N°Pictures/N°Visitors Vs Amount of Votes - Opinions?

[matiasasun]

Maybe we should discuss it. How about comparing the total amount of votes each of us have with a coefficient like this:

( Total Number of Pictures / Total Number of Visitors) * 100

The more closer you get to "0.00" the "better photographer you´ve become"

For example Me:
I´ve 878 Images and 34317 Visitors
( 878 / 34317 ) * 100 = 2.55

The 8 people wich are actually popular in the "7 Days" have:
Linda Alstead = 0.40
Vinay = 0.13
Dan = 0.58
Ernst Schütz = 0.12
G. & M. = 0.22
Alon Brik = 0.17
Thomas = 0.24
dR ... = 0.86
The average this users have is 0.34.

In my point of view, it should work. Sadly we cannot see our amount of votes (even if we haven´t got a single one). That´s why I propose this alternative coefficient to determine is you are a good photographer because other people likes your pictures. It could also be a way to see if we are getting any better in time!.

Please don´t take me wrong. I´m not triying to determine how good/bad we are. That´s another story. I´m triying to (A) create a method to see if people/users think we are good, and (B) have a way to compare our own developement as a photographer.

I´d like to see comments and replys, because I can´t think if this method has any weak points.

Matias Asun

*** Discussion Notes: ***

(1) As I´ve discover that a lot people visits our galleries because we post a message in a forum (it´s look like it is). But they don´t keep visiting us if our pictures are not that good for their taste. I´ve learn that in my personal experience. Maybe this is not completely truth...

(2) Slug has mentioned that he amount of votes is lower than it should be; we should "express" ourselves more. That´s why Votes are not the ONLY way to determine how good are we getting. Anyway we can only vote for an image or a gallery, not for an artist. So, I proposed this alternative method to describe wether an artist is welcome in the comunnity or not. We can also chech if we are getting any better as we publicate more pictures.

(3) To compare Between USERS, if you preffer, it could only work with the average coefficient of The rest of the users that have the same amount of pictures. I´m not thinkings this could work for people who as less that 500 or 600 pictures; if I have a single picture and 1000 visitors I´ll be the god of photography!. So, if a personas has been a member for at least 6 months we could use ranges:
First Range 1-1000 Pictures
Second Range 1001-3000 Pictures
Third Range 3001-6000 Pictures
Fourth Range 6001-as much as you can upload.

(4) The most popular galleries "of all time" has this numbers:
Francis Toussaint = 0.07
Abba Richman = 0.21
Ray Soemarsono = 0.14
Frank Vetere = 0.05
tglass = 0.03
Scott Wright = 0.24
Paul Keates = 0.30
dsouzl = 0.05
The average this users have is 0.13. A difference of 0.21 compared to the "7 Days galleries".

[ilanphoto]

first - seems that this rule shows what you want it to show

BUT - Let's think why we are here is it to collect visits? or is it to show and share our work and receive feedback?

BTW if you want to improve your score - delete all your pictures. As the points remain you will have a perfect ZERO

I would like to see the number of votes

[matiasasun]

first - seems that this rule shows what you want it to show

BUT - Let's think why we are here is it to collect visits? or is it to show and share our work and receive feedback?

BTW if you want to improve your score - delete all your pictures. As the points remain you will have a perfect ZERO

I would like to see the number of votes

You reply seems a little agresive. So much than I cannot reply. I just was wondering a way to have a mesure to see what people like, wich is a feedback don`t you think?... I just was triying to propose a numerical one.

Hope to have discussion anyway.

[ilanphoto]

first - seems that this rule shows what you want it to show

BUT - Let's think why we are here is it to collect visits? or is it to show and share our work and receive feedback?

BTW if you want to improve your score - delete all your pictures. As the points remain you will have a perfect ZERO

I would like to see the number of votes

You reply seems a little agresive. So much than I cannot reply. I just was wondering a way to have a mesure to see what people like, wich is a feedback don`t you think?... I just was triying to propose a numerical one.

Hope to have discussion anyway.

Sorry for coming through aggressive I had no such intention

I only find that you are starting or at least heightening the popularity contest. And from first hand knowledge the number of hits per gallery / photo has nothing to do with quality but with the % of bare skin on the model

[matiasasun]

Well... yes. First; don`t worry Ilan.

Yes; there could be a problem because we cannot be sure about the visits taste. But, we copuld expecte they would preffer "contents" (the subjects of the pic) in a well takken shoot. Ilan did remember me the fact that a bikini gallery will always have more visitors.

As I see it, you can see whatever you want, but that "problem" make it hard to see if the Alternate Coefficient is really efficient. It is based in popularity, but could be destroy because of popularity. And, if implemented (formaly or by others users voluntarily), could not be a way to see "how good we `re getting".

I guees, as some known users told me, the fact is:

a) We should vote more
b) We should comment more
c) We should "Show" our pictures more and, of coure,
d) We should involve ourselves more in the discuss forums....
e) we should explore more the gallery search, the ramdon posibilitys and (of course) the popular galleries.

The goal I was aiming was to see if the actual system of votes were a good way to select what should get the possibility to have more attention. Maybe now I`m considering that it is not a completely good system, but a more effective one if we do what we should...

