Figures & data
Fig. 1. Example images representing the different image attributes (Photos: Wenche Dramstad, NIBIO, upper row from left to right 2021, 2018, 2021, lower row from left to right 2017, 2018, 2019)
![Fig. 1. Example images representing the different image attributes (Photos: Wenche Dramstad, NIBIO, upper row from left to right 2021, 2018, 2021, lower row from left to right 2017, 2018, 2019)](/cms/asset/e32ec6fe-ce39-463f-a42a-859d3ff5244d/sgeo_a_2257210_f0001_oc.jpg)
Fig. 2. A photo example illustrating identification of attributes in an example image (Photo: Wenche Dramstad, NIBIO, 2014)
![Fig. 2. A photo example illustrating identification of attributes in an example image (Photo: Wenche Dramstad, NIBIO, 2014)](/cms/asset/21aebe06-082c-475e-a855-31ac4224aa6c/sgeo_a_2257210_f0002_oc.jpg)
Table 1. Predefined image attributes identified during inspection of the photos
Fig. 3. Example of tag categories and aggregation of tags in the data illustrated on an example photo (Photo: Wenche Dramstad, NIBIO, 2010)
![Fig. 3. Example of tag categories and aggregation of tags in the data illustrated on an example photo (Photo: Wenche Dramstad, NIBIO, 2010)](/cms/asset/aa5af3b1-cf63-495c-aadb-14f56efedd40/sgeo_a_2257210_f0003_oc.jpg)
Fig. 4. Number of photographs taken within Norway and uploaded to Flickr between 2016 and 2020 (total 16,499)
![Fig. 4. Number of photographs taken within Norway and uploaded to Flickr between 2016 and 2020 (total 16,499)](/cms/asset/60c86dcb-ce00-44f8-85e1-70ca11d6d4f9/sgeo_a_2257210_f0004_ob.jpg)
Fig. 5. Location of the 11,575 unique photo points (left-hand side) and top 10 photo locations, based on kernel density with a 50,000 m search radius and 5000 m cell size (right-hand side)
![Fig. 5. Location of the 11,575 unique photo points (left-hand side) and top 10 photo locations, based on kernel density with a 50,000 m search radius and 5000 m cell size (right-hand side)](/cms/asset/c4aef5af-1663-4f4c-83a0-86f624ec68c4/sgeo_a_2257210_f0005_ob.jpg)
Fig. 6. a) Proportion of photos and area per land cover type in Norway; b) Photos per km2 for the different land cover types in Norway (photos apparently taken at sea are excluded from both graphs)
![Fig. 6. a) Proportion of photos and area per land cover type in Norway; b) Photos per km2 for the different land cover types in Norway (photos apparently taken at sea are excluded from both graphs)](/cms/asset/51a2c065-943e-43cd-a379-5f4324e02d88/sgeo_a_2257210_f0006_ob.jpg)
Fig. 7. Photos taken in the different land cover types (categories): (a) agriculture, (b) forest, (c) mountains, and (d) water
![Fig. 7. Photos taken in the different land cover types (categories): (a) agriculture, (b) forest, (c) mountains, and (d) water](/cms/asset/d1a9f772-f5a4-4e29-a87e-f7bd9b29a03c/sgeo_a_2257210_f0007_ob.jpg)
Table 2. Distribution of tags within each group of photos (%)
Table 3. Numbers of photos with hashtags and unique tags for each group