simply do not require interiors to be very meaningful database inclusions - and then comes the inevitable impossibility of deciding where to draw the line between what is valid and what is not. So far, there has been no clear answer to that, despite numerous attempts. 



Back to Top
jerm IX View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member


Joined: 09 May 2013
Location: Somewhere, ON
Status: Offline
Points: 42
Post Options Post Options   Quote jerm IX Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Jun 2013 at 8:27am
This is an important issue to discuss IMO. One possible way to address it is to give location credit to the first person to post interiors of a location, even if it (exteriors) has been posted by another member. Exteriors only steal the true discovery from the explorer. Maybe exterior only galleries should be added if a location has been demoed so that it can be remembered. There are some members I won't even look at their locations because I know they are just exteriors ruining another fresh find. This is supposed to be about exploring after all not roadside photography. My grandma can take exteriors.

I could add countless locations in that manner but why ruin it for other explorers and water down our communal database just to claim location discoveries? No thanks. Ill earn mine.
Back to Top
f.o.s. View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 205
Post Options Post Options   Quote f.o.s. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Jun 2013 at 12:31pm
Originally posted by jerm IX jerm IX wrote:

One possible way to address it is to give location credit to the first person to post interiors of a location, even if it (exteriors) has been posted by another member.........I could add countless locations in that manner but why ruin it for other explorers and water down our communal database just to claim location discoveries? No thanks. Ill earn mine.


I think this is a slippery slope.  Having such a policy would no doubt be a tempting incentive for new members to break the "rules" and force entry at sealed locations just to gain "credit" to attain full membership.  We are forgetting that half the job is finding a place, scouting, researching, and then making the physical trip, taking the initial risk without any intel from a previous explorer.  This all should not be discounted as fluff and insignificant. It's a huge part of the "earning" part, unless you are lucky enough to have a crystal ball on the kitchen table. 

We've read comments here from members stating how difficult it can be to find new locations. Of course, it is still very possible, as evident by the plethora of new locations every month from seemingly desaturated areas.  I do agree that curbside photos from a car, without leaving a single footprint on the grounds, should not be counted as a location. 
Back to Top
Golson Moldon View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 211
Post Options Post Options   Quote Golson Moldon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Jun 2013 at 12:52pm
We've been down this road before.  This hobby is filled with different types of explorers.  Ones that will wait for a POE, ones that won't post interiors simply because they refuse to go in an abandoned building and ones that are content to post drive-by shootings.  It will never change.   I don't think a location should be based on Interiors alone, it should be based, as it is now, on the location quality combined with pictures.
Back to Top
doom vs View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member


Joined: 21 Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Quote doom vs Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Jun 2013 at 1:01pm
I agree with GM...sometimes an exterior is all you're gonna get.  Of course there's a difference between trying and just driving by.  What if the house is sealed but three outbuildings are not, chock full of goodness (the one on Trafalgar was a study in this until it was finally cracked)?  Is that a full explore?  Half explore?  It should be self-policed (and peer policed) and those who are mature and in it for the right reasons know what to post and when and why.  Hell I've posted ones that were sealed and then others have gotten in.  Good for them.  But chances are they would not have known of the spot had I not posted it initially. 
Back to Top
f.o.s. View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 205
Post Options Post Options   Quote f.o.s. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Jun 2013 at 4:29pm
One small thing, I believe the phrenzeeism bps was referring to is actually "Pics or it never happened" loc 3553 Ayr in response to a member who claimed to have gained entry but, ironically, described the interior as boring and not worth photographing.
Back to Top
jerm IX View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member


Joined: 09 May 2013
Location: Somewhere, ON
Status: Offline
Points: 42
Post Options Post Options   Quote jerm IX Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Jun 2013 at 10:09pm
Ya those are some good points. Maybe I'll add a handful of interesting places that I've been trying regularly but have yet to access interiors. Once some of these open, I'm convinced they will be quite special. Maybe someone else will surprise me and get in before me. ;)

My small gripe is with members that almost exclusively post roadside exteriors. But I've learned to just try to ignore those people's posts.
Back to Top
OAP View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 883
Post Options Post Options   Quote OAP Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Jun 2013 at 10:15pm
Ontario Abandoned Places meets the needs of a diverse audience.
 
Some of the members/visitors arrive here to look at the photos and have no intention to contribute. These lurkers may not necessarily be concerned if there are no interior photos.

