ShipSpotting.com Forum

Shipspotters all over the world => Site related news, functions and modules => Topic started by: dirk septer on August 23, 2019, 03:33:28 pm



Title: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: dirk septer on August 23, 2019, 03:33:28 pm
Why are ancient motor vessels under 20 m like Wanderer:

http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=2100604

deleted?

Is it not time to add a new category "Classic wooden yachts" with
no under 20 m restrictions?

The photographs of my beautifully restored classic wooden yacht ORBA
(built 1927 by Lake Union Dry Dock) were yesterday deleted because of
this under 20 m restriction.

While maintaining literally hundreds of photographs of these boring,
huge floating condos (aka cruise ships), why restricting these few
rare surviving and lovely restored and maintained wooden beauties?

Anybody else in favour of adding a "Classic wooden yacht" category?




Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: Emmanuel.L on August 23, 2019, 07:06:24 pm
Yes Dirk, I am for your suggestion for this new category. Incidentally what is the category "examples" doing here ?,rather occupying a place for a better one like Dirk is suggesting. Can someone explain what this "examples" is?
regards
Emmanuel.l.(Malta)


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: Michael Wirth on August 23, 2019, 09:06:31 pm
This leads me to a general question I'm asking myself for some time now:

Is this site still developed further?
Is there anything planned, 'in the pipeline'?

With all respect - it looks and acts like such a site did more than ten years ago.

Here is much room for improvement in many ways - more categories is only one.

This site has truly a great community and database of pictures and knowledge - unparalleled as far as I know.

But technically it looks - neglected I am tempted to say.


Best regards,

Michael.


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: Marc Pingoud on August 23, 2019, 09:51:45 pm
Michael Wirth, you speak from my heart!
I have heard a lot about problems with updated ship data, the links to IMO, MMSi, ENI and their tracking. The platform shipspotting.com is ingenious and offers a wide range of possibilities - but only those that are finicky defined, regulated and interpreted...

Maybe some of you know my discussions about " atmospheric pictures "...
Open up - Give special pictures a chance and above all: Focus on the quality!
Michael - I often think the same - how long will the site survive in the status quo?
The development goes gigantic fast!


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: dirk septer on August 24, 2019, 01:47:59 pm
What gets me, that after all these years Shipspotting still cannot provide a vessel-specific photo search. For example, if I want to find my photos of Melinchenko's super yacht "A", I will have to scroll through 236,859 photographs.
Then you have to go to Advanced Search; and spend more time scrolling through the long list of photographers.

Also, the Vessel Identification information is incomplete, inaccurate and way out of date (sometimes up to many years). Is there no way this can be corrected? And it also looks so unprofessional, as if entered by a three-year-old: a mixture of upper and lower case letters; just looks so amateurish....


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: simonwp on August 24, 2019, 03:13:46 pm
In many ways the site is a victim of it's own success, it's seen as the premier ship photograph site. But that brings it's own problems, in that it's run by volunteers who give what time they can to keeping the site going. Perhaps if a few of the moaners volunteered to act as an admin for example, or undertake specifiying upgrades. Just a few more could make a big difference.

Also the site is free....information costs, so those wanting updated ship information need to consider this. Would you be prepared to pay for that information????? Even Miramar, which is run by amateurs charges a subscription. Equasis and others are professional bodies, they make there money selling information. Yes, they make some basic information available free, but anything else costs.


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: Michael Wirth on August 25, 2019, 08:53:19 am
I didn't mean the work of the volunteers - I appreciate their work wery much (and by the way would be willing to volunteer myself if needed).

What I mean is the lets say technical side - an as far as I know this is not in the hands of volunteers.

Most of the problems mentioned above and in other discussions related to this are out of reach for volunteer admins - correct me if I'm wrong.

And by the way - this site shows ads - so of course someone is making money with the pictures we provide. Which is OK, don't get me wrong. Hosting and administration costs money. And in the legal jungle of today (at least in my country) I am very reluctant hosting content myself.

