What makes proof-of-display photo review reliable?

A photo is evidence only when its context is trustworthy

A sharp image can still prove the wrong thing. It may show a different store, an earlier artwork version or only part of the intended display. Reliable proof-of-display review begins by binding each capture to a specific assignment, display spot and poster version before a reviewer opens it.

That context should come from the authorized work record, not from a filename or a person typing an identifier into a note.

Guide the capture without inventing certainty

Staff benefit from simple framing guidance: show the full display, keep the message readable and include enough surroundings to recognize the location. The app can check file type, orientation and basic quality, but those checks should not pretend to determine whether the physical execution is correct.

• Retain the original file and create previews separately.
• Show upload, received and submitted states independently.
• Resume interrupted transfers without creating duplicate evidence.
• Do not expose unvalidated uploads to ordinary recipients.

Give reviewers deliberate decisions

Review should compare the expected poster with the submitted evidence. Acceptance needs to be deliberate; opening a photo, swiping through a queue or acknowledging receipt is not approval.

When something is wrong, the reviewer should choose a material issue, add a bounded note or annotation and request correction. The original attempt stays in history while the replacement receives its own identity and state.

Report the denominator, not just the successes

A campaign report should count every included display assignment. Accepted evidence, outstanding submissions, corrections, exclusions and removals must reconcile to that denominator. This makes the report useful for action instead of turning it into a gallery of successful photos.