jacob_jozwiak Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Hi all, Not so long ago, maybe a year or so, if you were to put a photo up for critique you would get on average of maybe 500-1000 views. Nowadays though, you'd be lucky to get 100. About 20-30 seems to be the norm. I know that PN changed the way the critique forum displays recent photos, but it seems to me that it has had the opposite of the desired effect. Has anybody else seen this trend. The fact that nobody sees your images is making me less inclined to continue my subscription beyond this year (after 7 years) and look elsewhere. This concludes my whinge :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjmeade Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 I think it's been like that for some time now. 10-20 views and 1-2 ratings. It's probably been July since one of my shots had more than 10 ratings. Perhaps we should post nudes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 The views were incorrectly calculated prior to january 2007. Views counted thumbnails views (such as looking at a whole folder) the same as a full view. That is to say, if someone looked at your whole portfolio under the old system, every image would be credited with a "view". This was corrected in Jan 2007 so that only actual views of the full image were counted. The number of views you are getting now is likely the same as it ever was. You were just being given inflated numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diegobuono Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Jacob, I notished what you say. May be what Josh says is correct but in my opinion it don't explain it completely because I have picture seen more than thousands time an other just few time. Josh, I suppose that what you say is only a part of what's happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike dixon Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 You have pictures posted before January 2007 that have thousands of "views," and you have images after that with the more-accurately calculated number of views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacob_jozwiak Posted October 8, 2008 Author Share Posted October 8, 2008 The Incorrect tallying of views doesn't account for the fact that there are less ratings and less comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Nobody said it did, you asked about views, not about ratings/comments. If you want information, you have to ask the right question. I'm not a mind reader. Average number of ratings and comments are down because there are a significantly higher number of images going through the critique forum than their were a few years ago. Add to this the disturbing trend of photo.net users who want to take from the system (requesting ratings/critique) and not give back to the system (give ratings/critique) and you have another big reason why the average numbers are down. It is looking more and more likely that we are going to have to enforce some sort of a quota system for people wanting to use the critique forum. As people don't seem interested in contributing on their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_hardy1 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 If you look through thumbnails you still see the images much better than one of those index prints or a contact sheet. I'd like the idea of a gallery visit being counted as a "view". It's not like needing to linger like you're looking at the Mona Lisa. Heck, that looked a thumbnail, there were so many people in front of me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 <b>Fauxteaux's Law</b> struck earlier than usual here: <i>"As a photo.net discussion grows longer, the probability of someone mentioning or complaining about the ratings system approaches one."</i> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacob_jozwiak Posted October 9, 2008 Author Share Posted October 9, 2008 Not to mention "As a photo.net discussion grows longer, the probability of someone making a smart arse comment approaches one." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now