I Confess; I'm a Hit Whore

[bobhate]

Okay, I'm sure it's the height of lameness to admit this, but I really look at my hit counts. I determine my self-worth based entirely on how well I'm hitting my 5 wood AND how many hits my photos get.

But, I have a question that maybe someone can help me answer. Why is it that the total of hits for all photos in a gallery doesn't match up with what the gallery total hits add up to in the root gallery? For example, my July 2005 gallery shows hits totalling up to 1500 or so. But if I count the hits of all individual photos in that month, they come up to nearly 5000. Help?

And I've heard that in the future some rather astounding counting add-ons will be available here. Is that right?

Oh, and you are a hit whore, too? How do you live with yourself?!?!

Cheers,
WT

[1designguy]

Hello... my name is Scott and I'm a Hit Whore That does feel better

I tried to take one gallery to experiment on counts. My Revealed (fall color) gallery showed 2,326 hits in the gallery counter. A count of hits to the individual images in that gallery totalled 8,137 hits.

I think one thing is (with mine at least) many images start out as an introduction to my PaD and are then copied to another themed gallery so the hits that occur outside of the Revealed gallery don't count toward the other gallery(s) that the image exists in.

[mardoli]

Okay, I'm sure it's the height of lameness to admit this, but I really look at my hit counts. I determine my self-worth based entirely on how well I'm hitting my 5 wood AND how many hits my photos get.

But, I have a question that maybe someone can help me answer. Why is it that the total of hits for all photos in a gallery doesn't match up with what the gallery total hits add up to in the root gallery? For example, my July 2005 gallery shows hits totalling up to 1500 or so. But if I count the hits of all individual photos in that month, they come up to nearly 5000. Help?

And I've heard that in the future some rather astounding counting add-ons will be available here. Is that right?

Oh, and you are a hit whore, too? How do you live with yourself?!?!

Cheers,
WT

Well, I’m not totally sure, of course. But I think the difference in hits you noticed can easily be explained like that.
Your gallery gets hits when someone goes to your thumbnails page of that gallery. But if people go directly to see only a picture and then leave, the picture gets hits, while the gallery doesn’t.
Since you are in PaD, it means that all your new daily pictures are showed in the PaD Meta gallery, so it’s probable that people click on the picture they see in the meta gallery and then maybe leave, without opening your entire page.
This might explain why the sum of the number of hits you have for all pictures is higher than the number of hits you have for your gallery.
I hope it make sense, at least a little.
All the best
Marisa

[bobhate]

Your gallery gets hits when someone goes to your thumbnails page of that gallery. But if people go directly to see only a picture and then leave, the picture gets hits, while the gallery doesn’t.

That makes perfect sense. Thanks for the answer.

WT

[erichmangl]

And I've heard that in the future some rather astounding counting add-ons will be available here. Is that right?

Slug is indeed working on statistics, he said it might be online after he gets the new database hardware

[erichmangl]

Oh, and you are a hit whore, too?

nothing wrong with it, as long as you are not a cheater like some grandson

[bobfloyd]

My guess is that most PADers are in some way "hit whores". After all, it is a way of keeping score with yourself and gauging your skill level. How was today's photo received compared to yesterdays or last weeks? Am I going in the right direction or the wrong one? It is something of a metric for success or failure and I think most of us pay more attention to hits, comments and votes than maybe we often want to admit. No harm there though.

[dazedgonebye]

I used to be a hit whore...and I admit that I still fell the urge nearly every day. I've been clean and sober for some time now though and I hope to stay on the wagon.
The bottom line is that to really rack up the hits, you have to visit and comment on as many other people as possible. The problem is that you end up spending all your time commenting and too little time shooting.
I got off the hit whore roller coaster some time ago and my photography has improved. Of course, no one sees my stuff, but at least I know it's good.
I still cruise the pad meta and my favorites and I try to comment on a few shots a day. I don't restrict myself to commenting on friend's shots and I think they've come to understand that my not commenting is not a comment.
By the way, did I mention that I have a blog at http://photosteven.blogspot.com and my pbase galleries are at http://www.pbase.com/dazedgonebye?
Oh crap...now I've got to call my sponsor!

[purpod]

It's funny, I look at my comments & the hits, but my #'s are thousands lower than any of you guys ~ I must be in the minor minor leagues! LOL

There are many times when I love a shot & no one comments on it & then times when I think a shot is okay & 15 peeps will comment on it ..?.. (And yes, that's alot for me I just laugh to myself & say "It's Pbase ~ Go Figure!"

[purpod]

It's funny, I look at my comments & the hits, but my #'s are thousands lower than any of you guys ~ I must be in the minor minor leagues! LOL

There are many times when I love a shot & no one comments on it & then times when I think a shot is okay & 15 peeps will comment on it ..?.. (And yes, that's alot for me I just laugh to myself & say "It's Pbase ~ Go Figure!"

[cjmorgan]

Oh, and you are a hit whore, too?

I suppose I can't be because if I were, then I'd probably want
to do it most efficiently... and that would mean most of my images
would just be about scantily clad women.

CJ

[beunard]

ok with cjmorgan

[shannon_halsaver]

I don't look at my hit counter, I look for comments. I love it when someone comments on my images...

[annayu]

I don't look at the hit count either. Why bother when it's usually around 0-3 hahaha.

[gpaai]

I suppose I can't be because if I were, then I'd probably want
to do it most efficiently... and that would mean most of my images
would just be about scantily clad women.

CJ

Hahaha! Lotsa truth there. And they don't even have to be good looking as long as they expose all...