So the question was not: what more can the admins do? but What is planned for the development of the site in general - is there anything planned regarding development?


Best regards,

Michael.



Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: simonwp on August 25, 2019, 10:09:54 am
You are wrong with regards the ship information. The previous (free) provider ceased operating, that was nothing to do with the technical side.

Finding an alternative is a volunteer role, one which for many understandable reasons they have been unable to move forward as yet. the only technical involvement is an alternative provider was found would be creating the link.

As far as I'm aware no money is being made from this site, the ads cover the costs of the existing technical side.


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: DEREK SANDS on August 25, 2019, 10:11:45 am
In all my time as Webmaster on this site, it has slowly ground to a halt on the technical side. Once it was purchased by Andre Brandao it started of with much progress and went to a better platform. However that is when the site could no longer be individually developed and all software enhancements went to the "site manager" Henrik appointed by Andre. A deal with gross tonnage saw much information become available until Gross tonnage folded. That was how the present situation with out of date information happened.
Despite hoping to get a replacement database this has never materialised as they really don't exist unless you pay up front. The photographer therefore would have to upload any information himself for the benefit of others or link it to Equasis at the least. Volunteer admins would have a very difficult and time consuming task if they added much info themselves. The site has not developed as Andre no doubt wished, as I am sure he would have liked to finance it from sales of Shiptrax rather than adverts on the site (some rather dubious). His Airnav site for Plane enthusiasts I am sure sells enough of his tracking equipment/ software to finance it and make a small profit even though he has more staff ? There will be no more development of Shipspotting.com unless it is either sold off or Andre manages to develop an income stream to help upgrade it. I believe the tech man is just doing the bare minimum to keep the site on line and is not solely working for Andre who probably pays him a small retainer. Good luck to the current Webmaster and admins you have an unenviable task. Which I am glad is no longer mine

best regards
Derek


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: Michael Wirth on August 25, 2019, 10:17:17 am
Thank you very much Derek for shedding some light on this.

I was aware of the problem with grosstonnage.com going offline but not of the other things.

This answers my question.


Best regards,

Michael.


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: pieter melissen on August 25, 2019, 08:29:49 pm
"What gets me, that after all these years Shipspotting still cannot provide a vessel-specific photo search".

This quote from Dirk Septer shows that the working of the site is not known to everybody.
so if you want to see your pictures of A, you make an advanced search for A, you will find 292 photographs, of two different ships, and after some scrolling you will find the A you were referring to,

http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=2665278

 then you click on the summary page for that ship and you will get a list of all photographers who have submitted a shot of A. Dirk Septer has provided three shots.


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: dirk septer on August 25, 2019, 09:35:46 pm
First of all, to web masters like Ken Smith and Derek Sands, and all volunteer editors a big "thank you" for the great work they have done and are doing. They certainly do not get enough credit for this from the many members of Shipspotting.

Having said that, however, there always is room for improvement. I still fail to understand that the photo search cannot be made vessel name specific. For a simple vessel name search I should not have to go to the more time consuming advanced search. For example, if there are less than 300 photos of motor yacht "A," why does the system have to bring up hundreds of thousands photos? In this age of modern technology, this should not be necessary.

If already so much time is being spend on the quality of the photographs, it would be nice if the vessel information could also be more accurate and up to date. Or if it would be possible to edit this info, allowing to make corrections, updates and additions..... Only wishful thinking, I'm afraid...


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: pieter melissen on August 26, 2019, 06:55:25 am
First of all, to web masters like Ken Smith and Derek Sands, and all volunteer editors a big "thank you" for the great work they have done and are doing. They certainly do not get enough credit for this from the many members of Shipspotting.

Having said that, however, there always is room for improvement. I still fail to understand that the photo search cannot be made vessel name specific. For a simple vessel name search I should not have to go to the more time consuming advanced search. For example, if there are less than 300 photos of motor yacht "A," why does the system have to bring up hundreds of thousands photos? In this age of modern technology, this should not be necessary.