Some of our members are unwilling or unable to enter properties and are content to photograph them only from the outside. One of our administrators is unable to spend a lot of time taking interiors for personal reasons that I won't go into.

We also have many Basic Access members that, if all locations were of super quality and Full Member, would not see any new content on the website at all as everything would be private.

While it can be frustrating to see exteriors only, keep in mind that there are 4000 or so other members that these locations can appeal to.

In addition (as someone has mentioned already) some of our 'idolistic members' have gained access to locations posted by others as exterior photo only locations -or- have posted exterior only locations and then others have gained entry.

At this point I think I've pretty much ironed out the criteria for locations as best as possible - basically if a location "poses interest" to others. I'm not willing to revisit defining the criteria any more than I already have. The offer still stands that if the community wants to develop a criteria of their own, it might be considered.

Members can filter out non-FM locations and can ascertain what locations are FM before clicking on them. I can understand the frustration, I feel it as well but if you want interior photos AND quality, filter out Basic Member status locations.

This isn't to say we don't have standards. Photos taken from a car, from a distance, Google map photos only, etc. are quickly removed. There must be some effort made to at least get out of your car and take a look around. Sometimes I'll find members post two or more consecutive locations that are nothing but exteriors. The general consensus on this is that one location once in a while is fine but I become grouchy when I see a whole slew of them in one shot and go on a deleting spree. I know it contradicts much of what I've just said.

I really don't want to create any more filters - at this point I think the community should try to establish a set of criteria if they so desire.

In addition there is also a 'report location' option for those that feel a location doesn't belong on the site.
Back to Top
riddimryder View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member
Avatar

Joined: 06 Feb 2012
Location: Brantford
Status: Offline
Points: 318
Post Options Post Options   Quote riddimryder Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Jun 2013 at 8:54am
Originally posted by f.o.s. f.o.s. wrote:

One small thing, I believe the phrenzeeism bps was referring to is actually "Pics or it never happened" loc 3553 Ayr in response to a member who claimed to have gained entry but, ironically, described the interior as boring and not worth photographing.
LOL.  That was me!  That place sucked bag but then again I prefer taking photos of interesting things, not just mediocre, semi-modern,non-decayed places.  Look at my photostream & maybe you'll understand why I don't take 75 photos of some beat old shack.

Day by day this site is becoming more of a competition.   Remember, these are mostly just farm houses....
Back to Top
f.o.s. View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 205
Post Options Post Options   Quote f.o.s. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Jun 2013 at 9:53pm
I, for one, didn't find that location mediocre or uninteresting at all.  This site caters to many different tastes, and is not a harbor for elitism.  While some may feel entitled to put others down while beating their own chest, it is a disrespectful way to go about stating one's opinion. and not very gentlemanly I might add. 
Back to Top
OAP View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 883
Post Options Post Options   Quote OAP Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Jun 2013 at 9:57pm
There's no harm in raising the bar on location quality and photography quality.

HOWEVER people should not lose sight of the fact that there will always be other people with a lower skillset in photography as well as those that aren't comfortable entering buildings.

When we attempt to raise the bar for everyone because it fits our own needs and wants, then it begins to exclude other people and that's not what this website is about. We're a community and a community open to everyone.

People didn't like barns, we excluded barns. People didn't like shacks, we removed shacks. People wanted change, I implemented a criteria to be followed for location creation. As for exterior only photos, as long as they pose interest to others (your content motivates people to want to visit) they will be accepted.

BPS has a good idea but I don't feel it's come to the point we need to divert exterior only locations to another area. Search criteria and filtering is a practical solution. 
Back to Top
jerm IX View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member


Joined: 09 May 2013
Location: Somewhere, ON
Status: Offline
Points: 42
Post Options Post Options   Quote jerm IX Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Jun 2013 at 10:19pm
I don't think anyone is being disrespectful or chest beating. This is a healthy discussion and sharing of opinions.
I for one have gained a better understanding and respect for others through this thread and the comments made.
Back to Top
ground state View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member


Joined: 05 Apr 2012
Location: Niagara Falls
Status: Offline
Points: 371
Post Options Post Options   Quote ground state Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Jun 2013 at 10:37pm
Originally posted by riddimryder riddimryder wrote:

becoming more of a competition.


