GSV: "Inside This Place" replaces See Inside5666
Pages:
1
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
 https://twitter.com/sergey_alakov/status/923727926817894400 While it does not appear to be as direct as the 'See Inside' images that were front and center and immediately identified the presence of a Google Street View tour for any Google Place with one -- this is moving in the right direction for sure. Looks like this may roll out fully by the time Matterport launch GSV, which is a VERY good thing for the MSPs who are interesed in marketing GSV. The lack of a clear 'entry point' for GSV has been a pain point for marketing and explaining to customers what they have purchased. The creation of a clearly labelled area for tours to appear in restores value to GSV as a product. -- This is a developing story and I saw it on Facebook after @TrustedPhotoDC posted it. |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
 WGAN ForumFounder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Metroplex360 Thanks for sharing this ... I wonder if to be included "Inside this place" that the content has to be "owned" by the "place"? We do not want to give up our copyright or ownership of our content and want We Get Around to be credited as the source - not Matterport. How do you think this will play out? How do do you think it should play out? Dan |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DanSmigrod I recently had a wonderful conversation with Tom Chomiak @LCP360 and we discussed several things concerning Matterport GSV integration related to PanoSkin as a supplemental tool for refining and enhancing Matterport related content (adding 360 Views content, refining connections, applying a Nadir and Zenith, blurring, etc.) One of the struggles would be if all Matterport GSV tours are published AS Matterport. While I took the stance that I really didn't care initially (with the former attribution system), after seeing the Local Guides program develop and recognizing the need for ownership for editing purposes and customer service, I changed stances quickly. Cutting to the point - Tom revealed to me that Google has throttling limits in place that his company has encountered with their clients. If one account is posting a MASSIVE amount of content, it will be rate limited (blocked). Google can raise the cap for uploads, but this demonstrates that Google is sensitive to allow one user to flood their systems. I imagine they have an interest in keeping content attributed with its photographer for moderation. In addition to this, the Local Guides setup for reviewing contributions is already inefficient for most of us GSV photographers as reviewing contributions takes place in a very narrow column and takes a long time to scroll through. Search is not implemented and I would imagine that Google would need to build special software infrastructure to allow a single account to be responsible for tens of thousands of tours. Thus, it is my belief that our content WILL be credited to us and that Matterport WILL integrate Google Authentication in order to do this. If Matterport would like to co-brand their tours, it is possible that they may add attribution as a sub-label or force a nadir patch, but I don't really see that happening. I don't see brand recognition on GSV tours being a necessary path for them. |
||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Metroplex360 I hope you are right. And, thank you for the backstory. I could imagine that Matterport cut a deal with Google Street View to have the Source be Matterport - a BIG mistake - while the Pro still would have control over publish/not-publish and editing in Matterport Workshop. At the 2017 Google Street View Summit in Tokyo in May, I heard Google say that they were moving in the direction of encouraging Pros to transfer the copyright/ownership to the client to improve Google SEO of the content. Dan P.S. Stepping out for an early lunch shortly. So, if you write back, it may take me some time to reply .... |
||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DanSmigrod I could imagine Google showing absolutely no favoritism as seems to be their policy. One other problem for us ... if Matterport DID have themeslves attributed -- would be that a potential customer would see their name, submit a request on matterport.com, and then a request for a GSV tour would be sent out to multiple photographers and we would be fighting over a lead that we ourselves generated. That's not really fair imho. Best to simply allow us to publish our tours with our own Google Accounts -- it also offloads responsibility from Matterport so that they can focus on what they do best. |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
 StandardMember Windsor, UK |
leonvanzweel private msg quote post Address this user | |
| It is already possible to create tours inside premises with google maps at the moment. This is an experimental tour I created by uploading 30 spherical images to a business' google maps listing. This tour has not been edited, cleaned up or optimised. Tour works best on mobile - both IOS & Android. Works OK on MACOS with Chrome, Safari, Opera & Firefox. Not tested on windows desktop. GSV Experiment 1 Tour shot with Ricoh Theta S & iPhone 8. Next experiment will be shot with Insta360 One. |
||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
|
Standard Member Windsor, UK |
leonvanzweel private msg quote post Address this user | |
| At the moment anybody with a 360 camera can create a tour by uploading panos on a google map listed business and google's algos will create a tour. It takes about 24hrs to render. Right now the "Inside this place" is not visible to me. | ||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by @Metroplex360 Exactly! Well said. I added the bold. Dan |
||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1This topic is archived. Start new topic?