If already so much time is being spend on the quality of the photographs, it would be nice if the vessel information could also be more accurate and up to date. Or if it would be possible to edit this info, allowing to make corrections, updates and additions..... Only wishful thinking, I'm afraid...

Dirk, if you use advanced search and make sure that the EXACT name of the ship is searched for, typing A in the name box, gives you immmediately 292 photos. As there seems to be newbuilding also named A, the ship you are looking for is the 10th photograph, and once you have found that you can use the summary table to get all the info available. Furthermore you only have to fill in the name box in the advanced search system ,all the other fields you do not have to worry about. I cannot think of a quicker search system.

Regarding the ship data, As Derek Sands already explained, the data supplier, Gross Tonnage has folded and the existing data (that remained available after the demise of GT) get more and more obsolete over time. There is no way that anybody in the admin team can access those data and maintain them. So you have to look for outside data if you want to know more of a ship. Equasis for current vessels and Miramar (for the ridiculously low cost of 20 US# per year) if you are interested in more historic stuff.  

The site now is what it is, decisive progress is unlikely to happen anytime soon, but still it is probably the best free source of high quality pictures anywhere in the world. Now you/we can moan about its deficiencies, but as I explained above, some of those complaints are unjustified, and others we simply have to live with. I can but can you?  


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: DEREK SANDS on August 26, 2019, 06:59:35 am
Well put Pieter :)

If only data could be added but with no admin access allowed its a vain hope at present.


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: davidships on August 26, 2019, 04:20:03 pm
Thanks to Derek and current colleagues for clarifying the present situation.

It is indeed my understanding that we are effectively linked to a static version of of grosstonnnage database at its "closing point", and that have been told that this is non-editable.  

For ship searches, if there is an IMO number, there is no difficulty using the simple search either by entering the number or (if not known), clicking "more of: this ship".  If you only want one specific name that ship carried, then entering that name and the IMO number in advanced search is the simplest way.

(By the way, many database search engines cannot cope with one- or two-character names, but at least ours does that OK)  

It would nice to be able to link to an individual ship entry on Equasis, but that seems to be impossible because it requires individual (free) registration to view (it has also defeated the clever tech minds at Wikipedia).  Incidentally, Equasis is not, a suggested below, a commercial organisation selling information - it makes freely available information, relevant to its objectives in ship safety provided to it from a range of established sources (including IHS-Seaweb, Class societies, maritime administrations, P&I clubs etc) and is funded by the European Union plus five national governments.
http://www.equasis.org/EquasisWeb/public/About?fs=ShipInfo (http://www.equasis.org/EquasisWeb/public/About?fs=ShipInfo)
http://equasis.org/EquasisWeb/public/About?fs=About&P_ABOUT=Providers.html (http://equasis.org/EquasisWeb/public/About?fs=About&P_ABOUT=Providers.html)


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: pieter melissen on August 26, 2019, 04:53:58 pm
The disadvantage of Equasis is that it does not deal properly with older ships, Miramar does that much better, and while their modern stuff might not be totally up to date, especially about the owner's info, it is most of times good enough for shipspotters as we are. My ideal Shipspotting world would be where this site can serve to illustrate the Miramar data set. i know that there have been contacts with Miramar regarding this subject, but I don't know how or if the negotiaitons ended.

In the mean time, I have been approached as a WSS member whether I would be interested in supplying the Markit photographic database. I suppose I am not the only one. Markit is offering a silver package in exchange. Who has access to this database?


