Use of generic images from an era

What do people think of the use of "generic images from an era" as profile pictures?

See http://www.geni.com/family-tree/index/6000000006915869077

None of the images in that area are actual images of the people shown.

For example, the image at ASHER MEYER NIKKELSBURG is actually a portrait of Moritz Oppenheim, Germany, 1800-1882 - see http://www.imj.org.il/imagine/irso/item.asp?table=comb&itemNum=...

The About on that profile does say: "The photo is generic - not an actual portrait - but a contemporary painting of the period!"

I can understand a generic image maybe of the country or place or type of building where a person lived - but I feel uncomfortable seeing the portrait of Person A as the profile picture of Person B who is someone completely different.

What do others think?

The other images in the area include:

PAPA MICHIEL

MAMA MICHIEL

Marcus Meyer NIKKELSBURG

ESTER MEYER NIKKELSBURG

PHABO/FIJTE MEYERS (Cohen)

GERRIT G COHEN

JUDITH COHEN (MOZES)

- and there are more.

I totally agree that if the profile picture depicts a person, in either photographic or painting form, it should absolutely be that person and not someone else. Even with the disclaimer in the "about me" section there has to be a better alternative than doing it the way that it is currently done in this case.

Private User

Send me the URL. The woman who did this has not been on since 2008 so I'll just get rid of them and redo the about

Mike Stangel

There is a photo of Stephen Dodd, II

He died before photography but he and 5 other people older tan him are in a photograph
at http://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000003099910119?album_type=photo...

I removed the link to them from the photograph but the picture remains

I can not delete the photo. Can you please do it?

Mike Stangel

The issue that Marvin Caulk, Volunteer Curator raised re Stephen Dodd, II is the subject of ticket #17289 that I have raised with Geni CS.

The tagged people were I believe all correct - including the correct Stephen profile Stephen Dodd, II (1703-1764). All the tags were correct - but the profile picture still showed on the wrong Stephen.

Randy Stebbing and Marvin Caulk, Volunteer Curator

Thank you for your comments re those photos from an era.

There are some more:

PAPA COHEN

MAMA COHEN

ROSE GREEN (MYERS)

EVA LEVY GREEN (Pruikemacher) - and all her ancestors - I haven't listed them all individually

EPHRAIM LEVY GREEN - and all his ancestors - I haven't listed them all individually

Also I would appreciate an opinion on:

PAPA MOZES

MAMA MOZES

I put those two in a slightly different category - maybe?

[AND THOSE PROFILE NAMES ALL REALLY "SHOUT" AT YOU!]

FYI this is a duplicate tree which I found even though the Geni "match" algorithm didn't.

These two are the same:

Marcus Meyer NIKKELSBURG

Marcus Meyer Nikkelsburg

plus consequential merges in the area. But I have held off the merges till the images were sorted.

Before starting this discussion, I tried to find a "guideline" on Geni for what is or is not an appropriate profile image. I searched help and wiki and didn't find. I found how to upload a photo and tag it, but no guidance on what is or is not appropriate to upload and tag.

Is there such a guideline? If so, please can it be posted on the front page of this project (with a link)? If not, perhaps we can use a new discussion in this project to formulate one collaboratively?

David, I don't believe there is any "official" guidance. Let's use this discussion topic to come up with some suggested best practices which we can then place on the "description" of this project.

Here is an initial draft...

Best Practices for Image Use:

The following are guidelines to help determine best practices for profile pictures.

1) If possible include a photograph of the person.

You should upload pictures that you have taken yourself, or where you have permission from the photographer who took the picture. Or you should be reasonably sure that the photograph is in the public domain.

2) Because the main profile picture is also used in the tree view it is suggested that the picture be a "head and shoulder" shot and not the full "foot to shoulder" framed shot of the person.

3) For the main profile picture individual photos are preferred to group photos.

4) For profiles that pre-date photography a painted portrait of the person if one exists works well. Make sure the painting was done contemporaneously with the person depicted and not merely an "artistic" interpretation of a random person from that historic time period. A photograph of a sculpture of the person can also be used if one exists.

5) In all cases please include an attribution giving credit to the photographer or artist that generated the original image used for the profile picture.

6) In many cases a photograph, painting or sculpture do not exist. In those cases there are many other suitable alternatives including:

Cemetery Gravestone
Picture of the person's residence.
Picture of the person's signature.
Picture of an actual personal belonging that the person used.
Picture of a primary source document that includes vital information about the person like a birth or death certificate.
Picture of an "historical marker" relating to the profile.
Picture of the person on coin, currency or a stamp.
Picture of the Cemetery (only used if the person doesn't have a headstone).
Picture of the ship or sailing vessel used by an immigrant ancestor.
Picture of a geni project image. Projects categorize individuals based on a research criteria. Some projects will use a custom project "Icon" or "image" for all profiles that don't yet have a better image available for them.

Private User
We did have a discussion on them at one time, I will look to see if I can find it.

In gerneral, pictures considered in poor taste are pictures of persons lying at a traffic accident or an open casket.

Anything of a sexual nature ect that you would not want your children to see

Pictures taken out of a movie or DVD

The ones I removed were not really wrong but misleading and if reused could cause mis-merging, An example would be if you used a pictur of a Crown on every profile in a line, it would be very confusing.

In a picture like the one at MAMA MOZES it isn't rally wrong and not confusing enough for me to remove it. I was recommeded that in a pic like that one that ther be a note placcd in the pic, that would Identify it as not a drawing of a real event.

I will look for the other discussion and if I don't find it maybe someone else reading this remembers were it is.

You say the tag was right but they did not have photography in the 1700's or did I misunderstand?

Fred Bergman (dutch curator)

This seems to be dutch profiles. Yo may need to contact them.

I think there was a previous public discussion on appropriate profile images that led to this project being created.

Re the tags - Marvin - the tags weren't to people in 1700s - they were to the family of the private profile Stephen

BUT: a picture also showed incorrectly on another 1700s profile as well. And still does. That was and still is my help ticket issue.

Stephen Dodd, II

Removing the valid tags hasn't solved the problem with that incorrect profile picture.

Re Randy's initial draft - thank you!:

2) and 3) - I would mention that once loaded, such pictures should be resized in tree view to headshots.

4) Note that ALL of the Biblical images on Geni would fall foul of "Make sure the painting was done contemporaneously with the person depicted"! I think a famous artist's impression of a historic figure may be used even if not contemporaneous.

I would allow portraits even if photos also exist - but not as main profile photo. eg I would expect Queen Elizabeth II to have a profile picture that is an actual photo, but she may have additional pictures that are portraits.

Under 6) some more might include:
- An image that depicts a particular event. Some wish to use particular images that depict what happened to Holocaust victims for example.
- A work by the person eg a book cover
- A commemoration plaque for the person - for example many Holocaust victims don't have gravestones and these are "in lieu". That might be included in "historical marker".

Again I would allow all of 6) as profile pictures even if something "better" exists, but the better should be the main profile picture.

I tend to be against using pictures of actors playing characters. Except in the fictional tree. Otherwise how do you depict Harry Potter?

What about using flag of country? Sometimes that falls foul of Marvin's "if you used a picture of a Crown on every profile in a line, it would be very confusing"

What about an image that is really text and says for example "died young"?

FYI - The photo for MAMA MOZES is at http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/loc/Glimpse.html where it is seen to come from "Minhagim (Customs), published by Solomon Proops, Amsterdam, 1707"

This kind of image doesn't bother me. It is stylized and I learn something from it, nor is it misleading. If clearly labeled it would be appropriate to me.