But on the other hand, I think OAP has created a vibrant community here where we exponentially feed into each others' excitement for exploring. And with that success comes the inevitable greater volume and faster flow of new locations. When I post new places and write extensive comments, I'm hoping to genuinely interest the viewer, as much as I get interested with everyone's posts. I would never think about it as competing and I, for one, hope I have never come across that way, RR!


Back to Top
lowkeyimagedesign View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member


Joined: 08 Apr 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 24
Post Options Post Options   Quote lowkeyimagedesign Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Jun 2013 at 10:49pm
I for one would add exterior photos because there is no poe. I am not risking b&e, vandalism, mischief, among other charges just for photos. I feel as if I visit a location and am unable to enter it can be explored by another member. I work ~80 hours a week I have a life outside of exploring and photography there are members who don't have the time to explore the same location multiple times. There are a number of houses I know of but they do not have poe simply because of the location they are in with little vandalism and low crime so the houses that are boarded stay that way for quite some time, its good to see if there is any activity at a location based on pictures from members. 

to add to the "They could post them in this new category and after 30 days if there aren't any interiors then it gets deleted." I feel that would promote damage to the said location just to get inside. On the other hand, where do you draw the line on "interior" thru a window, hole in the wall, or other type of "peak inside" would that count? there are close neighbors to some of these locations and chances are they are watched by them so someone will notice if something is out of place is it worth risking a rude interruption by the police just for some photos.

As it has been said before everyone has a different skill set when it comes to this activity. we are all here for a common goal, exploration - I do agree sidewalk shots and drive by are not ok, at least cover all four (or more) sides of the building, as f.o.s said earlier places get torn down and might not ever get inside. I for one got super lucky to enter "view from here" shortly after my visit it was torn down I had planned on visiting the location again to view the basement which was flooded at the time but did not get a chance am disappointed at it but life goes on. 



Back to Top
f.o.s. View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 205
Post Options Post Options   Quote f.o.s. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Jun 2013 at 10:56pm
Originally posted by jerm IX jerm IX wrote:

I don't think anyone is being disrespectful or chest beating. This is a healthy discussion and sharing of opinions.
I for one have gained a better understanding and respect for others through this thread and the comments made.


When someone says a location "sucked bag" and then further invites the reader to view their photostream instead, that is unquestionably disrespectful to the person who posted the location, not a friendly statement of one's opinion.
Back to Top
ground state View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member


Joined: 05 Apr 2012
Location: Niagara Falls
Status: Offline
Points: 371
Post Options Post Options   Quote ground state Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Jun 2013 at 11:01pm
Originally posted by lowkeyimagedesign lowkeyimagedesign wrote:

I for one would add exterior photos because there is no poe. I am not risking b&e, vandalism, mischief, among other charges just for photos. I feel as if I visit a location and am unable to enter it can be explored by another member. I work ~80 hours a week I have a life outside of exploring and photography


Yes, see.... I get all crotchety about the 'no interiors' thing as time goes on, but then I read a statement like yours above and it immediately sets me right back into reality. You're so right. Everyone explores in their own way and at their own comfort level, and who are we to assume reasons. I have to submit a declaration of 'free from criminal charges' annually for my job. I know trespassing is a misdemeanor, but all it would take is some cop out to save the world to decide to take it a step further and charge me with criminal B&E and I'd be screwed. Well... my KIDS would be screwed!!!! So I get exactly what you're saying.


Back to Top
Golson Moldon View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 211
Post Options Post Options   Quote Golson Moldon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jun 2013 at 9:16am
Here is a prime example of what could happen to a building with no interiors.  Oddly enough, G.S. commented on it saying it was a beautiful building:
 
 
I drove by it last week to see if the building was there  and maybe find a POE, as I said it was sold.  To my amazement, the property, barn and yes the house are under full restoration! 
 
Nice to see that yes, sometimes what we see as decay, others see as potential.
Back to Top
ground state View Drop Down
Full Member
Full Member


Joined: 05 Apr 2012
Location: Niagara Falls
Status: Offline
Points: 371
Post Options Post Options   Quote ground state Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jun 2013 at 2:07pm
Originally posted by Golson Moldon Golson Moldon wrote:

Oddly enough, G.S. commented on it saying it was a beautiful building


I don't think that was odd! - the house was fantastic and obviously very old and you took the time to stroll around and take some high quality and well planned shots of it. Now THAT location was a key example of a house that should obviously be in the database, interior shots or not.

Amazing that it is being restored. Hopefully that means that it has very significant historic value.


Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.