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: davidships on August 26, 2019, 05:47:18 pm
Thanks Pieter

IHS Markit = Sea-web


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: DEREK SANDS on August 26, 2019, 08:15:29 pm
Yes I have been approached as well via the WSS for photos in exchange for access to information.
I am considering it but at present I find little time for research so have not bothered to contact them


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: Bob Scott on August 26, 2019, 10:26:13 pm
IHS Markit is the successor to Lloyd's Register-Fairplay (LRF)


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: Phil English on August 27, 2019, 12:12:53 pm
What I'd recommend to all:
1) Learn how to use the site properly
2) Take on board what the webmasters and admins write (quite frequently) on these forums regarding the site's technical and data shortcomings

Thankfully, most of us do and can live with it!

Brgds



Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: dirk septer on August 27, 2019, 01:06:04 pm
Meanwhile we all got sidetracked from my original question why the photographs of my classic wooden vessel ORBA were deleted:

Why are ancient motor vessels under 20 m like Wanderer:

http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=2100604

deleted?

Is it not time to add a new category "Classic wooden yachts" with
no under 20 m restrictions?

The photographs of my beautifully restored classic wooden yacht ORBA
(built 1927 by Lake Union Dry Dock) were yesterday deleted because of
this under 20 m restriction.

While maintaining literally hundreds of photographs of these boring,
huge floating condos (aka cruise ships), why restricting these few
rare surviving and lovely restored and maintained wooden beauties?


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: Kyle Stubbs on August 27, 2019, 01:46:00 pm
Yachts under 20m are not accepted. That's about the only clear line that can be drawn in regard to that form of vessel.

The term "classic" in itself is subjective. Is a wooden yacht from the 1970's classic? How about a fiberglass one from the 1950's? Or, what about that brand new yacht that's built from the plans of a vintage yacht from the 1930's?

The only way to establish a clear line, where we won't continue to bicker over our "feelings towards the matter" is to enforce a hard line based on a fixed trait of the vessels in question, which is already established. Regardless of age, if it is a yacht 20m or over it's fair game, if it's under 20m, don't post it.

If the yacht is under 20m, but was once a commercial vessel of a type allowed regardless of size, a fishing boat rebuilt as a yacht for example, I'm fine with a sort of exemption. Otherwise, once a yacht, always a yacht. "Historical status" is too subjective.

That's my opinion.


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: andrecas on August 27, 2019, 02:34:05 pm
Dirk's 3 photos of "Wanderer" uploaded 8/20/14 are in the AMV category.
According to description, the vessel measures: 17.07 X 4.08 X 2.23 m.
For those rarities under 20 m, regardless of category, include a "one of a kind/only photo on site" rule...?


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: dirk septer on August 29, 2019, 04:28:29 pm




I am not talking about a wooden yacht from the 1970s, nor a fibreglass one from the 1950s.... What is the cut off year for the current "Ancient Motor Vessels"  anyway?

What is the problem for a separate new category "classic wooden vessels 50 years or older?"


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: davidships on August 29, 2019, 09:51:30 pm
Just to note that I am letting this thread run for a little longer (on the ancient motor vessels subject only please) so that additional members can contribute - then it will be reviewed by Admin colleagues.

I can confirm that no specific definition of "ancient" is being applied as a matter of agreed policy (neither is there any FAQ on this category), and I know nothing of what may have been intended when the category was invented in the first place.  Any information on that from long-standing members would be welcome.  For me "ancient" is not the same as "old". But in any case I agree that there should be some specific guidance on what may be included.


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: Kyle Stubbs on August 30, 2019, 01:06:47 am
Dirk,

You may not be talking about a wooden yacht from the 1970's now, but in 5 short months your proposed category would start to include them! Around my parts, Seattle, wooden Chris Craft older than that are so worthless they are being used as homeless encampments (not joking, it was in the news last week). I've seen photos showing the same story up in your waters.

And why is a wooden vessel any more interesting than a steel or fiberglass one? No other category on the site is dependent on the material of construction, so why should this one be? In my opinion, the fiberglass yachts of the 1950's can be works of art, featuring car-inspired fins and other jet age extravagance. In comparison, 1950's wooden yachts are stodgy and hardly different from those of the 1940's or 1960's.