Well, more replys won`t hurt anybody.

Matias

Ps. By the way: I`ve notice that "nude", "bikini" and other words that are top rank in internet search (those we use when something does not work as it should) are not included in the popular list. the only one I notice was lingerie (127 results wich is much less than the 500 average). Do you know why is that? PBase users don`t use them? or They were excluded?

[jypsee]

Voting is mostly a popularity contest (people vote for people they know) and it's easier to get visitors if you promote your galleries.
Your co-efficient concept proves my first point. Several of the users you list are in the PAD group and "know" each other...

This is not a photographic critique website; it's a place to post your photos.

jypsee in FL
http://www.pbase.com/jypsee/root

[matiasasun]

Voting is mostly a popularity contest (people vote for people they know) and it's easier to get visitors if you promote your galleries.
Your co-efficient concept proves my first point. Several of the users you list are in the PAD group and "know" each other...

This is not a photographic critique website; it's a place to post your photos.

jypsee in FL
http://www.pbase.com/jypsee/root

Yes.. You´re right. This is a place to post photos. That´s why I was triying to see the better way to develope a system that could create better chanel of "information " for the visitors to determine the sites they could be interested in visiting.

UYour post have, in deed, an interesting fact: Populars could have create a "subcommunity". No problem with that, except if that could create a "exclusive effect" (likle the monopolization of the channels that popularity systems create to see others people work). It could an interesting fact.

Now that I think about the post in here, it seems that the subject is "what is PBase for us"... interesting.

Matias

[matiasasun]

By the Way, I found this threat that could be considered interesting for some view:
http://forum.pbase.com/viewtopic.php?t=4167

Looks like there could be another method of having "more information".

[oochappan]

Questions
What has popularity to do with good technical or artistic quality ?
What art is for you , must it be art for someone else ?
Do all people always look for art ?
Did PAD not influenced popularity in a drastic way ?

[matiasasun]

Questions
What has popularity to do with good technical or artistic quality?

In my personal opinion, nothing. Mostly because I don´t think good technical is a Must and because "artistic value" is a matter of subjetive/historical/contextual points of view.

To your other questions, I haven´t got an answer that could be satisfiying. Anyway, when i think about "Popularity" i´m thinking in a way to create alternative channels of information: I´m thinking "Is the voting a real reflection of what PBase is about?"... As you can see my perspectiva has change since yesterday, when I created this forum.

I´m thinking.. Is it possible that there is an excellent gallery (one that you personaly think could be included in the "popular categories") but without votes?.

Another: Do we always vote for what is good? or even (and more complex) Why do we vote for?.

Your Questions are in fact really interesting (at least to me). The discuss is Open.

[srijith]

guys (and gals), take it easy.. I am sure matiasasun did not mean to start another popularity contest thread. He was just trying things out for fun! Just like we look at our stats once in a while or google our names once in a while to see where we have been ending up

Anyway Matias, there are a couple of things that are missing in the equation. The obvious one is that a lot of people do not publicise their photos in places like Show and Tell or other forums that discuss photography. Those that do get more hits, those that don't (like me for example), do not..

Another thing missing in the equation is the age factor. Images that have been online for a long time tend to gather more hits (maybe slow, maybe fast). So that needs to be in the equation somewhere. Another thing is the case of restricted and private photos. They show up in the image count of pbase but will not get as many hits as a normal open photo.

Ofcourse nude and related snaps gets more hits. In general snaps where beautiful gals figure do get more hits..Snaps of more ordinary things (!) may not..

Just some thoughts..

[matiasasun]

Ok... Now you are convincing me. All of you (those that reply here and personally). They are too many problems that make my first post invalid. Guess some of us still could us it VOLUNTARILY and PERSONALLY to see if we can have a better score (without taking it very seriously; I do not want a reply post that say: Then post you mother naked! ). Sadly we cannot be sure why is that; bad job? bad calculations? bad day? not bad at all?

I´m beggining to think that Votes are a good way to make a gallery more visible. The problem is how to explore the galleries that we think could get one of our votes. It seems that:
a) Show and Tell,
b) Take a look once in a while in the recently updated galleries,
c) Random exploration and
d) Personal comments

are a good way to comunicate and to explore new possibilities. Maybe this is a site to post pictures... and the rest is up to each one of us.

But the question still remains:
What do we vote for?

Thanks to all for posting

[oochappan]

What do we vote for?

good question, I ask myself every time during elections.
BTW nice idea and good calculations !
For myself are comments very important: when sombody unknown to me takes the effort to write something, that means something to me.
Keep up the fun and let creativity trespass imagination.

[hipolito]

I totally agree with the spirit of the initial statement of matiasasun.

More information can hurt nobody and may help some of us.

I would like to know, #votes (a least on my own galleries), # of days each gallery stayed at the popular galleries, etc. I even would like to receive an email alert each day my galleries are among the 10% with more votes in the period!

Maybe after voting a form would ask the votant to select out of 5 options the one in witch the voter think the artist excel: Technical, significant moment, visual impact… This would ask your question “What do we vote for?â€