@phil_sandford Hi Phil, its not so new is it? I think its been a thing for years :)
As far as I know @scrivna and @bilbaroo select the photos to go on the curated page.
@phil_sandford@kali66 it's in a blog that Ross uploaded recently ( in january i think?) much like PP it's a popularity thing with ratio of comments to favs and speed they occur. Only thing magic monkey algorithms aren't involved in is the short list for the monthly challenge.
The Curated page works slightly different from the Popular, Trending, New Faces pages.
The Curated page is based on the Fav's from a relatively small selection of members that tend to fav good photos.
I can't tell you exactly who they are, because I don't actually know, and they don't know either ... an algorithm chooses these "taste makers" and monitors what they fav, collates them and puts on the curated page.
It was born from an experiment I made a few years back to try and get away from the purely "statistically based" dynamics of the Popular page etc
It seems to work pretty well but it's always hard to judge it's effectiveness because art/photography is always so subjective.
Now I’m doubly insulted. Although I have had some photos on the popular, or trending, pages, I don’t think any of my photos have ever appeared on the curated page. Now, in addition, I find out that I am probably not one of those tastemakers whose golden favouring elects photos to that page. Oh, wait, I almost never favour photos anyway, I prefer to comment….Nevermind. ; P
@gardencat I never, ever just fav, I too prefer to take the time to comment (+ fav ) and thank people on the image's thread for their comments😅 Don't be insulted 😉
@30pics4jackiesdiamond I admit, I am derelict in my thanking duties. Although I really appreciate comments when I receive them, I use the excuse that I would rather spend what time I have, in commenting on other's photos than in thanking people for commenting on mine.
I must say that what really intrigues me about the explanation of how the curated photos are picked is this statement:
"The Curated page is based on the Fav's from a relatively small selection of members that tend to fav good photos. "
Which kind of begs the question, but who decides which photos are 'good' in the first place?
@gardencat I can't remember the last time I looked at the curated page so wouldn't know if any of mine had been on there - it doesn't pop up on the side like trending and popular do so unless you look regularly you may never know.
@30pics4jackiesdiamond the formula for choosing is obviously different - I try to go into the PP to check any photos from friends I may have missed - and that is often the case but forget about the curated
@annied@30pics4jackiesdiamond I never even glanced at the curated page until some member mentioned that it was nice to see her photos on the 'popular' page, but what she really valued was getting photos on the 'curated' page so then, of course, I had to check it out. I don't remember what member it was, and though I wrote 'she' it might have been a guy too I just don't remember.
@Scrivna Ross, having started this discussion as I was truly puzzled as to what it was, I went into the Curated page this morning and saw that my photograph from yesterday is on it - but, unlike the Popular Page and Trending Page, where you get a noitification that your photo is ‘featured on the TT or PP’ there is nothing to say it's on the 'curated' page. Is that something that could be looked at? Just a thought?
@Scrivna I guess I just think that using the title 'curated' is rather misleading especially since the mechanism of the curation process seemed to be rather questionable and secretive up till now.
For me, curated should mean a real person, or persons, who look at the pictures posted and make a careful selection.
I love this site and I enjoy getting comments from other members here on my photos but I think using the number of favs a photo gets as a measure of its degree of quality or 'goodness' is seriously flawed. I think that very often the number of comments or favs you get, on any particular photo, has only a little to do with how appealing the photo is, and a lot to do with how many other people's photos you have commented on that day. It doesn't bother me at all if there are special trending, popular, or curated pages but I think it should be made clearer how selection to those pages is made and that often, getting on those pages is more a function of how active you are on the site and how many people you interact with, rather than on the artistic value of your photos.
My comment about being "doubly insulted" was made tongue in cheek but I do think some people take their work's appearance on these pages rather more seriously and are upset or discouraged when they see that their pictures are not often honoured in this way.
Sorry if I've turned this into something bigger than it needs to be. I do appreciate all the work you do to keep this site up, and active, and I know it is lots easier to criticize than it is to actually get out there and run something.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
As far as I know @scrivna and @bilbaroo select the photos to go on the curated page.
The Curated page is based on the Fav's from a relatively small selection of members that tend to fav good photos.
I can't tell you exactly who they are, because I don't actually know, and they don't know either ... an algorithm chooses these "taste makers" and monitors what they fav, collates them and puts on the curated page.
It was born from an experiment I made a few years back to try and get away from the purely "statistically based" dynamics of the Popular page etc
It seems to work pretty well but it's always hard to judge it's effectiveness because art/photography is always so subjective.
@phil_sandford curated page changes regularly, photos don't stay there for very long
I must say that what really intrigues me about the explanation of how the curated photos are picked is this statement:
"The Curated page is based on the Fav's from a relatively small selection of members that tend to fav good photos. "
Which kind of begs the question, but who decides which photos are 'good' in the first place?
As to commenting I haven't got a life, I ignore housework etc so have the time!!!
For me, curated should mean a real person, or persons, who look at the pictures posted and make a careful selection.
I love this site and I enjoy getting comments from other members here on my photos but I think using the number of favs a photo gets as a measure of its degree of quality or 'goodness' is seriously flawed. I think that very often the number of comments or favs you get, on any particular photo, has only a little to do with how appealing the photo is, and a lot to do with how many other people's photos you have commented on that day. It doesn't bother me at all if there are special trending, popular, or curated pages but I think it should be made clearer how selection to those pages is made and that often, getting on those pages is more a function of how active you are on the site and how many people you interact with, rather than on the artistic value of your photos.
My comment about being "doubly insulted" was made tongue in cheek but I do think some people take their work's appearance on these pages rather more seriously and are upset or discouraged when they see that their pictures are not often honoured in this way.
Sorry if I've turned this into something bigger than it needs to be. I do appreciate all the work you do to keep this site up, and active, and I know it is lots easier to criticize than it is to actually get out there and run something.