And that's exactly the point I was trying to make, interest in small vessels is incredibly arbitrary. Would you consider one of those moldy Chris Craft I mentioned above as interesting now as you would have considered a 1930's wooden yacht 20 years ago? Remember, even harder than judging interest by age is judging interest by condition, so a category open to nicely restored vessels would be equally open to those in a near-wreck state.

I'm not saying we shouldn't look at changing the category allowances in favor of smaller older vessels. But "opening up" some category that is already a dumping grounds of sort, like the ill-defined Ancient Motor Vessels, or adding some category with no lower boundary don't seem like wise options.

Perhaps expanding Motor Yachts into two parts would be a better solution. For example a " Motor Yachts Newer than 50 years (20 m and over)" category alongside a "Motor Yachts Older than 50 years (12 m and over)" category. That sort of compromise could expand the interesting vessels that are added, as well as weed out the potentially "over-abundant" forms of debatable-classic vessels no one would probably look at.

As for the Ancient Motor Vessels category itself, perhaps it would best be served as a home to working vessels converted to yachts, retired working vessels, or something of that sort. Apart from old yachts, which by site guidelines should be in the yachts category, that seems to be the primary focus, anyways.


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: Michael Wirth on August 30, 2019, 06:28:14 am
First of all: sorry for sidetracking the discussion, but I always wanted to ask these questions Derek answered (thanks again!) and I thought they might be not completely off-topic here.

I agree with David, ancient is not the same as old.

As a historian by education, ancient for me is at the beginning so to speak - ancient history relates to the beginnigs of our present culture and civilization.

But 'ancient' today also connotates outdatet, not longer in use.

I can only speculate, what the inventors of this category had in mind, but I wouldn't put pictures of yachts there (as said before).

I would use it perhaps as a category for early motor vessels as a counterpart to "Steamships, operating and preserved".

And I agree with David - some guidlines and examples would be helpful.

One last question: can admins create new categories? Or who else can do this?


Best regards,

Michael.


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: Phil English on September 02, 2019, 11:29:14 am
This thread is simply highlighting that the "ancient motor vessels" category, with its lack of definition and guidance, is being used as a dumping ground for photos of vessels which would otherwise not be accepted on this site. I'm not sure what the category was originally intended for, it's always been a curious outlier.

Just my opinion.

Brgds


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: DEREK SANDS on September 02, 2019, 02:48:28 pm
The category "Ancient Motor vessels migrated from the old site with no alteration.
Basically no one knew really what to do with its Title or in some cases its contents.
From what I remember it was tidied up a bit and then left in situ.

Maybe Dirk would like to take it on and introduce some order to it. It deserves a better and more accurate title thats for sure. However that what would seem simple to amend was not, any ideas ?

brdgs
Derek


Title: Re: Deletion of Ancient Motor Vessels under 20 m
Post by: davidships on September 03, 2019, 05:10:43 pm
Thank you all for your comments and views.
I have asked my Admin colleagues to review this discussion and to give consideration to how toake this forward.  I will come back to this thread in due course.

Just for info, we are able to alter titles of existing categories, and to create new categories if necessary.  We are able to move photos from one category to another.  The only thing we cannot do is to delete a category while it still contains images (this protects the interests of members - photos can only be deleted as part of the normal deletions process which considers individual photos against the site standards). And we can of course also add or revise FAQ/Guidance relating to individual categories.

Also for information, the Ancient Motor Vessels category (together with "Steam Ships (Operating and Preserved)" and "Museum Ships") is currently without a Category Admin.  Such position requires only a committment to review all new uploads to the category in a reasonably timely manner to confirm that they are in the right place (and moving if necessary) and compliant with General/Category Site Standards (and submitting to "Considered for Deletion" where appropriate).  A general interest in this type of vessel, and a willingness to review existing content, would also be welcome.  If any member would like to take this on, please contact me direct by PM or, preferable by email at webmaster@shipspotting.com .

This thread is not closed and further comments will still be taken into account.